IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0211758.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Tweeting about public health policy: Social media response to the UK Government’s announcement of a Parliamentary vote on draft standardised packaging regulations

Author

Listed:
  • Jenny L Hatchard
  • Joao Quariguasi Frota Neto
  • Christos Vasilakis
  • Karen A Evans-Reeves

Abstract

Background: Standardised tobacco packaging has been, and remains, a contentious policy globally, attracting corporate, public health, political, media and popular attention. In January 2015, the UK Government announced it would vote on draft regulations for the policy before the May 2015 General Election. We explored reactions to the announcement on Twitter, in comparison with an earlier period of little UK Government activity on standardised packaging. Methods: We obtained a random sample of 1038 tweets in two 4-week periods, before and after the UK Government’s announcement. Content analysis was used to examine the following Tweet characteristics: support for the policy, purpose, Twitter-user’s geographical location and affiliation, and evidence citation and quality. Chi-squared analyses were used to compare Tweet characteristics between the two periods. Results: Overall, significantly more sampled Tweets were in favour of the policy (49%) in comparison to those opposed (19%). Yet, at Time 2, following the announcement, a greater proportion of sampled tweets opposed standardised packaging compared to the period sampled at Time 1, prior to the announcement (p

Suggested Citation

  • Jenny L Hatchard & Joao Quariguasi Frota Neto & Christos Vasilakis & Karen A Evans-Reeves, 2019. "Tweeting about public health policy: Social media response to the UK Government’s announcement of a Parliamentary vote on draft standardised packaging regulations," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(2), pages 1-16, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0211758
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0211758
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0211758
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0211758&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0211758?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Selda Ulucanlar & Gary J Fooks & Jenny L Hatchard & Anna B Gilmore, 2014. "Representation and Misrepresentation of Scientific Evidence in Contemporary Tobacco Regulation: A Review of Tobacco Industry Submissions to the UK Government Consultation on Standardised Packaging," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(3), pages 1-15, March.
    2. Emily Savell & Anna B Gilmore & Gary Fooks, 2014. "How Does the Tobacco Industry Attempt to Influence Marketing Regulations? A Systematic Review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(2), pages 1-10, February.
    3. Jan Tempel & Aliya Noormohamed & Robert Schwartz & Cameron Norman & Muhannad Malas & Laurie Zawertailo, 2016. "Vape, quit, tweet? Electronic cigarettes and smoking cessation on Twitter," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 61(2), pages 249-256, March.
    4. Selda Ulucanlar & Gary J Fooks & Anna B Gilmore, 2016. "The Policy Dystopia Model: An Interpretive Analysis of Tobacco Industry Political Activity," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(9), pages 1-21, September.
    5. Harris, J.K. & Moreland-Russell, S. & Tabak, R.G. & Ruhr, L.R., 2014. "Communication about childhood obesity on twitter," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 104(7), pages 62-69.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Christina Sabbagh & Emma Boyland & Catherine Hankey & Alison Parrett, 2020. "Analysing Credibility of UK Social Media Influencers’ Weight-Management Blogs: A Pilot Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(23), pages 1-17, December.
    2. Louisa Walsh & Nerida Hyett & Nicole Juniper & Chi Li & Sophie Hill, 2022. "The Experiences of Stakeholders Using Social Media as a Tool for Health Service Design and Quality Improvement: A Scoping Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(22), pages 1-29, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tess Legg & Jenny Hatchard & Anna B Gilmore, 2021. "The Science for Profit Model—How and why corporations influence science and the use of science in policy and practice," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(6), pages 1-24, June.
    2. Valente, Thomas W. & Pitts, Stephanie & Wipfli, Heather & Vega Yon, George G., 2019. "Network influences on policy implementation: Evidence from a global health treaty," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 222(C), pages 188-197.
    3. Gary Sacks & Devorah Riesenberg & Melissa Mialon & Sarah Dean & Adrian J Cameron, 2020. "The characteristics and extent of food industry involvement in peer-reviewed research articles from 10 leading nutrition-related journals in 2018," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(12), pages 1-15, December.
    4. Patricia A McDaniel & Ruth E Malone, 2020. "Tobacco industry and public health responses to state and local efforts to end tobacco sales from 1969-2020," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(5), pages 1-25, May.
    5. MacKenzie, Ross & Mathers, Annalise & Hawkins, Benjamin & Eckhardt, Jappe & Smith, Julia, 2018. "The tobacco industry’s challenges to standardised packaging: A comparative analysis of issue framing in public relations campaigns in four countries," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(9), pages 1001-1011.
    6. Rosemary Hiscock & Nicole H Augustin & J Robert Branston & Anna B Gilmore, 2020. "Standardised packaging, minimum excise tax, and RYO focussed tax rise implications for UK tobacco pricing," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(2), pages 1-21, February.
    7. Qing Xu & Joshua Yang & Michael R. Haupt & Mingxiang Cai & Matthew C. Nali & Tim K. Mackey, 2021. "Digital Surveillance to Identify California Alternative and Emerging Tobacco Industry Policy Influence and Mobilization on Facebook," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(21), pages 1-12, October.
    8. Florentine Petronella Martino & Peter Graeme Miller & Kerri Coomber & Linda Hancock & Kypros Kypri, 2017. "Analysis of Alcohol Industry Submissions against Marketing Regulation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(1), pages 1-22, January.
    9. Linda Hancock & Natalie Ralph & Florentine Petronella Martino, 2018. "Applying Corporate Political Activity (CPA) analysis to Australian gambling industry submissions against regulation of television sports betting advertising," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(10), pages 1-21, October.
    10. John C. Boik, 2016. "Optimality of Social Choice Systems: Complexity, Wisdom, and Wellbeing Centrality," Working Paper 0005, Principled Societies Project, revised Mar 2017.
    11. Claire Adams Spears & Dina M. Jones & Scott R. Weaver & Terry F. Pechacek & Michael P. Eriksen, 2016. "Use of Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems among Adults with Mental Health Conditions, 2015," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(1), pages 1-14, December.
    12. Carnazza, Giovanni & Liberati, Paolo & Resce, Giuliano & Molinaro, Sabrina, 2021. "Smoking and income distribution: Inequalities in new and old products," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(2), pages 261-268.
    13. Jessica Liu & Donghee N. Lee & Elise M. Stevens, 2023. "Characteristics Associated with Young Adults’ Intentions to Engage with Anti-Vaping Instagram Posts," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(11), pages 1-13, June.
    14. Carters-White, Lauren & Chambers, Stephanie & Skivington, Kathryn & Hilton, Shona, 2021. "Whose rights deserve protection? Framing analysis of responses to the 2016 Committee of Advertising Practice consultation on the non-broadcast advertising of foods and soft drinks to children," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    15. Ariel Bardach & Andrea Alcaraz & Javier Roberti & Agustín Ciapponi & Federico Augustovski & Andrés Pichon-Riviere, 2021. "Optimizing Tobacco Advertising Bans in Seven Latin American Countries: Microsimulation Modeling of Health and Financial Impact to Inform Evidence-Based Policy," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(10), pages 1-13, May.
    16. Benjamin Wood & Gary Ruskin & Gary Sacks, 2020. "How Coca-Cola Shaped the International Congress on Physical Activity and Public Health: An Analysis of Email Exchanges between 2012 and 2014," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(23), pages 1-11, December.
    17. Platania, Marco & Spadoni, Roberta, 2018. "How People Share Information about Food: Insights from Tweets Regarding two Italian Regions," International Journal on Food System Dynamics, International Center for Management, Communication, and Research, vol. 9(2), March.
    18. Scott, C. & Hawkins, B. & Knai, C., 2017. "Food and beverage product reformulation as a corporate political strategy," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 37-45.
    19. Enai Ojeda & Christian Torres & Ángela Carriedo & Mélissa Mialon & Niyati Parekh & Emanuel Orozco, 2020. "The influence of the sugar-sweetened beverage industry on public policies in Mexico," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 65(7), pages 1037-1044, September.
    20. Hawkins, Benjamin & Durrance-Bagale, Anna & Walls, Helen, 2021. "Co-regulation and alcohol industry political strategy: A case study of the Public Health England-Drinkaware Drink Free Days Campaign," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 285(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0211758. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.