HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER		Author Keyword(s) Vol Page [Advanced]

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this link to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Add article to my folders Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Lopipero, P. Articles by Bero, L. A Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Lopipero, P. Articles by Bero, L. A Related Collections Environmental tobacco smoke

Tobacco interests or the public interest: 20 years of industry strategies to undermine airline smoking restrictions

Department of Clinical Pharmacy, University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA

Correspondence to:
Peggy Lopipero
MPH, Department of Clinical Pharmacy, University of California, San Francisco, 3333 California Street, Suite 415, San Francisco, CA 94143-0613, USA; lopiperop{at}pharmacy.ucsf.edu

Objectives: To understand the evolution of 20 years of tobacco industry strategies to undermine federal restrictions of smoking on aircraft in the United States.

Design: We searched and analysed internal tobacco industry records, public documents, and other related research.

Results: The industry viewed these restrictions as a serious threat to the social acceptability of smoking. Its initial efforts included covert letter-writing campaigns and lobbying of the airline industry, but with the emergence of proposals to ban smoking, the tobacco companies engaged in ever increasing efforts to forestall further restrictions. Tactics to dominate the public record became especially rigorous. The industry launched an aggressive public relations campaign that began with the promotion of industry sponsored petition drives and public opinion surveys. Results from polling research that produced findings contrary to the industry’s position were suppressed. In order to demonstrate smoker outrage against a ban, later efforts included the sponsorship of smokers’ rights and other front groups. Congressional allies and industry consultants sought to discredit the science underlying proposals to ban smoking and individual tobacco companies conducted their own cabin air quality research. Faced with the potential of a ban on all domestic flights, the industry sought to intimidate an air carrier and a prominent policymaker. Despite the intensification of tactics over time, including mobilisation of an army of lobbyists and Congressional allies, the tobacco industry was ultimately defeated.

Conclusions: Our longitudinal analysis provides insights into how and when the industry changed its plans and provides public health advocates with potential counterstrategies.

Abbreviations: ALPA, Air Line Pilots Association; ATA, Air Transport Association; CAB, Civil Aeronautics Board; DOT, Department of Transportation; ETS, environmental tobacco smoke; NAS, National Academy of Science; SHS, secondhand smoke; SRA, Smokers’ Rights Alliance; TAN, Tobacco Action Network; TI, Tobacco Institute; VP, Vice-President

Keywords: tobacco control; tobacco industry; airlines; smoking; secondhand smoke