An Analysis of Arguments Advanced via Twitter in an Advocacy Campaign to Promote Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems

Abstract Introduction Advocates of electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) increasingly use Twitter to promote liberal ENDS policies. “World Vape Day” (WVD) is an annual campaign organized by pro-ENDS advocacy groups, some of which have links to the nicotine industry (eg, via funding from the “Foundation for a Smoke-Free World”). In 2020, the campaign used dedicated social media accounts to disseminate WVD-branded images and campaign messages. We examined tweets posted as part of WVD 2020 to identify and analyze pro-ENDS policy arguments. Aims and Methods We extracted tweets posted between 26 May and 3 June 2020 that included the hashtag #WorldVapeDay. We used qualitative thematic analysis to code a random sample (n = 2200) of approximately half the original English language tweets (n = 4387) and used descriptive analysis to identify the most frequently used co-hashtags. Results Arguments related to four themes: harm reduction, smoking cessation, rights and justice, and opposition to ENDS restrictions. Tweets criticized individuals and groups perceived as opposing liberal ENDS regulation, and used personal testimonials to frame ENDS as a harm reduction tool and life-saving smoking cessation aid. Tweets also advanced rights-based arguments, such as privileging adults’ rights over children’s rights, and calling for greater recognition of consumers’ voices. Tweets frequently used hashtags associated with the WHO and World No Tobacco Day (WNTD). Conclusions The WVD campaign presented a series of linked pro-ENDS arguments seemingly aimed at policy-makers, and strategically integrated with the WHO’s WNTD campaign. Critically assessing pro-ENDS arguments and the campaigns used to promote these is vital to helping policy actors develop proportionate ENDS policy. Implications Social media platforms have considerable potential to influence policy actors. Tweets are easily generated and duplicated, creating an impression of sizeable and influential stakeholders. Evidence that the “World Vape Day” campaign was supported by groups with industry links, and targeted—at least in part—at WHO officials and those who follow the WHO World No Tobacco Day campaign, highlights the importance of critically reviewing such campaigns. Further research could examine how health advocates could engage in pro-ENDS campaigns to support balanced messaging and informed policy-making.

[1]  J. Hoek,et al.  Ethics and ENDS , 2022, Tobacco Control.

[2]  B. Freeman,et al.  Global tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship regulation: what’s old, what’s new and where to next? , 2022, Tobacco Control.

[3]  S. Hoffman,et al.  Comparing the regulation and incentivization of e-cigarettes across 97 countries. , 2021, Social science & medicine.

[4]  Brian A. King,et al.  Characteristics of e-Cigarette Use Behaviors Among US Youth, 2020 , 2021, JAMA network open.

[5]  J. Leung,et al.  A systematic review of randomized controlled trials and network meta-analysis of e-cigarettes for smoking cessation. , 2021, Addictive behaviors.

[6]  Katherine E. Smith,et al.  Evidence use in E-cigarettes debates: scientific showdowns in a ‘wild west’ of research , 2021, BMC Public Health.

[7]  Daniel Hunt How food companies use social media to influence policy debates: a framework of Australian ultra-processed food industry Twitter data , 2020, Public Health Nutrition.

[8]  Tama Leaver,et al.  E-Cigarette Promotion on Twitter in Australia: Content Analysis of Tweets , 2020, JMIR public health and surveillance.

[9]  T. Dewhirst Co-optation of harm reduction by Big Tobacco , 2020, Tobacco Control.

[10]  J. Hoek,et al.  Political ineptitude, public anxiety and the undermining of the WHO , 2020, Tobacco Control.

[11]  Tama Leaver,et al.  E-Cigarette Advocates on Twitter: Content Analysis of Vaping-Related Tweets , 2019, JMIR public health and surveillance.

[12]  M. Munafo,et al.  Is e-cigarette use in non-smoking young adults associated with later smoking? A systematic review and meta-analysis , 2019, Tobacco Control.

[13]  P. Brennan,et al.  Are electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDs) helping cigarette smokers quit? - A current evidence. , 2020, Journal of oral pathology & medicine : official publication of the International Association of Oral Pathologists and the American Academy of Oral Pathology.

[14]  T. Pechacek,et al.  Patterns and trends of dual use of e-cigarettes and cigarettes among U.S. adults, 2015–2018 , 2019, Preventive medicine reports.

[15]  S. Flint,et al.  A Social Network Analysis of the #SugarTax debate on Twitter , 2019, Obesity Abstracts.

[16]  B. Freeman,et al.  BAT(NZ) draws on cigarette marketing tactics to launch Vype in New Zealand , 2019, Tobacco Control.

[17]  J. Prochaska,et al.  What to do when tobacco advertisers exploit antitobacco social media campaigns to sell tobacco , 2019, Tobacco Control.

[18]  Noah A. Smith,et al.  World Vaping Day: Contextualizing Vaping Culture in Online Social Media Using a Mixed Methods Approach , 2019 .

[19]  J. Quariguasi Frota Neto,et al.  Tweeting about public health policy: Social media response to the UK Government’s announcement of a Parliamentary vote on draft standardised packaging regulations , 2019, PloS one.

[20]  Tama Leaver,et al.  The Messages Presented in Electronic Cigarette–Related Social Media Promotions and Discussion: Scoping Review , 2019, Journal of medical Internet research.

[21]  Markus Mykkänen,et al.  Media strategies in lobbying process. A literature review on publications in 2000-2018. , 2019, Academicus International Scientific Journal.

[22]  M. Hefler Worldwide news and comment , 2017, Tobacco Control.

[23]  Gary B. Wilcox,et al.  Public reactions to e-cigarette regulations on Twitter: a text mining analysis , 2017, Tobacco Control.

[24]  Mark Dredze,et al.  Why do people use electronic nicotine delivery systems (electronic cigarettes)? A content analysis of Twitter, 2012-2015 , 2017, PloS one.

[25]  G. Guyatt,et al.  Electronic nicotine delivery systems and/or electronic non-nicotine delivery systems for tobacco smoking cessation or reduction: a systematic review and meta-analysis , 2017, BMJ Open.

[26]  J. Cappella,et al.  Youth-Targeted E-cigarette Marketing in the US. , 2017, Tobacco regulatory science.

[27]  Jay M Bernhardt,et al.  E-Cigarette Social Media Messages: A Text Mining Analysis of Marketing and Consumer Conversations on Twitter , 2016, JMIR public health and surveillance.

[28]  G. Fooks,et al.  The Policy Dystopia Model: An Interpretive Analysis of Tobacco Industry Political Activity , 2016, PLoS medicine.

[29]  Ramakanth Kavuluru,et al.  Toward automated e-cigarette surveillance: Spotting e-cigarette proponents on Twitter , 2016, J. Biomed. Informatics.

[30]  Jon-Patrick Allem,et al.  Campaigns and counter campaigns: reactions on Twitter to e-cigarette education , 2016, Tobacco Control.

[31]  Cameron D. Norman,et al.  Vape, quit, tweet? Electronic cigarettes and smoking cessation on Twitter , 2016, International Journal of Public Health.

[32]  E. Fernández,et al.  Particulate Matter from Electronic Cigarettes and Conventional Cigarettes: a Systematic Review and Observational Study , 2015, Current Environmental Health Reports.

[33]  Heather Cole-Lewis,et al.  Social Listening: A Content Analysis of E-Cigarette Discussions on Twitter , 2015, Journal of medical Internet research.

[34]  Hayden McRobbie,et al.  E-cigarettes: an evidence update. A report commissioned by Public Health England. , 2015 .

[35]  Erik Blair,et al.  A reflexive exploration of two qualitative data coding techniques , 2015 .

[36]  C. Bullen,et al.  Electronic Cigarettes for Smoking Cessation , 2014, Current Cardiology Reports.

[37]  Bechara Choucair,et al.  Tweeting for and Against Public Health Policy: Response to the Chicago Department of Public Health's Electronic Cigarette Twitter Campaign , 2014, Journal of medical Internet research.

[38]  A. Gilmore,et al.  Understanding the emergence of the tobacco industry's use of the term tobacco harm reduction in order to inform public health policy , 2014, Tobacco Control.

[39]  M. McHugh Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic , 2012, Biochemia medica.

[40]  H. Cooper,et al.  Research designs : quantitative, qualitative, neuropsychological, and biological , 2012 .

[41]  Tom A. B. Snijders,et al.  Social Network Analysis , 2011, International Encyclopedia of Statistical Science.