News Publishers Welcome Tobacco Ads—Just Not for Cigarettes

In 1999, more than a dozen news publishers including The New York Times publicly pledged to ban cigarette advertisements. The move was part of a broader effort to curb the influence of an industry whose products were then—and remain now—the leading cause of preventable death in the United States, according to the CDC.

But since 2020, a handful of prominent publishers including The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, Semafor, Politico and The Boston Globe have run ads funded by tobacco companies, according to interviews, data provided by Nielsen Ad Intel and documentation from the Truth Initiative.

The ads range from newsletter and podcast sponsorships to display media. Some appear as corporate advocacy campaigns, where executives from tobacco companies submit articles that news outlets publish as branded advertorials. And while none promote specific products, the ads help rehabilitate the image of the companies that make cigarettes, according to Truth Initiative chief research officer Barbara Schillo.

“With these paid advertorials, the tobacco industry is emerging from the shadows to mount a campaign to improve its image,” Schillo said. “These ads give legitimacy to these companies, and anything that gives them legitimacy is not in the interest of public health.”

While there is no regulation against publishers working with tobacco firms, the issue spurs debate over how news publishers should fund their operations, and to what level of scrutiny that funding should be subjected—especially in the midst of an economic downturn.

“While at an industry level, it isn’t practical to refuse to run ads for anything that might have a degree of harm, publishers should be urgently reviewing their moral compass when it comes to sensitive categories,” said Jamie MacEwan, senior media analyst at Enders Analysis.

Representatives for The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Boston Globe and Politico said that the ads do not violate their policy on promoting tobacco products. The Washington Post and Semafor either declined to comment or did not respond to a request for comment.

Tobacco advertising today

Tobacco companies have sporadically advertised with some publishers, such as Vice Media, over the last decade. However, the industry mounted a concerted push in partnership with premium news outlets in 2020, according to Schillo.

From January 2020 to August 2021, the tobacco companies Philip Morris International, home to cigarette brands like Marlboro and Parliament, and Altria spent $11.72 million on media, primarily on news publishers and digital video, according to Nielsen Ad Intel, a database that tracks corporate ad spend. 

“Our aim is to inform key opinion leaders of our mission to achieve a science-based smoke-free future,” said PMI spokesperson Corey Henry.

While the ephemerality of digital ads makes it tough to catalog when a publisher runs a tobacco ad, the branded advertorials published by The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, Politico and Boston Globe leave digital footprints. 

The Times, Post, Journal and Politico all ran at least one such ad between 2020 and 2022, according to documents shared with Adweek. The Boston Globe, meanwhile, has run at least 40, according to reporting from the nonprofit CommonWealth.

In some of these campaigns, executives at tobacco companies pen essays that aim to underscore the objectivity of science. Others simply highlight scientific breakthroughs.

They do so, according to Schillo, to legitimize studies funded by PMI and Altria that support their claims that smokeless cigarettes like vapes are healthier than combustible cigarettes. The strategy seeks to introduce doubt into an otherwise straightforward subject—a tactic used by both the tobacco and petroleum industries to slow regulatory efforts, said Schillo.

Other campaigns are less subtle. 

In September, PMI sponsored both The New York Times’ flagship podcast The Daily and a marquee Semafor newsletter covering business, according to three people familiar with the placements. And in October, Altria ran ads during The New York Times podcast Popcast, which were heard by Adweek.

When morals and budgets collide

Similar to contemporary concerns over taking advertising from oil and gas companies, critics allege that publishers have an obligation not to promote products that harm consumers. 

Likewise, following the vital role publishers played in combating Covid-19, public health advocates have pointed to the hypocrisy of those same publishers now promoting tobacco companies, said Schillo. Cigarettes claim the lives of 480,000 Americans annually, according to the CDC.

According to Dan Kennedy, a journalism professor at Northeastern University who has tracked the trend, the resurgence of tobacco advertising is due to several trends. In 2017, tobacco companies embarked on an advertising blitz to promote their new crop of smokeless products and stave off regulation, according to Schillo.

The ads themselves have also become more palatable to publishers, according to Kennedy. By running as corporate advocacy initiatives or native placements, the campaigns allow tobacco companies to advertise themselves without actively promoting a product.

Critically, the ad spend has also materialized during a historically challenging era for digital media. The resulting financial pressure likely played a role, according to Kennedy, in convincing publishers to embrace as a partner an industry that it once considered a pariah.

“At the time that cigarette advertising disappeared, the newspaper business was a lot healthier—today they are pretty loathe to turn down advertising,” Kennedy said. “I do think sponsored ads about vaping are less harmful than cigarette ads, but I just don’t think that news outlets ought to be getting into bed with the tobacco industry.”