Some tobacco companies voluntarily withdrew from sponsoring various events. They were mixed reactions between the people in support of the ban and those who were against it.
The supporter: The supporters believed that when it comes to matters related to the health of the citizens of a country, the government has every right to take drastic measures. They used previous bans on hard drug like cocaine to make their case.
The fear that children and young adults were been drawn by various adverts and this might lead to them experimenting the tobacco products. Also, the fact that the government spends a lot on health care, smoking related ailment definitely increase government expenditure.
Furthermore, there were questions asked with respect to the economic impact of the ban, but study showed that the money that was meant to be spent on cigarette will still end up been spent on other goods and service in the country.
The …show more content…
They believe that various advertisements had no effect on people who do not smoke; the brand is only trying to reach it customers who are already smokers. In 1998, there was a survey conducted by the Indian Market Research Bureau (IMRB), 40 percent said they started smoking to see what is was like, 24 percent tried it because “all their friends smoked” and no one said they started smoking because of various advertisement they saw or watched.
They believed that the implementation of bans on tobacco advertisement will lead to the consumption of more dangerous product like ghutka and zarda which is a local form of tobacco.
Conflict of interest issues: A government who practices democracy, and believes in the freedom of its citizen is now going towards and autocratic style of government in the implementation of bans on advert placement on tobacco related products. As an adult (from 18 year) you have the freedom to make your own decision in a free