Final Ash Report

PRL 611 – Group 6

DECEMBER 5, 2018j & c consulting

Janet White and Cayley Young

Table of Contents:Table of Contents: 1

Executive Summary 3Problem and Opportunity Statement 3

Situation Analysis 4Internal Factors 4External Factors 4Strengths: 5Weaknesses: 5Opportunities: 6Threats: 6

Analyzing Key Publics 6Key Demographics: 7Problem Recognition: 7Constraint Recognition: 7Level of Involvement: 8

Key Publics 8Cannabis Carly 8Tobacco Tom 9Ambitious Allison 9Washed-up Walter 10Innocent Ivan 11

Research Objectives: 11Research Methodology: 11

Research Method 1: Social Listening Analysis (Meltwater) 11Research Method 2: Social Listening Analysis (Content Analysis) 12Research Method 3: Online survey 12

Research Results and Analysis 13Social Listening Analysis 1: Meltwater widget analysis 13Social Listening Analysis 2: Content analysis 16

Survey Analysis 16Research Method 3: Online Survey 16

Research Method 4: Focus Group 20Sampling Frame: 20Rationale: 20Execution: 21Data Analysis Method: 21

Focus Group Results and Analysis 21

1

Focus Group Summary 1: 21Focus Group Summary 2: 22Additional Observations: 22

Final Recommendations 23General Summary: 23Recommendation One: 23Recommendation Two: 23Recommendation Three: 24

Appendix 1: Content Analysis (Twitter) 25

Appendix 2: Focus Group 29Group Screening Questions: 29Focus Group Consent Forms: 31

Appendix 3: Qualtrics Survey 32

References: 34

2

Executive SummaryASH is a non-profit organization dedicated to phasing out the sale of cigarettes through regulatory change. The organization's headquarters is in Washington D.C., the heart of governmental influence in the United States. ASH's mission is motivated by research from the World Health Organization, among other legitimate sources, which calls for countries to act against tobacco use. ASH predicts that absent regulatory and societal change, by 2030 over 1 billion fatalities will a result of health complications related to tobacco use.

To combat this staggering statistic, ASH is working to eradicate the sale of combustible tobacco products. It has mobilized a network with other anti-smoking organizations to pursue this common goal. As a part of this movement ASH has led a full-fledged attack on the tobacco industry, including but not limited to pushing television and marketing advertisements, pioneering the smoke-free public places movement and establishing treaties and agreements with hegemonic authorities like the United Nations.

Despite ASH's success in helping to decrease smoking by about 30 percent in roughly the last 15 years alone, changes in marijuana legislation pose a new threat to the organization's goal. The current trend in the United States is the legalization of recreational and medical marijuana use. A key concern is that this trend of regulation change will impact public deference towards use of other substances like combustible tobacco products. This project serves to alleviate those anxieties through an in-depth analysis of public perceptions towards tobacco and marijuana use.

Problem and Opportunity Statement Action on Smoking & Health, known as ASH is a global initiative to promote change in the tobacco industry. Its goal is to rid the world of disease and casualties related to tobacco. To do so, the organization promotes practices that help individuals who have fallen victim to the tobacco industry’s insidious practices. On a micro-level, ASH works with local groups across the United States as part of an integrated approach to combating tobacco sales and use. Despite ASH’s success in decreasing overall tobacco use, “twenty percent of all deaths in the U.S. can be attributed to tobacco use” (ASH Publication). ASH believes this is due to the tobacco industry’s utilization of existing socioeconomic pressures in low income areas through social and generational addiction. Based on studies by the Center for Disease Control communities in which smoking is socially accepted tend to have higher rates of tobacco use (CDC Study). Consequently, ASH and its counterparts are concerned with how the legalization of marijuana will impact society’s deference towards tobacco use. ASH and its allies have the benefit of already having majority of American public opinion and legislation on their side but with limited capital in comparison to

3

the tobacco industry, must allocate resources efficiently, in a way that best promotes their objectives.

Situation Analysis

Internal Factors Lack of cannabis statics. Because the legalization of cannabis is so new, the no long term data on any health consequences does exist yet. ASH lacks the institutional knowledge about cannabis. Visual communication and online presence. ASH has an active Twitter and Facebook. Both handles are different from one another, which could cause problems in identification. ASH also has a low budget website, that is currently eighth down on the first page of Google. The ASH online presence is very minor and is often below Ash.com and @ashoffical. Resources and funding. Now ASH has no dedicated funding towards the “phase out” campaign. Its ability to invest will be short-term and looking for investors. The company only has six staffers managing the entire campaign effort. Focused staff. ASH has six motivated staffers with one being dedicated to the marketing of the campaign. ASH is “well-connected to tobacco control and public health communities with strong reputation and trust” (ASH Publication). Mission and vision. ASH defines its mission as “advocate for innovative legal and policy measures to end the global tobacco epidemic.” Its vision is, “a world free from the harm caused by tobacco.” The mission and vision are specific enough to grasp by community members.

External Factors Lack of public motivation. Based on the research done by ASH, “many people see the tobacco wars as ‘won,’ because of successful smokefree air campaigns.” Many others think smoking and its addiction is a personal choice and “‘deserve’ the health impacts of their bad choices.” Quit smoking organization. Though ASH has a strong relationship with the tobacco control community it is skating the line. When all anti-tobacco policy is not on the table the support of the community has varying levels of support. Its goal is to rid the world of disease and casualties related to tobacco (ASH Publication). This goal aims to begin the conversation of “phasing out”

4

combustible tobacco. Given that the United States has a variety of tobacco control organizations at varying sizes, ASH needs to find a way to not only garner support but also set itself apart.

Tobacco organizations. The United States has a variety of tobacco organizations. These organizations have unlimited funds to go into the defense of riding the economy of tobacco. ASH must figure out a way to navigate policy to combat the lack of funding.

Strengths: While ASH may have to tackle an increase in social acceptance of smoking due to the legalization of marijuana, the organization has several key strengths that makes it up to the challenge. History: One is ASH’s extensive history in the realm of anti-smoking. It has been around since 1971 and is not new to the industry. It has been a crucial player in the push for increased smoking legislation and knows how to navigate the tobacco industry. It will be able to use this experience to combat attempts to ensure the public accepts only marijuana use, rather than tobacco (Action on Smoking and Health, 2018). Reputation: In addition to its extensive history, ASH also has a good reputation with other anti-smoking campaigns. While the organization itself is fairly small, when coupled with dozens of other anti-tobacco organizations, its influence has proven to hold ground against the tobacco industry (Action on Smoking and Health, 2018). Team size: Additionally, the fact the organization is small allows the team to make decision quickly and efficiently. With less than ten people in total, a message or social media post does not have to go through a system of tedious approvals before being published. Therefore, it can respond quickly to breaking news and campaigns by pro-smoking and pro-tobacco initiatives. Preparation: ASH has also already prepared research to combat a potential increase in acceptance of smoking. It has readily accessible campaign materials and a fully developed strategy to ensure social acceptance does not increase (ASH Goals and Needs).

Weaknesses: Limited funding: The main weakness for ASH is its limited funding. Although the power of free and consistent social media posts goes a long way, it is up against an industry with billions at its disposal.

5

Limited staff: Although having a smaller team allows for easy decision making, it may leave workers feeling over-extended. It also limits the organization’s reach. A team of less than ten people simply cannot cover the same ground as a team of several hundred, as employed by the tobacco industry.

Opportunities: Social media platforms: The two social media platforms the organization is underutilizing are a great way to establish beneficial relationships and garner support in the public. This support aligns with the overall goal of ASH to rid the world of cigarettes. With over 100 million users, Facebook is right now a lost opportunity for the organization with only? 4,000 likes. Partnerships: There are numerous opportunities that ASH has to collaborate with existing anti-smoking organizations that have a solidified following. The other organizations can also help ASH diversify its contacts and socioeconomic reach. These partnerships can also supply more data to combat the tobacco industry.

Threats: Tobacco companies: As stated before, the tobacco industry has yet to lose a case against the illegalization of tobacco. They have millions and millions of dollars to sue and pay their way out of getting shut down, while ASH has nowhere near as much funding. ASH needs: ASH may never receive as much donations or funding as needed to continue moving forward with the action of illegalizing tobacco. With so many being ignorant or on defense to the effects of tobacco, this can decrease the chances of growth within this project as well as postpone any future efforts towards the illegalization of tobacco. Cannabis supporters: Though some may support the illegalization of tobacco, they may also be on the support group of the commercialization of cannabis which could interfere with their loyalty towards our project.

Analyzing Key Publics

6

Key Demographics: Tobacco use: According to a finding by the CDC, the majority of tobacco users come from lower income areas. Geographically these regions are located in pockets throughout the United States, mostly in the Midwest and Southern regions. Marijuana use: While little is known about the exact geographic location of marijuana users due to the jurisdictional variances in legalization, and illicit use, at a minimal, tracked usage occurs in Colorado, California, Washington, Oregon, Nevada, Vermont, Rhode Island and Maine. However, the use is fairly widespread throughout economic classes. In 2017, the Cannabis Consumer Organization found that over 42 percent of all marijuana users spent over 200 dollars per month on the product, while at the same time roughly 30 percent spent less than 50 dollars (Cannabis Consumer Study).

Problem Recognition: Although many support the idea of a tobacco free world, transforming from a supporter to a donor may be seen as a turn off to the public eye. Smoking is already an expensive habit so to cut it out completely would save a lot of money for those addicted however, whether you’re a smoker or not, saving the money would help more individually than to spend it on a donation instead. Voters/parents could be a hit or miss because they could support the campaign enough to speak out against cigarettes and smoking, but not support to the point where they help out financially. The public health community could be a major support group if the staff, doctors and policymakers support it enough under any circumstance because the tobacco industry has not lost a case yet.

Constraint Recognition: According to ASH’s Goals and Needs document, ‘it is a challenging time to have this decommercialization discussion while cannabis is being commercialized” (ASH Goals and Needs). This is an all-around constraint for ASH because we’ll have groups of people supporting the illegalization of tobacco but supporting the legalization of cannabis even more, though smoking in general is bad for one's health. Also, because communities like to focus of one major thing at a time, it all comes down to what our community feels is most important to tackle at this moment.

7

Level of Involvement: Many know and understand the problems that come with smoking tobacco but continue to do nothing for many reasons. With students, it may be because they are already overwhelmed with such a busy schedule. With parents, it could be because of finances, lack of time and/or lack of importance towards the issue because no one around them is being affected, as though they feel. Also, lack of knowledge on the issue greatly affects the level of involvement we have and will continue to receive. Many Americans now think that the “battle of against cigarette has been won,” due to the recent changes in legislation, and smoking in public places. This thinking may show a lack in knowledge and lead to less involvement.

Key PublicsBased off statistics from the CDC: https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/adult_data/cig_smoking/index.htm[MOU1]

I mage sourced from : https://www.flickr.com/photos/149481436@N03/34317869305

Cannabis Carly Profile:Cannabis Carly is a female around the age of 25. She is white and from the Kansas. Her income is about 45,000 dollars per year. She is single, bisexual and has no children. She is interested in pop culture, fashion and going out with friends. She has a high school diploma with a trade school certification in cosmetology but would like to pursue further education. She is a full-time hairdresser and make-up artist. She occasionally smokes cannabis and uses edibles recreationally when she is visiting states where it is legal. She also smokes cigarettes weekly when she needs to manage stress as she is diagnosed with generalized anxiety disorder. She has an iPhone X and is very active on Instagram, YouTube, Pinterest, Twitter and Facebook. She does not have cable but uses Netflix. She is politically liberal and receives her news from social media platforms. She needs to find a way to afford going back to school and would like to meet a long-term significant other.

8

Image sourced from: http://www.withanaccent.com/2015/09/05/patti-lupone-shazad-latif-wes-studi-others-join-penny-dreadful-season-3/wes-studi/

Tobacco Tom Profile:

Tobacco Tom is a male around the age of 50. He is from Texas and is a non-Hispanic American Indian. He makes under 20,000 per year, and he is beneath the poverty line. He has a GED certificate but no other formal education. He is straight. He is interested in racing and used to work as a mechanic but is currently on disability as a result of a car accident. He is single with no children but lives with his elderly mother, whom he cares for. He does not use cannabis because it is illegal where he lives but does use chewing tobacco and cigarettes daily. He would use and qualify for medical cannabis if it were legal in his state of residence. He developed an addiction to tobacco during his teenage years. He is very active on Facebook and has a government subsidized smartphone. He is politically moderate. He receives his news from a traditional newspaper and cable. He has no mental illness but needs to manage pain and figure out how to make additional income to support himself and his sick mother, as her social security checks barely cover her medical bills.

Image sourced from: https://www.pexels.com/photo/portrait-photo-of-smiling-woman-wearing-white-sweater-1171032/

Ambitious Allison Profile:

Adventurous Allison is a 35-year-old female, who lives in Washington. She is homosexual and is a cardiovascular surgeon. She earns over 150,000 dollars annually. She has a long-term partner but suffers

9

from severe anxiety and mild depression. She successfully manages her mental illness with medical and recreational cannabis. She smokes and ingests edibles 3 times per week. She does not and has never used tobacco. She enjoys traveling and is a self-proclaimed food connoisseur. She and her partner would like to get married and adopt children within the next three years. However, she needs to finish paying off her student loans first. She uses Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and LinkedIn. She gets her news from online newspapers and journals. She has an iPhone X and Blackberry for work. She does have cable but prefers to use streaming apps like Netflix, Hulu and HBO Go. She is politically liberal.

Image sourced from: http://www.wearemoviegeeks.com/2012/05/garrett-hedlund-richard-jenkins-jennifer-hudson-terrence-howard-amy-adams-cast-in-andrew-levitas-lullaby/terrence-howard/

Washed-up Walter Profile:

Washed-up Walter is a non-Hispanic mixed race 48-year-old male. He lives in Florida. He is straight and is single with three high school age children from different women. He has an associate’s degree and has been a car salesman for 25 years. He has an annual income of 75,000 dollars. He smokes cigarettes and cigars daily but does not use cannabis as he got in trouble with the law a few years ago. He does not suffer from mental illness but is addicted to tobacco products. He has a smartphone which he uses to access Facebook and Instagram. He does have cable and receives his news by watching Fox and Friends. He is politically conservative and religious. He is interested in hard rock music and enjoys bar karaoke each weekend with his friends from high school. He needs to pay monthly child support, save for his children’s college and continue to grow his car sales clientele.

Image sourced from: https://www.lipstickalley.com/threads/cuba-gooding-jr-dont-look-a-thing-like-o-j-simpson-so.982944/

10

Innocent Ivan Profile:Innocent Ivan is an African American 18-year-old male. He is from Massachusetts. He is straight and unmarried but has a steady girlfriend. He has no children. He has anxiety but does not use cannabis or tobacco products. He got into Harvard on a full academic scholarship. He earns less than 10,000 dollars per year. He is not opposed to cannabis use but believes tobacco is very unhealthy. He enjoys working out, spending time with his girlfriend and spending time with friends. He also loves football. He is politically liberal and religious. He needs to manage his anxiety and pay for living expenses. He is interested in bioengineering. He does not have cable but watches Netflix. He is active on Instagram, Facebook and Twitter. He receives his news from Twitter and email subscriptions like the Skimm.

Research Objectives: 1. Explore how the regulation of cannabis has affected the attitudes and perceptions of consumers.2. Identify whether the public would rather smoke cannabis or tobacco.3. Explore the attitudes and perceptions on health and legalization related issues associated with

smoking cannabis or tobacco.

Research Methodology: To satisfy the research objectives, we conducted both quantitative and qualitative research. A survey, created in collaboration with ASH, is meant to analyze the attitudes and perceptions of the chosen key public. Meltwater was used to monitor social listening and collect the sentiment of smokers through quantitative research. Our final method to conduct primary research will be a focus group, with the purpose of gathering more in-depth perceptions of our key public. Once all research has been conducted, ASH is to be consulted and given the summarized results.

Research Method 1: Social Listening Analysis (Meltwater) Sampling Frame: All the social media posts were garnered in Meltwater’s media search feature. The keywords used were, “smoking, tobacco, marijuana and health,” between Sept. 13, 2018 and Oct. 20, 2018. A wide range of posts were collected with geographical parameters of the United States. Rationale:Before conducting research, we first had to understand ASH’s key audience in order to best guide recommendations. By focusing on the key audience and regions, we have been able to evaluate how tobacco smokers, marijuana smokers and non-smokers perceive the industries, by gaining insight on the specific topics people are talking about. Execution:

11

● Recruiting Method: None● Location: Online (Meltwater)● Length: 45 minutes analyzing each social media post ● Incentive: None● Number of Social Media Post: 30

Data Analysis Method:Meltwater Widget Analysis

Research Method 2: Social Listening Analysis (Content Analysis) Sampling Frame:A wide variety of social media posts were selected using Meltwater and dated Aug. 29, 2018 to Oct. 20, 2018. This particular time frame was chosen to capture the political atmosphere of midterm elections in the United States. The posts are split between individuals and organizations, and represent the public perceptions regarding how tobacco smokers, marijuana smokers and non-smokers perceive the tobacco and marijuana industry. Rationale:To help ASH gauge the sentiment of the public regarding smoking tobacco, our group chose these specific posts using the keywords, “smoking, tobacco, marijuana, voting and health,” on Meltwater. These posts were used to gain a deeper understanding of the public sentiment towards smoking tobacco vs marijuana and the perceived health consequences of both substances. By analyzing the posts, we were able to garner insights regarding the public views towards the substances and phasing out cigarette sales. Execution:

● Recruiting method: None● Location: Online (Meltwater)● Length: 45 minutes analyzing each social media post ● Incentive: None● Number of Social Media Posts: 30● Data Analysis Method: Content analysis● Post: Appendix

Data Analysis:Meltwater Twitter Analysis

Research Method 3: Online surveySample Frame:The online survey sampling frame includes male and female smokers and non-smokers, of varying ages, over the legal smoking age of 18, income levels, and demographic locations within the United States.

12

Rationale:ASH’s audience are all smokers of legal smoking age. By conducting a survey, we can understand what the key audience’s views are, and what they expect the legalization of marijuana to be on the tobacco industry. We will also gauge whether people are willing to switch from smoking cigarettes to smoking marijuana. Execution:

● Recruiting method: Post links on Facebook and Twitter to target a general audience; paid service of Amazon Mechanic Turk.

● Location: Online (Facebook and Twitter)● Length: Five to ten minutes ● Incentive: None● Number of Participants: Our goal is to garner a minimum of 80 responses ● Data Analysis Method: Qualtrics Data Analysis● Questions: Appendix

Data Analysis:Meltwater Widget Analysis

Research Results and Analysis

Social Listening Analysis 1: Meltwater widget analysis

Keywords: Tobacco, Marijuana, VotingConnection: This graph illustrates the audience’s attitudes towards tobacco, marijuana and voting. This helps qualify the relationship between these substances and voter satisfaction. It indicates that overall voters generally perceive current regulations regarding both tobacco and marijuana to be inadequate.

13

Keywords: Tobacco, Marijuana, Health

Connection: This graph illustrates audience sentiment towards tobacco, marijuana and health. It qualifies the perception of these substances as they relate to health. Analyzing this information will help determine whether the legalization of marijuana will increase the public’s positive sentiment towards tobacco use. This graph helps make this determination by distinguishing whether the public feels tobacco and/or marijuana use positively or negatively impact general health. What is your conclusion then?

Keywords: Tobacco, Marijuana, Legalization

Connection: After the search related to tobacco, marijuana and voting came back with only 5 tweets, we chose to further narrow search results to analyze legalization rather than voting. This helps to illustrate the overall attitudes towards legalization of marijuana and tobacco. It also helps further clarify why perception of current tobacco and marijuana legislation is negative, as it indicates the public is more specifically upset about current legalization status.

14

Keywords: Tobacco, Marijuana, Smoking

Connection: Analyzing sentiment regarding tobacco, marijuana and smoking illustrates the audience’s attitudes perception towards smoking these substances. The in-depth analysis of tweets also helps further identify whether the public has the same attitude towards smoking tobacco as smoking marijuana. Again, what is your conclusion here?

Keywords: Tobacco, Marijuana

Connection: This graph indicates the audience’s perception of and attitudes towards marijuana and tobacco in general. It helps identify whether the audience feels the same about both substances or whether each substance is viewed differently. It further clarifies previous research by providing a basis for how each substance is perceived. Again, what is your conclusion here.

15

Social Listening Analysis 2: Content analysis● The results were mixed. Sentiment towards marijuana use specifically was generally positive while sentiment towards tobacco was negative. ● General sentiment towards current tobacco and marijuana legislation was negative. ● Members of the audience who felt positive or neutral about marijuana use as it relates to health, felt negative about tobacco use.● General sentiment towards marijuana legalization was positive. ● People who illustrated negative sentiment towards marijuana use, also illustrated negative sentiment towards tobacco use. ● Substances were grouped together when the twitter user wanted to make assertions about negative health benefits, but when posted about separately, marijuana was typically viewed as having positive or neutral health benefits while tobacco was viewed as having negative health benefits. ● In the context of regulations, the audience felt marijuana should be regulated in the same way as tobacco, or that marijuana should be less regulated.

Survey AnalysisAn analysis of Qualtrics survey results provide key insights into sentiment trends between various demographic groups. Findings were compared through cross tabulation between questions specifically related to sentiment towards sales regulations of tobacco and cannabis with age, annual income, education level and region of residency. Generally, region of residency and age played the most significant roles in predicting deference towards harsher tobacco regulations. Additionally, education level served to be closely related to preference of neutrality in regulations. However, income level provided the least conclusive findings as opposed to the other demographic identifiers.

Research Method 3: Online Survey

Correlation Between Age and Attitudes

16

1. Age and Regulation Summary In order to further understand the perceptions of tobacco and cannabis regulation we conducted a comparative analysis of age and deference towards various methods of regulation. Survey results were conclusive in finding individuals from all age groups agreed tobacco sales should be regulated more harshly regulated than cannabis. Individuals between 35 and 44 years old felt strongly that both substances should be more regulated in general. Younger individuals felt strongly that both substances should be regulated by the harm they cause. Further, in general the older demographic, individuals ages 55 years or older felt tobacco should be more regulated than cannabis. About half of all individuals per age group felt indifferent towards regulations. This analysis illustrates in general older and younger generations feel tobacco should be more regulated and middle age groups desire more regulation of both substances overall.

Income’s Effect on Attitude

17

2. Income and Regulation SummaryIn order to further understand the perceptions of tobacco and cannabis regulation we conducted a comparative analysis of annual income and deference towards various methods of regulation. Survey results help to provide insights as to whether income level impacts deference towards

regulation of tobacco and cannabis. Survey results indicate such a relationship may exist. As annual income increased, deference towards substance regulation became increasingly neutral. However, all income levels generally agreed tobacco should be regulated in the same way as cannabis and that products should be regulated by the harm they cause. Further, less regulation of cannabis became increasingly important as income level decreased. This illustrates income level has little connection

with deference towards tobacco regulation but was correlative to deference towards cannabis regulation.

Education vs Attitude

18

3. Education and Regulation Summary In order to assess which factors are most important when deciding whether the legalization of cannabis has affected the attitudes of consumers, we asked participants their education level and cross analyzed it with their level of agreement to various questions. Through our research we were able to discover 61 out of 119 people had at least a bachelor's degree. The trend among the higher educated, shows most participants neither agree nor disagree as the number one choice chosen, no matter the question. Whereas, people holding only a high school diploma were more disperse. One of the key takeaways, from most of the group with only a high school diploma, was the level of agreement that tobacco should be more strongly regulated.

Region of Residency vs Attitudes

19

4. Region of Residency and Regulation SummaryTo better understand the three objectives and the overall sentiment of smoking tobacco vs cannabis, the survey linked perceptions to regions within the United States. The goal was to

observe the relationship between where citizens live and their attitudes towards the substances. The results from the survey showed most people within the US were neutral to the entire subject, with upwards to 18.5 percent of all total answers neither agreeing or disagreeing. Looking more closely we were able to find that Midwestern’s were more likely to strongly agree with tobacco being more highly regulated than cannabis. On the other hand, Westerns are more likely to

disagree with further regulations against cannabis.

Research Method 4: Focus Group

Sampling Frame:

The sampling frame for our focus group included members of the Syracuse Community. Participants consisted of individuals local to Syracuse, as well as Syracuse undergraduate and graduate students from the South, Midwest, West and Northwest regions of the United States. Ages ranged from 19 to 39.

Rationale:

The focus group helped us gain insight on general perceptions of tobacco sales regulations and deference towards tobacco use as compared to cannabis use. We were able to ask open-ended questions that facilitated a comprehensive discussion. Through this discussion, sentiment towards substance regulations and use was easily identifiable. It provided feedback to support

20

our research in determining the potential impact of cannabis legalization on public deference toward tobacco use and regulations.

Execution:

● Recruiting Method: The Team 6 researchers reached out to potential participants on social media and used responses to organize the focus group at Newhouse. ● Location: S.I. Newhouse School of Public Communications● Length:30 minutes● Incentive: Pizza and good company● Number of Participants:7

Data Analysis Method:

Content Analysis

Focus Group Results and AnalysisFocus Group Summary 1: Keynote One: The adverse health effects associated with smoking tobacco over shadow any risk connected to smoking cannabis. Overall, most participants thought that cannabis was the better choice. With most people feeling that the health benefits outweighed any perceived danger. Some of the keywords that came up when asked about sentiment towards cannabis participants said things like medicinal, fun and healthier. Words like these were gauged as positive against the alternative of cancer. All participants agreed that smoking cigarettes would more than likely lead to cancer. When asked, many felt that smoking tobacco should not be illegal. They thought more education associated with the health consequences of smoking cigarettes should be more prevalent. Everyone did agree that cigarettes should have stricter regulations. These regulations were thought to look like, higher prices, awareness campaigns, larger labels, education programs; one participant said cigarettes should not be “out front” when children join their parents at the register. One participant found comfort in knowing “at least with cigarettes you at least know that there is harmful thing within them; and as far as marijuana goes, you do not know your source. You do use it, but you do not where it comes from, who it comes from, you don’t know necessarily know the dangers it has.” When the group was asked why they thought, considering the high chance of

21

adverse health consequences, people continue to smoke cigarettes the group proposed addiction and the feeling of euphoria or a head high.

Focus Group Summary 2:Keynote Two: Most people believe the legalization of cannabis, will positively affect society. The focus group was very enthusiastic to state their opinions for or against cannabis. Most people thought cannabis should be federally legal with the same sort of required risk education proposed earlier. One participant approached the discussion, stating that the complete legalization of cannabis would not change very much in society. This participant said that most people, when given the option to try cannabis may only smoke it once. Leaving, the majority unwilling to form a strong habit like the one found in current cigarette smokers. While about the recent legalization of cannabis, another participant spoke very strongly about how the decriminalization of cannabis should bring reform to men and women currently in jail for cannabis related offences. On the other hand, some said both substances should be illegal do to the dangerous external risks and lack of current research.

Additional Observations: The public has a strong negative sentiment towards smoking tobacco. Most feel that cannabis is a safer alternative to smoking cigarettes. However, most recognize the risk of impairment linked to smoking cannabis, and believe this risk is cause for regulations. Everyone agreed that both substances should only be legal if the public is fully educated of the potential risks. None of the millennials in the group admitted to smoking cigarettes, but a couple did admit to smoking cannabis on a regular basis. When asked why, they said cannabis “makes me feel good.” Overall, non-smokers do not believe smoking tobacco should be illegal. Though most admitted to knowing the potential death risk. They believe that smoking cigarettes will age out with the younger generations becoming more knowledgeable, there by choosing on their own not to smoke cigarettes.

22

Final Recommendations

General Summary:Based on our research we have determined several recommendations for ASH moving forward. Public opinion is generally shifting towards legalization of marijuana. However, it is important to note that legalization is a separate concept from regulation. Generally, individuals felt substance regulation was important and should be determined by the level of harm caused. Further, those who supported less regulation were generally motivated by their desire to reap the health benefits of marijuana. Despite knowledge of health benefits surrounding marijuana use, a general caution existed when the topic of smoking substances came into play. Individuals associated both tobacco and substance smoking with health issues. Our recommendations highlight ways in which ASH can capitalize on these sentiments and perceptions to further their goal to phase out smoking combustible tobacco materials.

Recommendation One:We recommend ASH makes every attempt to separate tobacco from marijuana. This separation would include keep the substances separate in all literature and marketing materials. Rather than targeting the general practice of smoking, ASH should use substance specific phrasing. This approach is like ASH's neutral stance on vaping. Although ASH need not advocate for marijuana use, it should continue to specifically attack only regulation and policies surrounding smoking combustible tobacco use. This recommendation is strongly supported by findings from the social listening analysis which illustrated that when standing alone, tobacco is generally viewed negatively, but when standing with marijuana the public is more likely to have a neutral stance on its use. An easy way to implement this strategy of separation would be to only share research that is specific to tobacco use. Further, push campaigns that use phrases like, "Stop Smoking Tobacco" rather than "Stop Smoking." Currently, ASH's goal to phase out combustible tobacco use is not at risk of losing public deference, however, to maintain this standing, the organization must continue to reassert its goal to phase out tobacco use rather than marijuana.

Recommendation Two:In addition to establishing the clear distinction in tobacco and marijuana use, ASH should use its platform to further educate the public on the substances. ASH should publish marketing materials that identify differences in marijuana use rather than tobacco use. This could look like something like a benefit and detriment list that clears up any ambiguities between substances. For example, unlike marijuana, tobacco is not prescribed to patients to alleviate ailments. ASH could further make clear distinctions as to how marijuana is regulated vs. how tobacco is

23

regulated. Reiterating this point with statistical data for support may even cause individual in marijuana legalizing states to switch from tobacco to marijuana or refrain from substance use in general.

Recommendation Three:Our final recommendation would be to customize all printed material by geographical region. After thoroughly analyzing the survey and Meltwater, one of the key takeaways was Midwestern’s had a different sentiment towards cigarettes and cannabis compared to Western’s. When creating campaign materials, it may benefit the organization to take into consideration the differences in opinion throughout the United States. For example, ASH could really stress the negatives related to smoking cigarettes including, price, and adverse health effects personally and second hand to Midwestern’s. Or vice versa, ASH could create materials that strictly focus on all the positives related to not smoking cigarettes. Whereas Western’s, that are more against cigarettes already, may need to see materials that focus on actions they can take to help potential smokers or the future. This example does not include the rest of the country as each region, district, county and state, should be considered before starting any future campaigns.

Another way of targeting states is to add in state specific facts that cater to the audience. Below is an image from an ad by Tennessee’s Department of Economic and Community Development. While they are a Tennessee based organization, ASH could apply a similar strategy and push state-specific campaigns featuring statistics on money spent on tobacco products, or deaths attributed to tobacco induced illness.

Image sourced from: https://www.cga.ct.gov/2017/rpt/pdf/2017-R-0297.pdf

24

Appendix 1: Content Analysis (Twitter)

25

26

27

28

Appendix 2: Focus Group

Group Screening Questions:

29

30

Focus Group Consent Forms:

31

Appendix 3: Qualtrics Survey

32

33

References:Center for Disease Control. (2017). Tobacco use by geographic location. Retrieved from

https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/disparities/geographic/index.htm. Action on Smoking and Health. (2018). Goals and needs. Retrieved from Blackboard Materials. Cannabis Consumer Organization. (2018). Cannabis consumer demographics. Retrieved from

https://www.cannabisconsumer.org/uploads/9/7/9/6/97962014/cannabis_consumer_demographics_and_behavior.pdf.

34