|
Its there jobs to do that. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I think more people should die from tobacco use. I'm positive that people who get addicted to
tobacco are largely ignorant and nobody really cares if they suffer extremely painful deaths brought
on by lung cancer and other things.
Tobacco companies have a right to free speech too. Right now all sorts of commercials use fantasy
situations to make things look cool, specifically alcohol, cologne/deodorant, hygiene things like
razors and hair stuff.
I do think we should require them to post the surgeon general warning. I believe the truth is that
most people know the facts about smoking and know that it isn't really 'cool'. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I fail to see the logic in banning tobacco companies from advertising at sporting events but
allowing them to advertise everywhere else. People's freedom of choice should be respected,
including the freedom to choose to do stupid things which might be damaging to their health such as
smoking cigarettes. Are children really so much more passionate about sports than adults? I don't
think so.
If governments are so concerned about the potential damage from cigarette smoking, it should simply
be banned altogether. For as long is it is considered legal, tobacco companies should be permitted
the same freedom to advertise as any other kinds of company. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I think that companies should be able to advertise where ever they want. If commercialism targets
children, then why do they have condom commercials, and that promotes safe sex, but it also sparks
curiosity and tells children that as long as they use a condom, it is okay to have sex at any age.
Everything targets children, but the truth is that children are exposed to stuff that you don't want
them to see everyday. So if tabacco companies are willing to pay for the advertisement, they should
have the right to. People are in such denial. As if their children aren't going to make the decision
they want when they are of age. They should be allowed to advertise at sporting events. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
It can be done anyway |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
As long as the advertising wasn't a band-wagon, false cause-and-effect, emotional, or other form of
advertising that makes kids thinks it's okay to use tobacco, I think it should be allowed. A sign
that just displays "Mike's Tobacco" would be fine, but "Everybody Smokes Mike's Tobacco" or "Mike's
Tobacco- It Gives You Wings" is too much and gets kids thinking it's okay. |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
Heck no!
That is kind of retarded.
I mean that would mean they could do it
at little kids sporting events. And you know no parents would agree with it. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
No I disagree, you can't associate something negative with something positive to make it more
appealing. The same goes for alcohol. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I bet you smoke. Only an addict or Tobacco Industry henchman would say a statement like that. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I don't agree with this. Children are watching the sports events and that could possibly influence
them to begin this horrid habit. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
No because that is practically tellin ppl to smoke! |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
There is no point in advertising or sponsoring sporting events by the tobacco companies. Knowing the
fact that cigarette smoking is injurious to health, but still people are addicted to cigarettes when
there are not even commercial advertisements in the television by this tobacco companies. If these
companies start advertising or sponsoring the sporting events then the restriction of their
commercial advertisements in the television channels becomes absolutely meaningless. The reason
behind this is a large number of young crowd generally attends the sporting events, so if they find
that the tobacco companies are sponsoring the events then they might get encouraged about having
them which ultimately leads to something which is not healthy at all. If the tobacco companies are
given the opportunity to sponsor sport events then why should they be stopped to advertise
commercially about the tobacco product openly on the television. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
No tobacco is bad for people i wish less people smoked cigarettes |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Athletes put tones of time and money into anti-tobacco campaigns. It would be a slap in the face to
them advertising something they don't do themselves and one more then that do not condone. Another
point I would like to push is this, think about the crowd that these companies are trying to win
over, to buy a pack of cigarettes. If the spectators are into the game or the event, admiring the
stars and there excellent shape and condition, the last thing there going to want to do is light up
a tobacco product. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I don think that this should be ok because tabaco is bad for you and that will just be worse for our
environment, and for people! |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I do not think they should be able to advertise tobacco anywhere, especially at sporting events
where there are children. Children are all over the place and anywhere where children are located,
they should not be allowed to advertise tobacco or alcohol. These types of advertisements give
children the wrong idea. These ads always show that the tobacco products are "smooth, clean, crisp,
and refreshing". This is far from the truth. The are rough, dirty, nasty, and stinky. Children do
not know how to interpret advertisements, so they only see them for exactly what they say they are;
and I believe that the advertisement companies know this and use it to their advantage. Therefore, I
do not think that tobacco advertisements should be allowed at sporting events or anywhere where
children will be. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I'm against ANY and ALL advertising for tobacco and/or tobacco related products. Death is not -
should not - be an industry. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
It seems entirely hypocritical that the government permits tobacco firms to advertise in stadiums or
during sporting events. Government regulations in many countries (including Canada) require that
cigarette boxes not only display a warning concerning the negative effects smoking can have, but
also include very graphic images of blackened lungs and yellowed, badly stained teeth. If the
government's message is that smoking is a dangerous, possibly fatal habit, and it is willing to go
to such lengths to express this belief, then why should it permit tobacco firms to advertise these
clearly dangerous products in the first place?
By doing this the government appears to say: 'we know that smoking is a deadly habit, it leads to
cancer and a host of other serious health problems and here's the graphic evidence to prove it--but
we'll just let these companies advertise their potentially fatal products anyway. '
A true cynic would point out that the government isn't being honest here; they want to highlight the
negative effects of smoking, but collecting taxes everytime people purchase these products isn't
such a bad thing after all. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I am against promoting tobacco and tobacco related products. Advertising in all its forms enforces
the use of the advertised product and enforcing use of tobacco either on mass media or events like
sports events will capture the attention of children and adults.
Sponsoring however is a different area and it can be used to advertise the tobacco brand and not its
use. In the event of sponsoring deals the company is not enforcing use of tobacco it is merely
promoting its name. Sponsoring is more targeted towards existing users as the brand name is being
enforced instead of its use. |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
30 Jan 2008 23:17
Sign In
For and Against Recent Activity
