Samuels B E, Begay M E, Hazan A R, Glantz S A
University of California, San Francisco.
J Health Polit Policy Law. 1992 Summer;17(2):329-51. doi: 10.1215/03616878-17-2-329.
The campaign for passage and implementation of Pittsburgh's Smoking Control Ordinance in 1987 illustrates the role controversy plays in tobacco control. Proponents of the ordinance sought at first to keep it noncontroversial, while the tobacco industry tried to defeat the ordinance by generating controversy, claiming that severe economic and social disruption would occur. After the ordinance had been in force for a year, Philip Morris tried to take over its implementation, seeking to redefine the central issue as one of social accommodation rather than health. To succeed, Philip Morris's effort had to be widely accepted and noncontroversial. Proponents of the ordinance countered with controversy to undermine the campaign and expose the company's intentions. The controversy made the established health organizations uncomfortable, causing them to play only a marginal role. Surprisingly, the people who prevailed were the nonsmokers' rights activists, a small group with limited resources.
1987年匹兹堡《吸烟控制条例》的通过及实施运动说明了争议在烟草控制中所起的作用。该条例的支持者起初试图使其不具争议性，而烟草行业则试图通过制造争议来挫败该条例，声称会造成严重的经济和社会混乱。该条例实施一年后，菲利普·莫里斯公司试图接管其实施工作，力图将核心问题重新定义为社会包容问题而非健康问题。为了成功，菲利普·莫里斯公司的努力必须得到广泛认可且不具争议性。该条例的支持者以争议予以反击，以破坏这场运动并揭露该公司的意图。这场争议让既有的健康组织感到不安，导致它们只发挥了边缘作用。令人惊讶的是，最终获胜的是无烟维权人士，这是一个资源有限的小团体。
