Tobacco industry use of personal responsibility rhetoric in public relations and litigation: disguising freedom to blame as freedom of choice

• Published in: American journal of public health (1971) Vol. 105; no. 2; pp. 250 - 260
• Main Authors: Friedman, Lissy C, Cheyne, Andrew, Givelber, Daniel, Gottlieb, Mark A, Daynard, Richard A
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States American Public Health Association 01-02-2015
• Subjects: Accountability; Cigarettes; Corporate responsibility; Debates; Disease; Framing Health Matters; Freedom; Gaming machines; Humans; Litigation; Media; Personal Autonomy; Public health; Public Relations; Regulation; Rhetoric; Smoking; Smoking - psychology; Social responsibility; Studies; Tobacco; Tobacco industry; Tobacco Industry - methods; Trials
• ISSN: 0090-0036; 1541-0048
• DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2014.302226

We examined the tobacco industry's rhetoric to frame personal responsibility arguments. The industry rarely uses the phrase "personal responsibility" explicitly, but rather "freedom of choice." When freedom of choice is used in the context of litigation, the industry means that those who choose to smoke are solely to blame for their injuries. When used in the industry's public relations messages, it grounds its meaning in the concept of liberty and the right to smoke. The courtroom "blame rhetoric" has influenced the industry's larger public relations message to shift responsibility away from the tobacco companies and onto their customers. Understanding the rhetoric and framing that the industry employs is essential to combating this tactic, and we apply this comprehension to other industries that act as disease vectors.