In fact,Tobacco seems not to have the tolerance in some other countries like France,Finland and norway ha already said no to tobacco ads as they believe that government has the right to intrude in its people decision to consumption when …show more content…
In fact, some people see this as intrusion in the people freedom of choice rights,that is, people should be able to decide on their own of what is good or not for their health—freedom and risk are inseparable —the Supreme Court of Canada had been accused of attempting to control people’s thoughts,beliefs and behavior to contraint them to act its own way. Further, the critics advance that the role of marketing is merely to guide people to better choose a paticular brand which benefits from the resulting market share of the good –choice related ad and even the survey result do not mention that ads have something to do with the choice of people to use Tobacco . They also denied targetting teenagers in their ad campaigns. In terms of overall markets blend,as the organised sector producing exclusively cigarettes represents only 16% as compared to the the remaining 84% which produces other products like ghutka and zarda,this ban is likely to fail. Also, as the industry provides direct and indirect jobs to more than 26 million people and is a major contributor to the State Exchequer, they believe that the implementation of this measure would only result in unemployment. They also pointed out the fact that India is the world’s third producer of Tobacco with the the lower per capita Tobacco comsumtiom in the world should lead to reconsider this approach to reducing Tobacco consumption. They also argue that because the expenditure on healthcare ,insurance and pension systems was meagre in India, health budget is not a major