Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Influence of tobacco advertising
Commercial use of tobacco essay
Pros and cons of tobacco advertising
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Influence of tobacco advertising
The IBS Center for Research Management (ICMR) puts together a collection of management case studies from Asia. One such study involved a proposed bill that would ban tobacco advertising in India. The ICMR article, “Ban on Tobacco Ads by the Government of India” discussed the arguments for and against a ban, as well as raised some moral dilemmas. This essay will summarize these issues.
The Indian Government justified the ban on tobacco advertising by focusing on how tobacco impacts the following topics: citizen’s health, the Indian economy, young people, and the effectiveness of the ban. However, for each of these topics, the Tobacco industry made persuasive counter-arguments against the ban. For each topic, the point and counter-point
…show more content…
The tobacco industry added 12% of the total excise revenue to India’s Exchequer. Experts believe a ban on advertising would have a negative effect to Exchequer y decreasing contributions. The ban creates an unfair disadvantage to the tobacco industry in the marketplace. The bill banning advertising made no suggestion that tobacco products should be illegal. Therefore, the industry should be able to advertise like all other industries. Indian tobacco companies are further disadvantaged because the advertisements of foreign tobacco companies will still reach the Indian public. The underlying point is that the proposed ban is an insult to the tobacco industry - considering that it is the third largest tobacco producer in the …show more content…
I believe the over-arching aim of the government should be to guide the making of a free and prosperous society. If this is accomplished with complete success, people would live up to their potential, be happy, and fulfil their dreams. In this utopia scenario, people would not use guns to kill other citizens and people would not drink soda in such excess that it correlates to an obesity problem. However, no such perfect society exists and sometimes dangerous products need to be outlawed. In my opinion, I support the status quo. When a product becomes increasingly deadly and dangerous to its people, elected representatives can vote on legislation to ban such products and those bans should be
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.
... not fundamentally different when looking at the larger perspective from banning drugs like cocaine. Cocaine addiction and the other issues in this essay are all issues that different groups of people say should be individual liberties but have real impact negatively on the society around them. The issues of paternalism is that could be abused and made into tyrannical regime as Mill fears but there is a large difference from telling a motorcycle rider to wear a helmet to telling people they cannot voice political opinion. The argument is guilty of the slippery slope fallacy. As long the system has stated rights that cannot be infringed like the constitution does the in the United States this that slide to tyranny should be prevented in a society that is rooted by the concept of rule of law. We do not just exist as individuals but also as parts of society.
...ike our attempts with the “War on Drugs”. A Lot of money and energy goes into such social reform fights, without any attainable outcome. People rebel, lives are still lost, money is spent on throwing individuals into prisons and jails. People end up with charges, which eventually may affect them obtaining employment down the line in the future. People ended up injuring themselves or killing themselves by the alcohol available at the time of prohibition, which was illegal and difficult to obtain. The alcohol’s purity was not regulated, some of it killed, blinded or damaged individual’s organs severely. Also, due to prohibition, the prevalence of cigarette smokers tripled in 1930 (Florien). Overall, people will do what they want, regardless of the consequences. When doing any sort of social reform, society may react with rebellion and it has the potential to backfire.
Sloan Wilson did not publish The Man in the Gray Flannel Suit, a classic on 1950's middle-class conformity, until 1955. But, by July 1953, PALL MALL cigarette advertisers appear aware that "society seemed to reward those who lacked rough edges and eschewed eccentricity" (Blum 794). This conclusion seems justified by a TIME magazine advertisement. Here, these promoters apply this conformity principle and other advertising techniques to a specific socioeconomic group. They seek to lure the expanding male, middle-class audience by presenting indecorous fun, an enticing social situation, and smooth smoking delight all stemming from their product.
Smoking Kills. This is no longer a myth, it’s a fact. According to the British Medical Journal, every time a person smoke a cigarette, he or she will lose about eleven minutes of life here on earth and subject yourself to cancer. In the advertisement below, you can easily tell from just looking at the picture that this ad is against smoking. The ad portrays the message that smoking is deadly, and is able to be comprehended by people of all ages in the hopes that the viewers do not get into a fatal habit such as abusing cigarettes. Essentially, smoking cigarettes is a long term form of suicide. A man is holding a lit cigarette in his hand with his middle and pointer finger, and his thumb held up. As shown in the
"Smoking Bans and the Tobacco Industry." Issues & Controversies. Facts On File News Services, 1 July 2013. Web. 4 Dec. 2013. .
I think that government’s only role in the matter is to provide people with the information they need to make their health decisions. Although Balko is against federal funding for food labels, I think that it is necessary for people to know exactly what they are eating, such as how many calories, fat, protein, etc. Once people are aware of what are good and bad, the rest is up to the consumer. There is no need for prohibiting junk food because the individual knows what their actions will result in, and what someone choses to eat is no one else’s
The arguments that I have just laid out are not perfect and they have some apparent flaws that some philosophers would strongly disagree with, while there are other arguments that some of the great philosophers would agree with. I will critique the arguments that I have just laid out using the perspective of three different philosophers who all have their own ideas of how the state should function and the role of the citizen. The three philosophers that I will use in this critique will be Karl Marx, John Stewart Mill, and John Locke. The reason why I picked these three philosophers is because they all agree with some aspects of my writing, while disagreeing with others. One will disagree with the role of the state and the citizens, but agree with legalizing recreational drug use, while the other two will agree with the role of the state and citizens, but disagree with legalizing drug use.
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.
The question of what is the government’s role in regulating healthy and unhealthy behavior is one that would probably spark a debate every time. Originally, the role was to assist in regulating and ensure those that were unable to afford or obtain healthcare insurance for various reasons would be eligible for medical care. However, now it seems that politicians are not really concerned about what’s best for the citizens but woul...
The fact is that in our country, any government intrusion looks undesirable. We are so used to making free choice and to having access to everything we need and want that we have already forgotten the value and usefulness of the government control. No, that does not mean that the government must control everything and everyone. What I mean here is that the government control should be balanced with the freedom of choice. Unfortunately, plentiful foods do not lead to improved health conditions. We cannot always make a relevant choice. Our hurried lifestyles make us extremely fast, and eating is not an exception. We eat fast, but fast does not always mean useful. I believe, and in this essay I argue that the government must have a say in our diets. Because there are so many obese people, because obesity is an expensive disease, and because very often it is due to poverty that people cannot afford healthy foods, the government must control the amount and the range of foods which we buy and eat. Healthy foods must become affordable. Poor populations must have access to high quality foods. The production of harmful foods should be limited. All these would be impossible if the government does not take active position against our diets.
Images are a powerful force in advertising as they are the ones that promote different perceptions and attitudes towards products. They are also the ones that create stereotypes. They are very manipulative, for they will never focus on the negative things that are associated with their products, only the positive ones. Advertisements are ambitious which gives them power, and engage customers for their approval.
One way that the tobacco industry can be more ethical is changing their advertising strategy. I believe that today’s advertising strategy is very misleading about cigarettes. Examples of this unethical advertising is in Argentina, here 20 percent of television advertising is spent on smoking commercials, as well as in countries in and around Africa there are billboards that depict a man in a business suit stepping out of a black Mercedes as a chauffeur holds the door. This displays that cigarettes make people classy and sophisticated, making cigarettes look not only harmless but stylish. Another good example of unethical depiction on cigarettes is in Nigeria; here they promote a cigarette for graduates, with a picture of a university and a student in a cap and gown. As if this wasn’t a misleading visual they add a slogan that says, "A very important cigarette for very important people." These ads and slogan are ...
Cigarette advertisements give the feeling that smokers are "bursting at the seams with joy" and that smoking is useful to you. Shockingly, nothing could be further from reality. The U.S. government has marked cigarettes as an unsafe medication that causes lung malignancy, coronary illness, and numerous different genuine sicknesses and conditions. Numerous individuals everywhere throughout the nation are discussing whether tobacco organizations ought to be permitted to publicize cigarettes or even to make cigarettes in today 's general public ("Analyzing Assorted Tobacco Advertisements").
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.