The New Straits Times, July 20, 1998
The controversy over "indirect" advertisements of alcoholic beverages on motor vehicles has died down with the Ministry of Transport's announcement that such advertisements would be banned.
The swift action by the Ministry is very sobering, to say the least. In fact the Ministry has been very visible and consistent in its campaign to wipe out drunk driving through the use of very graphic counter-advertisements aired regularly on television.
Last month, the Government reinforced this message when it directed Sukom to cancel the sponsorship of a beer company. From the viewpoint of public health interest, the pace at which these actions were taken is very commendable.
More importantly, the ban has severed the link between drinking and sports. The two will never mix, be it in the arena or even in the spectators' stand. We have seen enough sport-related violence caused by having one too many.
In this respect too, the Ministry of Information must be praised. Of course there have never been any advertisements on alcoholic beverages for as long as one can remember.
Despite the sponsorship of the International Cricket Tournament by a beer company held in Malaysia last year, the electronic media was careful not to air the company's logo when broadcasting reports of the match.
Such a meticulous consideration goes to show that we are genuinely concerned with not promoting the drinking habit in the country, what more at the expense of sports. Now the message to youngsters especially is indeed very clear - alcohol and sports are not compatible.
However, a question that needs to be raised concerns "indirect" tobacco advertisements. How earnest are the Government and the relevant ministries i.e. the Information and Youth and Sports ministries in curbing these advertisements in the name of sports?
Compared to the action taken against "indirect" beer advertisements, the Government appears to have dragged its feet in the case of "indirect" tobacco advertisements. It is astonishing that tobacco advertisements are plastered almost everywhere.
Will things change soon now that the Deputy Health Minister has announced the intention to do away with such tobacco advertisements and sponsorship (NST, June 1) when officiating the World No-Tobacco Day on May 31?
Will action be taken as quickly as in the case of the beer companies or will the feet-dragging continue indefinitely?
One can't help but feel that there is a lack of political will when in comes to the tobacco industry.
Why this difference exists is mind-boggling. Is it the advertising revenue? If so, why are television stations (and hence, the Ministry of Information) not accepting "indirect" beer ads as well? After all, other electronic media like the cinemas are allowed to screen full-blown beer advertisements repeatedly.
Moreover, the print media has been taking advantage of the situation by putting full-page colour ads showing tantalising bottles of beer (and women) ever so often in the newspapers. There's very little controversy arising from this. Somehow, television is the preferred media of tobacco companies for conveying whatever image they want to.
Is it based on religious grounds that beer ads are disallowed? This, too, does not make sense because the National Fatwa Council has ruled since March 1995 that tobacco is haram, the same as with all alcoholic beverages. However, the media chooses to remain oblivious to these rulings.
The Ministry of Information too is not keen on publicising this important decision, especially to Muslims who, according to surveys, make up the majority of smokers.
Even after a local cigarette company openly admitted last February that smoking is linked to lung cancer, and that passive smoking is dangerous, it is business as usual in terms of advertising the obnoxious product. In fact, the said company is now moving its operations from Hong Kong to Malaysia in September.
The tobacco business seems to be booming in Malaysia thanks to our indecisiveness. Meanwhile, we continue to lament that an increasing number of our youth are taking up smoking.
Hence, as we applaud the announcement to reduce dependence on tobacco companies for sponsorship, such dependency seems ingrained much like the smoking habit itself.
The government still condones the notion that unlike alcohol, tobacco and sports are compatible, even when sporting bodies like the International Olympic Committee and Fifa have long ruled against it.
The Government must make its stand. Is this not the time that there be more visible and coherent programmes against the impending tobacco-invasion of our society, beginning with the ban on all "indirect" tobacco ads? - National Poison Centre.
