Mapping discourse coalitions in the minimum unit pricing for alcohol debate: a discourse network analysis of UK newspaper coverage

Policy Actors' Perceptions of Conflicts of Interest and Alcohol Industry Engagement in UK Policy Processes

BACKGROUND

Alcohol industry organisations occupy a prominent position in UK alcohol policy, but their involvement has been contested by public health bodies on the basis that a conflict of interest (COI) exists between their economic objectives and those of public health. There are ongoing debates in the research literature about how to conceptualise COI and mitigate this in health research and practise. However, less attention has been paid to these issues in relation to the alcohol industry specifically. This article explores similarities and differences in beliefs among alcohol policy actors regarding COI and the implications of engagement with the alcohol industry in the context of UK public health policy.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews with a range of policy actors (n=26) including medical professionals, parliamentarians, civil servants, academic researchers, health campaigners, and alcohol industry representatives. Interviews with alcohol industry representatives were supplemented with an analysis of industry responses to a public consultation. All data was thematically coded using NVivo software.

RESULTS

Two competing "coalitions" were identified, expressing beliefs about COI linked to alcohol industry engagement. Both divergent and convergent beliefs were expressed by the two coalitions in relation to the type of industry actor, form of engagement, the policy issue under discussion and the stage of policy process.

CONCLUSION

Alcohol policy is a complex and contested space in which policy actors have differing, nuanced and contingent understandings of COI and identify varying risks associated with alcohol industry engagement. In identifying the areas of convergence and diversion in both understanding and evaluation of COI in alcohol-specific settings, these findings will assist both decision-makers and non-governmental actors in developing policies and guidelines to manage potential COI in future.

Framings of risk and responsibility in newsprint media coverage of alcohol licensing regulations during the COVID-19 pandemic in England

INTRODUCTION

Licensing is recognised as a World Health Organization (WHO) 'best buy' for reducing alcohol harms. In response to the 2020 COVID-19 outbreak, many countries-imposed restrictions on outlets selling alcohol to reduce virus transmission. In England, while shops selling alcohol were deemed 'essential', multiple restrictions were imposed on licenced outlets such as pubs and bars. Media reporting of licensing restrictions during the pandemic might have shaped public discourses of alcohol risks and responsibilities.

METHODS

This study aimed to understand how alcohol licensing changes in England were framed in newsprint media. Two hundred and fifty-three relevant articles from UK newsprint publications were identified through the Nexis database, published within six time points between March and December 2020 reflecting key changes to licencing in England. Thematic analysis, drawing on framing theory, was conducted to identify 'problems' framed in the reporting of these changes.

RESULTS

Four dominant framings were identified: (i) licensed premises as 'risky' spaces; (ii) problematic drinking practices; (iii) problematic policy responses; and (iv) 'victimisation' of licensed premises. The presence of these framings shifted across the reporting period, but consistently, social disorder was constructed as a key risk relating to licensing changes over health harms from alcohol consumption.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

The analysis shows newsprint media reproduced narratives of 'inevitable' drinking culture and social disorder, but also emphasised expectations for evidence-based policy-making, in the context of licensing during the pandemic. Discourses of dissatisfaction with licensing decisions suggests potential for public health advocacy to push for licensing change to reduce alcohol health harms, in England and internationally.

Sydney's 'last drinks' laws: A content analysis of news media coverage of views and arguments about a preventive health policy

INTRODUCTION

News media representation of preventive health policies can influence public discussion and political decision making, impacting policy implementation and sustainability. This study analysed news media coverage of the contested 'last drinks' alcohol laws in Sydney, Australia, to understand the arguments made by different 'actors' (stakeholders) regarding the laws and provide insights on how preventive health policies are positioned within media discourse.

METHODS

We identified print and online news media articles discussing the laws from 2014 to 2020. Content analysis was used to quantify the arguments made to justify support or opposition to the laws.

RESULTS

A total of 445 articles were included for analysis. Four hundred and thirty-five actors were identified, with industry actors mentioned most (213 times) followed by health actors (136 times). There were more quotes from opponents of the laws compared to supporters of the laws (57% vs. 25%). The proportion of media mentions reduced for supporters (34% in 2014 to 14% in 2020) while mentions increased for opponents (47% in 2014 to 73% in 2020). Supporters used arguments about crime, safety and health. Opponents of the laws focused on issues such as Sydney's 'night time economy' and negative impacts of the laws.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Opponents of the laws strategically used the media to influence public debate. Opponents, including industry actors, also ignored the health impacts of alcohol and utilised campaign groups to advocate against the laws. These findings have implications for how governments and advocates communicate and build support for contested preventive health policies.

Waiting for the wave: Political leadership, policy windows, and alcohol policy change in Ireland

Existing research has identified numerous barriers to the adoption of public health policies for alcohol, including the cross-cutting nature of the policy problem and industry influence. Recent developments in Ireland suggest that while formidable, such barriers can be overcome. Ireland's 2018 alcohol legislation adopts key evidence-based measures, introducing pricing, availability and marketing regulations that are world-leading in public health terms. Drawing primarily on the Multiple Streams Approach (MSA), this study investigates the adoption of the Public Health (Alcohol) Act 2018. We draw data from 20 semi-structured interviews with politicians, government advisors, public health experts, and advocates, as well as from relevant primary documents, newspaper articles, and other material in the public domain. We find that increased public attention to alcohol-related harms in Ireland (problem stream), developments within the institutional location of policymaking (the policy stream), and the political pressure exerted by politicians and advocates (the political stream) all combined to open a policy window. Unlike previous alcohol policy reform efforts in Ireland, several personally committed and well-positioned leaders championed policy change. This study suggests that political leadership might be important in understanding why public health approaches to alcohol have been embraced in some contexts but not in others.

Policy congruence and advocacy strategies in the discourse networks of minimum unit pricing for alcohol and the soft drinks industry levy

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Public health policy development is subject to a range of stakeholders presenting their arguments to influence opinion on the best options for policy action. This paper compares stakeholders' positions in the discourse networks of two pricing policy debates in the United Kingdom: minimum unit pricing for alcohol (MUP) and the soft drinks industry levy (SDIL).

DESIGN

Discourse analysis was combined with network visualization to create representations of stakeholders' positions across the two policy debates as they were represented in 11 national UK newspapers.

SETTING

United Kingdom.

OBSERVATIONS

For the MUP debate 1924 statements by 152 people from 87 organizations were coded from 348 articles. For the SDIL debate 3883 statements by 214 people from 175 organizations were coded from 511 articles.

MEASUREMENTS

Network analysis techniques were used to identify robust argumentative similarities and maximize the identification of network structures. Network measures of size, connectedness and cohesion were used to compare discourse networks.

FINDINGS

The networks for both pricing debates involve a similar range of stakeholder types and form clusters representing policy discourse coalitions. The SDIL network is larger than the MUP network, particularly the proponents' cluster, with more than three times as many stakeholders. Both networks have tight clusters of manufacturers, think-tanks and commercial analysts in the opponents' coalition. Public health stakeholders appear in both networks, but no health charity or advocacy group is common to both.

CONCLUSION

A comparison of the discourse in the UK press during the policy development processes for minimum unit pricing for alcohol and the soft drinks industry levy suggests greater cross-sector collaboration among policy opponents than proponents.

A discourse network analysis of UK newspaper coverage of the "sugar tax" debate before and after the announcement of the Soft Drinks Industry Levy

BACKGROUND

On 6th April 2018, the UK Government introduced the Soft Drinks Industry Levy (SDIL) as a mechanism designed to address increasing prevalence of obesity and associated ill health by reducing sugar consumption. Given that the successful introduction of upstream food and nutrition policies is a highly political enterprise involving multiple interested parties, understanding the complex network of stakeholders seeking to influence such policy decisions is imperative.

METHODS

Media content analysis was used to build a dataset of relevant newspaper articles, which were analysed to identify stakeholder agreement or disagreement with defined concept statements. We used discourse network analysis to produce visual representations of the network of stakeholders and coalitions evident in the debate as it was presented in UK newspapers, in the lead up to and following the announcement of the Soft Drinks Industry Levy in the UK, from May 2015 to November 2016.

RESULTS

Coding identified 3883 statements made by 214 individuals from 176 organisations, relating to 47 concepts. Network visualisations revealed a complex network of stakeholders with clear sceptical and supportive coalitions. Industry stakeholders appeared less united in the network than anticipated, particularly before the SDIL announcement. Some key industry actors appeared in the supportive coalition, possibly due to the use of corporate social responsibility rhetoric. Jamie Oliver appeared as a dominant stakeholder, firmly embedded with public health advocates.

CONCLUSION

This study highlights the complexity of the network of stakeholders involved in the public debate on food policies such as sugar tax and the SDIL. Polarisation of stakeholders arose from differences in ideology, focus on a specific policy and statements about the weight of evidence. Vocal celebrity policy entrepreneurs may be instrumental in gaining public and policy makers' support for future upstream regulation to promote population health, to facilitate alignment around a clear ideology.

Mapping discourse coalitions in the minimum unit pricing for alcohol debate: a discourse network analysis of UK newspaper coverage

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Minimum unit pricing (MUP) for alcohol was introduced in Scotland on 1 May 2018, and is now on the policy agenda in other devolved administrations and at Westminster. Previous research has explored the arguments deployed for and against MUP, but the congruence between actors in the MUP debate has not been sufficiently examined. This study identified and mapped the discourse coalitions that emerged in the UK MUP debate through an analysis of actors' use of arguments in media coverage of the policy debates.

DESIGN

A sample of print media coverage of MUP was obtained from the LexisNexis newspaper database. The resulting sample was imported into discourse network analysis (DNA) software for coding and subsequent visualization of actor networks.

SETTING

United Kingdom.

OBSERVATIONS

A total of 348 articles from eight UK-wide and three Scottish newspapers from an 18-month period, ending in November 2012, were analysed.

MEASUREMENTS

Actors' arguments were coded to generate structured data for conversion into a weighted actor network where ties represent similarities among actors in terms of arguments in support of or opposition to MUP.

FINDINGS

Two polarized discourse coalitions, Opponents and Proponents of MUP, emerged in media coverage. The Proponents coalition consisted mainly of health advocacy groups, charities, political parties and academic institutions. In the Opponents coalition, the networks were formed of key alcohol manufacturers and economic think-tanks. While producer organizations were central to the Opponents coalition, some commercial actors were more favourable to MUP, highlighting divisions within the industry overall.

CONCLUSIONS

Media coverage of minimum unit pricing (MUP) in Scotland from June 2011 to November 2012 showed alignment between the policy positions of (1) alcohol producers and think-tanks opposed to MUP; and (2) public health advocates and health charities in favour of the policy. Some alcohol industry actors were supportive of MUP indicating divisions among the industry. Discourse network analysis may be usefully applied to study other highly contested policy issues in health and beyond.