Summarize the arguments in favor of the ban on tobacco advertising in India
Part of the ban on tobacco was based on the "need to protect public health". Cigarettes are not in the best interest of the public, on the contrary they provoke high risk in serious or lethal illness. Also, there was a difference of 0.07% between the contribution (to the G.D.P) of cigarettes and the costs related to health care. The objective of the banning tobacco advertisements was to invert these results so that the health care costs would be reduced in the G.D.P as cigarette sales would decrease at the same time.
Based on a study for tobacco consumption and employment, it appears that a band in tobacco advertisements would actually increase employment opportunity
…show more content…
"It was found that per capital consumption of cigarettes (15 years +) had dropped between 14 and 37% after the implementation of the ban." This conclusion demonstrates factual results that support the positive effect of a ban on advertising products for …show more content…
This became a very sensitive argument because of the amount of justification required for drawing a line between the freedom of choice and the law. Tobacco consumers who opposed the ban felt that “the state was effectively stepping in to tell smokers that they were incapable of deciding by themselves what was good or bad for their health and that, therefore it had to play the role of a responsible nanny". This in result began to impose that with this ban in effect, it would limit the freedom of consumers. Tobacco companies claimed that they did not encourage smoking and that they were actually informing consumers of their brand choice by improving their "informed" selection of choice. It is argued that in turn, this could potentially encourage the "uninformed" consumer to lean towards more harmful tobacco products. There is also an argument that states how tobacco consumption would not be reduced if there was ban on advertisements as the advertisements were not the root cause of smoking and that it was actually the "friends" of consumers who initiated/influenced the consumer into smoking. Lastly, Illness’s related to smoking would "reduce the states liability on old-age pensions assuming that those who fall ill would die prematurely as a result”.
Discuss the conflict of interest issue as it pertains to government in
positive and healthful image. This is where beautiful men and women would be seen socializing
Tobacco companies have relied on the media to lure children. They quickly realized that ‘the company that dominates is that which most effectively targets young”(Imperial Tobacco document.) To counteract the idea of disease and other negative aspects of tobacco, the industry used imagery in the media such as natural settings and healthy actors doing active things. This helps them to insinuate that smoking leads to success, romance, sophistication and other advancements in their lifestyle, which was easily imprinted in the minds of children. A document found among Imperial tobacco files described their priority: “…having our imagery reach those non-reading young people who frequent malls should be our chief goal.”(1.170) Unaware of how important the under 18 market was to the industry, the government could only attempt to lengthen the distance between schools and billboards because they’re ineffective attempts were ignored by the large corporations. With many billboards concentrated in small areas it put the idea in children’s minds that smoking was socially acceptable and that t...
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.
Without explicitly stating it, anti-smoking ads are based on the logical argument that smoking is bad for your health and quitting is in your best interest. Ever since it was discovered that smoking is linked to cancer and other illnesses, society’s view of smoking has changed. Now, smoking has a negative connotation. Smoking has switched from “smoking is cool and mature” to the equivalent of writing your suicide note. The reasonable argument is smoking is hazardous for your health and can lead to illnesses, such as cancer, which in turn leads to
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. .
Reeples, Lynne. Cigarette Ads May Lure Teens to Smoke. 18 Jan 2011. Web. 8 Jan 2014.
The results of this study are consistent with the overall literature’s findings (Gallet, 2004; Meirer & Licari, 1997) that states with smoking bans have a decrease in cigarette sales. However, caution is warranted in the true reliability of the data presented in this study, because of the nature of the data.
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 ...
Although it is beneficial for the economy for the production of tobacco products it is extremely risky to use the product. According to researchers second-hand smoke is terrible for everyone in the world who walk by someone who is exhaling. In the article by Robert Proctor “Why ban the sale of cigarettes? The case for abolition” he states that cigarettes are the “most deadl...
Smoking is a simple process of inhaling and exhaling the fumes of burning tobacco, but it has deadly consequences. According to the American Cancer Society, smoking is the most preventable cause of death in America today (Encarta, 2002). Until the 1940?s, smoking was considered harmless. It was at this time that epidemiologists noticed a dramatic increase in the cases of lung cancer. A study was then conducted between smokers and nonsmokers to determine if cigarettes were the cause of this increase. This study, conducted by the American Cancer Society, found increased mortality among smokers. Yet it was not until 1964 that the Surgeon General put out a report acknowledging the danger of cigarettes. The first action to curb smoking was the mandate of a warning on cigarette packages by the Federal Trade Commission (Encarta, 2002). In 1971, all cigarette advertising was banned from radio and television, and cities and states passed laws requiring nonsmoking sections in public places and workplaces (Encarta, 2002). Now in some cities smoking is being completely banned from public places and workplaces and various people are striving for more of these laws against smoking.
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").
Plessis, Pierre D. "Should Alcohol and Cigarette Ads Be Banned." Living Healthy 360. N.p., 2 July 2008. Web. 08 Dec. 2013.
Big brands like Marlboro spend 70% of their profits on advertisements in 3rd world countries to try and get the people who do not know the consequences of smoking.In total tobacco companies spend over ten billion dollars on advertisement world wide. (who.int) The advertisement that is going on is on the covers are are cartoon animals and images that show if you smoke you will be
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.