Heated debates on regulations of heated tobacco products in South Korea: the news valence, source and framing of relative risk/benefit

Background We analyse news representations of the regulation of heated tobacco products (HTPs) in South Korea, the country where HTP use is among the highest in the world despite conflicts between the government and the HTP manufacturers. Methods We analysed a total of 571 print and TV news covering HTP regulations, published between 2017 and 2018, the time period when HTPs were introduced to the country and various regulations of HTPs were proposed and implemented. We assessed the prevalence and associations among specific types of HTP regulations that were discussed, valence towards regulation, sources, framing of the relative health risks/benefits of HTPs compared with conventional cigarettes. Results Taxation (55.2%) and warning labels (25.7%) were two regulation topics covered the most. Almost equal proportions of pro-regulation (2.5%) and anti-regulation valence (2.2%) were found in taxation-related news, while pro-regulation valence appeared more frequently for other restrictions, including warning labels (pro=9.5% vs anti=1.4%), marketing restrictions (pro=6.9% vs anti=0%) and integration of HTPs into smoke-free policies for cigarettes (pro=8.7% vs anti=0%). The government (59%), followed by the tobacco industry (39.4%), was the source cited most often across news stories while the presence of tobacco control advocates was low (4.9%). As for framing, there was no significant difference in the prevalence of stories mentioning reduced harm (31.7%) and equal or more harm (33.6%) of HTPs compared with cigarettes. Conclusions We provide implications for governments and tobacco control advocates on building consensus for applying cigarette equivalent taxes and pictorial warning labels to HTPs.

Automated summary

The news coverage of heated tobacco products (HTPs) regulation in South Korea focused mainly on taxation (55.2%) and warning labels (25.7%). While attitudes towards taxation were evenly split between pro-regulation (2.5%) and anti-regulation (2.2%), other restrictions such as warning labels (pro=9.5% vs anti=1.4%), marketing restrictions (pro=6.9% vs anti=0%), and smoke-free policies for cigarettes (pro=8.7% vs anti=0%) were more likely to be portrayed in a positive light. The government (59%) was cited most frequently as a news source, followed by the tobacco industry (39.4%), with a low presence of tobacco control advocates (4.9%). There was no significant difference in the prevalence of news stories mentioning reduced harm (31.7%) and equal or more harm (33.6%) of HTPs compared with conventional cigarettes.