Remembering to Forget: The Historic Irresponsibility of U.S. Big Tobacco

  • Diego M. CoraiolaEmail author
  • Robbin Derry
Original Paper


Society increasingly demands corporations to be accountable for their past misbehaviours. Some corporations engage in forgetting work with the aim of avoiding responsibility for their wrongdoings. We argue that whenever social actors have their past actions called into question and engage in forgetting work, an ethics of remembering takes place. A collective project of social forgetting is contingent on the emergence of coordinated actions among players of an industry. Similarly, sustained efforts of forgetting work depend on the continuity of the project through various generations of employees, which presumes the existence of frameworks of remembering in place. We analysed this paradox through a historical case study of the U.S. tobacco industry. We conclude that forgetting work may be a double-edged sword. It might be beneficial in the short run, to the extent that corporations can successfully maintain the public ignorance about their deceitful pasts. In the long run, however, it creates additional layers of historical irresponsibility and may turn into a compounded liability in the event the memory of the collective strategy of social forgetting becomes public.


Historic CSR Organizational mnemonics Tobacco industry 


Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

Diego M. Coraiola declares that he has no conflict of interest. Robbin Derry declares that she has no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

10551_2019_4323_MOESM1_ESM.docx (34 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 34 kb)


  1. Ahrne, G., & Brunsson, N. (2005). Organizations and meta-organizations. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 21(4), 429–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson, B. (1983). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  3. Anteby, M., & Molnár, V. (2012). Collective memory meets organizational identity: Remembering to forget in a firm’s rhetorical history. Academy of Management Journal, 55(3), 515–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Arthur D. Little Inc. (1961). L&M—A perspective review. Philip Morris Records: Bates #2018019799.Google Scholar
  5. Ashforth, B. E., & Anand, V. (2003). The normalization of corruption in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 25, 1–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bansal, P., & DesJardine, M. R. (2014). Business sustainability: It is about time. Strategic Organization, 12(1), 70–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Barnett, M. L. (2006). Finding a working balance between competitive and communal strategies. Journal of Management Studies, 43(8), 1753–1773.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Baron, D. P. (1995). Integrated strategy: Market and nonmarket components. California Management Review, 37(2), 47–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bell, E. (2012). Ways of seeing organisational death: A critical semiotic analysis of organisational memorialisation. Visual Studies, 27(1), 4–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bella, D. A. (1997). Organized complexity in human affairs: The tobacco industry. Journal of Business Ethics, 16(10), 977–999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bentley, M. R., Felton, D. G. I., & Reid, W. W. (1958). Report on Visit to USA and Canada: 17 April–12 May 1958. British American Tobacco Records: Bates #105408490.Google Scholar
  12. Blalock, J. V., & Burgard, J. (1963). Tobacco Institute, Tobacco Industry Research Committee, and Hill & Knowlton. UCSF Brown & Williamson Collection: Bates #1801.Google Scholar
  13. Booth, C., Clark, P., Delahaye, A., Procter, S., & Rowlinson, M. (2007). Accounting for the dark side of corporate history: Organizational culture perspectives and the Bertelsmann case. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 18(6), 625–644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Brandt, A. M. (2007). The cigarette century: The rise, fall, and deadly persistence of the product that defined America. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  15. Brass, D. J., Butterfield, K. D., & Skaggs, B. C. (1998). Relationships and unethical behavior: A social network perspective. Academy of Management Review, 23(1), 14–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Brown & Williamson. (1969). Smoking and health proposal. Brown & Williamson Records; Tobacco Industry Influence in Public Policy; Minnesota Documents: Bates #690010951.Google Scholar
  17. Chandler, A. D. (1959). The beginnings of “Big Business” in American industry. Business History Review, 33(1), 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ciresi, M. V., Walburn, R. B., & Sutton, T. D. (1999). Decades of deceit: Document discovery in the Minnesota Tobacco Litigation. William Mitchell Law Review, 25(2), 477–566.Google Scholar
  19. Cohen, P. (2003). History for hire In industry lawsuits. New York Times, p. B00007. Retrieved from
  20. Cooke, B. (2003). The Denial of slavery in management studies. Journal of Management Studies, 40(8), 1895–1918.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Coraiola, D. M., Suddaby, R., & Foster, W. M. (2018). Organizational fields as mnemonic communities. In J. Glückler, R. Suddaby, & R. Lenz (Eds.), Knowledge and institutions (Vol. 13, pp. 45–68). Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Cullman, J. P. (1983). Remarks of Jos. P. Cullman III at TMA Annual Mtg 830519. Lorillard Records: Bates #04211524.Google Scholar
  23. Derry, R., & Waikar, S. V. (2008). Frames and filters: Strategic distrust as a legitimation tool in the 50-year battle between public health activists and big tobacco. Business & Society, 47(1), 102–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Deterding, N. M., & Waters, M. C. (2018). Flexible coding of in-depth interviews: A twenty-first-century approach. Sociological Methods & Research. Scholar
  25. DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1991). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. In W. W. Powell & P. DiMaggio (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 267–292). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  26. Do, B., Lyle, M. C. B., & Walsh, I. J. (2019). Driving down memory lane: The influence of memories in a community following organizational demise. Organization Studies, 40(9), 1307–1329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Eco, U., & Migiel, M. (1988). An Ars Oblivionalis? Forget it! PMLA, 103(3), 254–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ehrhinghaus, J. C. B., Jr. (1971). Remarks before the Great Plains Candy and Tobacco Club. Ness Motley Law Firm Documents: Bates #TIMN0120578.Google Scholar
  29. Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Elsbach, K. D., & Sutton, R. I. (1992). Acquiring organizational legitimacy through illegitimate actions: A marriage of institutional and impression management theories. Academy of Management Journal, 35(4), 699–738.Google Scholar
  31. Facts Every Tobacco Man Should Remember. (1977, October 27). Tobacco Journal.Google Scholar
  32. Fellman, S., & Popp, A. (2014). Lost in the archive: The business historian in distress. In B. Czarniawska & O. Löfgren (Eds.), Coping with excess: How organizations, communities, and individuals manage overflows. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  33. Foster, W. M., Coraiola, D. M., Suddaby, R., Kroezen, J., & Chandler, D. (2017). The strategic use of historical narratives: A theoretical framework. Business History, 59(8), 1176–1200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Francey, N., & Chapman, S. (2000). “Operation Berkshire”: the international tobacco companies’ conspiracy. BMJ, 321(7257), 371–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Geyelin, M. (1998). Lonely Lawyers for Liggett Feel Minnesota Chill. Wall Street, p. B1. Retrieved from
  36. Glantz, S. A. (1996). The cigarette papers (University of California Press EScholarship Editions). Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  37. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research (Observations). Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
  38. Greve, H. R., Palmer, D., & Pozner, J. E. (2010). Organizations gone wild: The causes, processes, and consequences of organizational misconduct. The Academy of Management Annals, 4(1), 53–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Guardino, S. D., Friedman, L., & Daynard, R. A. (2004). Remedies for document destruction: Tales from the Tobacco Wars. Virginia Journal of Social Policy and the Law, 12, 1–60.Google Scholar
  40. Hahn, P. (1958). Re: policy issues of Tobacco Institute and corresponding public relations strategies. Ness Motley Law Firm Documents: Bates #3852.Google Scholar
  41. Hanauer, P., Slade, J., Barnes, D. E., Bero, L., & Glantz, S. A. (1995). Lawyer control of internal scientific research to protect against products liability lawsuits: The Brown and Williamson documents. JAMA, 274(3), 234–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Hardy, D. R. (1970). [Letter from David R. Hardy to Debaun Bryant regarding tobacco litigation]. Tobacco Products Liability Project Collection: Bates #202315508.Google Scholar
  43. Hargadon, A. (2015). From what happened to what happens: Using microhistorical case studies to build grounded theory in organization studies. In K. D. Elsbach & R. M. Kramer (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative organizational research: Innovative pathways and methods (pp. 122–133). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  44. Hearit, K. M. (1995). “Mistakes were made”: Organizations, apologia, and crises of social legitimacy. Communication Studies, 46(1–2), 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Hertsgaard, M., & Dowie, M. (2018, July 14). The inconvenient truth about cancer and mobile phones. The Guardian. Retrieved from
  46. Hill & Knowlton. (1953). Preliminary recommendations for cigarette manufacturers. Ness Motley Law Firm Documents: Bates #34341.Google Scholar
  47. Hill & Knowlton. (1954a). Report of activities through July 31, 1954. Philip Morris Records: Bates #2022998255.Google Scholar
  48. Hill & Knowlton. (1954b). Program of Tobacco Industry Research Committee. Ness Motley Law Firm Documents: Bates #3513.Google Scholar
  49. Hill & Knowlton. (1954c). Report of activities through July 31, 1952. Philip Morris Records: Bates #2022998255.Google Scholar
  50. Hills, S., Voronov, M., & Hinings, C. R. B. (2013). Putting new wine in old bottles: Utilizing rhetorical history to overcome stigma associated with a previously dominant logic. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 39(Part B), 99–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Hilts, P. J. (1996). Smoke screen: The truth behind the tobacco industry cover-up. Reading: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  52. Hudson, B. A. (2008). Against all odds: A consideration of core-stigmatized organizations. Academy of Management Review, 33(1), 252–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Janssen, C. I. (2012). Corporate historical responsibility (CHR): Addressing a corporate past of forced labor at Volkswagen. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 41(1), 64–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Jasa, K. K. (1990). Summary of important documents in John W Hill Collection. Brown & Williamson Records; Congressman Bliley Philip Morris Collection: Bates #680704707.Google Scholar
  55. Kessler, D. (2001). A question of intent: A great American battle with a deadly industry. New York: Public Affairs.Google Scholar
  56. Killick, M., Mangold, T., Stmor, R., & Goldberg, J. (1995). “Pack of lies”: A Panorama special investigation into the tobacco industry: A research brief. Hearings before the subcommittee on health and the Environment of the Committee on Energy and Commerce (2nd ed., pp. 529–541). Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  57. King & Spalding. (1990). B&W Conspiracy Notebook. Tobacco Products Liability Project Collection: Bates #503143822.Google Scholar
  58. Kluger, R. (1997). Ashes to Ashes: America’s Hundred-Year Cigarette War, the Public Health, and the Unabashed Triumph of Philip Morris. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
  59. Kroezen, J. J., & Heugens, P. P. M. A. R. (2018). What is dead may never die: Institutional regeneration through logic reemergence in Dutch beer brewing. Administrative Science Quarterly. Scholar
  60. Kyriakoudes, L. M. (2006). Historians’ testimony on “common knowledge” of the risks of tobacco use: a review and analysis of experts testifying on behalf of cigarette manufacturers in civil litigation. Tobacco Control, 15(suppl 4), iv107-iv116.Google Scholar
  61. Lamertz, K., Foster, W. M., Coraiola, D. M., & Kroezen, J. (2016). New identities from remnants of the past: An examination of the history of beer brewing in Ontario and the recent emergence of craft breweries. Business History, 58(5), 796–828.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Lange, D., & Washburn, N. T. (2012). Understanding Attributions of Corporate Social Irresponsibility. Academy of Management Review, 37(2), 300–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Langley, A. (1999). Strategies for Theorizing from Process Data. The Academy of Management Review, 24(4), 691–710.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Laszlo, C., & Zhexembayeva, N. (2011). Embedded sustainability: The next big competitive advantage. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  65. Le Goff, J. (1978). Documento/Monumento. In Enciclopedia Einaudi (Vol. 5, pp. 38-48). Torino: Einaudi.Google Scholar
  66. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Lowenthal, D. (2015). The Past is a Foreign Country—Revisited (Revised and updated (edition ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  68. Maclean, M., Harvey, C., & Clegg, S. (2016). Conceptualizing Historical Organization Studies. Academy of Management Review, 41(4), 609–632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Maclean, M., Harvey, C., Sillince, J. A. A., & Golant, B. D. (2014). Living up to the past? Ideological sensemaking in organizational transition. Organization, 21(4), 543–567.Google Scholar
  70. Mai, D. (2015). Organizational Cultures of Remembrance: Exploring the Relationships between Memory, Identity, and Image in an Automobile Company. New York: de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Mantere, S., & Ketokivi, M. (2013). Reasoning in organization science. Academy of Management Review, 38(1), 70–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. McGoey, L. (2012). Strategic unknowns: towards a sociology of ignorance. Economy and Society, 41(1), 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Mena, S., Rintamäki, J., Fleming, P., & Spicer, A. (2016). On the Forgetting of Corporate Irresponsibility. Academy of Management Review, 41(4), 720–738.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Morini, H. A. (1981). Note to All No. 1’s of Associated Companies: Legal Considerations in Smoking and Health Issues. Tobacco Products Liability Project Collection: Bates #109870817.Google Scholar
  75. Mozingo, R. L. (1986). The Tobacco Institute’s College of Tobacco Knowledge. Tobacco Institute Records: Bates #TI08820683.Google Scholar
  76. Neuberger, M. B. (1963). Smoke screen: Tobacco and the public welfare. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  77. Nissley, N., & Casey, A. (2002). The politics of the exhibition: Viewing corporate museums through the paradigmatic lens of organizational memory. [Article]. British Journal of Management, 13, S35–S45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Norr, R. (1952). Cancer by the carton. Reader’s Digest, 61(368), 7–8.Google Scholar
  79. Norris, Floyd. (1996). A Fight That’s All Smoke and Mirrors. (1996, Mar 17). New York Times, p. 1.Google Scholar
  80. Oreskes, N., & Conway, E. M. (2011). Merchants of doubt: How a handful of scientists obscured the truth on issues from tobacco smoke to global warming. New York: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
  81. Otgaar, H., & Baker, A. (2018). When lying changes memory for the truth. Memory, 26(1), 2–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Palazzo, G., & Richter, U. (2005). CSR Business as Usual? The Case of the Tobacco Industry. Journal of Business Ethics, 61(4), 387–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Panzer, F. (1972). The Roper Proposal. Philip Morris Records: Bates #3990468418.Google Scholar
  84. Pepples, E. (1978). CTR Budget. Brown & Williamson Records: Bates #682630804.Google Scholar
  85. Peirce, C. S. (1931). Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  86. Philip Morris. (1984). Monthly Progress Reports. Period Covered: June 1–30. Philip Morris Records: Bates #2001115061.Google Scholar
  87. Pringle, P. (1998). Cornered: Big tobacco at the bar of justice. New York: Henry Holt and Company.Google Scholar
  88. Proctor, R. N. (2004). “Tobacco and Health”—Expert Witness Report Filed on behalf of Plaintiffs in: “The United States of America, Plaintiff, v. Philip Morris, Inc., et al., Defendants,” Civil Action No. 99-CV-02496 (GK) (Federal case). The Journal of Philosophy, Science & Law, 4(March).Google Scholar
  89. Proctor, R. N. (2004b). Should medical historians be working for the tobacco industry? The Lancet, 363(9416), 1174–1175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Proctor, R. N. (2006). “Everyone knew but no one had proof”: tobacco industry use of medical history expertise in US courts, 1990–2002. Tobacco Control, 15(Suppl 4), iv117-iv125.Google Scholar
  91. Proctor, R. N. (2011). Golden holocaust: Origins of the cigarette catastrophe and the case for abolition. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  92. Research, C. f. T. (1974). Facilities of the CTR LibraryJune 1974. Council for Tobacco Research Records: Bates #HT0116002.Google Scholar
  93. Ricoeur, P. (2004). Memory, history, forgetting. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Rowlinson, M., Hassard, J., & Decker, S. (2014). Research strategies for organizational history: A dialogue between historical theory and organization theory. Academy of Management Review, 39(3), 250–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Saunders, B., Sim, J., Kingstone, T., Baker, S., Waterfield, J., Bartlam, B., … Jinks, C. (2018). Saturation in qualitative research: exploring its conceptualization and operationalization. Quality & Quantity, 52(4), 1893–1907.Google Scholar
  96. Sautter, E. T., & Oretskin, N. A. (1997). Tobacco targeting: The ethical complexity of marketing to minorities. Journal of Business Ethics, 16(10), 1011–1017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Schacter, D. L. (1999). The seven sins of memory: Insights from psychology and cognitive neuroscience. American Psychologist, 54(3), 182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Schad, J., Lewis, M. W., Raisch, S., & Smith, W. K. (2016). Paradox Research in Management Science: Looking Back to Move Forward. Academy of Management Annals, 10(1), 5–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Scheraga, C., & Calfee, J. E. (1996). The industry effects of information and regulation in the cigarette market: 1950–1965. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 15(2), 216–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Schrempf-Stirling, J., Palazzo, G., & Phillips, R. (2016). Historic corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 41(4), 700–719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Schrempf, J. (2012). The delimitation of corporate social Responsibility: Upstream, downstream, and historic CSR. Business & Society, 51(4), 690–707.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Schuck, P. H. (1987). Agent Orange on trial: Mass toxic disasters in the courts. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  103. Schwartz, J. M., & Cook, T. (2002). Archives, records, and power: The making of modern memory. Archival Science, 2(1–2), 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Sherri Hubbird, as Personal Representative of the Estate of David R. Ellsworth, deceased, and on behalf of Kerri L. Ellsworth, Plaintiffs, v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, Defendant. Videotaped Deposition of Robert N. Proctor, Ph.D. Volume 1 (2014). Depositions and Trial Testimony (DATTA).Google Scholar
  105. Simons, T., Vermeulen, P. A. M., & Knoben, J. (2016). There’s no beer without a smoke: Community cohesion and neighboring communities’ effects on organizational resistance to antismoking regulations in the Dutch hospitality industry. Academy of Management Journal, 59(2), 545–578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Spiliotis, S.-S. (2006). Corporate responsibility and historical injustice. In J. H. Keane (Ed.), Civil society: Berlin perspectives (pp. 51–70). Berlin: Berghan Books.Google Scholar
  107. Stinchcombe, A. L. (1965). Social Structure and Organizations. In J. G. March (Ed.), Handbook of organizations (pp. 142–193). Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
  108. Sturken, M. (1997). Tangled memories: The Vietnam War, the AIDS epidemic, and the politics of remembering. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  109. Stutz, C. (2018). History in corporate social responsibility: Reviewing and setting an agenda. Business History. Scholar
  110. Stutz, C., & Sachs, S. (2018). Facing the normative challenges: The potential of reflexive historical research. Business & Society, 57(1), 98–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Suddaby, R., Foster, W. M., & Trank, C. Q. (2010). Rhetorical history as a source of competitive advantage. In J. A. C. Baum & J. Lampel (Eds.), Advances in strategic management: The globalization of strategy research (Vol. 27, pp. 147–173). Bingley: Emerald.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. Sydow, J., Schreyögg, G., & Koch, J. (2009). Organizational path dependence: Opening the black box. Academy of Management Review, 34(4), 689–709.Google Scholar
  113. Taubes, G., & Couzens, C. K. (2012). Sweet little lies. Mother Jones, 37(6), 34–69.Google Scholar
  114. Teague, C. E. Jr. (1953). Survey of cancer research with emphasis upon possible carcinogens from tobacco R.J. Reynolds Records: Bates# 521185124.Google Scholar
  115. Timmermans, S., & Tavory, I. (2012). Theory construction in qualitative research: From grounded theory to abductive analysis. Sociological theory, 30(3), 167–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Tobacco Industry Research Committee. (1953). A frank statement to the public by the makers of cigarettes. Ness Motley Law Firm Documents: Bates #4720.Google Scholar
  117. Truth and Reconciliation Commission of South Africa. (2003). TRC Final Report—Volume 6—Section 2.Google Scholar
  118. Union of Concerned Scientists. (2007). Smoke, mirrors & hot air: How ExxonMobil uses big tobacco’s tactics to manufacture uncertainty on climate science. Cambridge: Union of Concerned Scientists.Google Scholar
  119. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2014). The health consequences of smoking—50 years of progress: A report of the surgeon general. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health.Google Scholar
  120. US v. Philip Morris USA, Inc (2006). F. Supp. 2d (Vol. 449, pp. 1): Dist. Court, Dist. of Columbia.Google Scholar
  121. Wells, J. K. III. (1980). New strategy on smoking & health. Ness Motley Law Firm Documents: Bates #680051009.Google Scholar
  122. Wells, J. K. III. (1984). Suggested changes to Blackman paper. UCSF Brown & Williamson Collection: Bates #1833.Google Scholar
  123. Wertsch, J. V. (2004). Voices of collective remembering. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  124. Written trial testimony of Frederick Theodore Gulson, September 2004, United States of America v. Philip Morris USA Inc (2004). Depositions and Trial Testimony (DATTA): Bates #gulsonf-er.Google Scholar
  125. Wynder, E. L., Graham, E. A., & Croninger, A. B. (1953). Experimental production of carcinoma with cigarette tar. Cancer Research, 13(12), 855–864.Google Scholar
  126. Yeaman, A. (1963). Implications of Battelle Hippo I & II and the Grifffith Filter. UCSF Brown & Williamson Collection: Bates #1802.Google Scholar
  127. Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar

Archival Sources

  1. Truth Tobacco Industry Documents Archive:
  2. Philip Morris USA Inc. Public Document Site:
  3. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company Online Litigation Document Archive:
  4. NIH-NCI Tobacco-Documents Project at The University of Georgia:
  5. Tobacco Control Laws:

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Augustana CampusUniversity of AlbertaCamroseCanada
  2. 2.Dhillon School of BusinessUniversity of LethbridgeCalgaryCanada

Personalised recommendations