CONFERENCE PROCEEDING
Tobacco industry marketing on Instagram: A comparative analysis using data from Tobacco Enforcement and Reporting Movement in Indonesia
More details
Hide details
1
School of Nursing, Muhammadiyah University Yogyakarta, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
2
Advocacy, Muhammadiyah Steps, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
3
Policy, Advocacy and Communication, Vital Strategies, New York, United States
Publication date: 2025-06-23
Tob. Induc. Dis. 2025;23(Suppl 1):A310
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Despite the controversy over e-cigarettes’ safety and long-term health impact, e-cigarettes have a rapid penetration into the Indonesian market. High exposure to e-cigarette marketing, particularly through social media, has become a key factor influencing young people to initiate e-cigarette use. In 2024, Indonesia had 191.4 million social media users, constituting 68.9% of the total population. Of these, 173.59 million (84.80%) were on Instagram, making it the country's leading platform. This study aims to compare e-cigarette and cigarette marketing on Instagram in Indonesia during 2022 to identify differences in marketer types, marketing tactics, message framing, and user engagement.
METHODS: Content analysis was employed to analyze publicly available Instagram posts collected through the Tobacco Enforcement and Reporting Movement (TERM) initiative by Vital Strategies. Data encompassed posts from January 1, 2022, to December 14, 2022 where a total of 14040 marketing posts related to tobacco products were extracted for analysis.
RESULTS: Cigarette marketing dominated on Instagram, comprising 84.8% (n = 11,909) of the total posts compared to e-cigarettes (15.2%, n = 2,131). E-cigarette marketing primarily originated from brand accounts (86.72%), while cigarette marketing leveraged brand-affiliated community groups (94.14%). Interestingly, e-cigarette marketing heavily relied on product features (60.44%) as a framing strategy, while cigarette marketing used an informational approach (90.82%). The primary tactic employed in e-cigarette marketing was direct advertising (93.43%). In contrast, cigarette marketing primarily focused on utilizing community-based marketing tactics (86,73%). Despite higher promotion, user engagement was significantly lower (p < 0.001) for e-cigarette marketing compared to cigarettes.
CONCLUSIONS: The lack of regulations on online tobacco advertising in Indonesia allows for unrestricted marketing of both cigarettes and e-cigarettes. This research provides valuable insights for policymakers and public health officials in Indonesia to develop strategies for curbing the influence of tobacco marketing, particularly e-cigarettes, on social media platforms.