because they want to reduce the number of people that smoke in the interest of public safety. there is a cost involved to the comunity as a result of ilness caused by smoking and by reducing advertisement the uptake of smoking is reduced and the giving up of smoking becomes easier for those that wish to do so.
because the government make money this way and if one part of the government said we will ban cigarettes not as many people would vote fore them
1970 .
barak oboma
A cigarette company's agenda also includes profiting from the sale of cigarettes.
they never did
April 1,1970
When a product is not banned, it is sometimes correct to ban its advertisement if those ads can influence children to use a product that is not recommended for children. For example, advertising for cigarettes is banned in some places to protect children.
The message that is being implied in the advertisement of cigarette is the harm it causes to humans. It shows how cigarette harms the smoker and the people around the smoker.?æ
ya it should banned, it leads to spoil the health of smooker & also health of passive smooker. ----- If you are going to ban advertisement of smoking then you should also ban adverts of other addictive porducts such as alcohol, caffiene and petrol.
Yes the government should ban explicit CDs
Cigarette smoking is not banned in America.
The Canadian government did ban Potlach because give an impression that the natives were poor and hardy.