African American/Black
How Big Tobacco Targets African American/Black Communities
Tobacco is immensely destructive in African American/Black communities, causing more deaths than AIDS, accidents, and homicide combined.1 Tobacco companies’ manipulative tactics have led to African American/Black communities experiencing the greatest burden of tobacco-related mortality of any racial or ethnic group in the United States.2
Big Tobacco systematically targets African American/Black communities by plastering neighborhood stores with deceptive ads and offering discounts on their products.3 Studies have found there are up to 10x more tobacco ads in neighborhoods where people predominantly identify as African American/Black, particularly for menthol cigarettes, which Big Tobacco has specifically pushed in the community for years.4
Tobacco companies are now pushing other flavored tobacco products such as little cigars and cigarillos and are pricing them lower in African American/Black neighborhoods.5 R.J. Reynolds, makers of Camel and Newport, recently sponsored community events and paid for the travel costs of prominent community leaders such as civil rights activist Reverend Al Sharpton to convince African American/Black communities that banning flavored tobacco, particularly menthol cigarettes, will continue the criminalization of people who are African American/Black. The truth is, flavor ban tobacco policies, similar to the 2016 California Tobacco 21 law, no longer penalize tobacco product purchasers, instead holding tobacco sellers responsible.
Clearly, Big Tobacco is not letting go of this community without a fight.
The proof is in the data
Indicator | African American/Black | General population |
|---|---|---|
Adult tobacco use | ||
1. Adult cigarette use: Adult cigarette smoking prevalence | 10% The estimate is significantly higher than the California general population. | 6.7% |
| ||
2. Change in adult cigarette use: Rate of change in adult cigarette smoking, 2014 to 2020 | -41.9% The 2020 estimate is significantly lower than the 2014 estimate. | -46.4% |
| ||
3. Adult tobacco use: Adult tobacco use prevalence (e.g., cigarettes, e-cigarettes and other vaping products, other tobacco products) | 15.9% The estimate is significantly higher than the California general population. | 11.3% |
| ||
Youth tobacco use | ||
4. Youth cigarette use: Youth cigarette smoking prevalence | 1% | 1.2% |
| ||
5. Change in youth cigarette use: Rate of change in youth cigarette smoking, 2016 to 2020 | -44.4% | -72.1% |
| ||
6. Youth tobacco use: Youth tobacco use prevalence (e.g., cigarettes, e-cigarettes and other vaping products, other tobacco products) | 10.2% | 9.7% |
| ||
Availability of tobacco & tobacco industry influence | ||
7. Cheapest cigarettes: Average price for the cheapest pack of cigarettes | $7.06 | $7.11 |
| ||
8. Flavored little cigar price: Average price for a single flavored little cigar/cigarillo | $0.92 | $0.97 |
| ||
9. Tobacco retail licensing: Proportion of population protected by a strong tobacco retail licensing law | 71.7% The estimate is 10.0 percentage points higher than the California general population. | 59.5% |
| ||
10. Tobacco stores: Density of stores selling tobacco per 100,000 residents | 89 The estimate is 10.0 stores per 100,000 higher than the California general population. | 77 |
| ||
11. Flavored tobacco: Proportion of stores that sell flavored non-cigarette tobacco products | 80.6% The estimate is significantly lower than the California general population. | 81.8% |
| ||
12. Menthol cigarettes: Proportion of stores that sell menthol cigarettes | 85.6% | 88.3% |
| ||
13. Tobacco advertising: Proportion of stores that keep 90% of their storefront free from any advertising | 39.3% | 40.1% |
| ||
Secondhand smoke | ||
14. Adult secondhand tobacco exposure: Proportion of adults exposed to secondhand smoke or vape | 38.7% | 35.2% |
| ||
15. Youth secondhand tobacco exposure: Proportion of youth exposed to secondhand smoke or vape | 29.7% | 33.1% |
| ||
16. Smoke-free multi-unit housing: Proportion of population protected by a smoke-free multi-unit housing law | 71.5% | 66.7% |
| ||
17. Smoke-free homes: Proportion of adults with smoke-free homes | 89.6% | 91.8% |
| ||
Cessation | ||
18. Quitting: Proportion of smokers who tried quitting in the last 12 months | 62.4% | 55.6% |
| ||
19. Doctor advice to quit: Proportion of smokers whose doctors advised them to quit | 63.5% | 46.8% |
| ||
Kick It California | Percent of Enrollees | Percent of Smokers |
20. Kick It California enrollees: Proportion of Kick It California enrollees | 14.4% The estimate is significantly higher than the population’s make-up of California’s adult smokers. | 8.3% of smokers are African American/Black |
| ||
A Story of Inequity
Tobacco’s impact on health disparities in California
For decades, the tobacco industry has aggressively targeted California’s diverse communities with predatory practices. Internal documents from Big Tobacco outline their strategies – many of which are shocking attempts to peddle deadly products by way of product discounts and manipulative advertising. They even gave away free products to youth in the past. These tactics masquerade as support for communities under the guise of cultural celebration.
Unfortunately, the tactics have worked. Big Tobacco aggressively targeted communities and, as a result, some populations have higher rates of tobacco use, experience greater secondhand smoke exposure at work and at home, and have higher rates of tobacco-related disease than the general population.1
Addressing tobacco-related health inequities is key to California’s efforts to fight tobacco, our state’s number one cause of preventable death and disease.2 Tobacco use, pricing, and its impact across California were analyzed where significant disparities were found across various populations. See how Big Tobacco affects each community in the Nation’s most diverse state.