Tobacco.org

• From adversary to target market: the ACT-UP boycott of Philip Morris 

Results: Philip Morris used the boycott to its own advantage. It exploited differences within the community and settled the boycott by pledging large donations to combat AIDS. Through corporate philanthropy, Philip Morris gained entrée to the LGBT market without appearing gay friendly. Many LGBT organisations, thirsty for recognition and funding from mainstream corporations, welcomed Philip Morris’s overtures without considering the health hazards of tobacco.

Conclusions: Unless the goal of a boycott is to convince the tobacco industry to abandon tobacco altogether, such actions invite the industry to expand its marketing under the guise of philanthropy. Tobacco control advocates should be clear about goals and acceptable settlement terms before participating in a boycott of a tobacco company. . . .

The boycott’s settlement ended any gains the boycott might have brought to the tobacco control movement. In addition to creating legitimacy and fostering dependence on industry largesse, tobacco company donations silence opposition.56 In a 1992 memo discussing questions raised at previous shareholder meetings, one Philip Morris vice president noted ACT-UP’s past criticisms of the company and added: "Considering that we met with them in May and agreed to donate $1,200,000 to AIDS-related organizations, they may decide not to raise the topic again."57 Indeed, we were unable to find reports of any subsequent ACT-UP protests against Philip Morris in the tobacco documents nor in a hand search of the Advocate, a leading national gay publication.

Jump to full article »