Tobacco Advertising Case Study

Arguments in favor of the ban on tobacco advertising in India:
India has several million smokers accounting for a significant proportion of the world’s smokers. According to the article, the World Health Organization (WHO) said that tobacco accounted for over 3 million deaths in 1990; and by 1998 the figure would rise to 4.023 million with an increasing threating rate of 10 million in 2030. The tobacco problem in India is peculiar; it is characterized by a large proportion on non-cigarette and smokeless tobacco use. Many of these products are manufactured as cottage and small-scale industries using varying mixtures and widely differing processes of manufacturing. Tobacco advertising increases consumption in several ways, most importantly by
But the "Nays’ opposing the ban believes it is unethical to make decision for people in a democratically state. This meant that people were incapable of deciding what was good or bad for their health and therefore the government had to play the role of a responsible father. However it meant that Government had lost sight of this principle on which all the free societies depend, meaning that that freedom and risks are inextricable, and whomsoever assumes the right to save us from risks, is also assuming right to limit our freedom". A major point by Nays was that if it were legal to manufacture and sell tobacco products; and even grow it as well, it should be legal to advertise. Nay insist that the role of marketing was merely to assist adults in making an informed brand choice and that advertising merely enhanced the market share of a particular brand. They argue that the selective action placed directly tobacco companies had economic consequences for the country GDP growth and jobs for over 26 million people. The ban might only work in the county but other international media and print magazine will advertise tobacco. This meant they could still advertise the product on those international media there by paying advertising fees to foreign Medias instead of local service provider which in turn could also affect GDP growth in the county. If the ban
They have the power to shut down tobacco farms and industries in an endeavor to maintain India healthy living style but the question is why is Government not exercising her power to do so? Is it that Government eyed direct taxes from tobacco industries and the over 26 million job as a result of the industry or some senior Government officials have share in top or big tobacco industry? Comparing the effect or death cause by of heroin & cocaine to that of tobacco on people involved their intake, tobacco death toll is higher but more attention is drawn in the fight against these