2008•American Journal of Public HealthOpen access

The Role of Corporate Credibility in Legitimizing Disease Promotion

Patricia A. McDaniel, Ruth E. Malone

Open full text 40 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: We explored what corporate "credibility" means to tobacco companies to determine why it matters to companies and what a lack of credibility means to them. METHODS: We collected documents from an online tobacco industry document archive and analyzed them with an interpretive approach. RESULTS: Tobacco companies conceptualized credibility not as being worthy of belief or confidence but as inspiring it. Thus, credibility was understood primarily as altering public perception of the industry. "Truth" was largely absent from tobacco industry conceptualizations of credibility, which were linked with "responsibility" and "reasonableness." However, industry research found that the public regarded credibility and responsibility differently, expecting these to entail truth telling, advertising reductions, less harmful products, apologies for deception, making amends, or exiting the tobacco business altogether. Overall, industry credibility-building projects failed repeatedly. CONCLUSIONS: Public health discourse increasingly attends to the roles of corporations in promoting disease. Industries such as tobacco and alcohol have been identified as profiting from harmful products. Yet corporations' ability to continue business as usual requires sustaining an implicit societal assent to their activities that depends on corporate credibility. For public health to address corporate disease promotion effectively, undermining corporate credibility may be strategically important.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

OBJECTIVES: We explored what corporate "credibility" means to tobacco companies to determine why it matters to companies and what a lack of credibility means to them. METHODS: We collected documents from an online tobacco industry document archive and analyzed them with an interpretive approach. RESULTS: Tobacco companies conceptualized credibility not as being worthy of belief or confidence but as inspiring it. Thus, credibility was understood primarily as altering public perception of the industry. "Truth" was largely absent from tobacco industry conceptualizations of credibility, which were linked with "responsibility" and "reasonableness." However, industry research found that the public regarded credibility and responsibility differently, expecting these to entail truth telling, advertising reductions, less harmful products, apologies for deception, making amends, or exiting the tobacco business altogether. Overall, industry credibility-building projects failed repeatedly. CONCLUSIONS: Public health discourse increasingly attends to the roles of corporations in promoting disease. Industries such as tobacco and alcohol have been identified as profiting from harmful products. Yet corporations' ability to continue business as usual requires sustaining an implicit societal assent to their activities that depends on corporate credibility. For public health to address corporate disease promotion effectively, undermining corporate credibility may be strategically important.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 40 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

OBJECTIVES: We explored what corporate "credibility" means to tobacco companies to determine why it matters to companies and what a lack of credibility means to them. METHODS: We collected documents from an online tobacco industry document archive and analyzed them with an interpretive approach. RESULTS: Tobacco companies conceptualized credibility not as being worthy of belief or confidence but as inspiring it. Thus, credibility was understood primarily as altering public perception of the industry. "Truth" was largely absent from tobacco industry conceptualizations of credibility, which were linked with "responsibility" and "reasonableness." However, industry research found that the public regarded credibility and responsibility differently, expecting these to entail truth telling, advertising reductions, less harmful products, apologies for deception, making amends, or exiting the tobacco business altogether. Overall, industry credibility-building projects failed repeatedly. CONCLUSIONS: Public health discourse increasingly attends to the roles of corporations in promoting disease. Industries such as tobacco and alcohol have been identified as profiting from harmful products. Yet corporations' ability to continue business as usual requires sustaining an implicit societal assent to their activities that depends on corporate credibility. For public health to address corporate disease promotion effectively, undermining corporate credibility may be strategically important.

Key concepts: Credibility, Tobacco industry, Public relations, Alcohol industry, Public health, Promotion (chess), Business, Source credibility

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
The Role of Corporate Credibility in Legitimizing Disease Promotion — Research Paper | ScholarLens