My analysis in favor of the ban of tobacco advertising in India. In 2001 the government of India (GOI) announces that it will be petitioning a bill to ban Tobacco companies from advertising their product. The main objective was to discourage teens from consuming tobacco products and also providing (GOI) with sovereignties to launch a diverse program against tobacco companies. The government of India announces that they would voluntarily retreat from all sponsorship affairs. The ethical stand point of the government of India is to discourage the habit and addiction of tobacco because the government is ultimately responsible for the safety of its citizens. Many activists opposed these bans. Stating that these new regulations were unwarranted
…show more content…
The parties that opposed the ban argued that by placing regulations on advertising and sponsorship. The public took it as if their government was stepping in to tell them what they can and can’t do, and that they were incapable of making their own decisions regarding their health. Tobacco companies argued that their advertising was merely to assist in making a brand choice and it was not targeting teenagers and young adults as a progressive strategy. “The organized-sector, which mainly produced cigarettes, comprised only 16% of the market, while remaining 84% was accounted for by other products like 'beedi, ' 'ghutkas, ' etc. The ban was likely to have no major impact on their sales. Analysts felt that ban on ads would reduce the consumer’s ability to distinguish between products of differing quality, and slow down the progression of Indian consumers up the scale from harmful tobacco consumption (like ghutka, zarda etc.) to more refined forms.” Tobacco companies provided direct and indirect employment to roughly 26 million people. Strict regulations could cause thousands of workers to be laid off. There have been several research studies conducted to determine if advertisement influences smoking the results were abysmal and it seems that advertisements were not influencing to pick up a smoking …show more content…
The most well-known sponsored in India is Marlboro sponsoring Formula 1 racing they had a very significant popularity with well-to-do youth in India as well as minors. Market analysis forecasted Indian industries at a disadvantage tobacco industries was a large contributor to the state. Many feel that this creates a conflict of interest for many reasons that it does not just impact sales, but it also makes it difficult to distinguish products of different qualities. “Some analysts pointed out that the ban could lead to spurt in surrogate advertising, which could defeat the very purpose of the ban. Moreover, there seemed to be no sense in imposing such a ban on the domestic players, when the foreign magazines that sold in India and the television channels that were uplinked from foreign countries carried advertisements by cigarette multinationals.”
My view is distinctive due to the circumstances of such regulations will most likely lead to larger consumptions of tobacco among teens and young adults. After researching deaths caused by tobacco I am in support of banning any and all products that contain tobacco. Governments should not decide what their citizens can and can’t do citizens should be educated about the harmful effects of smoking as well as any positive’s if there is
The parties that opposed the ban argued that by placing regulations on advertising and sponsorship. The public took it as if their government was stepping in to tell them what they can and can’t do, and that they were incapable of making their own decisions regarding their health. Tobacco companies argued that their advertising was merely to assist in making a brand choice and it was not targeting teenagers and young adults as a progressive strategy. “The organized-sector, which mainly produced cigarettes, comprised only 16% of the market, while remaining 84% was accounted for by other products like 'beedi, ' 'ghutkas, ' etc. The ban was likely to have no major impact on their sales. Analysts felt that ban on ads would reduce the consumer’s ability to distinguish between products of differing quality, and slow down the progression of Indian consumers up the scale from harmful tobacco consumption (like ghutka, zarda etc.) to more refined forms.” Tobacco companies provided direct and indirect employment to roughly 26 million people. Strict regulations could cause thousands of workers to be laid off. There have been several research studies conducted to determine if advertisement influences smoking the results were abysmal and it seems that advertisements were not influencing to pick up a smoking …show more content…
The most well-known sponsored in India is Marlboro sponsoring Formula 1 racing they had a very significant popularity with well-to-do youth in India as well as minors. Market analysis forecasted Indian industries at a disadvantage tobacco industries was a large contributor to the state. Many feel that this creates a conflict of interest for many reasons that it does not just impact sales, but it also makes it difficult to distinguish products of different qualities. “Some analysts pointed out that the ban could lead to spurt in surrogate advertising, which could defeat the very purpose of the ban. Moreover, there seemed to be no sense in imposing such a ban on the domestic players, when the foreign magazines that sold in India and the television channels that were uplinked from foreign countries carried advertisements by cigarette multinationals.”
My view is distinctive due to the circumstances of such regulations will most likely lead to larger consumptions of tobacco among teens and young adults. After researching deaths caused by tobacco I am in support of banning any and all products that contain tobacco. Governments should not decide what their citizens can and can’t do citizens should be educated about the harmful effects of smoking as well as any positive’s if there is