Otañez Martin G, Glantz Stanton A
Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education, University of California, San Francisco, 530 Parnassus Ave, Ste 366, San Francisco, CA 94143-1390.
Vis Anthropol Rev. 2009 May 1;25(1):1-24. doi: 10.1111/j.1548-7458.2009.01006.x.
The cigarette companies and their lobbying organization used tobacco industry-produced films and videos about tobacco farming to support their political, public relations, and public policy goals. Critical discourse analysis shows how tobacco companies utilized film and video imagery and narratives of tobacco farmers and tobacco economies for lobbying politicians and influencing consumers, industry-allied groups, and retail shop owners to oppose tobacco control measures and counter publicity on the health hazards, social problems, and environmental effects of tobacco growing. Imagery and narratives of tobacco farmers, tobacco barns, and agricultural landscapes in industry videos constituted a tobacco industry strategy to construct a corporate vision of tobacco farm culture that privileges the economic benefits of tobacco. The positive discursive representations of tobacco farming ignored actual behavior of tobacco companies to promote relationships of dependency and subordination for tobacco farmers and to contribute to tobacco-related poverty, child labor, and deforestation in tobacco growing countries. While showing tobacco farming as a family and a national tradition and a source of jobs, tobacco companies portrayed tobacco as a tradition to be protected instead of an industry to be regulated and denormalized.
烟草公司及其游说组织利用烟草行业制作的有关烟草种植的电影和视频，来支持其政治、公共关系和公共政策目标。批判性话语分析表明，烟草公司如何利用电影和视频中的烟草种植者形象、叙事以及烟草经济，来游说政客，并影响消费者、行业同盟团体和零售店店主，以反对烟草控制措施，并对抗有关烟草种植对健康危害、社会问题和环境影响的宣传。行业视频中烟草种植者、烟草仓库和农业景观的形象与叙事构成了烟草行业的一种策略，即构建一种烟草农场文化的企业愿景，这种愿景将烟草的经济效益置于优先地位。对烟草种植的积极话语表述忽略了烟草公司的实际行为，这些行为促进了烟草种植者的依赖和从属关系，并导致了烟草种植国家与烟草相关的贫困、童工和森林砍伐问题。在将烟草种植展示为一种家庭和国家传统以及就业来源的同时，烟草公司将烟草描绘成一种需要保护的传统，而不是一个需要监管和使其正常化的行业。
