Targets and abuse: the price public health campaigners pay

Daube, Mike

doi:10.5694/mja15.00059

Cited by 7 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 87 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…E-cigarette advocates, along with a small number of vocal public health professionals, researchers, and academics, were predominately positive in their discussions and were found to challenge other Twitter users who expressed antivaping views or were deemed to be “misrepresenting the facts” concerning e-cigarettes. Some Australian public health academics, who do not support the use of e-cigarettes until they are proven to be a safe and efficacious smoking cessation aid, have documented their relentless struggles with provaping advocates on Twitter [ 47 , 48 ], with one stating that the collective abuse received from other interest groups, such as smokers’ rights advocates, antivaccinationists, and climate change denialists, pales into insignificance compared with the volume of abuse received from vaping advocates. Several tactics were used by e-cigarette advocates to communicate their beliefs, including attempts to frame e-cigarettes as safer than tobacco cigarettes, imply that federal government agencies lack sufficient competence or evidence for the policies they endorse about vaping, and denounce as propaganda “gateway” claims of youth progressing from e-cigarettes to tobacco cigarettes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

E-Cigarette Advocates on Twitter: Content Analysis of Vaping-Related Tweets

McCausland

Maycock

Leaver

et al. 2020

JMIR Public Health Surveill

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background As the majority of Twitter content is publicly available, the platform has become a rich data source for public health surveillance, providing insights into emergent phenomena, such as vaping. Although there is a growing body of literature that has examined the content of vaping-related tweets, less is known about the people who generate and disseminate these messages and the role of e-cigarette advocates in the promotion of these devices. Objective This study aimed to identify key conversation trends and patterns over time, and discern the core voices, message frames, and sentiment surrounding e-cigarette discussions on Twitter. Methods A random sample of data were collected from Australian Twitter users who referenced at least one of 15 identified e-cigarette related keywords during 2012, 2014, 2016, or 2018. Data collection was facilitated by TrISMA (Tracking Infrastructure for Social Media Analysis) and analyzed by content analysis. Results A sample of 4432 vaping-related tweets posted and retweeted by Australian users was analyzed. Positive sentiment (3754/4432, 84.70%) dominated the discourse surrounding e-cigarettes, and vape retailers and manufacturers (1161/4432, 26.20%), the general public (1079/4432, 24.35%), and e-cigarette advocates (1038/4432, 23.42%) were the most prominent posters. Several tactics were used by e-cigarette advocates to communicate their beliefs, including attempts to frame e-cigarettes as safer than traditional cigarettes, imply that federal government agencies lack sufficient competence or evidence for the policies they endorse about vaping, and denounce as propaganda “gateway” claims of youth progressing from e-cigarettes to combustible tobacco. Some of the most common themes presented in tweets were advertising or promoting e-cigarette products (2040/4432, 46.03%), promoting e-cigarette use or intent to use (970/4432, 21.89%), and discussing the potential of e-cigarettes to be used as a smoking cessation aid or tobacco alternative (716/4432, 16.16%), as well as the perceived health and safety benefits and consequences of e-cigarette use (681/4432, 15.37%). Conclusions Australian Twitter content does not reflect the country’s current regulatory approach to e-cigarettes. Rather, the conversation on Twitter generally encourages e-cigarette use, promotes vaping as a socially acceptable practice, discredits scientific evidence of health risks, and rallies around the idea that e-cigarettes should largely be outside the bounds of health policy. The one-sided nature of the discussion is concerning, as is the lack of disclosure and transparency, especially among vaping enthusiasts who dominate the majority of e-cigarette discussions on Twitter, where it is unclear if comments are endorsed, sanctioned, or even supported by the industry.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

E-Cigarette Advocates on Twitter: Content Analysis of Vaping-Related Tweets

McCausland

Maycock

Leaver

et al. 2020

JMIR Public Health Surveill

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…RenderX or were deemed to be "misrepresenting the facts" concerning e-cigarettes. Some Australian public health academics, who do not support the use of e-cigarettes until they are proven to be a safe and efficacious smoking cessation aid, have documented their relentless struggles with provaping advocates on Twitter [47,48], with one stating that the collective abuse received from other interest groups, such as smokers' rights advocates, antivaccinationists, and climate change denialists, pales into insignificance compared with the volume of abuse received from vaping advocates. Several tactics were used by e-cigarette advocates to communicate their beliefs, including attempts to frame e-cigarettes as safer than tobacco cigarettes, imply that federal government agencies lack sufficient competence or evidence for the policies they endorse about vaping, and denounce as propaganda "gateway" claims of youth progressing from e-cigarettes to tobacco cigarettes.…”

Section: Xsl • Fomentioning

confidence: 99%

E-Cigarette Advocates on Twitter: Content Analysis of Vaping-Related Tweets (Preprint)

McCausland¹,

Maycock²,

Leaver³

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND As the majority of Twitter content is publicly available, the platform has become a rich data source for public health surveillance, providing insight into emergent phenomena, such as vaping. Although there is a growing body of literature that has examined the content of vaping-related tweets, less is known about the people who generate and disseminate these messages, and the role of e-cigarette advocates in the promotion of these devices. OBJECTIVE To identify key conversation trends and patterns over time, and discern the core voices, message frames and sentiment surrounding e-cigarette discussions on Twitter through a content analysis of tweets posted and retweeted by Australian users. METHODS Data were collected through TrISMA (Tracking Infrastructure for Social Media Analysis), a contemporary technical and organizational infrastructure for the tracking of public communication by Australian users of social media, via a list of 15 popular e-cigarette related terms. RESULTS A sample of 4432 vaping related tweets from 2012, 2014, 2016 and 2018, posted and retweeted by Australian users was analyzed. The analysis of the tweet content indicates that positive sentiment (3754, 84.7%) continues to dominate the discourse surrounding e-cigarettes on Twitter. Vape retailers and manufacturers (26.2%, 1161/ 4432), the general public (everyday persons) (24.3%, 1079/4432), and vape proponents (23.4%, 1038/4432) were the most prominent posters of e-cigarette related tweets. These account types most frequently posted and retweeted advertising and promotional content, support for e-cigarettes as a smoking cessation product or tobacco alternative, support for liberal e-cigarette regulation, and endorsement of the perceived health and safety benefits of these products. Furthermore, a number of tactics were used by vape proponents to communicate their beliefs, including attempts to frame e-cigarettes as safer than traditional smoking, denounce as propaganda gateway claims that youth who use e-cigarettes can progress to using combustible tobacco, and imply that federal government agencies lack sufficient competence or the evidence for the policies they endorse around vaping. CONCLUSIONS Australian Twitter content does not reflect the country’s current regulatory approach to e-cigarettes. Rather, the conversation on Twitter generally encourages e-cigarette use, promotes vaping as a socially acceptable practice, discredits scientific evidence of health risks, and rallies around the idea that e-cigarettes should largely be outside the bounds of health policy. The one-sided nature of the discussion is concerning, as is the lack of disclosure and transparency, especially among vaping enthusiasts who dominate the majority of e-cigarette discussion on Twitter where it is unclear if comments are endorsed, sanctioned or even supported by industry. Further insight into Twitter user’s profiles and their connections is required to fully understand how misinformation and disinformation spreads online, to develop data driven solutions to this growing threat, and to enhance the role of public health institutions in sharing quality information.

show abstract

“…Leaving aside the agendas of tobacco companies and other commercial interests, this has led to much debate—some among scientists and others of goodwill but differing views. Regrettably, legitimate robust debate has been accompanied by personal attacks and wholly unacceptable abuse, often anonymous, primarily directed at those who take a precautionary approach .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%