Cigarettes, Lies, and Videotape: Study Links Consumer Perceptions with Tobacco Industry Deceptions

To what extent can a tobacco company sizzle reel touting its corporate values and business practices shape public opinion of its image and products? An examination of the connection between consumer perception and corporate social responsibility (CSR) claims finds that the effect can be significant.

The study, first published online February 4, 2026, in Cadernos de Saúde Pública/Reports in Public Health, provides experimental evidence associating brief exposure to a tobacco company’s CSR messaging with perceptions that the company’s cigarettes are less harmful than others—or that the company is more caring or responsible, overall.

Made possible through an award from the Institute for Global Tobacco Control (IGTC) at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, the work was conducted by researchers from the University of Nevada, Reno (UNR), Brazil’s Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (Fiocruz), and IGTC.

Although tobacco advertising is banned in Brazil, there are currently no specific regulations to control or ban the public promotion of tobacco company CSR activities, providing a method and opportunity to mislead consumers about deadly products. 

— Graziele Grilo, MSc, Institute for Global Tobacco Control program officer and Latin American regional lead

The findings come as Brazil is facing its first national-level rise in smoking prevalence since 2007 and amidst forecasts that Brazilian tobacco exports could exceed record highs this year. But researchers’ rationale for examining the influence of tobacco industry CSR in Brazil goes even further.

“In recent years, Brazil has seen countless examples of tobacco companies engaging in CSR activities and highlighting these efforts in their messaging, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic,” said co-author Graziele Grilo, a program officer and Latin American regional lead at IGTC. “Although tobacco advertising is banned in Brazil, there are currently no specific regulations to control or ban the public promotion of CSR activities—meaning CSR falls beyond the scope of existing tobacco control policies and can potentially be used to bypass restrictions and undermine their intent.”

To gather their data, researchers first invented a fictitious tobacco corporation, “Cruzeiro do Sul,” and created two consumer-targeted videos; both were designed to be believable and relevant within the Brazilian cultural context and resemble those a real tobacco company might produce. One video provided an overview of the company and its financial performance, while the other focused on CSR messaging such as company values and promotion of its ethically driven programs. Over 4,000 Brazilian adults were recruited for the study, randomly assigned to watch one of the two videos, and asked to complete a questionnaire before and after viewing. Responses indicated how exposure to the tobacco company’s CSR messaging influenced participants’ perceptions and intentions concerning the company’s corporate image and the dangers of using its products. 

“Ultimately, we found that people not only had a better impression of Cruzeiro do Sul after watching the CSR video—they also believed its cigarettes were less harmful than those of competing brands,” explained UNR’s Jennifer Pearson, PhD ’11, the study’s principal investigator.

“These effects were often greater among women and participants who do not smoke,” added lead author Luciana Borges, a doctoral candidate at UNR. 

The evidence suggests that, like advertising, CSR messaging can be used by tobacco companies to shape consumer perceptions, support marketing goals, and potentially spread misinformation or disinformation—all while enhancing the companies’ public image.

Researchers also observed a “health halo” effect stemming from the CSR messaging—the first time this association (apparent in marketing research involving chocolate, wine, and snack foods) has been documented in a tobacco marketing study.

“When participants learned about the cigarette company’s environmentally friendly business practices, or its support for family farms and local communities, they were more likely to characterize its cigarettes as ‘less harmful,’ which is untrue,” Pearson said, highlighting a commonality with studies showing how terms like “healthy” and “organic” can sway food buying outcomes, regardless of a product’s nutritional value or how it was produced.

The study underscores why comprehensive tobacco advertising, promotion, and sponsorship policies must explicitly include restrictions on CSR activities/messaging.

Combined, these findings underscore the importance of comprehensive tobacco advertising, promotion, and sponsorship policies that explicitly include restrictions on CSR activities/messaging—in alignment with WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control recommendations and guidelines—to prevent gaps in the law that can be exploited. 

“Allowing CSR activities by tobacco companies provides them an opportunity and a method to greenwash their reputation and mislead consumers about their deadly products, which could lead to serious misjudgments about the perceived health risks of smoking,” said Grilo. “Comprehensive tobacco advertising bans that include CSR also help to denormalize tobacco use, leading people to quit, and preventing people who don’t already smoke—including youth—from ever starting.”

This work was supported with funding from Bloomberg Philanthropies’ Bloomberg Initiative to Reduce Tobacco Use (bloomberg.org) and the Fulbright-CAPES Scholarship (ME/CAPES n. 8/2020).