BAN ON TOBACCO ADVERTISEMENT IN INDIA
In 2004 the government of India banned tobacco companies from advertising their products and sponsoring sports and cultural events. The objective was to discourage adolescents from consuming tobacco products as well as empower the government with the power to launch an anti tobacco program. . This issue created a serious problem in that it was both ethical and commercial, the government on one hand, believe it was its responsibility to protect the welfare of its citizen, while the tobacco industry was a major contributor to the state funds.
Objectivity and fairness are the basis of ethical decision making and argument for the ban of tobacco should have been objective. Objectivity is impossible without personal detachment; fairness cannot be achieved without detachment since it is about other people. Being ethical is not a matter of imposing standards and views on other people as the government of India is seen doing. Being ethical is being fair and understanding implications from other people’s perspective and not just focusing on what you want to achieve without looking at the impact of your decision on other stakeholders , Objectivity is flexible because it can be approached and achieved in different ways. We know the Government of India wanted to safeguard against the rise in the uptake of tobacco among the youth, but on the other hand, they have a challenge that the same company of tobacco was a major contributor to the economy, the government in this case should have consulted with a view to reach a compromise with the tobacco company for the benefit of the country and the tobacco companies
The eight elements of an ethical organization comprise of respect, honor, integrity, customer foc...
... middle of paper ...
...th in India. Since tobacco has an impact on the economy of India a consultation with the stakeholders would have come up with a better way of addressing the issue because I take it there is resistance because consultation was not properly done. The government of India should have a law that punishes the businesses that sold tobacco to the youth. The government of India should know that tobacco use rose with measures of receptivity, including having a favorite tobacco advertisement and as such banning the advertisement of tobacco may not have an impact as banning the tobacco, because there would be several illegal ways of making the tobacco available to those who are not supposed to have them such as the youth.
Reference
1. www.icmrindia.org/free%20resources/casestudies/ban-tobacco-ads11.htm
2. www.icmrindia.org/free%20resources/casestudies/ban-tobacco-ads3.htm
The decision is also good as it is in line with the corporate social responsibilities. It is socially ethical for the company to reduce or eliminate the tobacco products in the company’s drugs stores and shelves. Moreover, it is the social responsibility of the business to ensure a healthy living of the society. Production and distribution of tobacco products will, however, be an irony for the organization whose sole mandate is to ensure healthy and productive society.
In conclusion, ethics has no place in the tobacco business and the rights and obligations that usually would apply for any other company would not apply to a tobacco company as the right to trade secrecy, information privacy or the right to get a customer to buy its products is nullified by the fact the tobacco industry itself is absolutely built to sell products that are scientifically proven to be carcinogenic and harmful to its users.
The tobacco industry seems like a beneficial addition to our economy. It has basically been a socially acceptable business in the past because it brings jobs to our people and tax money to the government to redistribute; but consider the cost of tobacco related treatment, mortality and disability- it exceeds the benefit to the producer by two hundred billion dollars US. (4) Tobacco is a very profitable industry determined to grow despite government loss or public health. Its history has demonstrated how money can blind morals like an addiction that is never satisfied. Past lawsuits were mostly unsuccessful because the juries blamed the smoker even though the definition of criminal negligence fits the industry’s acts perfectly. Some may argue for the industry in the name of free enterprise but since they have had such a clear understanding of the dangers of their product it changes the understanding of their business tactics and motives. The success of the industry has merely been a reflection of its immoral practices. These practices have been observed through its use of the media in regards to children, the tests that used underage smokers, the use of revenue to avoid the law, the use of nicotine manipulation and the suppression of research.
The cigarrette companies are not acting with social responsibility. Why or how could this be any bit of an ethical decision by the executives of the tobacco companies? These companies should believe and follow it’s moral set in the country it belongs and carry them into every business transaction that they make, whether it be in New York City or Mongolia. It is too bad that as a capitalistic society we lower ourselves below ethical lines just to earn a buck or two!
Questioning whether it is ethically right to defend something like tobacco sounds useless since we know the health consequences that come from smoking but the question is necessary. The film Thank You For Smoking touches on the topic of right and wrong. Instinctively, we would assume that taking the side of the tobacco lobbyists would be the wrong thing to do as it would seem like we’re disregarding the health effects of it but there are a few ways to justify taking that stance on the subject. The explanation of your decisions is what determines if what you did was right.
...by consumers. The human race needs to stop viewing the term “ethical” as a black-and-white fact and accept that often ethics is a reflection of opinion. From the business point of view, the production and distribution of tobacco products is ethical. Tobacco is a legal product and a desired one at that. If adults are legally allowed to consume a product and are eager to do so, then companies are going to provide it. From a humane perspective, the marketing and production of tobacco may be unethical; it knowingly harms its consumers and produces a product that purposefully addicts consumers. By asking the question “Are companies in the tobacco industry ethical or unethical?” we are being encouraged to view the topic as a black-and-white argument. The truth of the matter is that no matter which side people choose to argue; in the real world ethics has shades of gray.
There is clearly no way tobacco will never be outlawed but I believe there should be tighter restrictions on age limits throughout the world, and restrictions on the materials that are used in cigarette processing. Who is just letting cigarette companies continue to poison people and cause cancer risk? Throughout my essay I will analyze the affects of cigarette use on the society of the world and the elaborate corruption that keeps cigarette companies in business.
Since realizing smoking is associated to many health problems such as cancer, many advertisements are designed purposely to the end cigarette smoking. An estimated 40 million adults in the United States currently smoke cigarettes. Cigarette smoking is the leading cause of preventable disease and death in the United States (CDC, 2016). Nowadays we are more conscious about how terrible smoking is for our health. Smoking cigarettes can be one of the most destructive things you can do to your body and yet millions of people around the world continue to do so. Anti-smoking ads fight the cancerous substance and hope to transform the minds of many or even the lives of many. It has become frequent in many advertisements to see the damage that smoking causes to someone and to others due to secondhand contact.
Tobacco companies should be prevented from using advertising tactics that target teenagers. There has always been controversy as to how tobacco companies should prevent using advertising tactics to target teenagers. As controversial as this is tobacco companies shouldn’t advertise teen smoking. Many teens may be lured to believe cigarette advertising because it has been part of the American Culture for years, magazine ads and the media target young people, and these companies receive a drastic increase financially; however, the advertising by these cigarette companies has disadvantages such as having to campaign against their own company, limiting their cigarette advertising and becoming a controversial dilemma as to encouraging teenagers to smoke. From billboards to newspaper advertisements, cigarette promotions started becoming part of the American Culture.
A child who has lost his mother in a busy airport is a scenario that most audiences pay attention to. It’s thrilling in a way- will the protagonist find his mother? This video commercial is one that leads the way in the anti-smoking campaign. A young boy is walking alongside with his parental and the next minute is alone. Looking around trying to locate her, the effort is unsuccessful. Unaware what to do next, he cries and cries (See Figure 1). A narrator voices, “If this is how your child feels for losing you for a minute, just imagine if they lost you for life. (13QUIT)”
.I believe that the Tobacco industry is unethical, They provide a product that causes addiction and eventual death if smoking continues thought the majority of a person’s life. I think that the tobacco industry needs to take more responsibility for their product. I believe they should do this by not advertising on the false image of being a cigarette smoker and focus on what consumers are actually going to receive for their money when purchasing cigarettes. They should focus on the feeling it gives people, and what the cigarette experience actually is in the most literal terms. Also cigarette companies should tell costumers upfront in easy to read labels the long term and short term effects of smoking to let people clearly know what they are buying and what it’s effects are.
Daily people die with diseases caused by tobacco. Now a day in the United States tobacco uses become a main cause of death, diseases, and disability. However, some people affirm that use of tobacco give negative effects and that killed people in early age. The government should make uses of tobacco illegal to save people from the great variety of health problems that can cause by tobacco such as heart disease, cancer, and premature
Should tobacco and alcohol advertising be allowed on television? The ban on advertising tobacco is already in affect, however, alcohol is another harmful substance. Should liquor be allowed to be advertised, if tobacco can not advertise their product? The ban on advertising tobacco products on television and radio, was passed through legislation in 1970 by Richard Nixon. This argument like others out there has two sides, one side in favor these advertisements and the other against these advertisements. Since both of these substances are highly addictive and costly. Would we like to see these advertisements continued? Are these advertisements the hazard they are communicated to be? Through the research of these two important sides, this essay will explore which side has a stronger stance on the topic.
The use of tobacco products has been exposed as the reason for numerous medical complications such as cancer to non-smokers and smokers who breathe in tobacco smoke. Taking into account cigarettes adversely affect public health, putting a ban on smoking in public places is an appropriate action for governments, and other establishments presenting services to the public. Cigarettes can cause harm to the wellbeing of non-smokers unbeknownst to them, they involuntarily breath in smoke respired by smokers. Several nations have created laws that prohibit smoking in communal locations because of its impact on second-hand smokers particularly juveniles. Even though many disputes have been presented in opposition or endorsement of public smoking, prohibiting the use of this tobacco product is the most suitable strategy.
Most controversial debate is going on public smoking ban. The reason is simple, smoking ban affects directly all people rapidly and we can see its effects in a short-term period. There have been a lot of arguments brought up both in favour and against a public smoking ban. Some of the arguments in favour are the following. Smoking ban is one of the controversial ways for reducing smoking and recognizing non-smokers’ right to health protection. The health risks of smoking are clear. Passive smoking does carry risks. Many leading medical and scientific organizations recognize second hand smoke as a cause of a range of life-threatening conditions. The health situation could be drastically improved if one of the risk factors - tobacco - was eliminated. People have a right to protect themselves from smoke inhalation. People shouldn’t have to inhale the ill-effects of other people’s smoking. The creation of smoke-free public places also improves air quality.