Proceedings_CCI Conference on Corporate Communication 2016-June 6

CONFERENCE ON CORPORATE
COMMUNICATION 2016
May 31-June 3, 2016
Baruch College/CUNY
New York
PROCEEDINGS
Offered in association with Corporate Communications:An International Journal

Michael B. Goodman, Ph.D., Conference Chair & Director
CCI - Corporate Communication International at Baruch College/CUNY, USA
Regional Editor - North America
Corporate Communications: An International Journal, UK
Lancia Yan, M.A., Conference Coordinator &Assistant Director
CCI - Corporate Communication International at Baruch College/CUNY, USA
W. Timothy Coombs, Ph.D, Editor
Corporate Communications: An International Journal, UK
In partnership with …
CCI – The Baruch Chapter, Master in Corporate Communication, Department of
Communication Studies, Baruch College/CUNY, USA
CCI – The Hong Kong Chapter, Department of Chinese & Bilingual Studies, The Hong
Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong
Amsterdam School of Communication Research (ASCoR), University of Amsterdam,
The Netherlands
Centre for Corporate Communication, Department of Business Communication,
Aarhus University, Denmark
Corporate Communication, Department of Communication, Aalto University School of
Business, Finland
Department of Strategic Communication, Lund University, Sweden
Department of Strategic Communication, University of Johannesburg, South Africa
Grady College of Journalism and Mass Communication, University of Georgia, USA
IULM University of Milan, Italy
Richard T. Robertson School of Media & Culture, Virginia Commonwealth University,
USA
Wee Kim Wee School of Communication and Information, Nanyang Technological
University, Singapore
Writing, Editing & Publishing Program, School of Communication and Arts, The
University of Queensland, Australia
Conference Proceedings Editor
Yan Jin, PhD
Proceedings Editorial Assistant
Sungsu Kim, PhD student
Published June 2016 by CCI - Corporate Communication International at Baruch
College/CUNY, New York, NY
Published June 2016 by CCI - Corporate Communication International at Baruch College/CUNY, NY

Proceedings: CCI Conference on Corporate Communication 2016
Page i
CONTENTS
An Introduction:
“Transformation of the Corporate Communication Profession – Leading Practices
2016”
Michael B. Goodman, Ph.D., Conference Chair………………………………………………..iv
Corporate Communication International’s Conference on Corporate Communication
2016…………………………………………………………………...………………..............i
The War on Tobacco:
A PR Campaign for Good
Rebecca Carriero
Baruch College/CUNY, USA…………………………..................................................................1
Co-creating Polyphony or Cacophony?
A Case Study of an Organization’s Current Brand Co-creation Process
and the Challenge of Managing Multiple Voices
Anna Karina Kjeldsen and Line Schmeltz, Aarhus University, School
of Business and Social Science, Denmark…………………………………………...…………..19
Counter-Narratives and Organizational Crisis
How LEGO Bricks Became a Slippery Business
Marianne Wolff Lundholt
University of Southern Denmark/Denmark………………………………………………………27
Creating Business Value through Corporate Communication
A Theory-based Framework and Its Practical Application
Ansgar Zerfass and Christine Viertmann, University of Leipzig,Germany……………………..44
Employee Communication in Open Innovation Communities on Internal Social Media
The Perspective of Managers Responsible for Internal Open Innovation
Helle Eskesen Gode, Department of Business Communication, VIA University College, Denm
Ark…………...………………………………………………………………………………..…55
Employee Participation in Knowledge Sharing and Change
Solutions through Enterprise Social Media
Mona Agerholm Andersen, Annette Agerdal-Hjermind and Chiara Valentini, Aarhus University,
Denmark…………………………… …………….......................................................................66
Explicating the Information Vacuum

Contents
Page ii
Stages, Intensifying Factors, and Organizational Implications
Eugene Yong-Sheng Woon, Daryl Chin-Yong Chew, Alicia Ai-Ling Seah, Nazreen Muntaj,
Augustine Pang, School of Communication and Information, Nanyang Technological University,
Singapore………………………………………………………………………………………...73
Health Impact of Excessive Screen Time
A Smoldering Crisis for Organization
Ernest F. Martin Jr. Virginia Commonwealth University,USA………………………………….88
Internalizing Citizenship Behaviour through Internal
Communication among Indian Public Services Employees
Neha Sharma, SR Group of Institutions/UPTU, Sanjay K Khatri, Indian Administrative Services
and T.J Kamlanabhan Indian Institute of Technology Madras, India………………………….102
Is Strategic Communication Too Important to Be Left to Communication Professionals?
Jesper Falkheimer, Mats Heide, Charlotte Simonsson, Rickard Andersson, Howard Nothhaft and
Sara von Platen, Department of Strategic Communication, Lund University, Sweden…...…...122
It’s Good for You Because It’s Good for Them
Communicating the Costs of Participation in Volunteer Tourism
Kathryn Lineberger, Macaulay Honors College, City University of New York, USA………...138
Managing Corporate Reputation
Role of Corporate Communications in Reputation Work
Emilia Mikola and Venla Väkeväinen, Aalto University School of Business/Department of
Management Studies, Unit of Organizational Communication, Finland ……………..…….….163
Quality Visibility in CEO Crisis Management Response Using Nonverbal Communications
to Connect to Authenticity and Stakeholders Following a Crisis
Chigo Ugoalah, Royal Roads University, CU Communications, Canada …………………….179
Shifts in the Meaning of Corporate Brand Management
A Theoretical Perspective
Oluwayemisi Olomo and Olutayo Otubanjo, Lagos Business School, Nigeria………...……....194
Social Media Management across the Organization
Building a Conceptualization from Engaged Research in a Danish Company
Constance Kampf and Marjan Mohammadreza, Dept. of Business Communication, BSS Aarhus
University, Denmark……………………………………………. ……………………….……..207
Trust in Internal Social Media Conversations
Mia Leppälä, Aalto University School of Business, Helsinki, Finland ………..… ….………...230
Using Sustainable Social Marketing to Respond to Global Climate Change
Stevina Evuleocha and Steve Ugbah, California State University, USA.....................................238

Contents
Page iii

Page iv
An Introduction
Proceedings of the CCI Conference on Corporate
Communication 2016
“Transformation of the Corporate Communication Profession
– Leading Practices 2016”
Michael B. Goodman, Ph.D., Conference Chair
Director, CCI – Corporate Communication International
CCI – Corporate Communication International has conducted research on the leading practices of
corporate communication officers for almost two decades. As part of its 2015 study, the Chief
Communication Officer of a Fortune 50 Corporation, in response to the interview question about
how corporate communication contributes to the overall success of the organization, said:
...reputation is your license to do business… We do help to protect that license to do
business, enhance it… We also create opportunity for commercial success by telling the
story about the outcomes that we produce with our products, our people, our services.
We create additional commercial opportunities…We also help to build the network of
stakeholders. We engage with the world. I like to call it the engaged enterprise. We create
the relationships that ultimately can help you be successful.
In The New CCO, The Arthur W. Page Society observes:
The Chief Communications Officer (CCO) … is at a critical inflection point. The
environment in which enterprises operate is fraught with challenges: emerging
competitors reinventing traditional business models; changing demographic, regulatory
and sociopolitical conditions; new modes of work; and an ongoing paradigm shift in how
individuals engage with one another and with organizations. Spurred by these changes
and enabled by social media, stakeholder groups have become more empowered,
emboldened and organized. Evolution of the enterprise in the face of these new realities
is required, and CCOs increasingly willbe central to guiding these changes. (The New
CCO: Transforming Enterprises in a Changing World, NY: Arthur W. Page Society,
2016, p, 5.)
The Corporate Communication Practices 2015 study builds on the CCI – Corporate
Communication International Practices and Trends Studies conducted from 2000 – 2013. The
goal of each of the CCI studies during that period was to outline and analyze the state of the art
for corporate communication practice in publicly-traded, multinational companies.
Background on The CCI Studies The first CCI study in 2000 focused on publicly traded
companies for several reasons. First, information in such companies is public and more readily
accessible. Second, public companies are in the vanguard of corporate practices because of
– the pressures of the capital markets

An Introduction: Transformation of the Corporate Communications Profession
Page v
– their need to respond to the media
– the realities of the global marketplace.
And finally, public companies have a greater understanding that their “license to operate” comes
from public approval and is maintained by public trust.
The Contemporary Business Environment – Impact on Corporate Communication Practice Five
forces of the contemporary business environment have transformed the practice of corporate
communication:
Globalization—a quantitative shift in the globalization of the world economy that has
created a qualitative change in how businesses need to communicate;
The Internet (Web 2.0)—a transformation in the adoption, use, and consumption of
information technology;
Corporate Business Model—The Networked Enterprise—an evolution in the nature and
purpose of the public corporation that is both influenced by, and at the same time,
influences, the other two forces at work.
Uncertainty—the volatility of global financial and commercial markets, and political
turmoil in Western democracies, as well as in the developing world, combines to make
planning for the future filled with high levels of risk.
Privacy and “Big Data”—the impact and consequences of communication and
information technologies. (Goodman and Hirsch, Corporate Communication: Critical
Business Asset for Strategic Global Change, NY: Peter Lang, 2015, p.xx.)
The issues facing corporations and their communication officers reflect the impact of these
forces. When asked in the interviews to identify top issues, our 2015 survey respondents
identified these: speed, consistency, employee engagement, the search for talent (the right
people), the transition to digital, the convergence between marketing and public relations, the
collapse of traditional news outlets, reputation management, crisis communication,
transparency, authenticity, measurement aligned to business outcomes, being legally compliant,
demographics (millenials and an aging population), alignment and integration across the
organization, anticipating changes.
Thought leaders who had recently retired, who were also interviewed as background for this
study, echoed these issues and added these three: leadership, empowerment of audiences through
technology, and determining the future of corporate communication and how it is structured with
others in the C-Suite.
When asked in the interviews to identify top trends, many of our respondents identified: social
media platforms, employee use of social media and mobile technology, maintaining the value of
face to face communication, leadership engagement in communication, proactive engagement of
company critics, increased speed needed to react in a crisis, the demographics of a completely
new workforce, integration of communication into business strategy. The thought leaders added:
alignment with and acting in the public interest, self publishing and owned content, employee
involvement in communication, contribution to the success of the business, and ethics.
Defining Corporate CommunicationIn the 21st
century, corporate communication has become “a
critical business asset for meeting the challenges of global change” (Goodman and Hirsch, 2015).
This study examines, analyzes, and discusses the impact of the confluence of these forces on the
major communication needs in the lifecycle of publicly traded organizations. Considering the

Page vi
transformative impact of these forces, for this study we use this definition of corporate
communication in western publicly-traded companies:
“Corporate communication is the term used to describe a variety of strategic management
functions. Depending on the organization, corporate communication includes: public
relations; crisis and emergency communication; corporate citizenship; reputation
management; community relations; media relations; [social media]; investor relations;
employee relations; government relations; marketing communication; management
communication; corporate branding and image building; advertising.”
Goodman, Michael B. “Corporate communication
Practice and Pedagogy at the Dawn of the New Millennium.”
Corporate Communication: An International Journal (11:3) 2006, p.197.in Goodman &
Hirsch, 2010, p. 15.
As the contemporary corporate performance of multiple communication and management actions,
corporate communication has “great persuasive power, because it suggests a focus on the
corporation as a whole.” (Wim Elving, Keynote, CCI Conference on Corporate Communication,
June 2015). Corporate Communication represents the “significant, managerial ideal” for all its
communication, its identity, and its messaging. Corporate communication has become “the
central managerial activity involved in managing and orchestrating all internal and external
communications aimed at creating favorable starting points with stakeholders on which the
company depends,” as opposed to communicating with different “audiences or letting different
departments handle their communications autonomously, the vision of corporate communication,
in other words, is to manage all communications under one banner.” (Elving, 2015)This approach
recognizes that the reality for an organization is to manage the projection of “images that are able
to cover physical, symbolic, and behavioral dimensions of an organization’s life.” (Elving, 2015)
Organization of the Survey Instrument The 2015 survey instrument contained seven sections.
The seventh section, Company Profile – was an outline of the Industry Groups and SIC Codes of
the survey participants by industry, company size, number of employees, securities exchange
listed, equity index, market capitalization, and presence. Here are the other six sections of the
2015 survey discussed in the report:
Organizational Practices-- discusses the responses to questions about areas of
responsibility, the role of the communication department, the challenges it faces, how the
department is organized, its size, its staffing, any changes, its diversity, the skills it
requires. It also discusses the department budget, budget changes, budget allocation, and
the impact of cost-cutting efforts.
Leadership Practices -- discusses the background and qualifications of the chief
communication officer – title, gender, age, education, professional credentials. It also
discusses the level of compensation and length of time as the communication leader. It
discusses the reporting lines for the communication officer and membership on the
executive committee. It also discusses the recruitment of the communication officer.
Performance Assessment Practices -- discusses the types of communication measures,
the performance metrics in use, and the methods of data collection. Also discussed are
the measurement reporting and benchmarking practices, as well as any codes of ethics
used by communication professionals.
Use of Agencies and Other Service Providers -- discusses the practices communication
professionals use to engage agencies and other service providers by discussing the types

Page vii
of services used, the procurement policy used, and the use of pre-approved list of
agencies and service providers. Also discussed in this section are the annual expeditures
for the use of agenciess and outside service providers, as well as the disculosure of such
expenditures.
Internal Communication Practices -- discusses the length of time the company has been
monitoring internal communication and who is responsible for it. This section also
disucsses the communication channnels used for internal communication and employee
feedback, as well as the efforts taken to protect employee anonymity. This section also
discusses the use of social networks within the whole company.
Social Media Practices -- discusses the corporate use of social media, the channels used,
employee accesss to corporate social media accounts, and the use of crowdsourceing
campaigns. Here, also, is a discussion of the personal use of social media – the corporate
policy, the consultation with the Corporate Communication department, prohibitions on
personal use during working hours and non-working hours, other prohibituions, training
program for social media use, and the public disclosure of the company social media
policy.
Goals of the 2015 Study Five goals for 2015 are: to outline & analyze the state of the art for
Corporate Communication practice in public, multinational companies; to build on the CCI
Studies from 2000 – 2013; to identify and analyze Corporate Communication current practices; to
identify trends and determine leading practices in Corporate Communication; to continue to build
the database for further study; to distribute Key Findings to the academic and professional
communities through this publication of the study, as well as several professional presentations.
Methods of the 2015 Study In January 2015, the survey was sent to the chief communication
officer of companies in the Dow 30, the Fortune 500, the S&P 500, and the Russell 1000.
Interviews The second phase of the study used telephone interviews to gather qualitative
information. Interview responses often reveal insights into current and future practices and
trends. Responses can often articulate actions, beliefs, and values that provide a context for
quantitative survey questions.
Two groups of interviewees were used. The first were the 2015 Study participants who indicated
their willingness to be interviewed as part of the study. The second was a group of recently
retired industry thought leaders who had participated in CCI’s previous studies from 2000 –
2013. The rationale for this group was to capture their long term perspective on the
profession.Each of the two groups were asked the same questions. The interviews were recorded
and transcribed.
When asked in interviews about the future of the profession, corporate communication
professionals said that they see a bright future for the profession as it faces a challenging
transformation, increased business complexity, greater demands for engaging employees and the
corporate culture, meeting higher requirements for transparency, and the increased importance of
the profession to the overall success of the enterprise. The communication officers interviewed
observed:

Page viii
“It’s going to continue to be more strategic and intertwined in the organization and …
They are going to have to wear a few other hats in order to be really more valuable to the
business …”
“…communication professionals who use data to drive a lot of their decisions are going
to have a significant advantage over the communication professionals who don’t.”
“… I think that those folks that continue to view it as it was viewed a decade ago are in
for some trouble. I think those folks that understand how it's changing and can change
along with it will be the ones that will be successful.”
“… we are the storytellers, we are the reputation managers, we are the folks tasked with
engaging employees... we have to change. We can be the architect of a lot of that
change.”
“…higher quality disclosures, higher quality communications, more substantive
conversation … will be required…”
“…we all get smarter about the technology and the opportunities and challenges that it
creates for companies, that corporations will place an even higher value on the work that
we do in providing resources to enable us to help the company be successful, by using the
new technology … effectively.”
“…increasing integration across stakeholder groups. I do see functions coming together,
so that you have one architect of the best two that touches multiple stakeholders. I would
call it a rosy future for integrated strategic communications.”
One of our thought leaders, in an interview, put the future into sharp focus by observing, “The
best prediction … is about communications being about the success of the enterprise.”
A preliminary report of the study was presented in June 2015 at the Corporate Communication
International’s Conference on Corporate Communication 2015 in New York at Baruch College,
and a report was presented on October 29, also in New York at Baruch College.
(http://www.corporatecomm.org/studies/)
The report analyzes corporate communication practices regarding a sample of public companies
registered with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Corporate Communication
Practices: 2015 analyzes findings from a survey of 45 business corporations issuing equity
securities registered with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The survey was
administered by The Conference Board in collaboration with CCI—Corporate Communication
International at Baruch College, City University of New York (CCI). Each organization invited
corporate communication, investor relations and public affairs officers from its network of
member companies to participate in the survey, which was conducted in the spring of 2015.
Participants were asked to provide information based on corporate practices existing at the time
of the survey compilation or, in some cases, as of December 31, 2014.

Page ix
The Corporate Communication Practices Study 2015confirms corporate communication as an
essential strategic management function. Chief communication officers identified the strategic
importance of corporate communication:
“We're considered a strategic partner to the CEO, the CMO, the CIO, and we provide a
wide range of strategic counsel and planning, and execution. Not only in areas where
communications traditionally has played, like PR and internal communication, but also
on things like culture, business development strategy, M&A.”
“… the strategic importance is probably more reputationally focused. We’re viewed as an
organization that is charged with considering the impact on our reputation of everything
we actually do. But on top of that it’s also helping further the organization’s overall
objectives… We're looked at as an organization … that is managing risk around
reputation and is considering reputation in all things that the company does.”
“… the importance is that nature deplores a vacuum. So, in a world where everyone has
the ability to publish broadly through social media just about anything that they want to
say, virtually with impunity, the importance of effective corporate communication is
credible to people you need to have on your side.”
The results of the 2015 Study have significant implications for professional practice worldwide,
centered on these fifteen key findings:
1) Transformation of the discipline continues with emphasis on internal (employee
engagement, corporate culture, the Intranet) & external (media and reputation)
communication functions
We asked respondents to identify which of 32 possible corporate functions were the responsibility
of corporate communication professionals. Considering their responses to questions about areas
of responsibility, the role of the communication department, the challenges it faces, these
functions were almost ubiquitous (above 90%):
Executive communication;
Crisis and emergency communication;
Employee (internal) communication;
Communication strategy;
Communication policy;
Media relations;
Public relations;
Reputation management;
Intranet communication;
and effectively define the core of contemporary corporate communication practice. The
transformation of the discipline accelerates with new emphasis on internal communication,
specifically employee engagement, corporate culture, and the Intranet; as well as external

Page x
communication with an emphasis on media and public relations and corporate citizenship. The
ubiquity of these functions defines the discipline of corporate communication in 2015.
2) More robust budgets (no change 38.6% or increased 36.4%) reflect the increased need
for corporate communication. Steady staff increases (no change 37.8% or increase of
44.5%) reflect a new confidence to hire communication professionals.
Most corporate communication departments had a budget between $1 – 5 million, or their budget
was more than $10 million. We had asked for the total budget of the corporate communication
department (including salaries, operating expenditures, fees to agencies and other service
providers, etc.). We asked respondents if the budget for the corporate communication department
had recent changes. On the whole the vast majority (75%) reported no change (38.6%) or an
increase in their budget (36.4%). Almost a quarter (24.9%) reported a decrease. We asked
respondents to estimate the allocation of the corporate communication department budget for the
Current FY and the Last FY. Almost half the budget allocation for both was to salary and related
allocations. Almost a quarter was allocated to fees to agencies and other serivce providers. We
asked respondents how the budget of the corporate communication department was affected the
last time the whole company had to cut costs. More than there quarters indicated “neither sooner
nor later than other department budgets.”
3) The transformation of the profession has placed renewed emphasis on building positive
corporate culture and employee engagement in response to uncertain global economic
conditions, changing business and media models, “big data,” and the networked enterprise.
This internal focus acknowledges the essential role that employees play in the networked
enterprise, and it continues to drive the need to boost employee morale. Chief communication
officers characterized the influence of uncertainty – political, financial, technological -- on the
practice of corporate communication as “the economic realities [that] pervade our messaging,”
“made transparency far more top of mind” as executives “communicate more, but carefully.” “It
has made corporate communication a part of every important discussion and decision,” and
executives now run their teams “like a never-ending political campaign with polling, qualitative
listening, messaging and rapid response…” The opportunity to position the enterprise for a slow
global economic recovery, or protracted global economic weakness is a result of the “focus on
business imperatives,” corporate officers seek communication “…advice or counsel… more
frequently.”
4) Diversity and minority representation among the top corporate communication
professionals indicates greater female representation, with small strides within other
groups.
CCI found in its 2013 study a reversal of a then 6 year trend, the number of female
communication executive officers who responded increased 16.1% from 2011. That trend
continues with this 2015 Practices Study. Overall the top female communication officers make up
55.6% of our respondents, and 44.4% are male.
5) Communication executives continue to see their primary role as “manager of the
company’s reputation” and “counsel to the CEO.”
Communication executives continue to see their primary role as “counsel to the CEO” &
“manager of the company’s reputation.” Strategic communication counsel has been cited as the
primary role for corporate communication officers since the first CCI Study more than a decade
ago. Executives now consider their employees as corporate ambassadors to external audiences,

Page xi
and that shift in focus becomes an important element in reputation management. The survey
provided a list of thirteen descriptive phrases and asked the respondents to rank order them as the
best description of their communication department. The top seven in order are:
• Manager of the company’s reputation
• Counsel to the CEO and the Corporation
• Manager of employee relations (internal communication)
• Manager of the company’s image
• Manager of relationships between the company and all of its key constituencies
• Advocate or “engineer of public opinion,” in support of the company's policies
• Driver of company publicity
6) Integrity, trust, and comprehensive understanding of the business and its constituencies
are among the main success factors for reputation management.
In interviews, communication officers and thought leaders identified several points necessary to
manage the corporation’s reputation successfully: a formal process to track reputation,
measurement, third party awards and recognition, company values emphasized internally, having
a communication leader who understands the business environment. One communication officer
observed, “Have ongoing insight on what different stakeholders believe about you, having
knowledge of the levers that drive and influence their perceptions of you.”
In interviews, thought leaders identified several concepts necessary to manage the corporation’s
reputation successfully: One said, “Trust has certainly got to be the first. Comprehensive
understanding of the business and its complexities …. Understanding of the industry and your
competitive set and being able to forecast accurately what the expectations of the various publics
may be more likely or not, in a given situation…advocacy and the expectations as, if you will, the
perspective of the people you’re trying to connect with.”
Another observed, “Insights into each of the organization's key constituencies, influence on the
organizations behavior and relationships with those groups, and the skills, resources and
organizational support to communicate those behaviors effectively.”
For the CCO of a Fortune 50 company success is “Obviously, a clear understanding of your
culture, and your purpose. A reputation isn't made by communicators. A reputation is made by
[your] people. A reputation is the sum of all perceptions that people have of your organization.
Our role is to help build a strong culture, to help align our values with broadly held social
values.” Another CCO observed that “Alignment because everybody has to be clear on what
direction we're going in, what we're really trying to accomplish.” And another added, “…
leadership support and participation … preparedness … you can't anticipate every crisis that's
going to come along, maybe you can't anticipate any of them. You can be in the position to
respond effectively by understanding the fundamentals of what makes effective crisis
communication. And that is filling the vacuum, don't let other people fill the vacuum. And being
nimble. The world moves really, really fast, and you have to be in a position where you can react
in minutes, not just hours or days, to changes in the market, to announcements by the government
or what's happening on Wall St., or allegations of some scandal.”
7) Political, financial, technological uncertainty drives sharp focus on business imperatives
and has led to running corporate communication like a never-ending political campaign.

Page xii
Political, financial, technological uncertainty drives a sharp focus on business imperatives and has
led to running corporate communication like a never-ending political campaign. The speed and
complexity of information exchange and communication makes transparency and engagement
more effective management strategies than command and control. The post-email environment
offers an opportunity, as well as a strategy, to move beyond third party intermediaries and engage
internal and external audiences directly.
In interviews, the communication officers noted, that “uncertainty causes the company and
communications in the company to do one of two things—either to freeze and not do anything, or
to say we’re going to set our own course. I think we’ve done a bit of both … we’ve chosen most
of the time when there’s uncertainty to take that as an opportunity to set our own course and to
tell our own story.” For another, “political uncertainty is a big challenge… Ours is a very long-
term industry [that requires] a lot of long-term planning and predictability in order to operate
successfully. When we're doing so in an environment of political uncertainty, there's just a lot of
implications to our business and our ability to plan… political uncertainty influences corporate
communications … we increasingly are getting engaged in public affairs activities, so we've
broadened our communications goal to include public affairs. Basically, government affairs in
perfect communication, so we are supporting the company on things that are political in nature,
through our public affairs activities.” Another observed, “With regard to technology, … we are
not able to move as quickly as we'd like when it comes to the major systems that feed the
business. … spending more time engaging the hearts and minds of our employees and our
different stakeholders helps weather the uncertainty. … The uncertainty. I think you just have to
be really smart and prioritize.”
8) Citizens United and Dodd/Frank have required greater transparency and disclosure
efforts in reporting, more internal coordination with other corporate officers, and greater
efforts to communicate the company position with investors and other audiences.
In interviews, the communication officers noted that these rulings have created a greater need to
coordinate with other corporate officers so that the required reports can be more transparent to
investors, regulators, and other audiences.
In interviews with thought leaders, one offers this insightful response: “… on corporate
communications, it's had a big impact on our company, because we were at that time about half
financial services. But from our practices, we've tried to simplify significantly… how we disclose
the financial performance of the company both on an annual basis and through our quarterly
earnings, rather than single spaced forty page financial filings to make them more contemporary
and understandable with the visual aids to support the words…I think we were doing that
anyway… but it certainly is consistent with Dodd-Frank, which is to help people understand the
performance of your company in an objective way, whether good or bad. I think we were on that
path already before Dodd-Frank was passed. We were more prompted, I would say, by the
financial crisis in 2008 than Dodd-Frank. But our filings are simpler. They're more easy to read.
We changed our 10-K filing this year to be less words, more graphics. Simpler, easier to
understand. We've tried to just really make it easy for the average investor to understand the
performance of the company.”

Page xiii
9) Corporate Communication departments use agencies and other service providers for
advertising (corporate brand and product or service), the annual report, crisis and
emergency communication, internet communication, media relations, public relations, and
social media. Most have a procurement policy and pre-approved list for such engagements.
The budget for almost half ot the companies is over $1,000,000.
More than three quarters of the companies (75.6%) have a Procurement Policy that requires
agencies or other providers to undergo a bidding process for these services, while the rest (24.4%)
do not. Almost two thirds of the companies (61.4%) maintain a pre-approved list of agencies or
other service providers, while the rest (38.6%) do not. Most of the companies (46.5%) spent
$1,000,000 or more, and almost a third (32.6%) spent $100,000 to $499,999. Most (60.5%)
reported fees paid for these services as a stand-alone budget line, the rest (39.5%) did not.
10) Top Corporate Communication officers are: middle-aged, paid very well, better
educated.
Top Corporate Communication executives (71.2%) were between 45 and 59 years old. There are
a number (15.5%) of baby boomers (60 and older). They are paid comparatively well. Their
salary remains high despite an uncertain economy. Slightly more than three quarters reported an
annual base salary between $100,000 and $300,000; just over 16% between $300,000 and
$500,000; slightly more than 7% reported a base salary over $500,000. None reported a base
salary under $100,000. They are better educated almost all (97.7%) had completed an
undergraduate (54.6%) or graduate degree (40.1%).
In the survey we asked the gender of the head of the communication department. Overall the top
female communication officers make up 55.6% of our respondents, and 44.4% are male. CCI
found in its 2013 study a reversal of a then 6 year trend, the number of female communication
executive officers who responded increased 16.1% from 2011. That trend of more female
executives continues with this 2015 Practices Study. There are differences by industry (financial
services 70% female communication executives), by annual revenue (mid-sized companies 61.5%
female communication executives), and by number of employees (small companies 71.4% female
communication executives).
11) Corporate communication professionals see the top issues that they face related to
increases in techonology, speed, transformation of the discipline, alignment across the
enterprise and with business outcomes, convergence, and transformation.
In interviews, communication officers identified their top critical issues in corporate
communication. Our 2015 survey respondents identified these: speed, consistency, employee
engagement, the search for talent (the right people), the transition to digital, the convergence
between marketing and public relations, the collapse of traditional news outlets, reputation
management, crisis communication, transparency, authenticity, measurement aligned to business
outcomes, being legally compliant, demographics (millenials and an aging population), alignment
and integration across the organization, anticipating changes. Thought leaders who had recently
retired, who were also interviewed as background for this study, echoed these issues and added
these three: leadership, empowerment of audiences through technology, and determining the
future of corporate communication and how it is structured with others in the C-Suite.
12) Corporate communication professionals see the top trends that they face related to
social media, employee engagement, leadership, proactive engagement with company
critics, demographics of the new workforce, and alignment with public intrerst.

Page xiv
When asked to identify top trends, many of our respondents identified: social media platforms,
employee use of social media and moblie technology, maintaining the value of face to face
communication, leadership engagement in communication, proactive engagement of company
critics, increased speed needed to react in a crisis, the demographics of a completely new
workforce, integration of communication into business strategy. Our thought leaders added:
alignment with and acting in the public interest, self publishing and owned content, employee
involvement in communication, contributing to the success of the business, ethics.
13) Social Media, no longer a novelty, becomes another part of the strategic management of
corporate communication.
In the survey we noted that Blogs, social networks, and websites have become important vehicles
of communication with key external stakeholders of the company. We provided a list of 13 and
asked which ones the company uses as official channels of communication. A large majority,
more than a quarter, used LinkedIn, Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube. In the survey we asked
who, among 9 choices, at the company has access to and is authorized to use such channels of
communication. A large majority (77.8%) indicated the corporate communication officer. We
asked if the company conducted any crowdsourcing campaign in the last 12 months to gather
ideas from and engage a large audience of customers or other stakeholders. A third (33.3%)
indicated no such campaign. Slightly more than a tenth (11.1%) had used one to obtain ideas
useful to the design of a communication campaign, and another (11.1%) used crowdsourcing as
part of the communication campaign, to engage customers. A very small number (4.4%) used
crowdsourcing as part of an issue management strategy. We asked if the company has a formal
policy on the personal use of social media by employees, and more than 95% indicated that they
did.
14) Most of the heads of communication report to the CEO, but reflecting the transition
taking place in the profession, many report to the Chief Marketing Officer. All of our
respondents indicated that they were responsible for the oversight of internal
communication. Since 100% of our respondents were responsible for overseeing internal
communication, there were no differences by industry, annual revenue, or by number of
employees.
We asked to whom the head of communication reports. Almost a third (31.1%) report to the
Chief Executive Officer, and a fifth (20%) report to the Chief Marketing officer. Most of the
heads of communication report to the CEO, but reflecting the transition taking place in the
profession, many report to the Chief Marketing Officer. And many report to “other.” We also
asked if the head of the communication department is part of the company’s executive committee.
Most were not, but an important minority (28.9%) were.
We asked if the corporate communication department is primarily responsible for internal
communication, and if it does not oversee internal (employee) communication, what department,
of the nine listed, did:
Human Resources (HR)
Information Technology (IT)
Marketing and Sales
Office of the CEO
Office of a C-Suite executive (other than the CEO)
Public Affairs

Page xv
The company has instituted a dedicated Employee Engagement department, which
oversees internal (employee) communication
The company has instituted a dedicated Internal Communication (IC) department
Internal communication tasks are decentralized and conducted by individual departments
or divisions
None of our respondents indicated that they did not oversee internal communication. Since
100% of our respondents were responsible for overseeing internal communication, there were no
differences by industry, annual revenue, or by number of employees.
15) Corporate communication professionals see a bright future for the profession as it faces
a challenging transformation, increased business complexity, greater demands for engaging
employees and the corporate culture, meeting higher requirements for transparency, and
the increased importance of the profession to the overall success of the enterprise.
One of our thought leaders, in an interview, put the future into sharp focus by observing, “The
best prediction … is about communications being about the success of the enterprise.”

Page xvi
Corporate Communication International
Conference on Corporate Communication 2016
The annual Corporate Communication International’s Conference on Corporate Communication
is an opportunity for corporate communicators to develop professionally and to bring value to
their companies. It is also an opportunity for scholars to share their knowledge and research. It
has been the premise of this conference that relationships among scholars and practitioners are an
essential element of the social glue that binds civilized people together. And international
meetings are important to build and maintain trust among professionals with common interests
and goals, but who are disbursed around the world.
It is in this spirit that once again corporate executives and university scholars met at Baruch
College/CUNY in New York City, USAto exchange information and explore communication
from a global perspective.
CCI’sthree-day Conference on Corporate Communication 2016 is intended to:
Illuminate the interest in corporate communication as a strategic function in
organizational success.
Explore the influence of globalization on the corporate communication profession as
it relates to theory, practice, roles, processes, and ethics.
Continue as a forum for the exchange of ideas and information among industry and
university representatives.
Indicate trends and provide analysis for communication professionals, university
faculty, and others interested in corporate communication.
Disseminate the conference discussions through the publication of the conference
Proceedings, and selected papers in Corporate Communication: An International
Journal.
The papers published here were selected based on a peer review process. We are also grateful to
the members of the CCI Conference on Corporate Communication 2016 Program Committee for
their insight and expertise in making this conference a success. They are:
Norm Booth, D Litt,Coyne Public Relations, USA*
W. Timothy Coombs, PhD, Texas A&M University
ShuiDuen Chan, PhD,The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong*
Wim Elving,PhD, Corporate Communications: An International Journal*
Jesper Falkheimer, PhD, Lund University, Sweden*
Finn Frandsen, Mag Art, Aarhus University
Christina Genest, MA, CCI at Baruch College/CUNY (retired), USA*
Roger Hutt, PhD, Arizona State University, USA*
Yan Jin, PhD, University of Georgia, USA*
Anne Kankaaranta, PhD, Aalto University School of Business, Finland
Ernest Martin, Jr., PhD, Virginia Commonwealth University, USA*
Alessandra Mazzei, Mag Art, IULM University of Milan, Italy*
Augustine Pang, PhD, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore

An Introduction: CCI Conference on Corporate Communication 2016
Page xvii
Roslyn Petelin, PhD, University of Queensland, Australia*
Pat Scott, PhD, University of Pennsylvania &Uhmms Corp., USA*
Daniel So, Ed.D, Founder, CCI Hong Kong Chapter (retired)*
Jo-annStraat, MA,Daichi Sankyo (retired), USA*
Don Swanson, EdD, Monmouth University, USA*
Sonja Verwey, PhD, University of Johannesburg, South Africa*
*Abstract & Paper Reviewers
Additionally, we thank the following contributors to the Conference on Corporate
Communication 2016:
Conference Sponsors
CCI – The Baruch Chapter
CCI – The Hong Kong Chapter
Tribe Pictures
Conference Awards Sponsors
Corporate Communications: An International Journal, Emerald Group Publishing
Limited
Uhmms
Conference Panel Sponsors
ABC – Association for Business Communication
Journal of Communication Management, Emerald Group Publishing Limited
CCI Chapters
CCI - The Baruch Chapter, Department of Communication Studies, Baruch
College/CUNY, USA
CCI - The Hong Kong Chapter, Department of Chinese & Bilingual Studies, The Hong
CCI Academic Partners
CCI – The Baruch Chapter, Master in Corporate Communication, Department of
Communication Studies, Baruch College/CUNY, USA
CCI – The Hong Kong Chapter, Department of Chinese & Bilingual Studies, The Hong
Amsterdam School of Communication Research (ASCoR), University of Amsterdam,
The Netherlands
Centre for Corporate Communication, Department of Business Communication,
Aarhus University, Denmark
Corporate Communication, Department of Communication, Aalto University School of
Business, Finland
Department of Strategic Communication, Lund University, Sweden
Department of Strategic Communication, University of Johannesburg, South Africa

An Introduction: CCI Conference on Corporate Communication 2016
Page xviii
IULM University of Milan, Italy
Richard T. Robertson School of Media & Culture, Virginia Commonwealth
University, USA
Wee Kim Wee School of Communication and Information, Nanyang Technological
University, Singapore
Writing, Editing & Publishing Program, School of Communication and Arts,The
University of Queensland, Australia
CCI Corporate Sponsors
Amgen Inc.
Apco Worldwide Inc.
Honeywell
The J.M. Smucker Company
Pfizer Inc
Michael B. Goodman, Ph.D., Conference Chair& CCI Director
Lancia Yan, M.A., Conference Coordinator& CCI Assistant Director

Page 1
The War on Tobacco
A PR Campaign for Good
Rebecca Carriero
Baruch College/CUNY, USA
rebeccacarriero@gmail.com
Beyond the smoke and mirrors of big tobacco’s glamor stands a grim reality: each year, smoking kills 6
million people worldwide. In the U.S. it is the largest preventable killer and is responsible for more deaths
than from car accidents, illegal drugs, murder, and AIDS combined. Tobacco costs the U.S. more than $170
billion in health care expenditures. While public relations and advertising contributed to the rise of the
tobacco business – the good news is, the same tactics used to help promote tobacco are being used to
curb it. This paper analyses the fight to change public perception, starting with the Surgeon General’s
landmark study issued in 1964 that declared smoking a public health risk to the present. The multi-media
rich paper also explores how the anti-tobacco movement’s messages and tactics have evolved and in what
ways it needs to change particularly in the light of the emergence of electronic cigarettes, and the tobacco
industry’s international growth. Research was conducted by analyzing historical documents including ads,
press clippings, published books on the topic as well as original interviews conducted by the researcher.
Keywords: Crisis communications, public health communications, public perception, advocacy.
Introduction
What chance does the war on tobacco really have against the sophisticated, sleek and moneyed
coffers of big tobacco? Smoking is cool. It’s seductive, ritualistic and rebellious. Characters chain
smoke contemplatively in 1960s French New Wave cinema. Rough and tumble iconic smokers
graced American dramas for years. Cigarettes practically sell themselves. As BR, the fictional
tobacco salesman shouts in the movie, Thank You for Smoking, “We don't sell Tic Tacs, we sell
cigarettes. And they're cool, available, and addictive! The job is almost done for us!”
(International Movie Database, 2015)
Beyond the smoke and mirrors of big tobacco’s glamor stands a grim reality: each year, smoking
kills 6 million people worldwide (Center for Disease Control, 2015). Smoking is also the cause of
respiratory illnesses for thousands of others1
(Center for Disease Control, 2015). In the U.S. it is
the largest preventable killer and is responsible for more deaths than from car accidents, illegal
drugs, murder, and AIDS combined (Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids, 2015). In addition to
death, tobacco use leads to premature aging, rotting teeth, hair loss, sagging skin and yellow eyes
(Center for Disease Control, 2015). Big tobacco is an industry that puts millions at risk and ruins
the lives of many others through second-hand smoke. And smoking causes a substantial burden to
national health care costs. Tobacco costs the U.S. more than $170 billion in health care
expenditures and $151 billion in lost productivity each year. (Xu, 2015)2
While public relations and advertising contributed to the rise of the tobacco business (Public
Relations Museum Video, 2015) – the good news is, the same tactics used to help promote

The War on Tobacco: A PR Campaign for Good
Page 2
tobacco are being used to reverse the growth of smoking. Coupled with leadership from the
medical community, anti-tobacco advocates have used public relations to help change public
attitudes towards smoking, raise awareness about the health risks of smoking, the policy
regulations required for lasting change and have acted as watchdogs against the tobacco industry
(Office of National Health & Smoking, Center for Disease Control, 1999).
In efforts to shape policy and reduce smoking worldwide, the anti-tobacco movement has had to
compete with the ever creative and resource rich tobacco industry. Anti-tobacco advocates have
used former public smokers to speak out against the tobacco industry and health warnings in
campaigns. Today they are using sleek-ads aimed at teen viewers and tapping into the Millennial
generation’s brand awareness and social activism in order to stop another generation from getting
hooked.
Public relations campaigns exposing the risks of smoking have led to stronger legislative action
restricting tobacco sales, protection against consumers from deceptive marketing practices, and
public awareness campaigns that have contributed to the decline of smoking in the United States.
But the fight continues as the industry finds ways to expand overseas in low and middle income
countries where smoking is tied directly into the national economy. With the rapid expansion of
new products sold worldwide like electronic cigarettes, the resilient tobacco industry is
threatening to undo years of vital public health safeguards. Understanding the effectiveness of
previous messaging campaigns will help shape future public relations strategies to combat the
resurgence of smoking.
This paper will act as an analysis of the fight to change public perception, starting with the
Surgeon General’s landmark study issued in 1964 that declared smoking a public health risk to
the present. The paper will examine tactics led by anti-smoking groups, the Campaign for
Tobacco Free Kids and the American Legacy Foundation which runs an innovative youth tobacco
prevention campaign called, truth.
The paper will also explore how the anti-tobacco movement’s messages and tactics have evolved
and in what ways it needs to change particularly in the light of the emergence of electronic
cigarettes, and the tobacco industry’s international growth.
Smoking - A Known Health Risk since Before the 1964 Surgeon General’s Study
In 1964, the U.S. Surgeon General published a landmark study that linked smoking to cancer. The
report officially declared smoking a public health issue and led to a wave of civic action against
the industry. While it was the first time that the U.S. government and the medical community
established a firm line against smoking, the truth is, the threat caused by cigarettes was well
known before then. In the decades leading up to the 1960s the tobacco industry experienced sixty
years of solid growth, unencumbered by pressure from the public health community. It quickly
became a profitable and unstoppable American pastime.
Smoking rates in the U.S. skyrocketed in the early 20th
century with improvements in mass
production, the advent of the match and the rise of mass media advertising to promote cigarettes
(Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 1999). Annual per capita cigarette consumption
increased from 54 cigarettes in 1900 to 4,345 cigarettes in 1963, up until 1964 - the year that the
Surgeon General’s landmark study linking smoking to health risks was published (Morbidity and
Mortality Weekly Report, 1994). 3
Cigarette smoking among women increased in the 1920s with the help of Edward Bernays’
brilliant public relations campaign which linked smoking to the women’s movement. The “father

Page 3
of public relations,” Edward Bernays, turned cigarettes into “torches of freedom” and upended
the social taboo against women smoking in public. (Amos, 2000)
Bernays orchestrated letter writing campaigns, publicity stunts and shaped advertising messages
that played into women’s concerns about health and beauty. While he inadvertently advanced the
goals of the women’s movement – his main objectives were fueled by business interests.
Removing the taboo against women smoking helped open a whole a large market for his client,
Lucky Strike.4
(Bernays later tried to undo the damage by advising PR firms to stop working on
behalf of the tobacco industry). (Bisbort, 2008)
While scientific studies linking tobacco use with cancer and associated health risks were
published as early as the 1940s, by analyzing advertisements one can infer that big tobacco was
well aware of the health risks of smoking as early as the 1920s. Ads featured doctors and showed
the cigarette industry hijacking the medical community to mislead the public about the risks of
smoking.
For example, a Lucky Strike ad from the 1920s positions cigarettes as a slimming device, and
promoted the “toasted” cigarette. Lucky Strike differentiated themselves by promoting their
“toasted” method of curing tobacco. The company claimed “toasted” smokes protected throats
against irritation (A marketing ploy that was later discredited).
Image Caption: Cigarette ads from the 1920s-1950s playing on health concerns of the public
indicating that big-tobacco was well aware that smoking was unhealthy long before the 1964
Surgeon General’s report.
Yet the advertisement included disclaimer language. One ad with a shadowy image of an obese
woman next to a thin woman says, “We do not say smoking Lucky’s reduces flesh. We do say
when tempted to over-indulge, reach for a Lucky instead.” In 1930, Lucky Strike began running
advertisements featuring physicians and by the1950s, campaigns even featured dentists and
athletes.
Despite the use of doctors in ads for cigarettes, some in the medical community were already
making links to smoking and cancer. In 1919 lung cancer was such a rarely diagnosed disease

Page 4
that at the Washington University’s Barnes Hospital, an entire medical school class was invited to
witness the autopsy of a man who had died from the disease. The Professor leading the autopsy
believed that no one in the class would ever again see another case. (Blum, 1999)
Image Caption: Ad from the 1940s marketing cigarettes to World War I soldiers, linking smoking
to patriotism. Google Image search.
Anti-smoking pioneer, Dr. Alton Ochsner, was amongst those students witnessing the lung
autopsies. Nearly two decades later, Dr. Ochsner began to see an uptick of the once rare, lung
cancer. The patients had a common thread. All were men who had taken up smoking during
World War 1, just about the time that cigarettes were being newly mass-advertised and given to
soldiers to ease the stress of warfare. In the trenches, soldiers did not have time to savor a slow
burning cigar, or pack a pipe so cigarettes became the go-to source for nicotine and were even
packed in their rations. (Warner, Pollack, 2014)
In the 1940s Oschner began to publicize his theory that smoking was responsible for the increase
in lung cancer. In 1952, he published an article in the Journal of the American Medical
Association connecting science with his theory (Blum, 1999). More and more studies in the U.S.
and in Britain were linking smoking to health risks. In 1950 the Journal of the American Medical
Association (JAMA) published one of the most robust studies linking smoking to lung
cancer(Warner, Pollack, 2014). In 1952, Readers Digest published the JAMA findings in an
article title “Cancer by the Carton” bringing the issue to the general public’s attention. (Warner,
Pollack, 2014)5
In 1954 Eva Cooper filed the first civil lawsuit against the tobacco industry. She
sued R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. for the death of her husband from lung cancer. Cooper lost the
case but she became the first of many to put the industry on trial forcing big tobacco to reveal
much about its business practices and products. (Curriden, 1994).
As the debate about cigarettes and their links to public health begin to bubble, the industry began
to innovate and market new gimmicks to obfuscate the risks of smoking. By 1954 tobacco
companies began mass-marketing filtered cigarettes and low-tar formulations that promised a
"healthier" smoke.6
Robert Proctor’s book, the Golden Holocaust published in 2012, draws on
industry documents (made public thanks to litigation) and details how filtered cigarettes were one
of many fraudulent tactics created to assuage the public’s fear.

Page 5
Image Caption: Kent Cigarette Ad marketing their filtered cigarettes as a “proven, healthier”
smoke.7
The war on tobacco began to gain traction in the late 50s and led to a decade of strong, forceful
action in the battle over public opinion and health. The tobacco industry knew it too. In 1953,
competitive cigarette companies bound together to form the Council for Tobacco Research (later
known as the Tobacco Industry Research Committee).
Paul Hahn, president of the American Tobacco Company sent a telegram to eight other leading
cigarette companies suggesting that they publically respond together against research and
government action against smoking. Thus the creation of the committee was formed. The group
was run by and out of the headquarters of the public relations firm Hill & Knowlton (H+K) in
New York City (Kluger, 1997).
Through this committee, the cigarette industry in a united front, issued statements and published
pro-smoking research. Though bound together publically, many within the ranks disagreed with
these approaches. For example, Kent Cigarettes chose to play into the health concerns and
position their cigarettes as a “healthier choice” whereas other companies wanted to either
vociferously deny links and or stay out of the debate all together (Kluger, 1997).
While lawyers often argued that acknowledging any culpability could open up the industry to
regulation, it was undeniable that the industry had to do something to show that it was aware of
the public’s concern. While the Council for Tobacco Research rolled out rebuttal upon rebuttal,
flooding publications with articles like “Heavy Smokers with Low Mortality” and cigarette
companies’ annual reports or speeches to shareholders even included defiant words questioning
“proof” to health hazards, the industry’s PR firm Hill and Knowlton attempted to position their
client as acting responsibly in the face of the mounting public health concern.
H+K proposed voluntarily advising smokers to use the product in moderation and putting health
warnings on cigarette packages. The PR firm argued that warnings would protect companies
from civil claims. Lawyers feared it would be an admission (Kluger, 1997). H+K’s idea did not
gain any traction with cigarette companies, but warning labels became a requirement that health
organizations advocated for and secured.

Page 6
Of course, a coterie of lawyers and public relations consultants reviewed every piece of public
material in efforts to protect cigarette companies from damaging litigation. No matter how much
the industry spent on legal and PR counsel, the industry would face a barrage of lawsuits which
would reveal many of the deceptive marketing and business practices employed by the cigarette
industry.
1960 - The Decade that Put Tobacco on the Defense:
In the midst of publically denying the health risks through clever world play (for instance saying
there was no “proof” that smoking led to health risks and avoiding the word “evidence” for which
there was plenty) and backhandedly funding studies by “objective,” credible medical institutions
(for example giving a $25,000 three year gift to the leading cancer research organization in the
1960s Sloan-Kettering), Philip Morris was busy trying to engineer a “healthier” cigarette (Kluger,
1997) .
In a lab memorandum dated, November 15, 1961 – Philip Morris researchers had confirmed
trace amounts of 42 compounds in cigarette smoke identified as carcinogens and linked it to
increased tumor growth. The researcher, Helmut Wakeham went on to produce a report titled
“Research and Development Program Leading to a Medically Acceptable Cigarette” (Kluger,
1997).
At the same time, leading anti-smoking crusaders at the American Cancer Society allied with
three other health groups – the National Heart Association, the National Tuberculosis Association
and the American Public Health Association. Together they pressured the newly elected
president, John F. Kennedy to address the growing public health concern. When their letters
barely elicited a response, they threatened to go to the newspapers to complain about Kennedy’s
“foot dragging.” (Kluger, 1997).
In 1961, reeling from the Bay of Pigs fiasco, President Kennedy could not afford any bad press.
Kennedy punted the letters to his Health, Education and Welfare Secretary, who coordinated a
meeting with the three organizations and the Surgeon General, Luther Terry. In 1962 President
Kennedy was asked directly at a press conference what he was doing about the growing concern
over smoking and health. He could not provide a satisfactory answer but he tasked the Surgeon
General to find them. Two weeks later, Surgeon General Terry announced there would be a
committee to review the links (Kluger, 1997).
Within two years, the committee’s publically released findings led to a news firestorm that
changed public health history. In 1964, on national television, the Surgeon General announced
that the year-long study had indeed revealed a link to lung cancer, and declared smoking a public
health issue.

Page 7
VIDEO Image Caption: CBS News Archives, Harry Reasoner anchors a CBS News Extra "On
Smoking and Health" following the 1964 release of the U.S. Surgeon General's report linking
smoking with disease and mortality. Hover over the screen clipping & click CTRL Shift, to play
the full video.8
The report remained one of the top news stories of 1964. The anti-tobacco advocacy groups
finally had a strategic win against the war on smoking. But they picked a battle with a strong and
crafty adversary. In 1964, the tobacco industry was an $8 billion a year industry responsible for
$3 billion in local, state and federal taxes, as well as 96,000 jobs and $150 million in advertising
(Center for Study of Tobacco and Society Video, 2014)
In news story after news story, the anti-tobacco movement’s stance and the tobacco industry’s
position became framed as a business versus moral issue9
. Journalists interviewed southern
business men lamenting the loss of jobs and priests speaking on the immoral role of smoking ads
telling young children to “act like men” by smoking.
VIDEO Image Caption: News report features journalists interviewing southern business men
lamenting the loss of jobs and priests speaking on the immoral role of smoking ads telling young
children to “act like men” by smoking. Hover over the screen clipping above & click CTRL Shift,
to play the full video.
A War with Words:

Page 8
By the 1970s, the cigarette industry moved on to other messaging. It was no longer trying to
declare through ads – what brand was endorsed by doctors as it had in the 1950s – now, in the
rebellious 1960s and early 70s, the industry tapped into the anti-authoritarian, individualistic
undercurrent. Cigarettes were now marketed as an accoutrement to a pointedly defiant generation.
Smoking ads played on the rebellious and notorious connotations of cigarettes. Cigarette Ads
from Camel, Virginia Slim and Newport cigarettes used counter-culture arch-types to market
smoking. The ads tapped into the burgeoning Women’s ‘Lib’ Movement, sexual liberation and
the Black Power Movement.
For example, Virginia Slims, a brand marketed towards women alluded to the fight for equal
rights using the comic book heroine, Super Woman in one of their campaigns. The tagline was,
“We make Virginia Slims especially for women because they are biologically superior to men.”
Newport cigarettes picked up on the radical chic imagery popularized by the Black Panther
movement.
Image Caption: Cigarette Ads from Camel10
, Virginia Slim11
and Newport from the 70s12
using
counter-culture arch-types to marketing smoking. The ads tap into the burgeoning Women’s ‘Lib’
Movement, sexual liberation and even a look popularized by the Black Panther movement
The fight to smoke freely became once again, part of the rallying cry of a social movement, just
as it had in the 1920s during the first wave of women’s rights. The message from the anti-tobacco
industry had to compete with the aspirational tone of the cigarette industry’s ads.
Whereassmoking ads were defiantly glamorous, the anti-tobacco ads brought it back to reality.
Tobacco control advocates focused on exposing what was happening on the inside of a smoker’s
body, where tobacco had free reign to destroy.
The anti-tobacco industry began to push for restrictions that would ban cigarette ads on television
but also invested in campaigns that showed celebrities speaking out against the deceptive
marketing tactics and the health hazards of cigarettes. The first anti-smoking ad produced by the
American Cancer Society featured children imitating their smoking parents. It was created in

Page 9
1961 by political ad genius, Tony Schwartz, who was also responsible for creating the famous
“Daisy Ad” widely credited for helping Lyndon Johnson win the presidency (Fox, 2008).
Another ad created by the American Cancer Society in 1967 featured television star, William
Talman who was best known for his role as Hamilton Burger, the district attorney who
perpetually lost to Perry Mason. The ad struck a nerve. It intimately depicted the actor playing
with his young children and young wife. In a pensive voice he talked about how cigarettes
“would take [him] away” from his small children and wife. Four weeks after airing, the actor died
of lung cancer (Center for the Study of Tobacco and Society Video, 2014). During the same year,
warnings of the risks of smoking begin appearing on packs of cigarettes thanks to anti-smoking
advocacy work.
Image Caption: Anti-smoking ads from the American Cancer Society begin to appear in the late
60s and 70s. They focus on the ugly health effects of smoking, countering big tobacco’s
glamorous models in ads.
Anti-smoking materials often featured vulnerable children exposed to harmful second-hand
smoke. This was effective because they pulled at the heart strings of guilt-ridden parents.
Restricting tobacco companies from marketing to children directly was always an important part
of the anti-tobacco movement. It would ensure that the next generation would avoid getting
hooked. Efforts also focused on educating the 18 and under set about the health risks of smoking
– because that’s exactly the demographic tobacco marketers were targeting too.
By the 1970s and 1980s, as restrictions against cigarettes and advertising gained traction, the
tobacco industry became more sophisticated in their marketing
techniques. Tobacco companies maneuvered around this by
sponsoring major televised sporting events. Their branding
appeared all over tennis courts and other sporting venues. Live
action shots with cigarette logos could not avoid being shown on
national TV and so the clever tobacco industry outsmarts regulators
once again.

Page 10
Another blow to big tobacco’s credibility would emerge in the 1980s. Research proving second-
hand smoke is also hazardous would put a kink in tobacco’s messaging. While pro-smoking
talking points from the 1970s and 1980s stoked a quasi-freedom rallying cry of smokers, now
their right to smoke was undoubtedly infringing on others rights to clean air. (Watch the debate
on CSPAN, between John Banzhaf, executive director of Action on Smoking and Health, and
Brennan Moran, the assistant to the president at the Tobacco Institute, arguing the rights of
smokers and the rights of non-smokers).
With this new research and the Clean Air Act implemented by the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), smokers could no longer freely impose their ill choice on others. (US Surgeon
General, 2014). The American Lung Association’s anti-smoking materials broadened its message.
Where smokers might have been deaf to the health risks highlighted by anti-smoking groups,
non-smokers could be encouraged to be more protective about their own individual rights to clean
air.
Image Caption: American Lung Association pins and posters from the 1970s and 1980s
advocating that non-smoker’s rights to clean air trumped those of smokers’ arguing for their
rights to smoke.
Additional research to bolster the EPA’s Clean Air Act found links between second hand
smoking and air-born carcinogens became fodder for other agencies like the Labor Department’s
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). Research on second-hand smoke helped
usher in OSHA regulations banning smoking in work places.
By the 1990s, the public became more supportive of bans on smoking in other public places
including restaurants and in the early 2000s, even public parks (see chart). In the face of ongoing
denials and resistance from the tobacco industry, due to a combination of increased public
education, policy reform and litigation, attitudes around smoking have turned the tide. But the
war is hardly over.

Page 11
A Winnable War?
According to the Tobacco Atlas, the largest cigarette companies in the United States spent $8.37
billion on marketing and $26 million in lobbying efforts in 2011and 2012 alone (Legacy
Foundation, 2015). Yet the number of people who smoke have been trending downward
dramatically especially amongst young people. From 2011 to 2014, the share of high school
students who smoked traditional cigarettes declined substantially, to 9 percent from 16 percent
(Tavernese, 2015).
The American Legacy Foundation is the nation’s largest public health foundation devoted to
tobacco use, prevention and cessation. Legacy envisions an America where tobacco is a thing of
the past, where all youth and young adults reject tobacco use. Legacy’s proven-effective and
nationally recognized public education programs include truth®, the national youth smoking
prevention campaign that has been cited as contributing to significant declines in youth smoking;
EX®, an innovative public health program designed to speak to smokers in their own language
and change the way they approach quitting; and research initiatives exploring the causes,
consequences and approaches to reducing tobacco use. Located in Washington, D.C., the
foundation was created as a result of the November 1998 Master Settlement Agreement (MSA)
reached between attorneys general from 46 states, five U.S. territories and the tobacco industry.
The organization uses market intelligence, government outreach and unique public relations
approaches to snuff out smoking in the U.S. For example, because most major cigarette
corporations are publically held companies, tobacco companies are required to report marketing
tactics and vulnerabilities. Additionally, Legacy also uses information gleaned from thousands of
pages of tobacco industry documents that were made public by the tobacco settlement that created
the foundation. Legacy funds were used to establish the online Legacy Tobacco Documents
Library at the University of California, San Francisco. The Legacy Foundation strategically
exploits their blind spots.
The Legacy Foundation identifies who the tobacco industry is marketing to and counter markets
directly to these audiences. The organization conducts research including scouring public investor
VIDEO & TEXT TIMELINES:
Click here to watch a video
on a history of anti-smoking
efforts, created by the
Center for the Study of
Tobacco and Society.
Click here for a text timeline
of major tobacco related
events in the United States
written by the Robert Wood
Johnson Foundation.

Page 12
documents like 10-Ks and annual reports that exposes the marketing tactics of the tobacco
industry. Then the Legacy Foundation undermines them. Additionally, it also details questionable
business practices and contradictions to shareholders.
Their paid advertising is currently created by 72andSunny – media buying agency is currently
Assembly and the Public Relations firm of record for earned media is Ketchum (Bradley, 2014).
They are sophisticated and differ greatly from the Public Service Announcements (PSAs) of
previous years. The Legacy Foundation has clearly done its homework on what makes the
Millennial and Gen Z audiences respond.
Born in 1980-2001, Millennials account for 31% of the U.S. population outpacing members of
Gen X (born in 1965-1979) and Boomers (1946-1964). Millennials are:
Civic minded and socially aware.
They feel compelled to make the world a better place.
Value being good people over career and even marital success.
Value brands that show the ability to change with consumer feedback.
Would rather spend on a desirable experience than on coveted gadgets.
And they rely on social media to consume information and vet brands:
60% of millennials said social media was the top way they are influenced by brands
where print media trailed behind at 31%. (Morrison 2003, Horowitz 2014)
The current truth Campaign ads run on MTV, Vh1 and Bravo – networks among many others
that have high ratings of young viewers. Millennials are a generation of savvy youngsters all too
familiar with the overt marketing tactics of brands. truth ads tap into teenager’s awareness and
cynicism. One of the ads called out celebrities for inadvertently market to young people and
importantly, the entire ad campaign calls upon the generation to “end smoking now.”
VIDEO Image Caption: TMZ analyses the Truth Campaign ad which aired during the MTV
Video Music Awards. CTRL Shift to Watch the video.
They also are designed to visually appeal to Millennials, incorporating aesthetic trends popular
with the demographic in music and technology. truth is also seen on computer, mobile phone and
TV screens with aggressive electronic music, fast stats that stream onto the screen like a text
message and an overall ethos that feels similar to the “occupy Wall Street” movement’s energy.
Most importantly, the ads frame smoking as a curable epidemic that millennials can defeat – a
message likely to resonate with a civic minded, socially active generation.

Page 13
In an interview with the researcher, the challenge, says CEO & President of t Legacy Robin
Koval, is reaching smokers who do not necessarily consume information in the same way
previous generations have. “People with the most education and access to cessation tools are the
people who have stopped smoking. Smoking has become a behavior that is more concentrated in
lower socioeconomic groups,” she said.
A long industry exposé in the New Yorker or the New York Times may not reach these smokers,
but the good news is there are new ways to focus on this demographic. Koval added, “The way
we can message to people has changed a lot. We don’t have to exclusively use mass approaches
anymore. Through digital tools, we have the ability to tailor messages and reach folks that we
never have before.”
A perfect example is Legacy’s work with the Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender (LGBT)
community, a market long targeted by the tobacco industry. Through videos, panels and research
(separate from the truth campaign) the foundation has been able to expose why and how big-
tobacco profits from and harms the LGBT community. The foundation is also able to educate
members of the LGBT community about resources available to help them quit.
“Media has changed so much. We think there’s an opportunity to use the power of this
generation, their social influence and peer to peer influencing.”
And Koval thinks these efforts are sending a message to big tobacco. “The facts are, if you look
at what public health and tobacco control efforts can do – decrease prevalence dramatically and
we have done that with public education programs, clean air laws and [increased] pricing, it’s a
winnable battle,” she said. “The tobacco industry knows that well. If you look at where they are
focusing their efforts – it’s not hard to see the U.S. isn’t a growth market – they’re focused on
outside the U.S. where tobacco control isn’t as advanced as it is here.” And that’s where big
tobacco is going.
Mark Hurley, the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids International Advocacy Director for
Indonesia, is at the front-lines for tobacco-control in a country with some of the highest smoking
rates in the world according to his organization. The Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids (CTFK) is
a leading force in the fight to reduce tobacco use and its deadly toll in the United States and
around the world. CTFK works in low and middle income countries – where over 80% of
smoking related deaths occur.
The organization supports governments and non-governmental organizations around the world in
promoting and implementing public policies proven to reduce tobacco use. Hurley says that while
there are some tactics and lessons that can be learned from the United States’ anti-tobacco work,
the fact is that in low and middle income countries, there is a wide gap in cultural attitudes and
understanding about the risks of smoking.
“What we’ve learned from the U.S. are the elements that go into effective campaigns. You have
to do good communications work that gets to the policy [leaders] and the public. You have to
mobilize grass roots organizations so that you have a growing voice of people putting pressure on
the public policy and you have to be good at direct political advocacy because the tobacco

Page 14
companies are right there with lobbying,” he said during an interview for this report. But the
question remains, how effective can advocacy work be on a limited budget?
“A lot of the public messaging is starting to make a change, but the level of public awareness is
not at the level it needs to be,” continued Hurley.
Hurley says the problem is big tobacco has a good reputation in low and middle income
countries. In many countries, the tobacco industry gives to charity and does a lot of work that
governments can’t do. In Indonesia, Hurley says, the tobacco industry has done a lot of disaster
relief. They even sponsor concerts. While graphic mass media campaigns showing the health
impacts of smoking have had a tremendous impact in moving the needle, “Preventing tobacco use
saves lives, but it’s not always the argument that gets you the furthest for policy change,” Hurley
said.
Tobacco control advocates in low and middle income countries, he says, are focused on helping
governments understand how much tobacco is costing their countries in health care costs. In some
regions, vital resources should be spent on eradicating deadly diseases. With big tobacco entering
countries battling HIV or malaria, they are introducing an unnecessary and costly problem into
these countries.
Hurley explained, “We try to frame tobacco control as a national development issue. Showing
how much a country is spending to treat all of the illnesses caused by tobacco use helps show that
it’s money that should go elsewhere. In places like Africa where there is a huge burden of treating
HIV and Malaria, they should drive down rates of tobacco use because it’s easy to do and it’s
costing money.”
Framing the health issue as a fiscal issue resonates with policy leaders, he says. “If you can raise
[tobacco] taxes, you can raise tens of millions of dollars for your national budget. It’s a win-win
because it’s a public and fiscal issue.”
Conclusion
While the public health community may not always agree on the same tactics and messages
against the tobacco industry, the fact is smoking rates in the U.S. have declined steadily since the
1960s and internationally, countries are doing more to fight big tobacco. But there is a long way
to go. Tobacco is both a legal vice and wealthy foe.
Case in point, the tobacco industry is ramping up its use of international trade agreements to slow
health gains made by countries. Since 2010, Uruguay has been fighting a legal challenge by
Philip Morris International against the country’s graphic health warnings on tobacco products
with support from Bloomberg Philanthropies and international tobacco control advocates.
Australia is currently fending off both a World Trade Organization (WTO) challenge and a legal
challenge by Philip Morris International against its national law that requires cigarette packs to be
sold in drab colors with only the graphic health warnings – a tobacco control policy referred to as
“plain packaging”. Numerous additional countries have been threatened by the tobacco industry,
a tactic that can lead to delays by governments in passing and implementing the best-practice
tobacco control laws called for in the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) – the

Page 15
world’s first health treaty that has been adopted by more than 180 countries globally. (Bloomberg
Philanthropies, 2015)
To Mark Hurley, the solution to this is public support. “We’re asking countries not to shy away
from this. We’re urging countries to think about large graphic health warnings. We know the
industry is worried about it because they’re starting to sue. That means the tactic is working.”
While the tobacco industry is a legal and profitable business that deserves to exist like any other
vice – it also has earned every bit of skepticism from the public. As research in this paper shows,
the tobacco industry has a long history of obfuscating the truth about the harms of smoking. It has
the financial power and the political backing to survive for centuries to come. But it has also lost
the public’s trust.
In the ongoing fight against tobacco, public relations will continue to be a vital tool to ensure the
tobacco industry cannot lie and hide the health risks of smoking as it once did. The need to
change public attitudes towards smoking around the world, safeguard the gains made
domestically, and protect the public’s health will not cease until the war on tobacco is over.
By studying both the tobacco industry’s marketing tactics and the strategies that have been used
to counter those messages, future public relations specialists will be able to prevent and curb the
harmful effects of cigarette companies. Just as the industry continues to innovate with products
like electronic cigarettes, and expand into new markets overseas, the public relations tactics used
to keep the tobacco industry in check will need to evolve. From crafting the messages that
resonate, to using new communications platforms reaching influential audiences, in order to
impact the conversation– anti-tobacco public relations practitioners must understand the nuances,
the debates and the tools necessary to render the tobacco industry’s messages mute.

Page 16
References
“A brief history of tobacco” CNN.com. Web. Accessed 12 April 2015.
“Achievements in Public Health, 1900-1999: Tobacco Use -- United States, 1900-1999 .”
Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR). November 5, 1999.
“Fact Sheet. Leading cause of death, illness and impoverishment.” World Health Organization.
Web. May 2014. Accessed 12 April 2015
“Harry Reasoner anchors a CBS News Extra ‘On Smoking and Health’ following the 1964
release of the U.S. Surgeon General's report linking smoking with disease and mortality.”
CBS News Archives. Web. Accessed 12 April 2014.
“New Survey: Indonesia Has Highest Male Smoking Rate in the World.” Campaign for Tobacco
Free Kids. 12 September 2012. Web. Accessed 21 April 2015.
“Rights of Smokers.” CSPAN. 6 January 1988. Television.
“Social Norms and Attitudes About Smoking 1991-2010.” Robert Wood Johnson Foundation,
Center for Public Program Evaluation. April 2011. http://bit.ly/1EZJcQS.
“Surveillance for selected tobacco-use behaviors--United States, 1900-1994.” Morbidity and
Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR). 18 November 1994.
1970s Vintage Yes I Mind if You Smoke Pinback Button, American Lung Assoc. Pinback, Anit-
Smoking Button. For sale on Etsy. Web. Accessed 15 April 2015
1972 American Cancer Society Anti-smoking Ads. Google image search.
Amos, Amanda and Margaretha Haglund. “From social taboo to ‘torch of freedom’: the
marketing of cigarettes to women.” British Medical Journal (BMJ), Volume 1. Issue 9
(2000).
Anders, George “Millennials' Zesty New Identity: The 'Burning Man' Generation. Forbes.com 17
September 2014.
Bisbort, Alan. Media Scandals in American History. Greenwood Press, 2008. Page 37.
“Achievements in Public Health, 1900-1999: Tobacco Use -- United States, 1900-1999 .”
Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR). November 5, 1999.
Blum, A. “Alton Ochsner, MD, 1896-1981 Anti-Smoking Pioneer. The Ochsner Journal.” US
National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health. Volume 1 (1999)
Bradley, Diana and Laura Nichols. “Legacy Selects Ketchum as PR AOR to Boost Truth anti-
smoking Campaign” PR Week. 20 May 2014.
Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids. “Toll of Tobacco in the U.S. Fact Sheet.” Web. Accessed 15
April 2015
Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids. “Tobacco-Free Kids' Ongoing Public Affairs Campaign
Honored by the American Society of Association Executives” Web Press Release 20
December 1999.
Carriero, Rebecca. Phone interview with Mark Hurley. Conducted 27 April 2015
Carriero, Rebecca. Phone interview with Robin Koval. Conducted 21 April 2015.
Center for Disease Control (CDC). “ Fast Facts About Smoking.” Web. Accessed 15 April 2015.
Center for the Study of Tobacco and Society. “ Blowing Smoke: The Lost Legacy of the Surgeon
General's Report” Online video clip. YouTube. Published on 8 January 2014 . Accessed 12 April
2015.
Curriden, M. “Inside the Tobacco Deal. “ PBS Frontline. 1994.
Elkayam, Alona. “Best/Worst Brands: Breaking Good, Afros and Crowdfunding” Huffington
Post. 26 April 2013
Fox, Margalit. “Tony Schwartz, Father of ‘Daisy Ad’ for the Johnson Campaign, Dies at 84.”
New York Times. 17 June 2008
Google image search: cigarette ads to WW1 soldiers

Page 17
International Movie Database (IMDB). “Thank You For Smoking Quotes.” Web. Accessed 15
April 2015 .
Kluger, Richard. “Ashes to Ashes: the Hundred Year Cigarette War, the Public Health and the
Unabashed Triumph of Philip Morris. “ Vintage Books (1997).
Legacy Foundation Blog using Tobacco Atlas Stats. http://bit.ly/1FDd6u7 and
http://bit.ly/1ErOmTT
Markel, Howard. “The Very Deadliest Habit. Book Review of the Golden Holocaust.” New
Republic. March 29, 2012 http://www.newrepublic.com/book/review/robert-proctor-
golden-holocaust-origins-cigarette-catastrophe-case-abolition
Morrison, Maureen. “Study: Millennial Parents Just Like Those From Previous Generations.”
AdAge. 3 October 2003
Office on Smoking and Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health
Promotion, CDC. “Achievements in Public Health, 1900-1999: Tobacco
PM Horowitz, Class Lecture and Presentation, “The millennial Effect How Gen Y is changing
The Way Business communicates” Fall 2014
Public Relations Museum. Videos of Edward Bernays discussing work for Lucky Strike
cigarettes to attract a new audience to tobacco, the "Torches of Freedom" and the Green
Ball campaigns. Web. Accessed 12 April 2015
Respiratory Health Association. “50th Anniversary: Surgeon General's Report on Smoking.”
Web. Accessed 12 April 2015.
Tavernise, Sabrina. “E-Cigarette Use by Teenagers Soars, Even as Smoking Drops.” New York
Times. 16 April 1 2015.
This poster from the American Lung Association in 1985 addresses the problem of secondhand
smoke (http://1.usa.gov/1OPo5oZ)
United States. General. US Surgeon. The health consequences of smoking: 50 years of progress.
A report of the Surgeon General (2014).
Vintage 1980s Anti-Smoking Pin Badge. For sale on Etsy. Web. Accessed 15 April 2015
Vintage advertisement for Camel cigarettes, 1978 . Pinterest. Accessed 12 April 2015.
Virginia Slim Superhero Cigarette Photo Ad "Biologically Superior"
Vintage Advertising Wall Art Décor. Pinterest, Old Cigarette Ads...awful now.
http://bit.ly/1QxXPhv
Warner, Ken and Harold Pollack. “The Nicotine Fix.” The Atlantic. 13 November 2014
Xu, X et al., “Annual Healthcare Spending Attributable to Cigarette Smoking: An Update,” Am J
Prev Med, 2014. HHS, The Health Consequences of Smoking – 50 Years of Progress A
Report of the Surgeon General, 2014.
Notes
1. Center for Disease Control (CDC). “ Fast Facts About Smoking.” Web. Accessed 15 April 2015.
2. Xu, X et al., “Annual Healthcare Spending Attributable to Cigarette Smoking: An Update,” Am J
Prev Med, 2014. HHS, The Health Consequences of Smoking – 50 Years of Progress A Report of
the Surgeon General, 2014.
3. “Surveillance for selected tobacco-use behaviors--United States, 1900-1994.” Morbidity and
Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR). 18 November 1994.
4. Amos, Amanda and Margaretha Haglund. “From social taboo to ‘torch of freedom’: the marketing
of cigarettes to women.” British Medical Journal (BMJ) Volume 1. Issue 9 (2000).
5. Warner, Ken and Harold Pollack. “The Nicotine Fix.” The Atlantic. 13 November 2014
6. A brief history of tobacco” CNN.com. Web. Accessed 12 April 2015.
7. Warner, Ken and Harold Pollack. “The Nicotine Fix.” The Atlantic. 13 November 2014

Page 18
8. “Harry Reasoner anchors a CBS News Extra ‘On Smoking and Health’ following the 1964
release of the U.S. Surgeon General's report linking smoking with disease and mortality.” CBS
News Archives. Web. Accessed 12 April 2014.
9. Center for the Study of Tobacco and Society. “ Blowing Smoke: The Lost Legacy of the Surgeon
General's Report” Online video clip. YouTube. Published on 8 January 2014 . Accessed 12 April
2015.
10. Vintage advertisement for Camel cigarettes, 1978 . Pinterest. Accessed 12 April 2015.
11. VIRGINIA Slim Superhero Cigarette Photo Ad "Biologically Superior" Vintage Advertising Wall
Art Décor. Pinterest, Old Cigarette Ads...awful now. http://bit.ly/1QxXPhv
12. Elkayam, Alona. “Best/Worst Brands: Breaking Good, Afros and Crowdfunding” Huffington
Post. 26 April 2013
13. United States. General. US Surgeon. The health consequences of smoking: 50 years of progress.
A report of the Surgeon General (2014).

Proceedings_CCI Conference on Corporate Communication 2016-June 6

Proceedings_CCI Conference on Corporate Communication 2016-June 6

Recomendados

Recomendados

Más contenido relacionado

La actualidad más candente

La actualidad más candente (20)

Destacado

Destacado (7)

Similar a Proceedings_CCI Conference on Corporate Communication 2016-June 6

Similar a Proceedings_CCI Conference on Corporate Communication 2016-June 6 (20)

Proceedings_CCI Conference on Corporate Communication 2016-June 6