Recommendations

In view of the above findings, we recommend the following; 

1. Legal action against offenders: Action under Section 5 of “Cigarette and other tobacco products Act 2003” must be taken against the tobacco companies, all the film companies, producers, actors and directors who have shown tobacco products, brands or pack shots amounting to indirect promotion and advertising in their movies after May 1, 2004, i.e. from the enactment of the anti-tobacco legislation.
2. Investigate the relationship and financial irregularities: Indirect funding by tobacco companies, like; bearing a cost of a sequence of scenes; bearing the cost of film sets; sponsorship in the form of bearing the cost of hiring some equipments, travelling and/or hotel stay cost, etc. must be investigated to ascertain the relationship of the producers/movie companies and tobacco companies. The grapevine suggests that in many cases such costs are borne by the overseas or other subsidiary companies of the parent tobacco companies. This appears to be a clear possibility and is worth investigation in the larger public interest especially for the productions which have depicted tobacco brands most gallantly. A lot of financial irregularities and tax violations can also be uncovered and such an investigation would be in national interest.
3. Recall the movies which show tobacco brand: The movie prints, DVD’s, VCD’s, etc. showing tobacco brands and product shots should be recalled and the film producers and companies should be asked to obliterate all such sequences and mention of tobacco with immediate effect.
4. Remove tobacco from children film completely: All the children animation/cartoon movies showing any instance of tobacco must be recalled immediately.
5. The CBFC role: The role of film certification board members who in disregard of the present censorship guidelines, cinematographic representation rules and the legislative requirements, allowed quite apparent scenes of tobacco brand promotions through movies is intriguingly strange. Circumstances leading to such a scenario should be assessed and investigated so that such things do not happen in future.
6. Completely ban all depiction of tobacco: The opinion of the majority suggests that tobacco depiction is not at all a parameter on the basis of which a movie is watched. Tobacco has been perceived as a negative influence having no bearing on the decision of the public to watch a movie. It is perceived that the quality of the movie can in no way be affected by restricting tobacco depiction. In all respects the general public is not at all concerned about the depicting of tobacco in the movies. Whatever concerns are, they are only about the negative effects of tobacco depiction. So it is highly recommended that in the larger public interest the government must totally ban all tobacco depiction in all kinds of motion pictures.
7. Strict regulation: The tobacco companies and movie producers have shown little commitment to restrict the harmful influence of tobacco on youngsters. The commercial interest seemed to have weighed heavily on the minds of most of the film makers. There are more than one motion picture producers association and many independent producers too. These associations are not in a position to enforce any binding legal restrictions on the film producers to follow any particular parameter (like not showing tobacco) or other non-legislative guidelines. In the past also, we have seen that the commitment by various factions of film industry to follow non-tobacco promotion policy have turned out to be mere rhetoric, therefore the Government must impose strict regulations and legislative measures to restrict depiction of tobacco in movies without any exemption to the proposed restriction. The only exception can be a regulated permission for anti-tobacco educational movies without any mention of any tobacco brand name, company name or any related identical mention, whether directly on indirectly. Caution: Tobacco companies should not be allowed to produce any such anti-tobacco movies lest they may misuse the provision.
8. Obliterate tobacco scenes and show anti-tobacco advertisements: Wherever possible all tobacco scenes from the older movies showing tobacco brand must be removed and where it is not possible for any reason strong anti-tobacco advertisements must be run. The duration can be 3-5 minutes for every one hour or a part of such movie immaterial of the number of smoking scenes. For higher number of tobacco scenes increased frequency of anti-tobacco messages may be screened.
9. Run anti-tobacco advertisements on television: The national broadcaster and the other satellite channels should be asked to run regular anti-tobacco films and advertisement.
10. Ban surrogate advertisements: The presence of tobacco companies umbrella brands, and tobacco brand logos on non-tobacco products (including, but not limited to clothing, pan-masala, perfumes, spices, tea, motor racing cars, and events) should be considered tobacco brand promotion and subject to the same rules as direct tobacco promotion. Presently many other products marketed tobacco companies use the same umbrella brand/trade name as that of the tobacco company and/or the tobacco product, this creates an indirect psychological relationship with other tobacco products available bearing the same/similar insignia, logo, brand or trade name. This needs to be stopped immediately.
11. Block foreign movies showing tobacco: The foreign movies showing tobacco must be regulated and those violating the guidelines must be prohibited entry into India with immediate effect.