The logical solution would be to ban cigarette products completely or to forego their "dirty money", i.e. taxpayers' money, in the cantons of Neuchâtel, Vaud or Lucerne, where the cigarette multinationals are located. Of course, no politician dares to make such a demand.
The maxim has prevailed in our society: if you can't get rid of the evil, you attack the advertising. You hit the proverbial sack, but actually you mean the donkey. After the cigarette industry, bank, car, airline, travel morocco rcs data and food advertising will soon suffer from new bans and restrictions. The advertising industry cannot expect any support from our parliamentarians; the promises of being seen as a good and noble person and being able to wallow in the sociopolitical mainstream are too tempting. And I write this as a convinced non-smoker.
But it gets even more absurd: Many media outlets, dvertising, show no understanding for the advertising and marketing industry. For example, the culture-loving "Tages-Anzeiger" criticized Credit Suisse last Friday for its cultural sponsorship of the Lucerne Festival. But who should and can pay for this high-quality and certainly not cheap cultural event if not a financially strong, private company? Or take the "SonntagsZeitung," which last Sunday sang the praises of the fashion chain Zara because it "completely foregoes marketing." The author's conclusion: "Staying stubborn and quiet" when everyone else is loud is "great."