Three communities, three soda tax debates: What can advocates learn from news coverage of recent soda tax proposals?

Introduction: Communities around the country are exploring taxes on sugary drinks as a strategy to limit consumption and support local health programs. But in the towns where these measures have been proposed, the beverage industry has aggressively pushed back, often funding ostensibly “community-based” local coalitions to be the face of the anti-tax campaign.  

Methods: We systematically examined the similarities and differences between news coverage of three recent soda tax debates: Richmond and El Monte, California and Telluride, Colorado. We analyzed local and national news, and industry trade press, coverage of each proposal (n=393), evaluating how industry-funded opposition exploited the unique character of each city to rally opposition.

Results: In all three cities tax proponents used similar arguments about the health consequences of sodas, and the benefits of taxing them, with some variation; for example in El Monte, a city facing bankruptcy, proponents focused more on the tax’s economic benefits than did supporters in other cities. Tax opponents, on the other hand, employed a range of arguments that tapped into civic pride, or exploited existing community divisions. For example, in Richmond, a city with a history of racial tension, the beverage industry-funded anti-tax coalition included prominent civic leaders who decried the tax as a racist affront to African American residents.

Discussion: Supporters can draw on lessons learned from the three soda tax campaigns to anticipate important elements of the industry opposition they may face in their own communities, and to plan powerful and effective responses that protect and promote community health.