Tobacco Industry Use of Personal Responsibility Rhetoric in Florida Litigation

Audience:

Tobacco control activists who support and employ public health interventions that are adversely affected by misleading tobacco industry messaging about personal responsibility.

Key Points:

• Current tobacco trial structure in the so-called “Engle progeny” cases brought by injured Florida smokers requires proof that addiction was the cause of the smoker’s injury, and tobacco company defendants have used this as an opportunity to assert instead the plaintiffs’ personal responsibility for their own injuries.
• This trial structure has created an opportunity for the tobacco industry to foster deceptive and misleading arguments about choice and personal responsibility and prevent recovery for smoking-related injuries while also possibly impeding public health interventions.
• If left unaddressed, this latest trial strategy could be a dangerous throwback to past industry success in shifting responsibility from its products and corporate behavior onto its customers. Such a setback could ultimately deter previously effective tobacco control strategies that strive to combat the industry’s practice of blaming the victim.

Educational Experience:

Tobacco control advocates will learn about the importance of denormalizing the tobacco industry and its products, whether it be applied in litigation strategy, media messaging, educating the public or influencing regulators. Examples will be drawn from several Engle progeny cases.

Benefits:

A thorough understanding of the tobacco industry’s continuing use of misleading and deceptive personal responsibility rhetoric will equip tobacco control advocates with the information they need to push back against these tactics and counter them with evidence-based public health information and advocacy.