Introduction: Advertising is a tricky industry. It is possible to convince people on doing anything, no matter how harmful it is for themselves and their surroundings. Human nature contradicts with right and wrong in decision making, as there are no certainty to what is right and what is wrong. Most likely, it depends on one’s culture and perspective. In early 2001, Government of India announced a bill that would ban tobacco advertisements in the country. This written assignment will focus on summarizing
in favor of the ban on tobacco advertising in India. Some people opposing to the ban, advocates that the State have made unwarranted intrusion in private lives of the citizens by doing it (the ban). But others claim that the government has the right to interfere in the interest of people’s lives, as the banning as of drugs like cocaine. In 1981 and 1991 respectively the Supreme Court (of Appeal) in Belgium and the French Constitutional Council state that a ban on advertising tobacco products was not
issues for ban on tobacco advertising with the conflict of interest that pertained to government in India. In this essay, I will discuss about agreements and disagreements of the ban on tobacco advertising in India with the conflict of interest issues. Lastly, I will present my opinions on what India government should do. Advocates believed that tobacco advertising may affect public health and induce children and young people to begin experimenting with tobacco products. Advertising towards children
Case Study Analysis – Ban on Tobacco Advertising by the Government of India The connections held amongst the Government, the Tobacco Industry and the health of citizens has been a controversial and complicated topic for decades. This case analysis will focus on the ban on tobacco advertising in India. First, the ideas and arguments will be discussed for both the supporters and those who opposed the ban. The next topics will include the conflict of interest in regards to the government of India and
1. Summarize the arguments in favor of the ban on tobacco advertising in India Those in favor of the ban on tobacco advertising in India were the Ayes. According to the Ayes, the ban was common because it had happened before internationally in other countries like France, Finland, and Norway. Their first argument was that tobacco was the cause of death. For example, According to the World Health Organization (WHO), tobacco accounted for over 3 million deaths and rose to 4.023 million deaths in
in favor of the ban on tobacco advertising in India. The argument was that if advertising was banned for tobacco products it could effectively cut down on the amount of people who would smoke. It would also cut down on the youth who were beginning to smoke since they would not see the advertising. The cost of health care was more significant than the cost of what the tobacco companies would give to the government in revenue each year. Examples of how the consumption of tobacco went down in a few
INTRODUCTION Tobacco advertising bans have become commonplace in developed nations but are less prevalent in developing countries. In the context of the above mention claim, “Tobacco advertising” therefore means any commercial communication whose main, secondary or incidental aim or effect is to promote a tobacco brand or to promote tobacco use (Extracted from WHO framework convention on tobacco control). Tobacco advertising may either be direct or indirect. The direct form of the advertisement
down on the tobacco industry by banning the advertising and sponsorship of sports and cultural events by tobacco companies (Ban on Tobacco Ads by the Government of India, 2001). The Indian government claims that is for ethical reasons; tobacco jeopardizes the health of its users and the government believes banning the advertising will help discourage young people from using it. Such a significant move from the government has started debates between opposing sides, some in favor of the ban and others
arising out of their decision to place a on to place a ban on the advertising of tobacco products. This conflict of interest of interest would be dealt with later in this case study, but for now I will deal with the arguments in favor and in opposition of the ban on the advertising of tobacco products. It was the Indian government that ignited the debate, by announcing on February 6th 2001, its impending ban on the advertising of tobacco products. The government’s official reason was its effort
Introduction To say that tobacco advertising stimulates tobacco sales may seem a simple and moderate statement. In reality, tobacco control activists often meet serious opposition in defending this fact. Achieving the restriction or banning of tobacco advertising is one of the fiercest battles to face. Tobacco lobbyists usually assert that advertising does not increase the overall quantity of tobacco sold. Rather, the tobacco industry maintains that advertising merely enhances the market share of