Ban The Tobacco Industry From Advertising

Alcohol and tobacco advertising is not a new concept to this world. Alcohol and tobacco advertising has been going on since the mid 1900’s. During this time, alcohol and tobacco ads were on the TV almost as much as regular programs (Danna). This source is credible because the author has written many articles for the Chicago Tribune before. When alcohol and tobacco advertising first started they actually argued that smoking and drinking was beneficial for the human body. Since then, the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau and many other departments have tried to put in laws and acts to help regulate the advertisement of alcohol and tobacco. For example, laws such as the "Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act of 1965”, and the

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

Marketing options for big tobacco companies fizzled after the original Surgeon General report was published which prohibited the mass advertisement of tobacco in America. The push for smoking cessation for all in the United States has become big business. Long gone are the days of tobacco ads showing young adults enjoying themselves on beaches and at parties smoking cigarettes. Now, electronic cigarettes (E- cigs), nicotine patches and gums, and pharmaceutical cessation aids are being marketed. Tobacco companies continue to fight for the freedom to market and enlist consumers, sighting that smoking is voluntary, and the choice should be made by the consumer not the government.

The prohibition of tobacco has been trending in foreign nations such as Finland, Norway and France. To conduct similar constraints is the intention of the government of India. Endangerment and possible victims of hazards are the concerns of those who are in favor of banning tobacco as well as other precarious commodities such as handguns and narcotics in India. Millions of deaths around the world have been the aftereffect of tobacco and cigarette smoking since the 90’s. Predictions of an increase of death toll would occur in the latter years to come. Utilization of tobacco among the youth is the product of propagandas’ enticements. Consequently, an increase in medical expenses such as hospital bills and health care expenditures would become the repercussion of such consumption. Additionally, even supposing that the occupation of 26 million people is the liability of tobacco industries, a boycott of tobacco and job turnovers would not create an adverse impact on the economy of India. Investments in other stocks would enhance the Indian economy. Finally, a decline of tobacco consumption would become fruitful if there is a proper implementation of banning tobacco endorsements.

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.

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

It can be argued that tobacco products are one of the deadliest legal drugs in the history of mankind. Most of the countries around the world are making progress to ban the sale of tobacco products and reduce smoking. Over the years, there has been a steady decline in global tobacco use; however, their needs to be steeper taxation on tobacco products, bans on smoking advertisements, incentives towards reduced health care costs for non-smokers, and tougher penalties for smoking around children. Reducing the sale and consumption of tobacco can also help the planet and make cleaner air for everyone.

Tobacco products have been used for chewing and smoking in the North American continent for over a thousand years. Tobacco products have been a part of United Stated history since its colonization. However, although tobacco products have been used for centuries there have been studies done in more recent years that have linked tobacco products to widespread health problems. This has caused controversy in the world today on whether or not tobacco products should be banned in this country. There are many people in favor of keeping tobacco products in production due to monetary concerns. Conversely, there are many people very concerned with the health problems associated with tobacco products. Therefore, one must interpret for themselves if the production, sale, and use of tobacco products is something that is harmful to society and should be banned for its betterment, or something that is helpful to society and not worth getting rid of.

The government of India serves the people. When a product is produced that affects the health of the people the government is justified to take action. With Tobacco products India banned the advertising and sponsorship of sport and cultural events (IBS Center for Management Research (ICMR), 2001). Those in favor of the ban cite the French who stated that Tobacco advertising ban was to protect public health. They also, state the World Health Organization’s (WHO) death toll numbers. These numbers show that tobacco products are one of the leading causes of death in the world are continuing to grow. People who are in favor of the banning of advertising for tobacco products use a World Bank report that shows a substantial decline in smoking when ban of advertising in enacted for all forms of media. Finally, the fear of children becoming addicted to smoking has helped to support the justification to ban advertising on tobacco products. With these reasons we can understand and support a governments action to ban advertising on tobacco products.

products that are known to cause death with prolonged use. A case study authored by Philip

Those in favor of the ban on tobacco advertisements and sponsoring of cultural and sporting events in India noted that they were not the first country to be taking these steps. In fact, many European countries had previously invoked bans on tobacco beginning decades before. In both Belgium and France the ban was deemed to be constitutional as the main motivator behind this ban was public health, and not necessarily the desire to stop the tobacco industry from partaking in trade. Beyond that, it was noted that many industries that trade in “dangerous or potentially dangerous products” had already undergone these restrictions or bans on advertisement and sponsorship.

There are easily many reasons to support the banning of advertisement of tobacco products. The obvious reasons can be the smell, the public health risk, and simple things like fire hazards. Underlying the obvious there are numerous other reasons to support the need to ban tobacco with far more complex arguments and concerns like the targeting of children and impacts on the medical system of a nation. As a matter of ethical considerations, the purpose of a government is usually the protection or greater good of a nation and its people. This makes a direct point that a government has responsibility to protect its people and smoking kills undoubtedly

There has always been controversy around the subject of tobacco, and in particular cigarette, advertising. It has been much debated over the years, but lately there has been a surge in media on the discussion on restriction and even prohibition of tobacco advertising. The American legislation has banned commercials for cigarettes on TV and the topic has been highly debated within the European Union for many years now. Further, many American action groups, the Surgeon General together with the American Medical Association have stated their support for a complete ban of all advertising for these kinds of products.

The article states that the ban of tobacco is already going on globally and countries like Finland, Norway and France have all imposed bans on tobacco companies. The Indian government decided to interfere with the business of these companies because the well-being of its citizens is at risk. The government pointed out that 3 million that consumed tobacco were killed between 1990 and 1998 the death toll has increased to 4.023 million. The Indian government also stated that by the year 2020 the death toll of tobacco consumers might rise to 8.4 million deaths and by the year 2030 the death will rise to 10 million. These tobacco industries were aiming at increasing their profits by luring

When it came to this ban against advertising tobacco products in India, Managers were faced with huge ethical challenges. Managers are in place to uphold the integrity of the company and insure they are maintaining the highest code of ethics possible. This ban was accusing tobacco companies of targeting youth through advertising.