The Ban of Tobacco Advertising in India

Giving the health hazard that arises from tobacco, I am of the opinion that tobacco advertising be ban completely in Indian. Ethics is a system of moral principles governing the appropriate conduct of a person or a group. It is a way of being human and having a feeling of compassion, sympathy or regard for others the way we have for ourselves. There is this famous saying of Abraham Lincoln “When I do good, I feel good; when I do bad, I feel bad. That’s my religion.” Managers of tobacco companies cannot pretend they do not know that tobacco is dangerous for our health. Ethics is fundamental in any profession and is an integral part of any successful business today. If in our subconscious mind we are not comfortable it mean the consequences of our action are unethical: then we are doing bad business. . Albert Schweitzer says, “Ethics is the activity of man

Tobacco is the number one cause of preventable death in the United States. According to the American Lung Association in 2009, 20.6% of adults were current smokers. In 1970, the United States banned television and radio advertisements of cigarettes. Across the world countries battle similar issues in how to help prevent deaths, lower healthcare costs, and educate the population. Countries have banned advertising, posted health causes, renamed brands, and even included informational fliers in packs of cigarettes. In 2001, The Government of India decided to ban the advertising of cigarettes. This ban was created to help the youth of India and hoped to reduce the amount of future smokers. The proposal of this restriction caused debates between the government, advertising companies, and tobacco manufacturers. The supporting and dismantling arguments for these ethical and commercial causes of the ban have enabled the government to make their final decision.

Smokers have almost twice the risk of having coronary heart disease as nonsmokers. Smokers' risk of getting lung cancer is approximately 14 times than that of nonsmokers. It has taken many years for tobacco products deadly effects to be scientifically documented. Tobacco companies spend approximately $14 million a day on advertising. Students who own cigarette promotional items are more than four times more likely to begin smoking, compared to those who do not own these items. Eighty-six percent of people between 12 and 17-years old who smoke prefer the three most heavily advertised brands. Only about one-third of adult smokers choose these brands. Almost ninety percent of adult smokers began at or before age 18. A recent study showed that thirty-four percent of teens began smoking as a result of the tobacco company's promotional activities. Tobacco companies loose 3,000-5,000 customers each day, more than 1,000 die from using tobacco as intended, the rest die of other causes. The tobacco industry targets 1.63 million new smokers a year to compensate for those that quit or die. The average age of new smokers in the United States right now is 12. Since the 1980s, big tobacco companies have supported a number of efforts to reduce youth access to cigarettes at retail. Thirty percent of teens that smoke say that they were able to obtain cigarettes from retail stores. Thirty-two percent of kids who smoke say they borrow

The federal, state, and locals are taking action to prevent tobacco exposure, especially to the younger generations. Recently in California, the age limit to purchase tobacco products have been raised from 18 to 21 years old. There is a law that banned any electronic cigarettes from public places. The increased of tobacco tax also helped lower the prevalence of tobacco

The extent to which tobacco advertising contributes to the increase in smoking habits has been debated and still is being debated. The focus is heavily on the degree to which the advertising affects adolescents. Previous research which is explored above, suggests significant relationships between smoking behavior among youth and these advertisements. Tobacco companies on the other hand, have tried to prove their ads are not directed towards our youth. Specifically, the R.J. Reynolds tobacco company has run full page ads in national magazines advising youth to not smoke. They have asserted

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 particular, nearly all tobacco use begins in childhood and adolescence. Tobacco industries have youth-targeted additives in their tobacco and smokeless tobacco to attract teens. There are many different fruit flavor tobacco and cigars that attract the youth. Even though there are hundreds of programs to diminish youth smoking and a sufficient amount of stories in the media on the dangers of tobacco consumption, generation after generation continue to use these toxic products, and family after family continues to grieve the shattering consequences. As a result, the tobacco industry is the only one reaping benefits, finically, from tobacco.

Jancey and Jones (2002) found that the tobacco industry claims that tobacco advertising and promotion are not aimed at those under age. It’s accepted that cigarette advertising and promotion play a part in a child’s decision to smoke.

The issue of how tobacco companies try to influence teenagers into adulthood to consume tobacco was further highlighted in a legal case in the US that resulted in a ban on certain adverts that were said to attract the young into smoking Camel cigarettes.

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.

The discussion of advertising tobacco products is a controversial topic, there are relevant points on both sides of the argument, so it is hard to determine a true ethical decision. India’s government announced the bill banning tobacco companies from advertising their products in February 2001, their goal is to prevent adolescents from taking up smoking or any other form of tobacco products. Initiating this bill is the government answer to an ethical challenge, they are protecting the health of the entire country, rather than the financial future of one industry. (Bauer, 2016) Immediately, there was an uproar that sparked this intense debate, arguments between health concerns versus constitutional rights. In this paper I would like to discuss the pros and cons of banning the advertisement of tobacco products and the conflict of interest that it presents.

One might say that most people at some point in their lives want to look cool. It is a common concern, especially among young people. After all, who does not want to feel accepted among his or her peers? Including young people, other audiences like adults are more concerned with simply feeling good. As an adult, life can get very stressful and people want a way to relax and take the edge off things. What many believe solutions to these problems include things such as alcohol and tobacco, and Marijuana increasing as of more recently. Dating back ages ago, various tobacco products have been uncovered or created, paving their way into popularity and subsequent frequent recreational use. As of the early 20th century, cigarettes have boomed in popularity and it was the “hip” thing to do. Santa, doctors, and even babies advertised for big tobacco companies. Looking back at vintage advertisements from the eras like the 1920s and throughout the 1950s, one can make the connections of how mainstream tobacco cigarettes were although little research was conducted about how they effect health. As of today, extensive research has been made and many actions & campaigns have shown that there is more than meets the eye, and that cigarettes are not as great as they are embellished to be. All of that leads me to say the production and selling of traditional tobacco cigarettes should be made illegal.

Managers are faced with a mammoth task when it comes to issues which need ethical and commercial considerations. The ban on tobacco advertisements in India is no exception as India is a country which preserves its ethics but at the same time wants to develop.

One of the most widely debated topics when it comes to government interference is smoking. Often described as a slow killer, many feel that it is something that should not only be avoided, but also banned. In India specifically, a country that is renowned for its high use of tobacco production and use, the idea of smoking has become a national crisis. With tobacco companies trying to push for "freedom of speech” with advertisements, and the government attempting to assume a sense of responsibility, it seems almost impossible to find a solution that can encompass all perspectives.