Case Study: Smoke and Mirrors: RJ Reynolds Creates Front Group

Background

The tobacco industry has not had the cleanest track record with respect to honest and ethical communication with consumers and the public. Public relations pioneer Edward Bernays famously sold the pro-smoking “Torches of Freedom” march as a women’s rights effort. The industry was silent, and in fact even denied, for years that the use of its products had health implications for smokers.

The tobacco industry in particular has been known for the use of third parties and coalitions of organizations to promote its interests indirectly. As tobacco products and their negative effects on smokers became more well known, the industry and its corporations tried to mask their efforts to fight regulation of tobacco products. This case study looks at one particular effort to use a so-called “front group” – funded by a tobacco corporation but not publicly affiliated with it – and its ethical implications with respect to the PRSA Code of Ethics.

The Issue

In the mid 1990s, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) proposed policy changes that would influence the way that tobacco was regulated by the government. Specifically, the regulations would consider alcohol a drug and eliminate smoking in the workplace. Concerned that the regulations would lower their profits, the tobacco companies decided to take action.

However, the companies themselves had become so unpopular that they could not advocate directly to the public and to lawmakers in hopes of halting the changes. Instead, they created an opaque effort to stop regulations aimed at smoking by taking aim at the regulations themselves.

Course of Action

Launched in 1994, the “Get Government Off Our Backs” campaign was led by a public relations firm employed by tobacco giant RJ Reynolds. However, there was no mention of the tobacco company’s involvement in public materials about the campaign. The messaging of the campaign portrayed so-called “average Americans” complaining about the increasing role of government in their lives.

Of course, there were no “average Americans” involved in this campaign. As the campaign grew, it amassed a coalition of lobbying organizations in and outside of the tobacco industry. In fact, the group became so powerful – and its origins so nebulous – that organizations began proactively seeking to attach to the group in hopes of taking part in its share of media attention.

Consequences

The PRSA Code of Ethics was revised in the 1960s specifically to address the problem of front groups such as Get Government Off Our Backs. Such groups, while often effective, are fundamentally dishonest in the way they represent their funding and intent. This violates the PRSA Code’s provision emphasizing the free flow of information and the professional value of honesty.

In addition, a public relations firm that undertakes an effort like this one runs the risk of harming the reputation of the public relations industry overall. Such underhanded efforts perpetuate the notion that public relations is an unethical, win-at-all-costs profession that cares only about achieving its clients’ results. This violates the code provision about enhancing the profession, which states that ethical behavior by public relations practitioners should benefit the overall reputation of the field.

Moral of the Story

Ultimately, the efforts of the Get Government Off Our Backs front group were successful, at least for the RJ Reynolds tobacco company: The FDA did not regulate tobacco as a drug, and OSHA did not act to outlaw smoking in workplaces. However, the stated success of the group’s efforts should not be obscured by the serious ethical considerations presented by the use of front groups and other opaque efforts that deny consumers the ability to make educated decisions based on available, truthful information.