How food companies use social media to influence policy debates
A framework of Australian ultra-processed food industry Twitter data
Datos Bibliográficos
| ID | 15093223 |
|---|---|
| Autores | Daniel Hunt (0000-0003-0755-7015, City, University of London, autor de correspondencia) |
| Año | 2021 |
| Volumen | 24 |
| Número | 10 |
| Páginas | 3124-3135 |
| Fecha de publicación | 2021-07-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Sí |
| Open Access | Sí |
| Tipo | ARTICLE |
| Revista | Public Health Nutrition (JOURNAL) |
| Identificadores de la revista | ISSN: 1368-9800 • E-ISSN: 1475-2727 |
| Editorial | Cambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1017/s1368980020003353 |
| PMID | 33222709 |
| OpenAlex | W3110440322 |
| Idioma | EN |
| Citas recibidas | 14 |
| Referencias citadas | 66 |
Objective: To understand if, and how, Australian ultra-processed food industry actors use Twitter to influence food and health policy debates and produce a conceptual framework to describe such influence. Design: Twitter data of prominent industry actors were defined through purposive sampling and inductively coded to investigate possible influence on food and health policy debates. These are described using descriptive statistics and coded extracts. Setting: Australia. Participants: Twitter accounts of nine prominent ultra-processed food industry actors, including major trade associations. Results: Ultra-processed food industry actors actively used Twitter to influence food and health policy debates. Seven overarching strategies were identified: co-opting public health narratives; opposing regulation; supporting voluntary, co- or self-regulation; engaging policy processes and decision-makers; linking regulatory environments to the need for ongoing profitability; affecting public perceptions and value judgements; and using ignorance claims to distort policy narratives. Each lobbying strategy is underpinned with tactics described throughout and captured in a framework. Conclusions: The current study creates a framework to monitor how food industry actors can use social media to influence food and health policy debates. As such, social media appears to be not only an important commercial determinant of health for brand marketing, but also an extension of lobbying practices to reshape public perceptions of corporate conduct and policy-making
Business · Ignorance · Political science · Public relations · Social media · Consumer Attitudes and Food Labeling · Global Public Health Policies and Epidemiology · Marketing
Ultra-processed food narratives in social media forum posts
Big food and the World Health Organization
Digital disinformation strategies of European climate change obstructionist think tanks
The impact of the social media industry as a commercial determinant of health on the digital food environment for children and adolescents
Typology of how ‘harmful commodity industries’ interact with local governments in England
Public perceptions of front-of-package warning label during policy design and implementation in Uruguay
Corporate activities that influence population health
Filling the prognosis gap
Fossil fuel companies' climate communication strategies
A Content Analysis of Alcohol Marketing on Instagram
Exploring the commercial determinants of health in the online food delivery sector
How policy actors assert authority in the governance of food marketing policies
Social network and linguistic analysis of the #nutrition discourse on the social network platform X, formerly known as Twitter
A mixed-method analysis of the #SugarTax debate on Twitter
How Does the Tobacco Industry Attempt to Influence Marketing Regulations? A Systematic Review
A proposed approach to systematically identify and monitor the corporate political activity of the food industry with respect to public health using publicly available information
Alcohol industry involvement in policymaking
Profits and pandemics
Social interaction via new social media
Food Marketing Influences Children’s Attitudes, Preferences and Consumption
Digital marketing of unhealthy foods to Australian children and adolescents
Manufacturing doubt
Twitter power
Corporate practices and health
The implications of trade liberalization for diet and health
Trade and investment liberalization and Asia¿s noncommunicable disease epidemic
Trade and investment liberalization and Asia’s noncommunicable disease epidemic
Alcohol Industry CSR Organisations
Food Marketing in Facebook to Thai Children and Youth
Designing a Healthy Food Partnership
Systematic examination of publicly-available information reveals the diverse and extensive corporate political activity of the food industry in Australia
Addressing the policy cacophony does not require more evidence
We have a rich heritage and, we believe, a bright future’
Tobacco industry exploiting International Women’s Day on social media
Blowing smoke
How does policy framing enable or constrain inclusion of social determinants of health and health equity on trade policy agendas
How food companies influence evidence and opinion – straight from the horse’s mouth
Playing the policy game
Public health and the ultra-processed food and drink products industry
Like and share
Ultra-processed food product brands on Facebook pages
Trade liberalisation and the nutrition transition
Trade and nutrition policy coherence
Tobacco industry efforts at discrediting scientific knowledge of environmental tobacco smoke
Corporate strategy, corporate capture
Constructing and Reconstructing Scientific Ignorance
Nothing can be done until everything is done’
Revisiting the Corporate and Commercial Determinants of Health
Digital Junk
The Food Industry and Self-Regulation
Digital Dialogue? Australian Politicians' use of the Social Network Tool Twitter
Heightening Uncertainty Around Certain Science
The UN Decade of Nutrition, the Nova food classification and the trouble with ultra-processing
Research on media framing of public policies to prevent chronic disease
For Whom the Bot Tolls
| Obras citantes distintas | 14 |
|---|---|
| Citas por año | 2,8 |
| Intervalo de citas | 2021 - 2026 (6) |
| Velocidad de citación | current |
| Altamente citado | No |
| Tipos de cita | Neutras: 14 |