Introduction:
This paper will be analyzing the case study by Philip Morris (2001) Indian Tobacco. The writer has analyzed both positive and negative impact of banning the advertisement of tobacco in India. He has demonstrated different ethical issues arising from government getting involved in Tobacco business. The government goal of imposing the advertisement ban is to discourage the adolescents from consuming tobacco products. As a result, fulfill its obligation to maintain the welfare of its citizen. Whilst, tobacco industry, contributes largely to revenue generation consequently, impacting on the country’s development. As a result, there are some serious argument if tobacco advertisement should be allowed or not and if so what extent should …show more content…
Suhel Seth, CEO, Equus Advertising, explains the ban only create popularity to the government. By stating “it is a typical knee-jerk reaction by any government to create some kind of popularity for itself.”
Advocates of free choice, also opposed, emphasize this Bans can only amount to “unwarranted intrusion by the state into people private affairs or life”. Increasingly, this stress that presumed objective is telling people that they are incapable of making their own decisions on what is good and bad for them. Therefore, the government and the pro-ban act like “Nanny”. Amit Sarkar, expound further by saying that “the adults who smoke do so at their free choice and the risk which they are aware off, fall unto them fully.” Similarly, Canada Supreme Court held that by controlling behavior using this advertisement ban, limits the freedom of the citizens hence controlling the thoughts, beliefs and behavior which shouldn’t exist in a free democratic society. Interestingly, if it is legal to produce and sell tobacco products then the advisement should also be …show more content…
As discussed, the government discourages behavior because it’s responsible for the welfare of its citizens. However, it also derives most income from Tobacco business. This revenue is crucial for the growth and development of India. The government is faced with both ethical and commercial challenge and on top of it, the personal interference in personal behavior. Another ethical issue arising is how the government’s objectives are achievable and if these laws would be equitable. The challenges place doubts on its practicability and in the moral policing. Lastly, by imposing tobacco ban and becoming the lowest per capital consumer, in a country that is the third largest tobacco producer, may not rub well to the
This paper will be analyzing the case study by Philip Morris (2001) Indian Tobacco. The writer has analyzed both positive and negative impact of banning the advertisement of tobacco in India. He has demonstrated different ethical issues arising from government getting involved in Tobacco business. The government goal of imposing the advertisement ban is to discourage the adolescents from consuming tobacco products. As a result, fulfill its obligation to maintain the welfare of its citizen. Whilst, tobacco industry, contributes largely to revenue generation consequently, impacting on the country’s development. As a result, there are some serious argument if tobacco advertisement should be allowed or not and if so what extent should …show more content…
Suhel Seth, CEO, Equus Advertising, explains the ban only create popularity to the government. By stating “it is a typical knee-jerk reaction by any government to create some kind of popularity for itself.”
Advocates of free choice, also opposed, emphasize this Bans can only amount to “unwarranted intrusion by the state into people private affairs or life”. Increasingly, this stress that presumed objective is telling people that they are incapable of making their own decisions on what is good and bad for them. Therefore, the government and the pro-ban act like “Nanny”. Amit Sarkar, expound further by saying that “the adults who smoke do so at their free choice and the risk which they are aware off, fall unto them fully.” Similarly, Canada Supreme Court held that by controlling behavior using this advertisement ban, limits the freedom of the citizens hence controlling the thoughts, beliefs and behavior which shouldn’t exist in a free democratic society. Interestingly, if it is legal to produce and sell tobacco products then the advisement should also be …show more content…
As discussed, the government discourages behavior because it’s responsible for the welfare of its citizens. However, it also derives most income from Tobacco business. This revenue is crucial for the growth and development of India. The government is faced with both ethical and commercial challenge and on top of it, the personal interference in personal behavior. Another ethical issue arising is how the government’s objectives are achievable and if these laws would be equitable. The challenges place doubts on its practicability and in the moral policing. Lastly, by imposing tobacco ban and becoming the lowest per capital consumer, in a country that is the third largest tobacco producer, may not rub well to the