The RICO Verdict and Corrective Statements: Catalysts for Policy Change?

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: A federal court ruled tobacco companies violated racketeering laws and ordered them to publish corrective statements. This study assesses effects of exposure to the statements and related court findings on attitudes toward tobacco-related policies and tobacco company influences on policymaking. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of US adults (N = 2010) prior to publication of the statements. Participants were randomly assigned to the "unexposed" group (N = 1004), which answered attitude questions before reading the statements and court findings, or the "exposed" group (N = 1006), which answered attitude questions after reading the statements and court findings. RESULTS: The exposed group was less likely to think lawmakers should trust tobacco companies as much as other companies (ß = -.24, p < .001) or that lawmakers should trust tobacco company lobbyists to provide accurate information (ß = -.17, p = .019), compared to the unexposed group. The exposed group also was more likely to support requiring graphic warning labels (ß = .15, p = .014) and point-of-sale quitline signs (ß = .13, p = .028). CONCLUSIONS: Exposure to the statements and court findings may aid tobacco industry denormalization and tobacco-related policy initiatives.