How important is the advertising, how much does it actually make you want to purchase what is advertised? The government of India is trying to stop tobacco Companies from advertising their product. Is it really the government decision? Would banning tobacco advertising actually make a difference in tobacco sales? There are many pros and cons on tobacco advertising. Many countries have already banned tobacco advertising.
The government of India has a hard decision to make; to ban tobacco advertising or risk the welfare of its people. In February of 2001 the government of India told the tobacco companies that they are launching an anti-tobacco program. The Tobacco industry voluntarily withdrew their advertisements and sponsorship of events. The state Exchequer major supplier was the tobacco industry. Should the government control to interfere with the people’s choice?
Do tobacco advertisements actually cause people to smoke or use tobacco products? Dr. …show more content…
Is it in the power of the government to implicate such a ban? Would the ban on tobacco ads effect the economy? As Brown & Williamson from the Tobacco Corporation, “From an ethical standpoint, it would be wrong to try to cause people to take the risk of smoking.” However the tobacco company does not believe that their ads convince people to smoke. Tobacco and nicotine are deadly to people and cause many health risks. As seen in the documentary supersize me so are hamburgers and French fries. Yet these are advertised and legal in most countries.
I think that tobacco advertisements should be banned. The government sole responsibility is to protect their citizens. The evidence proves while tobacco is killing people it the government job to protect the children of the India by not encouraging them to smoke. That will difficult task do, being as India is the third largest tobacco manufacturer. Many of the country’s jobs are in the tobacco
The government of India has a hard decision to make; to ban tobacco advertising or risk the welfare of its people. In February of 2001 the government of India told the tobacco companies that they are launching an anti-tobacco program. The Tobacco industry voluntarily withdrew their advertisements and sponsorship of events. The state Exchequer major supplier was the tobacco industry. Should the government control to interfere with the people’s choice?
Do tobacco advertisements actually cause people to smoke or use tobacco products? Dr. …show more content…
Is it in the power of the government to implicate such a ban? Would the ban on tobacco ads effect the economy? As Brown & Williamson from the Tobacco Corporation, “From an ethical standpoint, it would be wrong to try to cause people to take the risk of smoking.” However the tobacco company does not believe that their ads convince people to smoke. Tobacco and nicotine are deadly to people and cause many health risks. As seen in the documentary supersize me so are hamburgers and French fries. Yet these are advertised and legal in most countries.
I think that tobacco advertisements should be banned. The government sole responsibility is to protect their citizens. The evidence proves while tobacco is killing people it the government job to protect the children of the India by not encouraging them to smoke. That will difficult task do, being as India is the third largest tobacco manufacturer. Many of the country’s jobs are in the tobacco