Ban On Advertising For Tobacco Smoking

Tobacco has existed for long as we have known about history, but due to the negative effects of it to the broader community Tobacco has sparked greater controversy across the globe. Many people argue that it is the government’s responsibility to protect the individual but on the contrary some disagree and believe it’s up to the individual. This essay will elaborate above mentioned aspects and lead to a logical conclusion.

The Government of India has created an anti-tobacco plan to tackle the growing issues of tobacco, health concerns, and rising death toll. Their first goal was to eliminate advertising as this was perceived to encourage the youth to take up the dangerous habit. This ban posed ethical and commercial challenges for both sides of the argument. The government has the power to pass laws to help prevent people from smoking and protect its people. They found the ethical decision was to use this power by creating and

The following statistics gave a solid argument as to why the government of India was on track in banning tobacco advertisement. In 1981, the Supreme Court (of Appeal) in Belgium gave its ruling that a ban on tobacco advertising was not unconstitutional. In 1991 the French Constitutional Council declared that the French ban on advertising tobacco products was not unconstitutional as it was based on the need to protect public health and did not curtail the freedom of trade.

The need to enforce stricter regulations for tobacco control by local communities and individual states is the health policy issue being analyzed. According to The Healthy People (2010) tobacco use and the availability of its products are harmful to our population in various ways, ranked as one of the top ten leading indicators for health concern. The addictive nature of tobacco has created a high demand for their products, boosting the tobacco industry 's profits tremendously, and states gaining revenue from taxation on it has contributed to the issues and reasoning states lack enforcing stricter controls. Regulations have been set in place from the federal government in efforts to control tobacco regulation gaining some control over distribution.The federal government 's actions and implementations have affected the tobacco control authority of state and local governments. The need for additional stricter regulations and laws by individual states are needed to reduce the tobacco consumption for their targeted populations.

In conclusion, the tobacco industry is very harmful to society’s health. Cigarettes are the only legal consumer products in the world that cause half of their long-term users to die prematurely. Putting a ban on advertisement was just a start to not advertise so the tobacco industry would not solicit children, but the tobacco industry has come up with different strategies to solicit adolescents even more. If a law was passed to ban tobacco completely, citizens of the United States would not have to worry about second hand smoke, reduces the chance of cancer, and health

To protect the society the anti smoking law goes further and strongly restricts tobacco advertising moreover link to wellness and health image the cigarette, also provides that 100 % of back of the packaging is occupied by health warning, including real images of the effects of cigarette in human

The tobacco industry knowingly provides a product that is both addictive and detrimental to the health of their customer. Extensive studies have conclusively confirmed the significant negative health and economic impacts of this product. From a deontological perspective, the tobacco industry has a clear duty to educate their customers, and the public, of the dangers of being exposed to their product. Despite this duty, the industry has illustrated unethical behavior in the past. Over the last several decades, numerous studies have confirmed various health impacts on the users and bystanders. Even today the same unethical behavior continues. As regulations are imposed in developed nations the tobacco industry targets the poor in developing nations, where regulations may be lacking, and the target market may not fully understand the consequences of smoking.

On Feb 6, 2001 Government of India (GOI) dropped a bombshell on the tobacco Industry when it announced that it would shortly table a bill banning Tobacco Companies from advertising their products and sponsoring sports and cultural events. The objective of such a ban was to discourage adolescents from consuming tobacco products and also arm the Government with powers to launch an anti-Tobacco Program.

In 2001, there was an argument by the government of India trying to decide whether or not it was a good idea to ban all advertising from the tobacco industry. The government’s main goal was to find a way to reduce the number of teenagers using tobacco. The government believed that these advertisements encouraged teens to start smoking or to continue smoking if they were doing it already. As expected, this situation created a lot of tension between the government and the tobacco industry. This created two sides: those in favor of the ban, and those against it.

A global hot topic that has been on debate for decades and does not appear to go silently into the night is the influence of tobacco advertising and its influence on the populous. Recently to join the discourse was the government of India versus the tobacco conglomerates. The Indian government hopes to follow suit of many other nations including: France, Finland, Norway, Canada and New Zealand who already imposed bans on cigarette advertising with successful results. The tobacco industry, however, holds their position that by placing a ban on advertising is controlling the opinion of the masses not allowing them to make their own decision of right and wrong. The government has the difficult task of weighing out the ethical issues of what causes more harm in the future, to allow tobacco advertisers to continue with business as usual or to out a halt on their advertising all together.

In an effort to discourage the consumption of tobacco products in India, a ban was issued stopping advertising and sponsoring of sporting events. This ban was brought to the table with the intentions of keeping the citizens of India from undue influence towards the use of a product that when used to the satisfaction of its producers would result in major health issues and eventual death. The use of tobacco products is directly attributable to the deaths of 3 million people in 1990 and the eventual death of 10 million people in the year 2030. Those in favor of the ban argued that a government that provides health insurance for the very people it collects taxes from in the purchase of the product that leads to their eventual illness is one

This essay is a case study analysis that uses the case Ban on Tobacco Ads and talks about the conflict of interests between tobacco producers and the Government of India.

First, when it comes to the arguments in favor to ban tobacco advertising in India, from an international point of view, “countries like France, Finland, and Norway had already imposed similar bans.” As an obsticle, some advocates of the “free choice” opposed to the banning but other supporters voiced out that these states should have the right to protect their

Cigarettes Kill. "Tobacco accounted for over 4.023 million deaths in 1998"1. There is a relation between cigarettes and long term health effects or smoking related illnesses. The case in India had the government engaged in a dialogue and democratic debate on if they wanted to create an advertising ban on cigarettes. They wanted to prevent undue influence on their youth to take up smoking and in so doing save their lives or possible future health care expenditures.

India in 2001 proposed a ban on tobacco advertisement in an effort to curb tobacco use with adolescents. It was met with sharp criticism from the tobacco industry. However, some saw it as a great move by the government in looking after the welfare of its citizens. I hope to explore in the essay each side’s voice as well as deal with the myriad of issues the government faced upon the bans proposal. Lastly I will give my opinion on what position the government should take.