Cati G Brown-Johnson1, Lucinda J England2, Stanton A Glantz3, Pamela M Ling4. 1. Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education, San Francisco, California, USA. 2. Office on Smoking and Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA. 3. Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education, San Francisco, California, USA Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Philip R Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies, San Francisco, California, USA. 4. Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education, San Francisco, California, USA Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Describe tobacco companies' marketing strategies targeting low socioeconomic status (SES) females in the U.S.A. METHODS: Analysis of previously secret tobacco industry documents. RESULTS: Tobacco companies focused marketing on low SES women starting in the late 1970s, including military wives, low-income inner-city minority women, 'discount-susceptible' older female smokers and less-educated young white women. Strategies included distributing discount coupons with food stamps to reach the very poor, discount offers at point-of-sale and via direct mail to keep cigarette prices low, developing new brands for low SES females and promoting luxury images to low SES African-American women. More recently, companies integrated promotional strategies targeting low-income women into marketing plans for established brands. CONCLUSIONS: Tobacco companies used numerous marketing strategies to reach low SES females in the U.S.A. for at least four decades. Strategies to counteract marketing to low SES women could include (1) counteracting price discounts and direct mail coupons that reduce the price of tobacco products, (2) instituting restrictions on point-of-sale advertising and retail display and (3) creating counteradvertising that builds resistance to psychosocial targeting of low SES women. To achieve health equity, tobacco control efforts are needed to counteract the influence of tobacco industry marketing to low-income women. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.
OBJECTIVES: Describe tobacco companies' marketing strategies targeting low socioeconomic status (SES) females in the U.S.A. METHODS: Analysis of previously secret tobacco industry documents. RESULTS:Tobacco companies focused marketing on low SES women starting in the late 1970s, including military wives, low-income inner-city minority women, 'discount-susceptible' older female smokers and less-educated young white women. Strategies included distributing discount coupons with food stamps to reach the very poor, discount offers at point-of-sale and via direct mail to keep cigarette prices low, developing new brands for low SES females and promoting luxury images to low SES African-American women. More recently, companies integrated promotional strategies targeting low-income women into marketing plans for established brands. CONCLUSIONS:Tobacco companies used numerous marketing strategies to reach low SES females in the U.S.A. for at least four decades. Strategies to counteract marketing to low SES women could include (1) counteracting price discounts and direct mail coupons that reduce the price of tobacco products, (2) instituting restrictions on point-of-sale advertising and retail display and (3) creating counteradvertising that builds resistance to psychosocial targeting of low SES women. To achieve health equity, tobacco control efforts are needed to counteract the influence of tobacco industry marketing to low-income women. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.
Entities:
Keywords:
Advertising and Promotion; Priority/special populations; Socioeconomic status; Tobacco industry; Tobacco industry documents
Authors: D R Bailey Miles; Usama Bilal; Heidi E Hutton; Bryan Lau; Catherine R Lesko; Anthony Fojo; Mary E McCaul; Jeanne Keruly; Richard D Moore; Geetanjali Chander Journal: J Health Care Poor Underserved Date: 2019
Authors: Noah R Gubner; Denise D Williams; Thao Le; Wayne Garcia; Maya Vijayaraghavan; Joseph Guydish Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2019-02-05 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Carl A Latkin; Ryan D Kennedy; Melissa A Davey-Rothwell; Tuo-Yen Tseng; Lauren Czaplicki; Anirudh Baddela; Catie Edwards; Geetanjali Chander; Meghan B Moran; Amy R Knowlton Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2018-11-15 Impact factor: 4.244