www.public4you.fora.pl

kannhelen

The government's dedicated efforts over the past few years to target smoking [link widoczny dla zalogowanych] in films stand in direct contrast to its toothless efforts to actually curb smoking on the ground. It dithered for years on the pictorial warnings on tobacco products, and even when they did come out, they were comical at best. Cigarettes in India are nowhere as prohibitively expensive as they are abroad.

However, the government is quick to enact laws and amendments banning smoking in films, TV and advertising, in a classic case of shooting the messenger, while the producer and the consumer of the product are unaffected. If other countries have combated smoking without necessarily throttling their movies, does the Indian film audience have a uniquely high susceptibility to cinematic influence? Also, if scrolls and warnings (that essentially mar the experience of a film) have to be introduced for smoking on screen because it is seen to influence people to do something that's harmful for them, why not the same for drinking on screen?

Rape scenes, extramarital affairs, fast driving - all of these might be said to influence people to do things that would affect them adversely or even be fatal. What about bunking class, for instance - and where would this selective policing stop? An over-zealous, over-righteous, misguided policy like this one is hard to justify. The government's efforts to ensure better public health and minimize smoking should be reflected in the CBFC's (censor board's) certification policy, not in curbing creative freedom or spoiling the moviegoing experience.