Ethics
The Tobacco industry in India faced an advertising ban from the Government of India. This also included sponsoring of sports. The ban was introduced to reduce the numbers of people taking Tobacco so that in the end diseases caused by tobacco can be controlled.
In Favour of Tobacco Advertising Ban
The arguments that were presented in favour of the ban of tobacco advertising in India in included the precedent that was set by countries like Norway which effected the ban in 1975 and showed a drop in tobacco consumption of 25%. Another country which also banned advertising of Tobacco is Finland. The ban in Finland was effected in 1978 and showed a drop in consumption of 37%. The department of Health (DOH) in United Kingdom also reviewed …show more content…
The risk falls entirely on them and is fully explained to them…” (http://www.icmrindia.org/free%20resources/casestudies/ban-tobacco-Business%20Ethics%20Case.htm) and he goes one to allude to the fact that the ban interferes with their right to freedom.
There was denial also from the companies in Tobacco industry that their adverts encouraged other adults to smoke or even enticed teenagers and young people to start smoking. A reference to study by Indian Market Research Bureau (IMRB) showed that 49% of the respondents said they “ started smoking to see what it was like” and some 24% said that their friend were smokers but no one said the adverts induced them to start smoking.
References were made to a US study that examined the relation between cigarette adverting and consumption from 1961 to 1990. And the conclusion supported the view that there wasn’t significant evidence to support the expenditure in advertising also influenced consumption. And also despite the ban in Norway in 1975 for tobacco advertising, the consumption of tobacco remained unchanged all the way through 1995. The industry also felt vindicated by the study that was done by Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) that was carried out in 22 countries that from 1964 to 1990, that …show more content…
The country was benefiting from the Tobacco industry through employment of some 26 million people that were directly or indirectly involved as indicated in the article. The industry also contributed to the economy by paying taxes. At the same time, tobacco is a health hazard it causes so many ailments including cancer and as the paper quoted, the government of India was spending more (0.21% of the Gross Domestic Product)to treat patients than what was being collected from the industry (0.14% of the Gross Domestic Product). This probably caused an ethical issue and a decision to ban the advertising of tobacco was done to at least address the need to make people stop smoking
The Tobacco industry in India faced an advertising ban from the Government of India. This also included sponsoring of sports. The ban was introduced to reduce the numbers of people taking Tobacco so that in the end diseases caused by tobacco can be controlled.
In Favour of Tobacco Advertising Ban
The arguments that were presented in favour of the ban of tobacco advertising in India in included the precedent that was set by countries like Norway which effected the ban in 1975 and showed a drop in tobacco consumption of 25%. Another country which also banned advertising of Tobacco is Finland. The ban in Finland was effected in 1978 and showed a drop in consumption of 37%. The department of Health (DOH) in United Kingdom also reviewed …show more content…
The risk falls entirely on them and is fully explained to them…” (http://www.icmrindia.org/free%20resources/casestudies/ban-tobacco-Business%20Ethics%20Case.htm) and he goes one to allude to the fact that the ban interferes with their right to freedom.
There was denial also from the companies in Tobacco industry that their adverts encouraged other adults to smoke or even enticed teenagers and young people to start smoking. A reference to study by Indian Market Research Bureau (IMRB) showed that 49% of the respondents said they “ started smoking to see what it was like” and some 24% said that their friend were smokers but no one said the adverts induced them to start smoking.
References were made to a US study that examined the relation between cigarette adverting and consumption from 1961 to 1990. And the conclusion supported the view that there wasn’t significant evidence to support the expenditure in advertising also influenced consumption. And also despite the ban in Norway in 1975 for tobacco advertising, the consumption of tobacco remained unchanged all the way through 1995. The industry also felt vindicated by the study that was done by Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) that was carried out in 22 countries that from 1964 to 1990, that …show more content…
The country was benefiting from the Tobacco industry through employment of some 26 million people that were directly or indirectly involved as indicated in the article. The industry also contributed to the economy by paying taxes. At the same time, tobacco is a health hazard it causes so many ailments including cancer and as the paper quoted, the government of India was spending more (0.21% of the Gross Domestic Product)to treat patients than what was being collected from the industry (0.14% of the Gross Domestic Product). This probably caused an ethical issue and a decision to ban the advertising of tobacco was done to at least address the need to make people stop smoking