Working with the Media

This guide is intended to assist people working in tobacco control work more effectively with the media at local and regional level.  It is particularly geared towards the issue of ending smoking in workplaces and enclosed public places.  With the government announcing a ban on smoking in public places in the Queen’s speech, media interest in the issue is likely to be intense.

Part 1 of this Guide is intended to provide basic information on being an effective advocate and media representative.  It is intended to be used by those working in tobacco control who do not have media experience.

Part 2 of this Guide presents some key facts and arguments on secondhand smoke, including a run down on the disinformation spread by the tobacco industry and how it can be countered.

Part 3 of this Guide suggests things you can do to participate in the fight for smokefree public places in the UK and gives samples of letters to newspapers.

Part 1:  How to use the media

Effective media work is essential to successful campaigning.  Small towns, city districts and rural areas will generally have at least one priced weekly local paper, and possibly a number of free sheets delivered directly to the door. Don’t ignore freesheets: even though they employ few journalists, they are widely read and an important source of local news for many people.  Local papers (and regional and local radio and TV) cut across social groups because they often go through every neighbourhood door, regardless of age, income, education or politics.  Local media also tend to be read, watched or listened to with more attention and local stories stick in people's minds better than national media stories.

What to do first

Find out which media cover your area.  There may be many more than you think.  Look in commercial media directories such as PIMS or Editors (try your local library) or ask the national ASH office for help.  Don’t forget local radio.  Ensure your list is kept up to date.  Make a note of their deadlines. 

Make contact with the key people on your local paper and local news programmes.  Ring them and find out what subjects interest them most.  Also keep an eye on the local press and make a note of journalists who write articles in favour of smokefree workplaces.  They are likely to be interested in what you have to say and ideas you have for stories.  If there is a local journalist with a particular interest in health issues or specifically in smoking issues, it pays to know who they are and to cultivate a relationship with them.  Personal contacts are as important in media work as in any other area of business.  If media folk know, trust and hopefully like you, you will get more of your stories reported. 

How journalists work

Journalists are ordinary working people.  They are usually bright although they are generalists, and may well be ill-informed about the issue of secondhand smoke.  A key part of their daily lives is pressure - pressure from editors and producers to find good stories, and pressure to produce them by strict deadlines.  If you help journalists produce good and accurate work and they will soon be your friends.  Make that pressure worse and they may spike your news idea or simply never contact you again.

All news organisations have a newsdesk or equivalent.  This is basically the central processing point for incoming news, including press releases.  Always send a copy of your release to the newsdesk as well as to named contacts.

Agencies, particularly the Press Association (PA), send on their news coverage to other media outlets.  In the case of the PA, this is done on a rolling 24-hours, seven days-a- week basis.  There will be a PA journalist in your region, the PA head office can supply contact details.  Don’t assume that a local story is not of national interest, especially if it is about a child with poor health.  Getting your story picked up by an agency is a good way of feeding into the national press.

What is News?

Journalists are always looking for news.  It helps if your 'news' is in fact new but it does not have to be:  politicians are very good at dressing last month's announcement in new clothes.  It may also be helpful to include human interest, controversy, local personalities and provide picture pointers.

Human Interest:  Secondhand smoke is not just a matter of statistics.  It affects the health of real people, like a local child whose chronic asthma is made worse when she goes into a local smoky restaurant/shopping centre.  This is the sort of thing that is likely to get picked up by the national tabloids.

In the run-up to legislation on secondhand smoke, the media will certainly want to speak to employers, particularly in the pub and restaurant trades, about the implications of going smokefree for their business.  If you know anyone in the trade who has already made this move and is both supportive and articulate, ask them if they would mind speaking to journalists (many will welcome positive publicity for their business).  If they say yes, offer them as useful contacts to media whenever appropriate.  A publican supporting smoke freedom can be very persuasive.  The ASH website has a list of smokefree pubs and restaurants around the UK which is continually being updated.

Controversy: “The local branch of restaurant Burger Hut was slammed by local campaigners yesterday for exposing children to life-threatening secondhand smoke”.  Rows are often news.

Pictures: Often communicate better than words.  You cannot photograph a health statistic.  But you can photograph a child as she wheezes her through a smoke haze in a local cafe.

Be Available: If you give your name as a contact, then you must be available.  If possible give the media a home or work telephone number and/or pager/mobile phone number.  If you get a message on your answer phone return it promptly.  There is nothing more frustrating for a journalist or researcher than to be unable to contact key sources before deadline.

Media organisations get their news from many sources, including news agencies, forward news planners, and the courts.  But a key source is press releases.  Media outlets get hundreds or even thousands of press releases: your press release must stand out.  

The Press Release

Stage 1: Writing

You should have a good press release template which you can use time and time again. Use headed paper and number the pages.  Make sure there is a clear logo and name for your group at the top of the page.  Use the words "Press Release" in large writing.  Put the page number on each page of your release, in bold and in the form "Page N of X". Press releases should be one side of A4 for preference, and two sides maximum.

Here is an example of a press release.

Key points about the above release are:

• The date and time of publication are given at the top.  Either mark a press release “For Immediate Release” followed by today’s date – which means it can be used at once – or give an “Embargo” for a specific time and date, which means it cannot be used before then.
• Try to make the headline attention-grabbing.
• Put all the main facts in the first paragraph. Read the news stories in any reasonable newspaper and you will see how this is done. Remember the five Ws – WHO, WHAT, WHEN, WHERE and WHY.
• Use simple and clear English throughout.  Avoid jargon, and explain any essential technical terms. Aim to write like the Daily Mirror, and you will at least end up writing as clearly as the Guardian!
• Make sure the facts are correct – always get someone else to check your draft release for facts, figures, grammar, spelling, dates.
• Include an interesting quote from a campaigner or spokesperson. Use spoken not written English for this. Use indents or italics or both for this.
• Use notes for technical details and supporting information. Put number references in the main text.
• Don’t forget to include contact details.

Stage 2: Sending Your Press Release

Send your press release by both fax and email, and even by post when appropriate. The more ways you send it, the more chance there is that someone will read it.

Stage 3: Follow-up

You must ring all your contacts to make sure they have received the release.  Ask if there is anything else they wish to know.  Media organisations are chaotic, and things get lost.  Send it again if they did not receive it.

Stage 4: Interviews

Remember: always prepare for your interview in advance.  Time spent working out what points you want to make and what points you want to use is never wasted.  Think about the kinds of questions you are likely to be asked.  If you are an ordinary citizen, rather than a politician or paid spokesperson, journalists will usually help you.  Make sure you prepare for antagonistic questions, e.g. Aren’t you just demonising smokers?  Don’t smokers have a right to smoke?  Isn’t this just the nanny state gone mad?

ASH are happy to advise you on preparation.  Ring the national office and ask for our help.  ASH’s staff includes former TV producers and senior press officers, as well as tobacco control experts.  We can help.

Television interviews

Recorded TV interviews (by far the most common kind) tend to be very short – and may result in a final broadcast “clip” as short as 10 to 20 seconds.  So be brief and incisive with your answers.

While the camera operator is setting up the equipment, ask the reporter what questions they are going to ask you.  And let them know if there are particular points you want to get across.

Look at and talk to the reporter, not the camera.  If eye contact makes you nervous, fix your gaze two inches over the interviewer's head.  If you stumble with your answer in a recorded interview, stop and ask for the question to be put to you again.  In a live interview you must keep talking.

Four tricks for success

1.  Appear relaxed, confident, and friendly in your body language. The appearance of confidence creates confidence.

2.  Try to suggest a good spot in your building or pick an interesting backdrop for the interview. Don’t be filmed in front of inappropriate locations, signs etc.

3.  Eccentricities of dress or behaviour will distract the viewer.  Always look tidy and 'ready' for the interview.

4.  Try not to fidget, sway or rock from foot to foot.

Radio interviews

Radio interviews are generally short. You may get three minutes or so for the complete interview, enough time to make maybe two main points.  Decide what these points are before you do the interview.  Find out if the interview is live or taped.

Remember who your audience is for radio interviews.  People may be driving in their car or busy at home with their kids.  You must work to capture their full attention.  Speak clearly and avoid complicated language that would be difficult for the radio show's audience to understand.  Do not use jargon.  Use simple words to paint a picture and express feeling.  You are a campaigner because you care about the issue.  Make sure the audience understands this.

Key Points for All Interviews

• Anything you say can end up on the air.  If you do not want it repeated, don't say it.
• Say what you mean, avoiding jargon.  Jargon can be defined as words or concepts understood only by a particular community.  For example, public health experts know what is meant by "smoking prevalence rates". Most other people don't.
• Don’t use percentages.  Many people do not understand them.  Say “one in two” of “half” rather than 50%, for example.
• Emphasise positives.  Focus on what you want to achieve, e.g. wanting to help and support smokers in giving up their addiction and in protecting their health, discourage people (particularly young people) from starting to smoke,  protecting non-smokers from environmental tobacco smoke.  Tobacco-control campaigners are pro-life.  Our opponents are pro-death.
• Many people will have forgotten, or will never have heard, exactly how dangerous smoking is.  Remind them that half of all lifelong smokers will die prematurely as a result.  Remind them that 106,000 people die from smoking in the UK every year, the entire population of a town the size of Guildford or Exeter, or the equivalent of a jumbo jet crashing every single day.
• On secondhand smoke, challenge opponents on the science.  Do they accept the latest report from the Government’s own Scientific Committee on Tobacco and Health, which shows that the evidence on SHS and health is clear and decisive?
• The “libertarian” argument about “freedom to smoke” falls down, first because smoking is a powerful physical and psychological addiction, fostered over many decades by the tobacco companies and their allies, and secondly because smoking in the presence of others damages their health.  The liberal principle is that people should be free to do what they like provided that they do not harm others.

Last Word

Be truthful, be helpful, and be precise.  But there is no need to be solemn.  A good joke may be worth a hundred statistics.  Campaigning should be fun!

The tobacco industry opposes tougher controls on smoking in public places because it encourages smokers to quit and reaffirms that passive smoking is a threat to public health.  A 1993 report for Philip Morris concluded that the “three to five fewer cigarettes per day per smoker will reduce annual manufacturer profits a billion dollars plus per year.”  It is therefore not surprising that the tobacco industry has embarked on a series of aggressive campaigns to oppose smokefree legislation.  However, rather than lobby against smokefree laws themselves, they have enlisted the hospitality industry to fight for them.  Having failed to prevent the introduction of smokefree laws in Australia and the United States, the industry has doubled its efforts to oppose the laws in Europe.  The most common arguments you will encounter are:

1.         There is no evidence that secondhand smoke is bad for health

The tobacco industry have denied that passive smoking is a health hazard for many years, and have only recently acknowledged the risks posed by active smoking. 

• The dangers of secondhand smoke have been confirmed by the Government’s Chief Medical Officer, Sir Liam Donaldson, as well as by the heads of all of Britain’s thirteen Royal Colleges of Medicine.
• The UK’s Scientific Community on Tobacco and Health (SCOTH) concluded in their 2004 report that “SHS represents a substantial public health hazard”.
• The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has classified environmental tobacco smoke as a Class A (known human) carcinogen, alongside asbestos and benzene.

Secondhand smoke is bad for health:

• Tobacco smoke contains over 4000 chemicals in the form of particles and gases, some 60 of which are known or suspected carcinogens.
•  Secondhand smoke includes tar (itself composed of many chemicals), benzene, carbon monoxide, ammonia, formaldehyde, and hydrogen cyanide.
• The EPA identifies passive smoking as a risk factor in the following:

Childbirth and infancy

Cot death (SIDS)

Low birthweight

Illness in Children

Middle Ear Infection

Illnesses in children

Middle ear infection

Asthma (induction & exacerbation)

Bronchitis (induction & exacerbation)

Pneumonia (induction and exacerbation)

Illnesses in adults

Heart disease

Stroke

Lung cancer

Nasal cancer

Heart Disease

Stroke

Lung Cancer

Also

Spontaneous abortion (miscarriage)

Adverse impact on learning and behavioural development in children

Meningococcal infections in children

Cancers and leukaemia in children

Asthma exacerbation in adults

Exacerbation of cystic fibrosis

Decreased lung function

Cervical cancer

·        There are more than five million people suffering from asthma in the UK.  Secondhand smoke has been identified as the second most common trigger in the workplace.

The tobacco industry have undertaken a huge PR exercise to discredit scientific research linking passive smoking to disease, repeatedly arguing that there is disagreement amongst the scientific community about the “alleged” health risks of secondhand smoke.  This is false.

• The only scientists who dispute the evidence that passive smoking is a major cause of disease and death are those funded by the tobacco industry.  Campaigning groups such as FOREST are also funded by the tobacco industry to reinforce the impression that there is debate about the health effects of passive smoking.
• Most studies do show health risks, for example, research has shown that even limited exposure to ETS causes the blood to thicken - a phenomenon known as platelet aggregation – and that the endothelium (the inner lining of arteries) seems to be particularly susceptible to tobacco smoke.  Researchers found that even half an hour’s exposure to ETS by non-smokers is enough to adversely affect cells lining the coronary arteries.  The dysfunction of these endothelial cells contributes towards the narrowing of arteries and a reduction in blood flow.

·        The tobacco industry also likes to infer that secondhand smoke is an annoyance rather than a health hazard.  Their referral to the ‘comfort’ of nonsmokers is a cynical attempt to draw attention away from the dangers of passive smoking.  Many people in the hospitality industry have picked up on this point and use it to argue that ventilation is a suitable compromise.

• In the United States, the Federal Government is suing the tobacco industry for $280 billion for, among other things, lying about the health effects of secondhand smoke.

Tobacco lobbyists and allies often demand that we produce ‘victims’ of secondhand smoke, claiming that there aren’t any.  In fact there are numerous case studies of people whose health has been badly damaged by secondhand smoke.  The most famous is Roy Castle, a non-smoking musician who played extensively in smoky jazz clubs early in his career and died of lung cancer in 1994.

See http://www.oldash.org.uk/html/casestudies/casestudies.html for some good examples – all the people on this site are prepared to talk to the media about their experience.

It has been estimated that exposure to secondhand smoke in the workplaces is responsible for around 600 premature deaths in the UK every year.  This can be compared with 235 deaths from all other industrial accidents combined in 2003/04 and 64 deaths from Variant CJD in 2004.

2.         Ventilation is the best way to deal with secondhand smoke

This is the central argument of both the tobacco and the hospitality industries and pro-smoking groups like FOREST and AIR.

• Ventilation and similar systems cannot eliminate all the dangerous elements of cigarette smoke.  They removes the visible smoke but not the cancer-causing particulates which are invisible to the human eye and too small to be caught by the filter.
• Ventilation systems are usually not well maintained, making them even less likely to be effective.
• The tobacco industry knows this; their websites usually have fine print saying that ventilation does not address the health issues of secondhand smoke.  Tobacco giant Philip Morris admits on its company website that ventilation has not been “shown to address the health effects of secondhand smoke”.

• The ventilation argument is also used to address the issue of the “comfort” of non-smokers.  This is a blatant attempt to draw attention away from the health concerns:  while it is true that nonsmokers often avoid pubs because they dislike the smoke, the reason for smokefree legislation is to protect people’s health.
• Ventilation systems are expensive and ineffective in cutting the risks from secondhand smoke.  Smokefree workplaces are the only safe option.

3.         Pubs will lose money/have to close if smoking bans are introduced 

This is the most pernicious piece of disinformation circulated by the tobacco industry.  It has been used in every country which has debated smokefree legislation and is completely unsubstantiated.  It is scaremongering, plain and simple.

• Publicans say that, because half of their customers are smokers, a ban on smoking could dramatically affect their business.  On the surface, this seems to be a valid fear but it ignores the fact that three quarters of the population don’t smoke and avoid pubs because of the smoky environment.  There may be some regular customers who stop going to pubs when they are not able to smoke, but the potential for attracting new non-smoking customers far exceeds any predicted losses.

• Studies in Australia and New York examining the economic effects of smoking bans found that profits either increased or stayed the same.  Other countries which have smokefree legislation report the same thing.

• It is true that hospitality industry profits have declined in Ireland.  However they have have been falling steadily for several years now.  The tobacco industry is working hard to convince publicans in England that the smoking ban was the cause of last year’s fall.  Again, this is untrue.  Changing social habits and rising prices are the cause, not the smoking ban.
• It is unlikely that smokers would stop going to pubs altogether just because they could no longer smoke inside.  Smokers still go to the cinema, the theatre, travel on airplanes, none of which permit smoking.
• The most comprehensive review of the evidence (Scollo M, Lal A, Hyland A and Glantz S: “Review of the quality of studies on the economic effects of smokefree policies on the hospitality industry”: Tobacco Control 2002 12:13-20) shows that from 97 studies worldwide, all independent studies showed no negative impact on takings. In New York, the City Finance Commissioner has revealed that business taxes from the city’s hospitality venues rose by 12% in the first nine months after the legislation took effect.

Smokefree legislation is popular with the public and good for business.

• Surveys consistently show that the public want restrictions on smoking.  Even a majority of smokers prefer to socialise in smokefree environments.  A MORI poll commissioned by ASH in 2004 found that 89% of people supported a law to ensure all enclosed workplaces were smokefree.
• Smoking can create a number of extra costs for employers such as additional cleaning and redecoration costs, repairing cigarette burns to the carpet and furniture, ventilation machinery, and the provision of special facilities for either smokers or non-smokers.
• Introducing smokefree legislation means that the burden of risk and inconvenience is transferred from non-smokers (who no longer have to breathe smoky air) to smokers (who go outside or to a designated smoking area when they want to smoke).
• In the UK, the Chief Medical Officer’s Annual Report for 2003 suggested that the net economic benefit of ending smoking in all workplaces and enclosed public places would be between £2.3 billion and £2.7 billion a year.

The voluntary approach has been tried without success.

• The Public Places Charter was a voluntary scheme adopted by the hospitality industry but after four years, fewer than 1% of pubs banned smoking completely. 
• The Charter focused on giving customers choice rather than protecting the health of pub workers.
• It is clear that the hospitality industry are unable to address this issue themselves, therefore legislation is necessary..

4.         Smoking bans only serve to demonise smokers

Smokefree legislation is not a ‘ban’ on smoking.  The issue is not whether people smoke, but where they smoke.

• Smokefree legislation is not prohibition through the back door.
• Seventy percent of current smokers would like to quit.  It is known that ending smoking in workplaces is a simple and cost-effective way of encouraging smokers to quit.  Smokefree laws are therefore helpful to smokers, and the majority of smokers back them.
• The current law penalises non-smokers who, at just over 70%, make up the majority of the population.  Non-smokers currently have no legal protection from being forced to breathe in other people’s smoke while at work.  Likewise, if non-smokers want to breathe clean air when they go to a pub, they are the ones obliged to go outside.  Smokefree legislation would reverse this situation, requiring smokers to adjust their behaviour, not nonsmokers.

5.         Isn’t a smokefree law just “an obsession of the learned middle classes”?

This unhelpful phrase was used by former Health Secretary John Reid during the debate in the run-up to the White Paper.

• In a MORI poll of more than 4,000 people, conducted for ASH in May 2004, four out of five (80%) of those polled supported a law to ensure that all enclosed workplaces must be smokefree. The MORI poll reveals that support for a smokefree workplace law is strong across all social classes:

-         86% of social class AB support the proposal

-         83% of social class C1 support the proposal

-         79% of social class C2 support the proposal

-         72% of social class DE support the proposal

• Smoking is no longer allowed in most offices, where white collar and professional people mainly work.  But it is still allowed in many factories, small business and hospitality venues, where jobs are more likely to be in routine, manual or semi-skilled occupations.  This health inequality needs to be addressed.  All workers are entitled to protection from toxic chemicals at work regardless of their social class..
• Smoking is the greatest single factor in the different life expectancy between social classes.  Men and women in manual socio-economic groups are more likely to smoke than people in non-manual occupations.  (20% of men and 18% of women in the professional and managerial groups smoke compared with 32% of men and 31% of women in routine and manual groups.)  Ending smoking in the workplace could be the best thing to happen to smokers for many years.

6.         This is an infringement of smokers’ rights

Smoking in enclosed public places causes direct harm to other people.  A law which prevents this is reasonable and fair.

• The right of non smokers to breathe clean air must take priority over the perceived right of smokers to indulge their habit wherever they choose.
• Smokers are not free to endanger the health of those around them.
• Pro-smoking groups often argue that we might as well ban alcohol as well, since the health effects are equally bad.  However there ARE laws governing the consumption of alcohol.  You are not, for example, allowed to drink alcohol and drive a car.  People are free to consume alcohol provided that they do not endanger someone else’s life while doing so.  The same should apply to the consumption of tobacco.
• The Americans coined the phrase “your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins” to answer this argument.

In his great essay “On Liberty”, John Stuart Mill wrote that: “the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others.”

Always put the emphasis back on protecting the health of nonsmokers.

7.         Smokers will smoke more at home

This claim has been made by both the tobacco industry, and, more worryingly, by former Health Secretary John Reid.  There is no evidence to support this.  If anything, the reverse is true.

• Many smokers give up altogether when smokefree legislation is introduced.
• Smokers and non-smokers become more aware of the risks of smoking around others, and children in particular when smokefree legislation is introduced.

·        After smoking restrictions were introduced in public places in Australia, there was a rise in the number of private homes also restricting smoking.

·        Further data from Australia shows that current and former smokers who work in smokefree environments are more likely to have smokefree homes.

• In California, the percentage of children living in smokefree homes rose from 38 per cent in 1992 to 82.2 per cent in 1999.

Anyone claiming that ending smoking at work increases smoking at home must be challenged to produce hard evidence – there isn’t any!

8.         It will be bad for tourism.

• This has not proven to be the case in New York, Australia, California or Ireland.  Again, if anything the reverse is true.  Surveys of tourists in Ireland drew comments that they wish smoking was banned in their countries.
• A hotel in Scotland which recently went smokefree increased it’s bookings as non-smoker tourists lined up to stay there.
• Non-smokers travel too.
• Banning smoking on aeroplanes has not had an adverse effect on tourism.

9.         The UK is too cold for smokers to go outside when they want a cigarette.

• Restrictions on smoking have been successfully implemented in New York, Canada, Norway, Ireland and the southern states of Australia which are cold in winter.  Smokers already accept smoking outside in most workplaces.  Many smokers enjoy the camaraderie of going outside for a cigarette.
• One of the benefits of smokefree legislation is that it makes it easier for smokers to quit.  If they are forced to go outside every time they want a cigarette they generally smoke less.

10.       It will be too hard to police

• It has been suggested in Scotland that there will be riots if a smoking ban is introduced.  This ludicrous claim was also made in Ireland, but such problems have not happened anywhere else in the world.

• Smoking restrictions already in place, for example on the London Underground, are routinely observed without heavy enforcement, because the great majority of people are law-abiding and recognise the purpose of the restrictions.
• Publicans are already in charge of enforcing the ban on under age drinking. 

11.       There will be an increasing number of cigarette butts in the street.

• This argument should be ridiculed.  The suggestion that legislation which protects the health of thousands of workers should not be introduced because there might be an increase in cigarette butts in the street is absurd.
• Pubs in Dublin installed wall mounted ashtrays.  These ashtrays were later used to carry advertisements for stop smoking services. 

The Current Legal Position

Smoking in the workplace is not currently banned in the UK.  However:

·        The Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992, covers the work environment, safety, facilities and housekeeping.  This Directive does not prohibit smoking in the workplace, but does require that where rest areas are provided, there must be non-smoking areas.  This means that a worker is entitled to smokefree air during breaks, but not while actually working!

·        The Pregnant Workers Directive 92/85/EEC, which provides general obligations on employers to protect the welfare of employees who are pregnant, have recently given birth or are breast-feeding.

• The carcinogens at work directive 90/394/EEC aims to protect workers against the health and safety risks that might arise from exposure to known carcinogens and covers grounds for preventing this exposure.  It makes reference to employers having to train their staff concerning the health risks posed by tobacco consumption (Article 11(1):a).
• Employers also have a common law responsibility to provide a safe place and system of work.  They should act to resolve complaints from employees that their health may be at risk from a smoky environment.  When considering risk, the key factor is not whether the employer knew about the dangers, so much as whether s/he ought to have known, in the light of the knowledge available at the time. 
• The tobacco industry support the argument that the smoking policy of a public house are purely a matter for the manager, owner or licensee.  However, to offer a commercial service to the public, all premises have to meet numerous consumer protection standards in relation to fire, electrical safety, building design, sanitation, food hygiene and so on – the excuse that “people don’t have to come here if they don’t like it” is not acceptable for these standards.

Part 3:  What you can do

1.            Generate positive publicity for the introduction of smokefree legislation.

Ideas for storylines to suggest to your local media:

• Levels of secondhand smoke in your local pub.  Journalists can either test exposure to tobacco smoke of bar staff (cotinine test) or levels of indoor pollution generally (using a CO² monitor).   Cotinine tests measure a person’s exposure to cigarette smoke cotinine levels (which indicate exposure to cigarette smoke) in staff who work in pubs which allow smoking with staff who work in a smokefree environment or a general comparison of .  Contact ASH Head Office for the relevant kit.  Journalists like to do things that involve investigation.

• Comparisons of laws around the world.  Draw attention to the countries which have implemented smoking bans and how successful they were.  For example. smoking has been successfully banned in the Northern Provinces of Canada.  If rural Canada can do it why can’t we?

• Local smokefree pubs which are successful.  There is a list of pubs and restaurants on the ASH website.  Contact the ones in your area to see if they would be willing to be interviewed about their experiences of going smokefree.

• Hospitality workers who’ve become sick from passive smoking.  If you know of any, and they are willing to be interviewed, use them as much as possible.  Journalists love these kinds of stories too.

• Companies who run in-house programmes to help their workers who smoke to quit – running smokers groups, supplying NRT.  Your local stop smoking service will know if any local businesses are doing this.

• Someone with asthma/bronchitis/heart disease who can’t currently go to pubs because they are too smoky but would really like to go.  Better yet, a child who can’t go to certain restaurants/the local ice rink etc.  Your local branch of Asthma UK might be able to help with this.

• Positive stories, e.g. there is an interior designer based in Scotland who has started a business helping Scottish publicans redesign their premises to accommodate the proposed smokefree legislation.  Smokefree legislation benefits many people.  Find them and promote their stories.

2                    Letters to the Editors of your local paper

It is important to respond to negative articles or letters in your local press as well as write letters in favour of the legislation.  You can write on behalf of your organisation or as a concerned citizen but the more letters received by the newspaper the better.  Try and encourage as many people as you can to do the same.

Keep an eye on articles in your local paper.  If they run a story saying that pubs will go out of business if smoking is banned, write to them explaining why this is not the case.

Most of the negative letters received are from disgruntled smokers.  This was published in the Irish Times in Dublin:

There are several issues raised in this letter which could be addressed.

1. The writer agrees that smokers should not infringe on the rights of non-smokers.  Would it be possible to provide a smoking room under the circumstances described by the writer.  Surely such a room would need to be cleaned more often than the following morning (smokers are generally untidy, dropping butts on the floor), plus glasses need to be cleared.  If a room was not cleaned for an entire night, would smokers really want to sit in it?  Also, workers would still be exposed during the cleaning process the following morning.  Something could also be said about the ventilation argument here.
2. Surveys in Ireland have shown that 93% of people believe the law is a good idea, including 80% of smokers.  This contradicts the writer’s belief that smokers are generally unhappy with the current law.  In reality the law is so popular that people in Northern Ireland are demanding similar laws be introduced there.
3. Highlight the fact that most smokers want to quit and smokefree laws encourage them to do – many smokers report that quit attempts fail because they are unable to socialise without being exposed to smoke.  If smoking was not permitted in pubs this would not be a factor.

This is an example of a letter that ASH sent to the Western Mail in Cardiff in response to a letter to the Editor by the Licensed Victuallers of Wales, arguing that smokefree legislation will have a devastating effect on pubs in Wales.  The writer claimed that the dangers from passive smoking were small and that a ban on smoking at the bar was sufficient to protect the health of staff.  He also stated (incorrectly) that the ban in Ireland was responsible for a ten percent down turn in profits and massive job losses across the industry.  It is particularly important to respond to this kind of letter because it is spreading incorrect information and likely to alarm publicans.

It is sometimes appropriate to write a more polemic letter – controversial letters are sometimes more likely to be published.  However, if you are going to adopt this tone, make sure your facts are correct!

This is an example of a letter sent to the Blackpool Gazette by a non-smoker in May of 2005.

This is a simple and direct letter.  More importantly it reminds people that non-smokers feel strongly about being forced to breathe in other people’s smoke.

Here is another from a resident of a nursing home which recently went smokefree.  The letter was published in the Swindon Evening Standard in early May 2005.

Again, this reinforces the fact that non-smokers have rights too and the current situation penalises non-smokers.

3                    Encourage local pubs to go smoke free.

Publicans are bombarded by predictions of doom and gloom if they go smoke free.  This needs to be countered.  Getting positive stories in your local press about pubs and restaurants which successfully went smokefree is a good start.

The Basildon Recorder has run a series of supportive stories about a local pub which went smokefree.  This may or may not have been responsible for several other pubs in the area going smokefree but it can’t have hurt.

Example of story from the Basildon Recorder

If you know of a local pub which has gone smokefree, contact the manager to see if s/he would be willing to be interviewed.  You could also combine this with a story about the improved working conditions for staff.

This letter from a publican, who has successfully implemented a smoking ban in her pub, was published in Caterer and Hotelkeeper in May 2005.

Where to Get More Information

The ASH website (http://www.ash.org.uk) has a great deal of useful information. You can download two factsheets on secondhand smoke (No 4 and No 14).

Feel free to contact ASH by telephone at any time for help and advice. Our number is 020 7739 5902.

	print this document
	download in word format(177kb)

back to top