Say No To Nanny

Smokefree Ideology


Nicotine Wars

 

40 Years of Hurt

Prejudice and Prohibition

Road To Ruin?

Search This Site
The Pleasure of Smoking

Forest Polling Report

Outdoor Smoking Bans

Share This Page
Powered by Squarespace
Friday
Oct142016

A Billion Lives - it's on!

Well, that's weird.

Having been thwarted in my attempt to host a central London screening of the pro-vaping documentary A Billion Lives, I booked tickets for the 'Scottish premiere' in Glasgow on October 26 (as I explained here on Tuesday).

At that stage only 17 tickets had been reserved, 50 short of the number required for the screening to take place.

Yesterday I got an email to say 67 tickets have now been sold (with 33 remaining) and the screening is going ahead.

How did that happen? I've no idea. I'd like to take credit - Tuesday's post did after all invite people to join me - but I'm guessing one or more vape stores have purchased blocks of tickets and are giving them away. I'll find out when I meet organiser Andy Morrison who is keeping his cards close to his chest.

Anyway it seems I chose wisely when I selected Glasgow because the other UK screenings scheduled for October 26 are still struggling. Seven tickets have been reserved in Manchester, three in Preston.

Of the 12 screenings currently scheduled in the UK (Belfast has just been added) only one (Glasgow) has been confirmed. The others look doomed although I thought the same about Glasgow three days ago so what do I know?

I still find it extraordinary that a central London screening hasn't been arranged. The E-Cigarette Summit on November 17 is at the Royal Society, a short walk from the Odeon Panton Street. Just a suggestion.

Meanwhile credit to Andy Morrison. His screening of A Billion Lives is going ahead and I'll be there. Hooray!

Thursday
Oct132016

Taxpayer-funded lobby group lobbies government to publish tobacco control plan "without further delay"

At 1.30 this afternoon there's a debate on tobacco control in Westminster Hall at the House of Commons.

The leading figures appear to be Alex Cunningham (Labour), Norman Lamb (Lib Dem) and Mrs Flick Drummond (Conservative). No, I've never heard of her either so it will be interesting to hear what she has to say.

The driving force behind the debate is almost certainly ASH, hence this press release, issued this morning:

Members of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Smoking and Health will today be calling on the Government to publish its promised new Tobacco Control Plan without further delay. The Government committed to a new plan after the previous one expired in December 2015 and to publication in summer 2016, but summer has passed and there is still no publication date.

There is widespread public support for Government action to limit smoking. A recent large public poll found that over a third (35%) of adults in Britain thought the Government’s activities to tackle smoking were about right, while nearly 4 in 10 (39%) thought the Government was not doing enough. Only 11% thought the Government was doing too much. [2]

In today’s debate members of the APPG will be focusing on the stark health inequalities across the country, of which smoking is the major driver. The importance of tackling health inequalities was recognised by Theresa May when, in her maiden speech, the new Prime Minister committed her Government to “fighting against the burning injustice that if you’re born poor you will die on average nine years earlier than others.”

The release quotes Tory MP Bob Blackman MP who is chairman of the APPG on Smoking and Health:

"The UK has an excellent record in tackling smoking but we can’t afford to rest on our laurels. The evidence is clear: without a renewed strategy there’s a real risk that smoking rates will rise again.

"I recognise the need to control public expenditure but measures to drive down smoking are cost-effective and will result in reductions in heart disease, lung cancer and respiratory disease, with the potential to save the over-stretched NHS billions of pounds a year.”

Leaving aside the crass economic ignorance of that remark (fewer smokers mean far less revenue for the Treasury), Blackman added that he "strongly believed that the tobacco industry should be required to contribute to the costs of treating people with diseases caused by smoking".

"Given the appalling damage the tobacco industry causes, and given that the major companies are vastly profitable, I cannot see why they should not be required to make a greater financial contribution to help solve the public health disaster they have worked to create. I can’t imagine a more appropriate application of the polluter pays principle."

Anyway, this is part of Forest's response:

Forest has criticised members of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Smoking and Health, run by the anti-smoking group ASH, who are urging the government to publish a new Tobacco Control Plan "without further delay".

Simon Clark, director of Forest, said: "Like Brexit, the government must take its time and get its strategy right. How can ministers introduce new measures when we're still waiting for an independent review of existing policies, and measures such as plain packaging have yet to be fully implemented?"

He added: “Anti-tobacco campaigners are lobbying the government to introduce new tobacco control measures. Research however suggests there is little public support for further anti-smoking policies.

"What is equally clear is the public’s desire for a common sense approach to policy making in the area of tobacco control. Regulation should not be made at the behest of taxpayer-funded lobby groups but on the basis of credible, independent evidence."

You can read it in full here.

I'll keep you posted on this afternoon's debate. Last I heard very few MPs had noted their intention to speak so it could be a bit of a damp squib. We'll see.

Update: Well, I listened to the 'debate'. Needless to say it was completely one-sided and predictable.

The best bit was at the end when new health minister Nicola Blackman declined to give a publication date for the Government's new Tobacco Control Plan which she said had to be "evidence-based". That would certainly make a change.

Pushed on whether this meant this year or next she replied, sweetly, "You'll have to wait and see."

Oh, I wish I'd seen Deborah Arnott's face at that moment.

PS. I've no evidence for this but I wonder if Deborah's long-standing influence at the Department of Health may be coming to an end.

Given the nature of ASH's press release, and the minister's subsequent statement, they don't appear to be singing from precisely the same hymn sheet.

We can but dream.

Update: Tobacco control plan debate (Hansard).

Tuesday
Oct112016

A Billion Lives: would anyone like to join me in Glasgow on October 26?

Yay! I have finally found two screenings of A Billion Lives that are actually going ahead.

Unfortunately they're both in Australia.

One is in Churchlands, Western Australia, where 58 tickets have been sold. The second is in North Adelaide where 71 tickets have been snapped up. Both screenings are on October 26.

In total there are currently 13 screenings scheduled in Australia with a total of 249 tickets 'reserved'.

Meanwhile, since I highlighted my own struggle to put on a screening in London, three more have been registered in the UK – in Newark, Bracknell and Bristol – making eleven in all.

So far however those additional screenings have generated combined sales of just seven tickets, pushing UK sales to the giddy heights of 64 (an average of 5.8 per screening).

Two screenings are currently registered in New Zealand with a total of 12 tickets sold. There was a third, I believe, but it failed to meet its 'threshold deadline' and was dropped.

Perhaps A Billion Lives will do better in America where there are ten million vapers – enough, it seems, for a leading Washington lobbyist to think they could influence the outcome of the US Presidential election. (Seriously?)

Anyway, having abandoned my own plans to host a screening in central London following interminable delays in the confirmation process, I have this morning purchased two tickets for a screening in Braehead, Glasgow, on October 26.

Unfortunately a further 53 tickets still have to be sold before it goes ahead and there are only five days left in which to do it. If anyone in the West of Scotland wishes to join me I suggest you book your ticket now.

PS. I invited director Aaron Biebert to respond to my previous post on the subject. He hasn't replied. Too busy drafting his Oscar acceptance speech?

Update:

Hi Simon,

Thank you for reserving your ticket(s) to the upcoming screening of A Billion Lives at intu [?] Braehead, Soar, King's Inch Rd, Glasgow, Renfrewshire, PA4 8XQ, United Kingdom on Wed, Oct 26, 2016 8:30 PM.

You haven’t been charged - that will only happen when the event reaches it's [sic] threshold. We have 5 days to reserve them. By reserving the tickets you have told us you are keen to see the film – why not help make the screening happen?

Share this link with friends and family – A Billion Lives.

We are excited about our new way of bringing amazing films to the cinema so we can all experience them the way the filmmakers intended – on a big screen, with big sound and an appreciative audience. Many of these films would not otherwise be seen this way so thank you for supporting it. And we hope the screening goes ahead (with your help it will) and we know you will have a great night at the movies.

Once the event confirms we will process your credit card and email you your tickets. If it doesn’t go ahead, again, you won't be charged.

Thanks
The Crew at Demand.Film

I think it's a great concept too and I wish Demand.Film the very best of luck.

I'm disappointed though that my efforts to host a screening of A Billion Lives in central London failed to happen. I'm not exaggerating when I say that many of us would have found that rather more convenient!

Scotland it is, then.

Tuesday
Oct112016

The silent majority needs to speak up

Following publication of Forest's new report yesterday, ConservativeHome ran an article by yours truly.

Headlined 'If May really wants a fairer Britain, she should end the war on smokers', it concluded as follows:

In her first speech as Prime Minister Theresa May said she wanted to make Britain “a country that works for everyone”. In Birmingham last week she added that the Conservatives will use government to “restore fairness” in Britain. In the coming months, as the government’s new smoking strategy is finalised, ministers should reflect on what that truly means. A significant number of adults smoke, and enjoy smoking, and their contribution to society is substantial (£12 billion a year in tobacco taxation alone, far outweighing the alleged cost of treating smoking-related diseases). Further discrimination against smokers would be the clearest sign that this new One Nation Conservative government is not as inclusive as it purports to be.

If the Prime Minister really wants to stand up for millions of ordinary people who are sick and tired of being patronised by politicians and the professional classes, she must stop her government introducing further policies that will discriminate against the UK’s seven million smokers. Enough is enough. It’s time to stop this spiteful war on ordinary people who choose to smoke.

These were some of the comments:

Of all the ridiculous things I have heard over the past few days, this one has to take the biscuit.

Those who wish to stick paper and tobacco in their mouths and then set light to them are quite welcome to do so as far as I am concerned - as long as they put a leak-proof bag over their head and don`t pollute any further the air I have to inspire.

I am appalled at this language which is deliberately inflammatory and offensive to those of us who have had to put up with smokers depriving us for decades of clean air and costed our NHS billions of pounds of tax payers money.

I approve of the legislation and regulations that have already been brought in to control smoking and would support further measures to control smoking in public spaces.

The laws on smoking in public places were the best thing to come from 13 years of New Labour government.

There were some supportive comments too but I find the level of intolerance a bit depressing.

Thankfully I don't think they're representative of the population as a whole (as our report makes clear) but the silent majority are just that – silent.

What politicians (and the media) hear constantly are the moaners, people who spend their lives looking for things to grumble about, and the internet and social media has given them the perfect platform.

It's notable too that there are fewer people willing to stick their heads above the parapet and defend smokers. I guess it's easier to keep your head down, more's the pity.

Anyway it's not too late to comment on ConHome so if you get a moment click here.

Monday
Oct102016

Attitudes to UK smoking policies

Today sees the publication of a new Forest report.

Enough Is Enough: Attitudes to UK Smoking Policies is based on a series of polls conducted by Populus on behalf of Forest over the last 15 months.

The Department of Health is currently working on a new tobacco control strategy and we've been testing public opinion to see what the public thinks of existing policies and further measures including further restrictions on smoking.

As you can imagine ASH and other tobacco control groups are lobbying government like mad and on Thursday, prompted by Labour MP Alex Cunningham, MPs will take part in a Westminster Hall debate on tobacco control strategy that is designed to put pressure on Theresa May's government to get on with it.

The timing of Forest's report is therefore rather fortuitous. Here are some of the headline results:

  • A clear majority of the public believe that measures to tackle smoking have gone too far or gone far enough.
  • The public overwhelmingly believe the government has more pressing priorities than tackling smoking – investing in new doctors and nurses, for example.
  • There is no appetite for additional tax rises on tobacco products – a huge majority believe that tobacco duty is already about right, too high or far too high.
  • A significant majority of the public believe that purchasing illegal tobacco is an understandable response from consumers faced with the high cost of tobacco products.
  • Measures to restrict smoking in outdoor public places such as parks and beaches have no popular or scientific legitimacy and would be hard to police.
  • Following a dramatic fall in the number of people using NHS stop smoking services a significant majority of the public believe there should be a review of how these services are funded.
  • A majority of the public believe the government’s tobacco control policies should be independently reviewed and should not be driven by taxpayer-funded lobby groups.
  • Almost a decade since smoking was banned in pubs and clubs in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, and ten years since smoking was prohibited in Scotland’s pubs and bars, a majority of the public believe that pubs and private members’ clubs, including working men’s clubs, should be allowed to provide a well-ventilated designated smoking room to accommodate smokers.

You can read our press release here but our message to government can be found in these quotes:

“Anti-tobacco campaigners are lobbying the government to introduce new measures they believe are essential to tackling smoking. It is clear however that there is relatively little public support for further anti-smoking policies.

“What is equally clear is the public’s desire for a common sense approach to policy making in the area of tobacco control. Regulation should not be made at the behest of taxpayer-funded lobby groups but on the basis of credible, independent evidence.

“Regulations should be based on fairness not dogma. Punishing rather than educating the consumer is not acceptable. Nor should legislation be introduced without proper consideration of the inevitable unintended consequences.”

“Theresa May says she wants to make Britain a country that works for everyone. She also says the Conservatives will use government to ‘restore fairness’ in Britain. In the coming months, as the government’s new smoking strategy is finalised, ministers should reflect on what that truly means.

“A significant number of adults smoke, and enjoy smoking, and their contribution to society is substantial. Further discrimination against smokers would be the clearest sign that this new one nation Conservative government is not as inclusive as it purports to be.”

To download a copy of the report click here.

Sunday
Oct092016

Rough guide to dealing with the media


A few weeks ago I was asked for some advice on dealing with the media.

The request came from a vaping advocacy group and I was happy to help. Having made a few notes I thought I'd publish them here. They're not guidelines and they're not exhaustive but they may be of interest to some people.

The 24/7 rule
In general Forest never turns down an interview or an opportunity to comment if we can possibly help it. Spokesmen are available at all times of the day or night. Sometimes on a very busy day there may be too many TV or radio interviews to handle. When that happens we refer broadcasters to people with similar views to our own. In media terms, never create a vacuum because you never know who might fill it!

Journalists and broadcasters need to know they can get hold of you at short notice or you'll reply quickly to messages or requests left on voicemail. If they think you're going to be unreliable or too difficult to get hold of they will soon stop calling.

Producers will sometimes make a preliminary call to see what you have to say on a specific issue. They will also seek out other options so if you're monosyllabic, morose or just plain grumpy, don't expect them to call back unless they're truly desperate.

As well as the UK media we also do our best to accommodate overseas media, hence you'll occasionally find me in my pyjamas in the middle of the night waiting to do an interview with a radio station in Hong Kong or wherever.

A former director of the Tobacco Manufacturers' Association told me he once did an interview whilst sitting entirely naked on the balcony of his holiday home in Spain. Too much information!

Local radio
It's easy to dismiss the value and importance of local radio. The first interview I ever did for Forest was with BBC Radio Leicester. I was booked 48 hours in advance and I remember being extremely nervous. It went OK but doing that and other local radio stations before I went on national radio a few weeks later was extremely useful.

Nevertheless I've come across a surprising number people who sneer at the prospect of doing local radio. Perhaps they think it's beneath them. If however you're starting a new campaign local radio is a great way to establish a profile. I imagine the BBC has a database of spokesmen or 'experts' on thousands of subjects so the trick is to get on that database as soon as possible. Local radio is a passport to national radio and even television and to ignore it is seriously short-sighted.

It's worth adding that local radio stations love to feature someone from their area. Likewise local newspapers. There are some stations that insist on having someone local so make the most of the regional media, wherever you are. They could be your biggest ally.

There is also a tendency among some lobby groups to decline or ignore requests for interviews with student broadcasters because they think it's a waste of time. It may not be a priority but if you're new to all this it's silly to reject the opportunity to gain relevant experience.

It rarely takes more than a few minutes so why not be helpful to an aspiring journalist or broadcaster? Very occasionally I've had a call a year or two later. "Hello, Simon, remember me? I'm now working for the BBC. Can we interview you ...?" It costs nothing to give a quote or a soundbite to anyone who asks. Why discriminate?

Press releases
If there's one skill that needs to be learned sooner rather than later it's the ability to write a half decent press release. Press releases come in many styles and it's not for me to say which is the best, but the style I was taught when I worked in public relations was to write it like a genuine news report with short, punchy quotes and a headline that says exactly what's in the tin.

There's a temptation to make press releases far too long by including too many long-winded comments. Less is more and direct quotes should be short and to the point because if you're responding to something it's rare you'll get more than three or four sentences, usually less.

There's another problem with verbose quotes. You have no control over the comment they'll use. You may find journalists will ignore the sentence or paragraph you really wanted them to use in favour of something that, out of context, makes you sound a bit mad.

Also, when you're giving a quote, even in writing, make it sound like spoken English. I've seen thousands of press releases where I've thought, "No-one speaks like that." If a journalist thinks the same there's less chance of your quote being used and if it is you'll just sound odd. Likewise you can always tell a press release that's been written or approved by lawyers – the quotes sound like something a robot would say.

Another tip. If you're responding to a study or campaign launch ask for a copy of the press release you're being asked to react to (if there is one). If you don't you could find your comments aren't relevant to the way it's being reported. Press releases are frequently spun to produce something that is far more newsworthy than what lies behind them so seeing the press release can make a huge difference to the way you respond. Get it wrong and your response will be deemed irrelevant to the story and won't be used.

Soundbites
Standard press releases aren't to every journalist's taste. Sometimes they want a quote that's unique to them. Also, if they're in a hurry and only want a sentence to complete their report ahead of a fast approaching deadline, they won't want to wait while you laboriously craft a press release for general consumption.

Beware however the snatched phone call in which you gabble a hasty response to a variety of quick-fire questions. The more you talk the more chance there is of saying something indiscreet or off message. The comment journalists or broadcasters use may not be the soundbite you intended them to use. If you want greater control over what is published or broadcast it's best to email a short quote.

Tone is quite subjective but I don't think Forest would have survived as long as we have if our spokesmen had been overly aggressive or confrontational. Some people think we're too soft but I disagree. We're usually combative and passionate but we try not to come across as one-eyed or humourless. We work hard to avoid language and demeanour that makes us look and sound like cranks, loonies or worse. The aim is to sound sane, sensible and completely normal.

On the radio a few years ago I heard a 'pro-smoking' (sic) caller almost come to blows with a leading tobacco control campaigner. At one point it sounded like the former was threatening to fight the latter. As Ukip can confirm, such 'scuffles' are immensely entertaining to the wider public but they do nothing to enhance your credibility.

Media contacts
There's no point sending press releases to all and sundry. They should be targeted so you need to build a contact list. There are companies that have relevant databases that are updated regularly but they can cost several thousand pounds to subscribe to each year.

The cheapest option is to develop your own database and it's not rocket science. Monitor the media, note all the relevant editors and correspondents and get their contact details. Create a spreadsheet and you have the beginnings of a media contacts list.

Television and radio can be a bit more time consuming. Basically you have to make a list of the relevant news or magazine programmes and find out the names of editors and producers and their email addresses. Producers (especially the junior ones) change or rotate quite a lot (ditto researchers) so you have to keep on top of the list to make sure your information is up-to-date.

Newspaper columnists should be targeted too. Likewise journalists and bloggers who write about your issue online. Anyone, in fact, who writes about smoking or vaping, positively or negatively. Add them to your contacts list.

Persistence and communication
It's easy to lose motivation if you think you're being ignored. Don't lose heart. They may not be aware you even exist. Press releases from unknown email addresses can be swallowed up by spam filters and firewalls.

Persist. Call one or two journalists on your contacts list and ask them why they're not reporting your comments. Put them on the spot, politely of course. You're not at war with them. Treat them as a potential friend not your enemy (see below).

After you've spoken to them follow up with an email or letter explaining who you are and what you do. Thereafter, in addition to press releases, send them an occasional newsletter. And make it easy for them to contact you. The key thing is communication.

That said, don't rely on one individual acting on your press release, even if you've developed a good relationship. He or she may be on holiday, out of the office or working on another story. Always send press releases to the news desk and at least one other named journalist on the same publication.

Rapid response
It's rare to be given much time to respond to a news story. Journalists will want either an immediate response (because they're working on their report that very minute) or they'll want it within the hour, and sooner rather than later.

I know of one organisation that set up a 'rapid response unit' to react to relevant stories. Unfortunately their definition of 'rapid' was 48 hours which was an improvement on previous practice but if you delay even a few hours the horse has usually bolted.

In my experience embargoes don't make much difference because journalists rarely give you the benefit of that extra time, especially if they have what they think is an exclusive. They may be worried you'll break the embargo or you'll leak it to another journalist. The result is much the same as a breaking news story. You'll be contacted at the last possible moment and you'll be expected to give a response as soon as possible, usually within the hour.

Sometimes it's necessary to buy a little time to consider your response. If you're not immediately sure what you want to say tell them you'll call them back in five, ten or 15 minutes. You can then give a more considered response. Don't allow yourself to be rushed into saying something off the top of your head. Sometimes it's best to email your quote. Then it's in black and white exactly as you want it, although they may edit it if it's too long so keep it short.

I don't wish to blacken the name of any journalist but be careful, especially if you're dealing with a student or a young trainee working on a local newspaper. Often their shorthand is not, how shall I put it, up to scratch (if they have that skill at all) and you can be misquoted, sometimes quite badly. That can happen with more experienced journalists too so, when in doubt, send a written quote. Or ask them to read out the quote they have just scribbled down. Don't complain after your mangled response has appeared in print because by then it will be too late.

Preparing for an interview
This may sound obvious but some people don't prepare properly for interviews. Despite years of experience I'm not immune to this either. For example, there have been occasions when I've blithely agreed to do an interview without asking what they want me to talk about. Live on air I've then been asked questions I wasn't prepared for. I've muddled my way through but it's not been a comfortable experience.

I've also agreed to do interviews at short notice on subjects I knew relatively little about at the time and almost come a cropper. On one occasion, ironically, I was saved by Clive Bates, the former director of ASH (although he didn't know it). It was a few years ago and we were talking about e-cigarettes when the presenter suddenly asked me to explain exactly how they worked and how much they cost. There was a short silence while my brain stood still. Thankfully Clive stepped in with the answers. (Don't worry, I know now!)

That (and another interview on food) taught me never to give an interview without being reasonably well briefed on the subject in advance. It may sound obvious but over-confidence or failure to do homework trips everyone up eventually.

Media training
It's not essential but if you have no experience of being interviewed on TV or radio it's worth considering some professional media training. That includes everything from the way you respond to questions on specific issues to the way you look and the clothes you wear.

Personally I find media training quite stressful – more stressful, in fact, than genuine interviews – but I would recommend it because it does teach you some useful lessons including some pretty basic stuff that should be obvious but isn't.

For example, always check in advance the length of time you will be on air and whether it's live or recorded. If you're being recorded they may only want a 20 second soundbite to drop into a news bulletin. Alternatively it could be anything between two and eight minutes. The way you give a soundbite or a longer interview is completely different so check in advance.

Where possible, if it's a three-way discussion that includes the presenter and an opponent, try and get to the studio where the programme is being broadcast. It makes a big difference if you're in the same studio as the presenter because you have that all important eye contact and there's usually a bit more chemistry between you and the presenter (unless it's the Today programme!). That said, I quite like working from a 'remote' studio because you can have one or two notes in front of you which I find quite helpful. They offer a safety net if your mind momentarily goes blank.

Most important, have a clear idea what it is you want to say – two or three bullet points, no more. You don't want to sound like a robot and keep repeating yourself, nor should you ignore specific questions, but it's important not to babble or divert too far from your principal message. Go with the flow of the interview but by the end it should be clear what your basic message is so don't complicate things by going off on too many tangents - and don't be afraid to repeat yourself. It's an interview not a conversation.

On a more trivial note, one tip I was taught many years ago is to have one of those compact make up kits in your pocket when you go to a TV studio. If there's no make up person available you can then disguise that glistening forehead and any other imperfections! Needless to say I've rarely acted on this extremely useful advice because, being British, I'm far too embarrassed to go into a shop and buy make-up for myself.

Believe it or not I once spent 30 minutes in a branch of Boots close to Broadcasting House in London plucking up courage to approach the make-up counter. Nevertheless, speaking as a balding, middle-aged man, I can vouch for the fact that wearing make up gives you much more confidence in your appearance. If I could wear make-up every day outside a TV studio I would!

Make friends not enemies
I know what it is to metaphorically bang your head against a brick wall. It's incredibly frustrating when reports are published that appear one-sided, factually incorrect or both. I've experienced this for many, many years. No-one, I believe, has more experience of the futility of engaging with certain journalists who are deaf to the likes of you and me. Nevertheless it must be done and my advice is that abusing individual journalists, often directly, on social media is wholly counter-productive.

Yes, it will make them aware of the extent of your anger and frustration but you can do that privately. It makes little sense to set the dogs on them, which is effectively what you're doing by encouraging others to steam in with similar comments of their own. Human nature is such that if people feel they are being bullied by a mob they will react negatively. The idea that they will suddenly choose to see your point of view is naive.

Journalists have a job to do. According to the late great Ian Wooldridge, a famous sports writer with the Daily Mail, the advice he received as a young journalist faced with a blank sheet of paper was, "It doesn't matter what you write, just get it written." I suspect that today's journalists are under even more pressure than they were in Wooldridge's day, much of which was spent in the pub. To feed the ravenous online beast they may be expected to write several stories a day which is why press releases (notably those issued by public health) are often published almost verbatim with little or no alternative comment or analysis.

I'm not saying it's right that journalists don't check the facts or chase contrary viewpoints but it's no use taking it out on individual correspondents. Whatever the rights and wrongs of the report that offended the vaping community earlier this year, for example, some of the subsequent attacks on the Daily Telegraph's science editor Sarah Knapton were deplorable.

A couple of years ago I took issue with a health correspondent at the Press Association, which is hugely influential in determining media coverage in both the national and local media. If the PA quotes you there's a far greater chance your comments will appear in the print and broadcast media which rely on PA reports for many of their own stories.

Having enjoyed a fairly good relationship with the PA's previous health correspondent who frequently called Forest to ask for a comment on smoking-related issues, I heard nothing from her youthful successor. I eventually called her and my complaint seemed to surprise her. According to her the onus was on Forest to contact her with a comment, not the other way around.

It demonstrates just how far journalism has changed that journalists no longer consider it to be their job to actively contact third parties for comments and quotes. Of course we send the PA our press releases when we are alerted to a story or have one of our own. The problem is, Forest isn't on the tobacco control industry's mailing list so when ASH, Cancer Research, Public Health England or the Department of Health issue a press release we're often unaware of it until a journalist contacts us for a response.

If no-one alerts us in advance we can't respond until the story has appeared in print or online by which time it's usually too late to do anything about it, although I have been known to call the BBC News night editor to ask that they add a quote from Forest to a one-sided online report. More often than not he or she will do this with very good grace. Why the actual correspondent couldn't have done this in the first place I really don't know but the only way to overcome such bias is persistence and communication (see above). It is however an ongoing battle.

New story angles
The media gets bored with a story or issue and understandably so. Readers want something new so unless you come up with a new angle or new information journalists move on. This happened with the smoking ban and, more recently, plain packaging. For a year or two we engaged quite successfully with the media on standardised packs. By coming up with a series of arguments and initiatives we kept journalists and broadcasters interested. (The opposition was doing the same thing, of course.) By the time our campaign entered its third year journalists were saying, "We've heard all the arguments, for and against. Do you have anything new?"

We hit the same barrier a decade ago with the smoking ban and the 'debate' about passive smoking. After a while, with no new studies on the alleged effects of secondhand smoke, and the smoking ban a done deal, the media lost interest because, in the opinion of experienced news editors, there was nothing new to report.

Vaping advocates have a huge advantage in this respect because e-cigarettes are an evolving product and new studies and guidelines are coming out all the time so the media has a lot to work with. In a few years however it won't be enough to simply argue the pros and cons of vaping. The media will want a new angle to report so make the most of the current wave of interest.

Forward planning
Plan your media operation in advance. What are the forthcoming pegs you can hang a story on? This year, for example, marked the tenth anniversary of the smoking ban in Scotland. We planned ahead, commissioned an opinion poll on separate smoking rooms (a majority of people in Scotland would allow them), distributed the results to the Scottish media, and got widespread coverage.

As I explained in 'New story angles' (above) it wouldn't have been enough to simply argue against the smoking ban. That would have seen as repeating a debate held ten years previously. We had to come up with something new and topical. And we did, with some success.

Now we are planning for 2017. Next year England, Wales and Northern Ireland will 'celebrate' the tenth anniversary of the smoking ban in those countries. Another milestone is May 20 when all branded cigarette packs and tobacco pouches will finally disappear from the nation's shelves. After that it will be illegal to sell a branded pack or pouch.

On the same day, thanks to the EU's Tobacco Products Directive, all smaller packs and pouches will also disappear (if they haven't done so already). These and other milestones are highlighted in our calendar. So the message is, plan ahead.

Timekeeping
It sounds obvious but don't be late for an interview! I always give myself plenty of time and you'll often find me sitting in a studio car park or nearby cafe at least 30 minutes ahead of schedule. This is because of one specific incident a long time ago when I was booked to appear on Newsnight Scotland which is broadcast from the BBC Scotland studios in Glasgow.

I'd already been in Glasgow that day but come the evening I was in Edinburgh where Forest was hosting a drinks reception at the Oxygen Bar (geddit?) near the Royal Mile. The party finished at 9.00 and I set off to drive to the BBC in Glasgow where I was due on set at 10.30. Unfortunately I got hopelessly lost and ended up driving through the Clyde tunnel. Not only was I on the wrong side of the river, I had no idea where I was or where I was going. In a bit of a panic I leapt out of the car, flagged down a passing taxi and pleaded with the driver to escort me to the BBC while I followed in my own car.

We got there with seconds to spare and moments later I was on live TV. I never want to go through that again! In an interesting quirk, however, I think it was one of my better television performances because I was so relieved to have got there and there wasn't time to sit around over-thinking what I wanted to say.

Get an iPhone
A bane of modern life are all those radio interviews and phone-ins that rely on the use of mobile phones. The reception is often poor and you can barely hear what the person is saying. Now more and more radio stations are asking, "Do you have Facetime or Skype?" Alternatively, if they want to record an interview, they'll ask you to use the Voice Memos app on your iPhone and you can send them a digital file. The point is, Facetime, Skype and digital files provide far greater clarity so if you're planning to do any radio interviews my advice is ... get an iPhone!

And finally ...
Some people take to the media like ducks to water without training or anything else. Some are natural interviewees in a way that I'm not but ego and vanity sometimes come before a fall and I've seen and heard several people crash and burn, which is not a pretty sight. My own worst moments tend to happen when I'm over-confident or I've done a series of back-to-back interviews and think I've got the subject nailed. I haven't.

Some people's egos propel them towards national TV and radio like a moth to a flame but they're not prepared to do the hard graft – the more mundane work like writing and distributing press releases, appearing on local radio late at night or early in the morning, developing contacts with journalists and broadcasters, chasing night editors to find out why a quote or story hasn't appeared. Instead it's so much easier to tweet a vicious comment about a perceived enemy in the media and enjoy all the plaudits and acclaim from sycophantic fellow travellers.

Anyway, these are a few thoughts jotted down for a group of vapers who asked for some advice. There's a lot more that could be said in a more formal style so please don't consider this to be a definitive guide. It's far short of that.

Ultimately media relations isn't an exact science. Like most things it's a combination of hard work and persistence plus a touch of luck. There are skills involved – some of which come naturally, some of which can be learned – but the most important ingredient is common sense. Without that you're seriously compromised.

Saturday
Oct082016

The beast of Birmingham

Final word on our Conservative conference fringe event. LBC Radio presenter Iain Dale writes:

The other fringe I spoke at was hosted by Forest and the Tobacco Manufacturers Association in a very loud bar called Nuvo. There were several hundred people there, all getting gradually drunk as a skunk.

I’d written a few bullet points, which I then discovered I had lost, so I had rapidly to type out a few notes on my iPhone, just in case I dried up. Although I speak on the radio for three hours every day, I don’t do many speeches nowadays, so I got a lot more nervous about doing this than I would have done a few years ago. In fact, I was bloody petrified.

There were four speakers and I was the last, after Paul Scully. Most of the audience were happily guzzling and chatting while we all spoke, but in the end I think it went off OK. I banged on about freedom of the individual and the fact that we should all take responsibility for what we put in our bodies (ooh, er), and that anyone who supported a sugar tax should forfeit the right to call themselves a Conservative.

OK, shameful populism at an event like this, and of course it got the cheer I knew it would. I also got the biggest laugh out of the four of us for using the phrase “shag like a beast”. You had to be there. It was in context, I promise.

For those who weren't there the context was this.

Introducing Iain to guests I announced, "Our next speaker doesn't smoke. He doesn't vape. He doesn't even drink ..."

Cue loud voice behind me, "But I shag like a beast!"

Perhaps, as Iain says, you had to be there. All I know is, it got a huge laugh, the largest of the night.

Visit ConservativeHome for Iain's weekly column that also has items on Ukip, Boris Johnson and Brexit minister David Davis.

Saturday
Oct082016

Vice royale

I'm not really familiar with Vice. However my daughter, 19, is and her verdict is damning:

"It's written by a bunch of pathetic twenty somethings who hate anyone who doesn't agree with their uni politics.

"They pass their bitterness off as sarcastic humour. I much prefer Dazed and Confused if you're gonna read that stuff."

With that in mind I think we got off lightly when home affairs correspondent Simon Childs attended Forest's party at the Conservative conference in Birmingham this week.

Here's a taste of his review:

What the party was like: Actually really good. An upper-middle market bar packed to the gills with free booze, mini burgers, pocket ash-trays (a weird plastic wallet thing you can carry around) inscribed with the words, "Say no to outdoor smoking bans," and leaflets about how "A once benign nanny state has become a bully state, coercing rather than educating adults to give up tobacco."

Entertainment: It was advertised as "Eat. Drink. Smoke. Vape.", so like all good parties there were no frills beyond the amount of inebriants you could stuff in your body.

There were one or two comments that were less complimentary but compared to some of the other events Childs' reviewed (one was described as a "crap party" in a "drab, half empty hotel room where people pawed at tepid goujons") I'm not complaining.

You can read the full article here: We Did a Bar Crawl of the Tory Conference's Parties.

Above: Speakers at Eat, Drink, Smoke, Vape included LBC Radio presenter and publisher Iain Dale (left) and Paul Scully MP (right).