Abstract
BackgroundAotearoa New Zealand passed world-leading legislation to implement tobacco endgame policies, including greatly reducing the number of tobacco retailers. British American Tobacco New Zealand and Imperial Brands Australasia tried to undermine this policy via the 'Save Our Stores' (SOS) campaign, which purportedly represented small convenience store owners' interests.MethodsWe used the Policy Dystopia Model as a framework to review discursive and instrumental strategies employed in the SOS campaign. Specifically, we critically analysed the arguments, narratives and frames employed in the campaign.ResultsMost SOS arguments drew on discursive strategies that emphasised unanticipated costs to the economy and society, and presented a near-apocalyptic future. Adverse outcomes included economic mayhem, thriving illicit trade, increased violent crime, fewer police, and heavier individual tax burdens. The campaign framed the government as an authoritarian legislator with misplaced priorities and used disinformation to bolster these claims. We identified a new normalisation narrative used to present very low nicotine cigarettes (VLNCs) as experimental and, by implication, risky. A metanarrative of lawlessness and decreased public safety connected the different claims.ConclusionTo address the existential challenges they face, tobacco companies used several discursive strategies to oppose the retailer reduction and VLNC policies. Our findings could inform counterarguments, and help international policymakers and advocates anticipate opposition they may encounter when introducing endgame measures, such as reducing tobacco availability.