Media debates around smoking in vehicles carrying children: newsprint representations of claim-makers, arguments and target populations Chris Patterson 1, Dr Sean Semple 2, Sheila Duffy 3, Josh Bain 1, Karen Wood 4, Dr Heide Weishaar 1, Dr Shona Hilton 1 1 Informing Healthy Public Policy programme, MRC/CSO Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, University of Glasgow 2 Scottish Centre for Indoor Air, University of Aberdeen 3 ASH Scotland 4 General Practice & Primary Care, University of Glasgow Towards a generation free from tobacco: turning the vision into reality Thursday 18 th June 2015
Smoking in private vehicles carrying children Ban to be introduced in England and Wales Bill currently under consideration in Scotland Advocacy seems to have been successful
Research questions How did the debate about legislation to protect children from SHS in cars evolve over time Was the overall tone of the debate favourable to legislation? How were the problem and its target groups represented?
Sampling and data collection Timeframe: January 2004 February 2014 Eighteen UK and Scottish publications Keyword searches for articles on Nexis database (n=1,572) Manual exclusion of insufficiently relevant articles (n=1,150) Final sample (n=422)
Data coding and analysis Data were coded quantitatively and qualitatively Generated a quantitative coding frame combining a priori themes and emergent themes Exploratory statistical analysis using STATA Thematic qualitative analysis using Nvivo informed by results from the quantitative coding
Frequency of articles by year of publication 80 70 All articles (n=422) Articles mentioning vehicles (n=129) British Medical Association calls for total ban on smoking in vehicles 60 50 40 Smoke-free legislation implemented in Scotland Smoke-free legislation implemented in England, Wales and Northern Ireland 30 UK House of Commons empowers ministers to introduce ban on smoking in vehicles carrying children 20 10 0 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014*
Frequency of articles containing arguments about the legislation (n=105) Only critical arguments 5% Only supportive arguments 30% Both supportive and critical arguments 65%
Representations of the problem and legislation SHS predominantly presented as a proven health risk, particularly to children Vehicles presented as a major site of children s exposure, in which children are confined or trapped Supporters characterised legislation as: Necessary Enforceable Publically supported Legitimised by child protection Legislation is sometimes simply a benchmark of decency. We declare, through law, that something is not acceptable and potentially actionable, and then we are left to police ourselves. That is the mark of civilised society and successful communal living. Editorial, The Guardian, 30 th May 2013
Opposition to legislation Opposition to legislation was rare, often from FOREST Criticism focused on: Evidence Enforcement Civil liberties
Representations of the public The public were presented as broadly aware of the risks of SHS, but unaware of the specific risks Smoking parents were demonised Just two articles presented parents as caring and responsible, focusing on former smokers who had quit out of concern for their childrens health Few articles acknowledged the need to assist smokers in quitting with encouragement and support
Representations of children Children were predominantly depicted as vulnerable and passive Articles used strong emotional language to describe children s experiences of SHS exposure: distressing (Sunday Herald, 5 Sept 2004) shocking (Daily Record, 29 June 2010) Five articles (4%) highlighted children s ability to voice concerns ( nag, lecture ) about their SHS exposure and their parents smoking. Smoking can kill do you know? Why do you do it? (Daily Record, 10 Jan 2012)
Findings summary Newsprint coverage of protecting children from secondhand smoke in vehicles grew from 2005-2014 Arguments for legislation were significantly more frequent than arguments against legislation Second-hand smoke acknowledged as a health risk Advocates presented a wide package of rationales Opposition was rare, and focused on evidence, enforcement and civil liberties The public were represented as insufficiently aware of the specific risks of SHS to children in vehicles Smokers were typically demonised Children were typically presented as passive victims
Positive lessons The weight of arguments in favour of legislation benefits advocates The tobacco industry had a low profile A focus on child protection is powerful Advocates should draw more attention to the success of existing legislation which promoted changes in attitudes, behaviours and social norms Focusing on the successes of existing UK smoke-free legislation Highlighting the success and enforceability of smoke-free vehicle legislation abroad Reiterating evidence about SHS and children that may not be widely known
Stigma Pathologising smokers behaviour may be an effective strategy in building acceptance for legislative solutions However, it could have the side effect of contributing to the stigmatisation of smokers Mitigate stigma by being clear that smoking is sociallypatterned and structurally-driven
Thank you Funding Cancer Research UK Scottish School of Public Health Research ASH Scotland UK Medical Research Council Chris Patterson chris.patterson@glasgow.ac.uk Informing Health Public Policy programme MRC/CSO Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, University of Glasgow @c_c_patterson