Use of Brand Engagement Appeals in US Cigarette and E-Cigarettes Ads (2019–2020)

Abstract

Background: The tobacco industry has historically used brand engagement – communication tactics companies use to increase customer attachment to a brand and brand loyalty – to recruit and retain consumers. Limited information is available to assess the brand engagement tactics used to promote the two most popular tobacco products in the US – cigarettes and electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) – across different advertising platforms (e.g., direct-to-consumer (DTC), social media). Material and methods: We acquired 520 cigarette and 5,502 e–cigarette ads that ran in the US January 2019 to December 2020 from market research firms (Kantar, Numerator), Rutger’s University ad surveillance website (trinketsandtrash.org), and branded social media accounts. Ads were double-coded for eight types of brand engagement tactics: Price Promotion, Sweepstakes, Mobile App, Email/Mail List, Free Gift, Social Media engagement request, Sponsored Events, and Auto-Ship subscription program. We report presence of brand engagement tactics by product type and advertising platform. Results: Overall, 62.9% of cigarette ads and 49.9% of e-cigarette ads contained at least one brand engagement tactic. For cigarette ads, the most common tactics were Sweepstakes and Mobile App requests, which were most commonly featured in DTC ads. For e-cigarettes, the most common tactic was Price Promotion which was featured in most DTC and online e-cigarette ads. Conclusions: Brand engagement was common in this sample of cigarette and e-cigarette ads. Our findings highlight key differences in the type of brand engagement tactic used to promote each product on different advertising platforms. Results can inform continued advertising surveillance studies and regulatory efforts.

Keywords:

• Brand engagement
• cigarettes
• e-cigarettes
• marketing
• advertising

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to Person 1, Person 2, and Person 3 for their contributions to this work.

Disclosure statement

Author 4 reports financial support was provided by Burroughs Wellcome Fund. Author 4 also reports a relationship with Northeastern University Public Health Advocacy Institute that includes: paid expert testimony. The other authors have no other conflicts of interest to disclose.

Data availability statement

The data underlying this article were provided by Numerator under license. Coded data can be shared upon reasonable request.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by an Innovation in Regulatory Science Award from the Burroughs Wellcome Fund.