Anti Tobacco Advertising

1252 Words 5 Pages
In 2001, the government in India decided to introduce legislature to impose a ban on tobacco advertisements at sporting events and cultural events, as well as sponsoring such events. This was intended to stop tobacco companies from appealing to children and young people, and also to help the government start an anti-tobacco campaign. There were strong reactions on either side of the debate. Those in favor of the bill said doing so would save millions of lives and protect children from being bombarded with tobacco advertisements. Those not in favor of the bill claim that the government was simply trying to pass legislation that would not be effective and was intended to control consumers ("Ban on Tobacco Ads by the Government of India", 2001). …show more content…
People in favor of the ban on tobacco advertising in India argue that tobacco companies are influencing children and young adult to use tobacco. In documents released in the United States, young teens and adults were described as “tomorrow 's cigarette business” and indeed, the advertisements used of a colorful cartoon camel were appealing to children. Anti-tobacco protesters claim that these advertisements were made to appeal to children and tap into that future market, even at an early age. This leads to regularly smoking adults and so the tobacco industry thrives at the cost of millions of lives. Although the increasing number of smokers keeps the industry thriving, a study found that a decrease in smokers actually led to a boost in the economy. The more people stopped smoking, the more they could use the money previously spent on cigarettes on other goods and services, and more jobs are available because of this. So in effect, people who support the ban claim that it can only do good for the economy and the population. Cigarettes in India add to the government 's expenditure because of increasing health concerns. The number of deaths and illnesses related to tobacco smoke will drop while the number of jobs and employment because of new industries opening up will increase. This is seen as a win on both angles ("Ban on Tobacco Ads by the Government of …show more content…
The Indian Market mainly produces other tobacco products besides cigarettes like beedi or ghutkas, hand-rolled Indian cigarettes that were not advertised in the same way as organized sector cigarettes. The amount of other products produced is a whopping 84 percent. Therefore, the ban would not have any major impact on the sale of these products. The ban on ads would also keep consumers from being able to tell the difference between products in regards to quality. Beedi and ghutka cigarettes products are considered less refined than tobacco, and without proper advertisement of regular cigarettes, consumers may end up smoking such products instead. Even with the ban, some argue that advertising would still go on. For instance, in the case of television and internet, most that come from foreign markets, advertisements of certain cigarette brands would still be able to leak through, effectively defeating the purpose of the ban. And, in the case of employment and economy, the anti-ban analysts insist that doing away with tobacco adverts and sponsorships may lower the employment rate of nearly 26 million people, 6 million of which are farmers and 5 million who roll the cigarettes. This would have an adverse effect on the Indian economy as India is the third largest producer of tobacco in the world ("Ban on Tobacco Ads by the Government of India",

Related Documents