Li Xiao, Gillespie Robyn, Nettel-Aguirre Alberto, Smithers Lisa Gaye
School of Social Sciences, Faculty of the Arts, Social Sciences and Humanities, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia.
Health Promot J Austr. 2025 Oct;36(4):e70082. doi: 10.1002/hpja.70082.
This study investigated how various advertisers engage in vaping-related marketing on social media, with a focus on message stance, audience targeting and advertising strategies, using data from the Meta Ad Library. This is particularly relevant given the growing concern around vaping among young people and recent policy reforms in Australia.
We analysed vaping-related advertisements from Meta platforms between May 7, 2018 and July 31, 2024. Keyword searches identified relevant advertisements. Descriptive statistics were applied to the number of impressions, spending, duration, year posted, audience size and platform distribution, with advertisers classified into government, politicians/political groups, non-governmental organisations (NGOs)/universities, commercial entities, news sources and undisclosed groups.
A total of 861 advertisements were identified. After duplicates and non-vaping related advertisements were removed, 394 were included in the final analysis. Of the anti-vaping messages (n = 269), 37% were posted by NGOs/universities and 35% by politicians/political groups, while pro-vaping messages (n = 87) primarily originated from commercial entities (44%) and undisclosed groups (47%). Anti-vaping campaigns had higher audience reach, targeted all ages and spending varied widely compared with pro-vaping messages, which predominantly targeted the 18-34 age group.
The advertisers of pro- and anti-vaping messages on social media differ in their expenditure and demographic targeting. Commercial entities were still able to post pro-vaping content despite Meta's advertising restrictions. SO WHAT?: These findings offer timely insights for health promotion practitioners and policymakers. Better understanding of paid social media advertising practices can inform the development of more targeted, transparent and effective digital health campaigns.
本研究利用Meta广告库的数据，调查了各类广告商在社交媒体上如何进行与电子烟相关的营销，重点关注信息立场、受众定位和广告策略。鉴于年轻人对电子烟的担忧日益增加以及澳大利亚最近的政策改革，这一研究尤为重要。
我们分析了2018年5月7日至2024年7月31日期间Meta平台上与电子烟相关的广告。通过关键词搜索确定相关广告。对展示量、支出、持续时间、发布年份、受众规模和平台分布数量进行描述性统计，广告商分为政府、政治家/政治团体、非政府组织/大学、商业实体、新闻来源和未披露团体。
共识别出861条广告。在去除重复和与电子烟无关的广告后，最终分析纳入394条广告。在反电子烟信息（n = 269）中，37%由非政府组织/大学发布，35%由政治家/政治团体发布，而支持电子烟的信息（n = 87）主要来自商业实体（44%）和未披露团体（47%）。与主要针对18 - 34岁年龄组的支持电子烟信息相比，反电子烟活动的受众覆盖面更广，针对所有年龄段，支出差异很大。
社交媒体上支持和反对电子烟信息的广告商在支出和人口统计学定位方面存在差异。尽管Meta有广告限制，商业实体仍能够发布支持电子烟的内容。那又如何？：这些发现为健康促进从业者和政策制定者提供了及时的见解。更好地了解付费社交媒体广告做法可以为制定更有针对性、透明和有效的数字健康活动提供信息。
