The recent verdict to lift ban on smoking in films has come in as quite a dampener in the government’s crusade for banning smoking. Judge S.K. Kaul of Delhi High court has announced that “A cinematographic film must reflect the realities of life. Smoking is a reality of life! It is undesirable but it exists. It is not banned by law.”
Film Stars serve as role models to the society especially the youth. Research has proven that children or even youngsters try to emulate their role models. So by lifting this ban in films we are actually encouraging smoking amongst them. This brings about an even stronger challenge for all of us who are fighting the war against tobacco, to come together as one voice and keep pacing up the anti-tobacco campaign.
Posts
20 comments:
i agree with the decision. smoking is a reality of life and must be shown to the world.
maybe in scenes that do not require it to be shown can be banned but otherwise it adds to the character in the movie.
people can make their own decisions. if they wish to smoke, they have the right to.
WHO youth researchers reviewed more than 440 Bollywood films between 1991 to 2002 and found that tobacco portrayal was prevalent in nearly 3 out of four movies. In earlier films only the villains smoked, but increasingly most Bollywood films also showed heroes smoking. The superstar Shahrukh Khan has been shown to smoke on screen 109 times in the last 12 years, and the legendary south Indian actor Rajnikant has smoked 103 times! Portrayal of smoking as 'cool' or 'normal' is wide-spread.
Most people who criticize the above move are ignorant of several studies that have reported a correlation between smoking on screen and public smoking. A famous study reported that adolescents who watched extensive smoking in movies were nearly three times more likely to try smoking than their peers who had seen movies with less smoking. There are several other reports that have shown similar results of impact of smoking by role models on vulnerable minds of adolescents.
This has little to do with 'artistic freedom.' We are talking here only about feature films, each one of which requires several tens of millions of rupees to produce. No one ever puts that kind of money into any 'artistic' hole and these are basically commercial propositions with some possible artistic elements into them. We do know and film-makers acknowledge that they receive money from commercial sponsors for using/ showing their products or services in films (beverages, foods, airlines, computers etc., the list can be very long). We do not however, know all commercial sponsors and film makers need not and do not tell anyone about all their funding sources. We strongly suspect, and there is some documentary proof, that film makers receive money from the tobacco industry in exchange for showing the act of smoking and the use of tobacco products in their films. This is advertising in a most insidious and effective manner and that is why we need restrictions on showing smoking in films.
Smoking is a reality for not only those who smoke but also the ones who are victims of passive smoking. The ban should be made effective for not who smoke but for those who suffer because of it.
Children watch TV and emulate the happenings on it and research has proven it. So if smoking is not restricted in this medium it will not only lead to more rampant usage.
Its not possible to get smokers to leave the habit but yes, efforts like banning it i movies can just help a few from not getting into it.
personally i am not influenced by celebrities smoking nor has it affected me,
but i do believe that the removal of the ban on smoking in films will have some effects on the die hard fans, who will try to gimmick their stars hair styles etc...
yes
smoking shown in films do encourage
people and specially youth, it should be banned from all areas and symbols from where people can be encouraged.
yes it is very much dangerous for all of them who smoke.
it damages the branchioles of lungs
and reduces the oxygen content
it also reduces the oxygen carrying capacity of blood
seriously,people must stop smoking
please its not the trend but a hazard
1) no,i dont thik so only films are not enfluence factor to encourage youth. 2)youth can enfluence by various factor of society like parents,friends and surronding,finaly youth can understand good & bad thing about their own.
yes i very much agree with this decision because people are very much influenced by films. films play a very major role in popularizing the current trend they shape the society people try to imitate them. thus ban on smoking films will definitely encourage the youth because this would be done on a larger scale.
smoking is injurious to health if this is truth,then why should not the entire worlds government comes together and banned on it?.as well as its our individual duty to protest smoke
we all know smoking and chewing tobacco is harmful. Each and every person of society knows that they have some rights and authorities but we must respect others' rights, but the smokers never cares about these all thing. Smoking was banned earlier for some weeks in public places and we followed it for a couple of days only and now the smokers smoke wherever they want. I am really thank full to all those people who are directly or indirectly connected with this project.
I believe that smoking is part of the new emerging culture now. We cannot deny the fact that smoker get some kind of relief each time they smoke but it's necessary to give a thought to the passive smoker who are the real victims. In the above articles one thing is for sure that films or media today is playing crucial role in taking this smoking culture forward. It is a influential tool and it is constantly influencing the youth.But again here we need to see that is it only the media or cinema which is influencing people to smoke. I feel no, we need to look around, especially our elders who says smoking is injurious to health but they themselves go and smoke out. They are the one who are to be blamed.Smoking in the films are used to present the characters and people see it in that way. Youth today is smart enough to understand what is right and wrong. They do what they want to do. Cinema gives encouragement to people who have fascination about smoking.
i am completly agree with decision of Supreme Court because film is the part of our society and according to indian constitution we have right to freedom of speech and expresion but i know we have some restriction too, but so film makers must have this right to reflect the society. all the politician and many NGOs raising their voice in banning smoking in film but my point is that instead of banning in film why dont our Government closed and ban tobacco making companies. in that way we can completly become tobacco free society in large level.
its true that many laws have been implemented against smoking which includes smoking in public places and smoking in films.
unfortunately i would like to know how many of the laws are been taken really seriously. smoking in films not only will result in more problem for the youth but it will also encourage the youngsters to take up the cancer stick at a very young age. its necessary for the people,especially the non smokers to stand up against smoking rather than to pass it up as another lame issue.
I think many people agree that celebrties do have an affect on their fans it comes to smoking but yet many feel that it is an individual decision.But everyone atleast agrees on one point that it definately harmful to one's health, either as an active smoker or a passive one! It was also seen in a comment that that the allowing smoking in films has little to do with artistic freedom! But then what is the final solution to this tobacco menace?
Smoking in films encourages the youth to smoke,movies like DEV D have glorified the act of smoking and now youth finds it cool to smoke and dope when they are going through a rough patch in their life.
Its more about kids getting easily influenced by wathing films or TV. In India Bollywood and cricket are the two things that drive the nation, so you can imagine the imapct it could have. When every day, more than 55,000 children in India below the age of 15 are estimated to try tobacco for the first time.
While five million Indian children are said to be addicted to tobacco and one third of them are likely to die due to this addiction. How can this lifitng ban be beneficial, I dont think so...
Regards
Bhavika
http://www.indiamatters.co.in/
In this day and age, who really emulates their favourite celebrities? If you are a SRK fan do you change you chose Pepsi over Coke just for that reason or use Dish TV? Do Big B fans honestly use Navratna Oil?
Gen Y is smarter than we give it credit for. Everyone knows what actors do in movies is not real.
There are other factors which effect a person's decision to smoke like peer pressure, kids trying to 'fit in' or be a part of the 'cool crowd'.
Rather than banning smoking from anything, I feel education is key to solving any problem.
The Law is supposed to protect the vulnerable! The enticement (Via Actors Smoking) of children into an addiction, which is forecast to kill one billion people this century (W.H.O.), is downright evil! You cannot use freedom of expression if it is detrimental to public health!
The European Convention on Human Rights ARTICLE 10
1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.
2. The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or the rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.
The Law is supposed to protect the vulnerable! The enticement (Via Actors Smoking) of children into an addiction, which is forecast to kill one billion people this century (W.H.O.), is downright evil! You cannot use freedom of expression if it is detrimental to public health!
The European Convention on Human Rights ARTICLE 10
Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.
The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or the rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.
Post a Comment