Case Analysis Of The Ban On Tobacco Ad By The Government Of India

This paper will examine the history of the tobacco industry and its advertising campaigns from the 1920s to the present. Some of the issues discussed in this paper will include: What forms of mass communication has tobacco companies used to persuade the public, how changes in technology have influenced the way tobacco companies communicate with target audiences, and how the United States government restrictions affect the current efforts of tobacco companies advertising strategies. Other topics that this paper will expound upon are, the ethics of the tobacco industry’s advertising approaches, how tobacco companies responded to health warnings from the government, and what

Due to the serious health issues surrounding smoking, the government imposes laws and tax increases to act as deterrents to tobacco smoking. These pose a serious threat to present and future marketing activities of the industry. Governments worldwide have approved bans on any advertisement that has the affect of promoting a tobacco product, including electronic and print media advertising. This affects companies marketing within the tobacco industry, on two levels. Anti-smoking organisations claim that advertising for smoking encourages people to start consuming tobacco products. Therefore, bans on advertising affect the industry’s marketing activities by reducing their

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

Therefore, we find the Tobacco Advertising Prohibition Act from 1992, the Tobacco Regulations from the year 2007 that amended the 1987 law or the Public Health (Tobacco) Act of 2008. With these policies, the Australian government wanted to reduce the sale and consumption of these carcinogenic products that are killing an average of 15,000 Australians a year and costing the Australian society and economy approximately $31.5 billion a year.

Tobacco companies have been in a battle with anti-smokers for a while about regulating tobacco, and there has been a war between tobacco companies and anti tobacco crusaders, because of regulating tobacco and some lawsuits. For one viewpoint regulating tobacco would be a good thing to do, anti tobacco crusaders are saying that regulation of tobacco is necessary to protect public health; on the other hand the other viewpoint is say that the tobacco companies are saying “regulation of tobacco will do more harm than good.”

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.

Companies in every industry attempt to attract consumers by creating effective marketing and advertising campaigns that appeals to various consumers and target audiences. The use of advertising can benefit a bus Banning the Advertisement of Alcohol and Tobacco Banning the Advertisement of Alcohol and Tobacco by increasing the sales of a business, providing information about new products, create brand awareness and generate customer loyalty. Although, advertising may provide business with the means to promote their products, it should not be at the cost of someone’s health. The promotion of tobacco and alcohol through advertisement aids in the development of alcohol and tobacco dependency and can create negative health issues in those who consume these products; therefore, advertising should be banned on these products.

“Tobacco is an agricultural crop, most commonly used to make cigarettes. It is grown all over the world and supports a billion-dollar industry.” Tobacco is one of the huge issues that include people in our society. Many people are using sources that will bring up tobacco. Even though TVs, radios or cigarettes packs have warnings on them, people still continue to do it. The government should take more actions to this problem; actions that will make people want to realize the cause that is given to them. Tobacco may not seem to be dangerous but it has causes to humans. People may feel good when they smoke, do shisha or other tobacco related sources that include the same chemicals, but they do not realize the risks that tobacco brings. Therefore, tobacco use should be decreased.

Tobacco companies are no longer able to produce advertisements and brand their packaging (only brand name is allowed in plain text) with the introduction of the Tobacco Advertising Prohibition Act in 1992. With the acts in effect and the demonisation of the market it has made it increasingly harder for tobacco industries to enter and compete within the market. The result has led consumers to foreign markets for particular and cheaper goods (if customs doesn’t seize it), or illegal markets that are able to smuggle or grow tobacco in

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

There are several ways through which government can control the usage of Tobacco. One of them is that government can impose huge tax on tobacco products by which people will move out of tobacco. It can also be argued that government should ensure smoking should not be high-hand in advertisements

In this essay, I will analyze two advertisements for smoking. The first advertisement is a vintage ad for cigarette brand known as Phillip Morris. This particular ad, which I am going to title, “Guard Your Throat” and I am going to estimate it was published in 1942. The second advertisement I will analyze is a modern ad for electronic cigarette brand known as Blu. This ad will be titled, “Take Back Your Freedom”, and was published in 2013. Both advertisements include large text, along with photographs of men. Advertising can be an incredibly effective and powerful method in persuading people. It also is a productive way to sell products, regardless of the positive or negative consequences for the consumer. Advertising is an extremely beneficial

This essay will explain, why governments have to protect citizens from the adverse influence of smoking cigarettes.

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.