Death and taxes: The framing of the causes and policy responses to the illicit tobacco trade in Canadian newspapers
The illicit tobacco trade accounts for 10% of the global cigarette market and results in US$31 billion in lost tax revenues annually. Despite legal prosecution of tobacco companies, and the introduction of new policy responses, the trade has reached an all-time high. Previous research documents how...
| Autores principales: | ; ; |
|---|---|
| Tipo de documento: | Electrónico Artículo |
| Lenguaje: | Inglés |
| Publicado: |
2017
|
| En: |
Cogent social sciences
Año: 2017, Volumen: 3, Número: 1 |
| Acceso en línea: |
Presumably Free Access Volltext (Resolving-System) |
| Verificar disponibilidad: | HBZ Gateway |
| Palabras clave: |
| Sumario: | The illicit tobacco trade accounts for 10% of the global cigarette market and results in US$31 billion in lost tax revenues annually. Despite legal prosecution of tobacco companies, and the introduction of new policy responses, the trade has reached an all-time high. Previous research documents how transnational tobacco companies have sought to influence government responses to the illicit trade in various countries through multiple means, including influencing of news media framing. This paper extends this analysis to Canada where the illicit trade is particularly problematic in scale and political complexity. Articles in Canadian newspapers, published from 2010-2015, were systematically searched (n = 177) and analysed to identify dominant frames, frame sponsors and policy positions related to the illicit tobacco trade. The results show that the most common frames present the issue in ways favourable to the industry. The most common non-governmental sponsors of these frames frequently have links to the tobacco industry, which are rarely disclosed. Findings indicate the need for Canadian media to be critical in its use of data sources amid industry efforts to shape public policy, and the importance of reframing policy discussions in public health terms based on independent evidence. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2331-1886 |
| DOI: | 10.1080/23311886.2017.1325054 |
