Role of Tobacco Regulatory Symbolism: A Comparison of U.S. and Canadian Cigarette Warning Label Requirements

Since the 1980s, advocates of governmental privatization and deregulation have argued that rather than centralized governmental regulations (such as tobacco control programs like cigarette pack warning label requirements), the private market is the most efficient approach in meeting societal needs. Other policy analysts have argued governmental regulations are actually necessary to sometimes maintain or bolster corporate profitability. In this research, an analysis using internal tobacco industry documents, newspaper reports, web pages, laws, regulations, and peer reviewed articles was conducted to compare the efficacy of 2006 government mandated Canadian and U.S. cigarette pack warning label requirements in promoting tobacco cessation. The analysis included whether 2006 U.S. and Canadian requirements contained four public health recognized standards to vigorously promote tobacco cessation including: color graphics depicting disease, warning labels in front of cigarette packs, warning labels covering at least 30% of cigarette packs, and clear health warning messages. In 2006, Canadian cigarette labeling requirements were very effective meeting all four standards while U.S. cigarette labeling requirements were weak not meeting any of the four standards. The symbolic or weak nature of U.S. cigarette pack requirements has supported the profitability of the tobacco industry in the U.S. because cigarette warning labels have had little impact on U.S. tobacco cessation efforts and weak cigarette warning messages have been used as a defense in costly litigation. Despite the claim by free market advocates, a weak and symbolic governmental tobacco control program can actually enhance or protect profitability while not significantly advancing the public health.