Changes in industry marketing of electronic nicotine delivery systems on social media following FDA's prioritized enforcement policy: a content analysis of Instagram and Twitter posts

IF 1.5 Q2 COMMUNICATION
Jamie Guillory, Sarah Trigger, Ashley Ross, Stephanie Lane, Annice Kim, James Nonnemaker, Sherry T. Liu, Kimberly Snyder, Janine Delahanty
{"title":"Changes in industry marketing of electronic nicotine delivery systems on social media following FDA's prioritized enforcement policy: a content analysis of Instagram and Twitter posts","authors":"Jamie Guillory, Sarah Trigger, Ashley Ross, Stephanie Lane, Annice Kim, James Nonnemaker, Sherry T. Liu, Kimberly Snyder, Janine Delahanty","doi":"10.3389/fcomm.2023.1274098","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In February 2020, FDA prioritized enforcement of flavored (other than tobacco- or menthol-flavored) cartridge-based electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) without premarket authorization. To explore potential marketing changes, we conducted a content analysis of brands' social media posts, comparing devices and flavors before/after the policy.We sampled up to three posts before (November 6, 2019–February 5, 2020) and after the policy (February 6–May 6, 2020) from brands' Instagram (n = 33) and Twitter (n = 30) accounts (N = 302 posts). Two analysts coded posts for device type and flavor. We summarized coded frequencies by device, flavor, and device-flavor combination, and by platform.In posts mentioning devices and flavors, those featuring flavored (other than tobacco- or menthol-flavored) cartridge-based devices (before: 2.5%; after: 0%) or tobacco- or menthol-flavored cartridge-based devices (before: 0%; after: 2.8%) were uncommon while any flavor disposables were most common (before: 10.8%; after: 14.6%) particularly after the policy. Half of posts featured devices without flavor (before: 50.0%; after: 50.0%) and one-fifth had no device or flavor references (before: 21.5%; after: 18.8%).In the months before and after the policy, it appears ENDS brands were not using social media to market flavored (excluding tobacco- or menthol-flavored) cartridge-based ENDS (i.e., explicitly prioritized) or tobacco- or menthol-flavored cartridge-based devices (i.e., explicitly not prioritized). Brands were largely not advertising specific flavored products, but rather devices without mentioning flavor (e.g., open/refillable, disposable devices). We presented a snapshot of what consumers saw on social media around the time of the policy, which is important to understanding strategies to reach consumers in an evolving ENDS landscape.","PeriodicalId":31739,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Communication","volume":"181 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Communication","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2023.1274098","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In February 2020, FDA prioritized enforcement of flavored (other than tobacco- or menthol-flavored) cartridge-based electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) without premarket authorization. To explore potential marketing changes, we conducted a content analysis of brands' social media posts, comparing devices and flavors before/after the policy.We sampled up to three posts before (November 6, 2019–February 5, 2020) and after the policy (February 6–May 6, 2020) from brands' Instagram (n = 33) and Twitter (n = 30) accounts (N = 302 posts). Two analysts coded posts for device type and flavor. We summarized coded frequencies by device, flavor, and device-flavor combination, and by platform.In posts mentioning devices and flavors, those featuring flavored (other than tobacco- or menthol-flavored) cartridge-based devices (before: 2.5%; after: 0%) or tobacco- or menthol-flavored cartridge-based devices (before: 0%; after: 2.8%) were uncommon while any flavor disposables were most common (before: 10.8%; after: 14.6%) particularly after the policy. Half of posts featured devices without flavor (before: 50.0%; after: 50.0%) and one-fifth had no device or flavor references (before: 21.5%; after: 18.8%).In the months before and after the policy, it appears ENDS brands were not using social media to market flavored (excluding tobacco- or menthol-flavored) cartridge-based ENDS (i.e., explicitly prioritized) or tobacco- or menthol-flavored cartridge-based devices (i.e., explicitly not prioritized). Brands were largely not advertising specific flavored products, but rather devices without mentioning flavor (e.g., open/refillable, disposable devices). We presented a snapshot of what consumers saw on social media around the time of the policy, which is important to understanding strategies to reach consumers in an evolving ENDS landscape.
FDA 优先执法政策出台后,电子尼古丁输送系统行业在社交媒体上的营销变化:Instagram 和 Twitter 帖子内容分析
2020 年 2 月,美国食品药品管理局(FDA)对未经上市前授权的调味(非烟草味或薄荷味)盒装电子尼古丁给药系统(ENDS)进行了优先执法。为了探讨潜在的营销变化,我们对品牌在社交媒体上发布的帖子进行了内容分析,比较了政策实施前后的设备和口味。我们从品牌的Instagram(n = 33)和Twitter(n = 30)账户(N = 302条帖子)中抽取了政策实施前(2019年11月6日-2020年2月5日)和政策实施后(2020年2月6日-5月6日)的最多三条帖子。两名分析师对帖子的设备类型和口味进行了编码。在提及设备和口味的帖子中,有口味(除烟草味或薄荷味)的盒式设备(之前:2.5%;之后:0%)或有烟草味或薄荷味的盒式设备(之前:0%;之后:2.8%)的帖子并不常见,而任何口味的一次性设备最常见(之前:10.8%;之后:14.6%),尤其是在政策实施之后。在政策出台前后的几个月中,ENDS 品牌似乎没有使用社交媒体来推销有味道(不包括烟草或薄荷味道)的盒装 ENDS(即明确优先),也没有推销有烟草或薄荷味道的盒装设备(即明确不优先)。品牌基本上没有宣传特定口味的产品,而是宣传未提及口味的设备(如开放式/可充装、一次性设备)。我们展示了消费者在政策出台前后在社交媒体上看到的情况,这对于了解在不断变化的 ENDS 环境中接触消费者的策略非常重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
8.30%
发文量
284
审稿时长
14 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信