Introduction: Twitter enables public organizations to engage the public in health policy discourse. However, documented hostility towards tobacco control proposals on Twitter suggests that a closer examination of the nature of interaction with such content is warranted.
Aims And Methods: We scraped tweets from government bodies with tobacco control interests between July and November of 2021 (N = 3889), 2 months before and after the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Premarket Tobacco Authorization Act's (PMTA) September deadline. PMTA is a review process for authorizing the sale of new and existing e-cigarette or vaping products. Tweets related to PMTA were identified (n = 52) using a keyword filter. A content analysis of quote tweets and replies examined the amplification of pro and anti-policy sentiment via likes and retweets.
Results: Replies were overwhelmingly anti-policy (96.7%). Moreover, the amplification of these replies, including 83.3% of likes and 65.6% of retweets, amplified anti-policy replies. Quote tweets, which allow users to add their own commentary to an existing tweet, were 77.9% (n = 120) anti-policy, receiving 87.7% of likes (n = 1708) and 86.2% of retweets (n = 726) compared to pro-policy quote tweets (n = 240 likes and n = 116 retweets). Regression analyses showed a significantly greater amplification of anti-policy content.
Conclusions: Communicating about tobacco policy on Twitter carries risks. Anti-policy advocates can weaponize quote tweets for easy construction of messages designed in accordance with evidence-based guidelines for conferring resistance to persuasion. Future research should examine whether public health organizations can adapt this strategy to counter anti-regulatory advocates on Twitter.
Implications: The primary implications of this research are that communication about tobacco policy on Twitter should be part of a broader public engagement strategy with quantifiable metrics of success. The information environment on Twitter is demonstrably hostile to pro-tobacco regulatory policy positions. As a result, efforts to engage on the platform by regulatory institutions like the FDA can inadvertently provide materials that are easily leveraged as effective counter-messaging. Moreover, this counter-messaging can disseminate more broadly than the original message.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ntr/ntad078 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!