Skip to main content Accessibility help

Following in the footsteps of tobacco and alcohol? Stakeholder discourse in UK newspaper coverage of the Soft Drinks Industry Levy

  • Shona Hilton (a1), Christina H Buckton (a1), Chris Patterson (a1), S Vittal Katikireddi (a1), Ffion Lloyd-Williams (a2), Lirije Hyseni (a2), Alex Elliott-Green (a2) and Simon Capewell (a2)...



In politically contested health debates, stakeholders on both sides present arguments and evidence to influence public opinion and the political agenda. The present study aimed to examine whether stakeholders in the Soft Drinks Industry Levy (SDIL) debate sought to establish or undermine the acceptability of this policy through the news media and how this compared with similar policy debates in relation to tobacco and alcohol industries.


Quantitative and qualitative content analysis of newspaper articles discussing sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) taxation published in eleven UK newspapers between 1 April 2015 and 30 November 2016, identified through the Nexis database. Direct stakeholder citations were entered in NVivo to allow inductive thematic analysis and comparison with an established typology of industry stakeholder arguments used by the alcohol and tobacco industries.


UK newspapers.


Proponents and opponents of SSB tax/SDIL cited in UK newspapers.


Four hundred and ninety-one newspaper articles cited stakeholders’ (n 287) arguments in relation to SSB taxation (n 1761: 65 % supportive and 35 % opposing). Stakeholders’ positions broadly reflected their vested interests. Inconsistencies arose from: changes in ideological position; insufficient clarity on the nature of the problem to be solved; policy priorities; and consistency with academic rigour. Both opposing and supportive themes were comparable with the alcohol and tobacco industry typology.


Public health advocates were particularly prominent in the UK newspaper debate surrounding the SDIL. Advocates in future policy debates might benefit from seeking a similar level of prominence and avoiding inconsistencies by being clearer about the policy objective and mechanisms.


Corresponding author

*Corresponding author: Email


Hide All
1.Bates, B, Cox, L, Nicholson, S et al. (2016) National Diet and Nutrition Survey: Results from Years 5 and 6 (combined) of the Rolling Programme (2012/2013–2013/2014). (accessed September 2017).
2.World Health Organization (2015) Guideline: Sugars intake for adults and children. (accessed July 2018).
3.Basu, S, Yoffe, P, Hills, N et al. (2013) The relationship of sugar to population-level diabetes prevalence: an econometric analysis of repeated cross-sectional data. PLoS One 8, e57873.
4.Briggs, ADM, Mytton, OT, Kehlbacher, A et al. (2013) Overall and income specific effect on prevalence of overweight and obesity of 20% sugar sweetened drink tax in UK: econometric and comparative risk assessment modelling study. BMJ 347, f6189.
5.Colchero, MA, Popkin, BM, Rivera, JA et al. (2016) Beverage purchases from stores in Mexico under the excise tax on sugar sweetened beverages: observational study. BMJ 352, h6704.
6.Colchero, MA, Rivera-Dommarco, J, Popkin, BM et al. (2017) In Mexico, evidence of sustained consumer response two years after implementing a sugar-sweetened beverage tax. Health Aff (Millwood) 36, 564571.
7.Smed, S, Scarborough, P, Rayner, M et al. (2016) The effects of the Danish saturated fat tax on food and nutrient intake and modelled health outcomes: an econometric and comparative risk assessment evaluation. Eur J Clin Nutr 70, 681686.
8.Silver, LD, Ng, SW, Ryan-Ibarra, S et al. (2017) Changes in prices, sales, consumer spending, and beverage consumption one year after a tax on sugar-sweetened beverages in Berkeley, California, US: a before-and-after study. PLoS Med 14, e1002283.
9.Dobbs, R, Sawers, C, Thompson, F et al. (2014) Overcoming obesity: an initial economic analysis. (accessed June 2017).
10.Public Health England (2015) Sugar reduction: the evidence for action. (accessed May 2017).
12.Her Majesty’s Treasury (2017) Spring Budget 2017. (accessed July 2018).
13.Office for Budget Responsibility (2016) Economic and fiscal outlook– March 2016. (accessed February 2019).
14.Hashem, K &Rosborough, J (2017) Why tax sugar sweetened beverages? J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 65, 358359.
15.HM Government (2016) Childhood obesity: a plan for action. (accessed July 2018).
16.Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition (2015) Carbohydrates and health. (accessed July 2018).
17.Dew, C (2016) NHS Outcomes Framework, England: February 2016: quarterly publication. (accessed October 2017).
18.Lustig, RH, Schmidt, LA & Brindis, CD (2012) Public health: the toxic truth about sugar. Nature 482, 2729.
19.Brownell, KD, Farley, T, Willett, WC et al. (2009) The public health and economic benefits of taxing sugar-sweetened beverages. N Engl J Med 361, 15991605.
20.DiNicolantonio, JJ & Lucan, SC (2014) The wrong white crystals: not salt but sugar as aetiological in hypertension and cardiometabolic disease. Open Heart 1, e000167.
21.World Health Organization (2009) Global health risks: mortality and burden of disease attributable to selected major risks. (accessed July 2018).
22.Malik, VS, Schulze, MB & Hu, F (2006) Intake of sugar-sweetened beverages and weight gain: a systematic review. Am J Clin Nutr 84, 274288.
23.Malik, VS, Popkin, BM, Bray, GA et al. (2010) Sugar-sweetened beverages and risk of metabolic syndrome and type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis. Diabetes Care 33, 24772483.
24.Mytton, O (2015) Time for a sugary drinks tax in the UK? J Public Health (Oxf) 37, 2425.
25.Powell, LM & Chaloupka, FJ (2009) Food prices and obesity: evidence and policy implications for taxes and subsidies. Milbank Q 87, 229257.
26.Mialon, M, Swinburn, B, Allender, S et al. (2016) Systematic examination of publicly-available information reveals the diverse and extensive corporate political activity of the food industry in Australia. BMC Public Health 16, 283.
27.Savell, E, Gilmore, AB & Fooks, G (2014) How does the tobacco industry attempt to influence marketing regulations? A systematic review. PLoS One 9, e87389.
28.Savell, E, Fooks, G & Gilmore, AB (2016) How does the alcohol industry attempt to influence marketing regulations? A systematic review. Addiction 111, 1832.
29.Martino, FP, Miller, PG, Coomber, K et al. (2017) Analysis of alcohol industry submissions against marketing regulation. PLoS One 12, e0170366.
30.Ulucanlar, S, Fooks, GJ & Gilmore, AB (2016) The policy dystopia model: an interpretive analysis of tobacco industry political activity. PLoS Med 13, e1002125.
31.Petticrew, M, Katikireddi, SV, Knai, C et al. (2017) ‘Nothing can be done until everything is done’: the use of complexity arguments by food, beverage, alcohol and gambling industries. J Epidemiol Community Health 71, 10781083.
32.Cullerton, K, Donnet, T, Lee, A et al. (2018) Effective advocacy strategies for influencing government nutrition policy: a conceptual model. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 15, 83.
33.Katikireddi, SV, Bond, L & Hilton, S (2014) Changing policy framing as a deliberate strategy for public health advocacy: a qualitative policy case study of minimum unit pricing of alcohol. Milbank Q 92, 250283.
34.Walton, D (2007) Media Argumentation: Dialectic, Persuasion and Rhetoric. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
35.Entman, RM (1993) Framing: toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. J Commun 43, 5158.
36.Scheufele, DA & Tewksbury, D (2007) Framing, agenda setting, and priming: the evolution of three media effects models. J Commun 57, 920.
37.McCombs, ME & Shaw, DL (1972) The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public Opin Q 36, 176187.
38.Diepeveen, S, Ling, T, Suhrcke, M et al. (2013) Public acceptability of government intervention to change health-related behaviours: a systematic review and narrative synthesis. BMC Public Health 13, 756.
39.Burstein, P (2003) The impact of public opinion on public policy: a review and an agenda. Polit Res Q 56, 2940.
40.Innvaer, S, Vist, G, Trommald, M et al. (2002) Health policy-makers’ perceptions of their use of evidence: a systematic review. J Health Serv Res Policy 7, 239244.
41.Oliver, K, Innvar, S, Lorenc, T et al. (2014) A systematic review of barriers to and facilitators of the use of evidence by policymakers. BMC Health Serv Res 14, 2.
42.Weiss, C (1991) Policy research: data, ideas or arguments? In Social Sciences and Modern States: National Experiments and Theoretical Crossroads, pp. 307332 [Wagner, P, Weiss, C, Wittrock, B et al., editors]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
43.Joshi, D & O’Dell, RK (2017) The critical role of mass media in international norm diffusion: the case of UNDP human development reports. Int Stud Perspect 18, 343364.
44.Wakefield, MA, Loken, B & Hornik, RC (2010) Use of mass media campaigns to change health behaviour. Lancet 376, 12611271.
45.Hornik, R & Yanovitzky, I (2003) Using theory to design evaluations of communication campaigns: the case of the national youth anti-drug media campaign. Commun Theory 13, 204224.
46.Hill, ME & Davis, C (2016) The short and sweet on taxing soda. (accessed November 2018).
47.Cruickshank, H (2018) Could UK’s new ‘sugar tax’ work in the US? (accessed November 2018).
48.Davey, M (2018) Sugar tax: why health experts want it but politicians are resisting. (accessed November 2018).
49.Hilton, S, Hunt, K, Langan, M et al. (2010) Newsprint media representations of the introduction of the HPV vaccination programme for cervical cancer prevention in the UK (2005–2008). Soc Sci Med 70, 942950.
50.Hilton, S, Wood, K, Bain, J et al. (2014) Newsprint coverage of smoking in cars carrying children: a case study of public and scientific opinion driving the policy debate. BMC Public Health 14, 1116.
51.Hilton, S, Wood, K, Patterson, C et al. (2014) Implications for alcohol minimum unit pricing advocacy: what can we learn for public health from UK newsprint coverage of key claim-makers in the policy debate? Soc Sci Med 102, 157164.
52.Patterson, C, Hilton, S & Weishaar, H (2016) Who thinks what about e-cigarette regulation? A content analysis of UK newspapers. Addiction 111, 12671274.
53.National Readership Survey (2016) NRS readership estimates – newspapers and supplements Jan–Dec 2016. (accessed July 2018).
54.Hilton, S, Patterson, C & Teyhan, A (2012) Escalating coverage of obesity in UK newspapers: the evolution and framing of the ‘obesity epidemic’ from 1996 to 2010. Obesity (Silver Spring) 20, 16881695.
55.Her Majesty’s Treasury (2016) Soft Drinks Industry Levy: consultation document. (accessed May 2017).
56.Her Majesty’s Treasury (2016) Soft Drinks Industry Levy: summary of responses. (accessed May 2017).
57.Nexis (2018) Online database. LexisNexis. (accessed July 2018).
58.Cohen, J (1960) A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psychol Meas 20, 3746.
59.Landis, JR & Koch, GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33, 159174.
60.Department of Health (2011) The Public Health Responsibility Deal. (accessed November 2018).
61.Katikireddi, SV & Hilton, S (2015) How did policy actors use mass media to influence the Scottish alcohol minimum unit pricing debate? Comparative analysis of newspapers, evidence submissions and interviews. Drugs (Abingdon, Engl) 22, 125134.
62.Patterson, C, Katikireddi, SV, Wood, K et al. (2015) Representations of minimum unit pricing for alcohol in UK newspapers: a case study of a public health policy debate.J Public Health (Oxf) 37, 4049.
63.Oxman, AD, Lewin, S, Lavis, JN et al. (2009) SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 15: engaging the public in evidence-informed policymaking. Health Res Policy Syst 7, Suppl. 1, S15.
64.Orton, L, Lloyd-Williams, F, Taylor-Robinson, D et al. (2011) The use of research evidence in public health decision making processes: systematic review. PLoS One 6, e21704.
65.Blecher, E (2015) Taxes on tobacco, alcohol and sugar sweetened beverages: linkages and lessons learned. Soc Sci Med 136–137, 175179.
66.Burton, R, Henn, C, Lavoie, D et al. (2017) A rapid evidence review of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of alcohol control policies: an English perspective. Lancet 389, 15581580.
67.Wright, A, Smith, KE & Hellowell, M (2017) Policy lessons from health taxes: a systematic review of empirical studies. BMC Public Health 17, 583.
68.Patterson, C, Semple, S, Wood, K et al. (2015) A quantitative content analysis of UK newsprint coverage of proposed legislation to prohibit smoking in private vehicles carrying children. BMC Public Health 15, 760.
69.Capewell, S (2015) President’s Letter: My thanks to internet trolls, libertarian bloggers and hobbits. Soc Soc Med Newsl 6, issue 3, 1.
70.Lucherini, M (2018) Caught in the middle: early career researchers, public health and the emotional production of research. Crit Public Health. Published online: 26 November 2018. doi: 10.1080/09581596.2018.1550252.
71.Kearns, CE, Schmidt, LA & Glantz, SA (2016) Sugar industry and coronary heart disease research: a historical analysis of internal industry documents. JAMA Intern Med 176, 16801685.
72.Royal College of Physicians (2012) Fifty years since Smoking and health: progress, lessons and priorities for a smoke-free UK. (accessed October 2017).
73.World Health Organization (2010) Global strategy to reduce the harmful use of alcohol. (accessed October 2017).
74.Wodak R & Meyer M (2009) Critical discourse analysis: history, agenda, theory and methodology. In Methods for Critcal Discourse Analysis, 2nd ed., pp. 133 [Wodak, R and Meyer, M, editors]. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
75.Otten, AL (1992) The influence of the mass media on health policy. Health Aff (Millwood) 11, 111118.
76.Weishaar, H, Dorfman, L, Freudenberg, N et al. (2016) Why media representations of corporations matter for public health policy: a scoping review. BMC Public Health 16, 899.


Type Description Title
Supplementary materials

Hilton et al. supplementary material
Hilton et al. supplementary material 1

 Unknown (23 KB)
23 KB

Following in the footsteps of tobacco and alcohol? Stakeholder discourse in UK newspaper coverage of the Soft Drinks Industry Levy

  • Shona Hilton (a1), Christina H Buckton (a1), Chris Patterson (a1), S Vittal Katikireddi (a1), Ffion Lloyd-Williams (a2), Lirije Hyseni (a2), Alex Elliott-Green (a2) and Simon Capewell (a2)...


Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed