The Government of India (GOI) proposed ban on tobacco advertising was not unusual keeping in view the international precedents. Countries like France, Finland, and Norway had already imposed similar bans. An example is Belgium whose Supreme Court (of Appeal in 1981, gave its ruling that a ban on tobacco advertising was not unconstitutional. In a case which started in 1991 and ended in 1997, RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company, marketer of Camel cigarettes, was forced to withdraw its mascot, Joe Carmel, an animated camel, from all its advertisements, after the California Supreme Court (USA) ruled that the company could be prosecuted for exploiting minors. The accusation was that the slick, colourful advertisements (using an animated camel) appealed to the children and encouraged them to smoke.
The impact of cigarette advertising on consumers was another contentious issue. A World Bank report published the details of a comprehensive study of over 100 countries, comparing the consumption trends over time in those countries where relatively complete bans on advertising and promotion were and where were no such bans. In the countries with nearly complete bans, the downward trend in consumption was much steeper. In 1992, the Department of Health (DOH), UK reviewed various forms of evidence to assess whether tobacco advertising affected the aggregate demand for tobacco products. Four countries (Norway, Finland, Canada and New Zealand) were chosen, as these countries had already imposed an
Although tobacco advertisements are banned, people still consume it. The ban started in 1971 and since then has become even more strict on the sponsoring and promotion of tobacco brand logos. Now, all tobacco ads used, dissuade users from consuming. Advertisements in general can be obnoxious and tiresome, but they are sometimes necessary for the seller to get their point across. Ads are either trying to get money from the consumer or driving to change a person’s mind positively. The main reasoning for the creation of advertisements is to persuade the viewer or audience through the evocation of ethos, pathos, and logos, to have a change of mind about the product. The ads I chose are both similar, but have different goals towards their audience.
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.
There was a recent ruling that made the media headlines that shows how important the rulings of the FDA are to the public. On March 18, 2010 new rules were announced that have a strict impact on the way that the tobacco industry can sell and market smokeless products and cigarettes. In particular the advertising that targets the nation’s youth population. That law that takes effect on June 22,
Should tobacco advertising be restricted? This is a very controversial issue. There is the idea that young children that smoke started smoking because of advertisements, but there is also the idea that children start smoking for other reasons. Many big, well-known tobacco companies like RJ Reynolds are being sued for their advertisements. On Monday April 20th, 1998 the jury heard a testimony from Lynn Beasly, the marketing vice president of the RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company. The courts believed that the advertisement was directed towards children under the age of 18, due to a document from the RJ Reynolds Board of Directors showing that they set a goal to increase the company's market share among 14
Cigarette advertising has changed throughout history from how it has been advertised, what is being advertised, and who the intended audience is. In the 60’s seeing a cigarette advertisement in the Sunday paper would just be like any other advertisement, but recent generations would be appalled to see such a gruesome product being publicized. The annual deaths from smoking cigarettes are increasing each year and doctors and scientist are teaming together to try and help prevent more. Realizing that advertising may be playing a role the controversy over cigarette advertising has lead to the censoring of harmful products in other public advertising which still has a lasting effect today.
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.
Tobacco ads have been barred from television for over twenty years. Young children don’t need the influence to smoke or dip, considering they’ll have enough peer pressure to do so later in life. By essentially censoring television ads, the government decreases the advertising power of tobacco companies. However, there are simply some things that should not be censored. When censored, any sort of art loses its meaning. When the government tries to censor art, such as music, paintings, digital art, movies, or TV shows, people can no longer truly express their feelings or convey the message they were attempting to portray.
Although cigarette advertisements were banned from broadcast media, including television and radio in 1971, the tobacco industry still continues to produce ads through other means but under strict restrictions. Cigarette advertising is allowed in business establishments or magazine publications that are strictly for adults over 21 years of age. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced many restrictions in 2010 on the way that tobacco can be advertised. For instance, tobacco companies can no longer sponsor sporting/entertainment events and cannot sell cigarettes in packs fewer than 20, which eliminates the “kiddie packs.” In addition, a regulation for billboard advertising is up for discussion and is being processed (Food and Drug Administration, 2014). However, the laws and strict regulations that have been passed are in conflict with the best interest of the cigarette companies.
Question 1: How can SCT and ISCT address the controversial nature of advertising and promoting cigarettes across international borders?
The intervention of the government defies one’s one will regarding health. The legalization of advertisements and the production of tobacco should go hand in
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 four basic dimensions of media literacy allows viewers to fully understand the operation and messages found in mass communications within the media industry. The cognitive dimension is how viewer intellectually process information that is portrayed to them. The emotional dimension helps viewers understand the feelings that go along with the message. The aesthetic dimension is the viewer’s interpretation of content through a artistic or critical point of view. The moral dimension allows viewers understand the values and the message of the media.
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
Advertisements involving smoking should be prohibited. Kids and teens that are the most impressionable and easily influenced. Cigarette promotions make smoking appear harmless and cool and have led to many kids under the age of 18 to have smoked for years. The advertisements on quitting smoking and how bad they are for you may be effective for older viewers however many teens and kids are drawn to cigarettes even more because adults are saying it is bad for you and it appeals to their “bad boy/girl” ideal. Many might argue that forbidding a company from advertising its product is against freedom of speech. This essay will show that the harmful effects of cigarettes will justify dramatic means to prevent people especially our youth from being encouraged to start smoking.
Tobacco advertising refers to promotion display of tobacco products in media such as; radio, television, print, billboards and at retail stores. The ban on tobacco advertising by the Indian Government has many effects on the people as well as their ethics and freedom of choice. This paper will provide a summary argument in favour of the ban as well as opposing the ban. And to conclude with my opinions on what the government should do with tobacco advertising.