The issue of how to handle smoking in films continues to be a real hot potato in many countries. As the film industry focuses on its responsibility to clearly label content that depicts smoking while avoiding any promotion of smoking in films, health authorities—in their understandable desire to curtail tobacco consumption—sometimes overzealously impose unrealistic conditions in pursuit of public health ends. It can be tricky to strike the right balance, ensuring that smoking is not promoted in films while avoiding undue censorship where some depiction of smoking is a necessary part of the storytelling. Likewise, anti-smoking warnings are a legitimate requirement—unless they are enforced through unrealistic regulations that not only interrupt the flow of a plot but require bespoke country-by-country editing to insert warnings into the narrative of the film. Saying this, I am fully aware that the tobacco industry will do just about anything to promote smoking and try to gain new consumers for its noxious products. (The marketing of candy flavoured nicotine packs in corner stores near schools in some countries is a good example, if one was needed). Various countries are grappling with this dilemma; protecting public health while ensuring that health regulations don’t inflict unintended collateral damage. India is no exception.

The current controversy in India is about new draft anti-smoking regulations for film content announced by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare in September. The new regulations would require that online streaming services (Video on Demand), or what is known as “online curated content” (OCC) in India (think Netflix, Hotstar, Amazon Prime, SonyLIV etc), display 30 second non-skippable anti-smoking health spots at the start of—and in the middle of—any film that depicts smoking. In seeking to impose these requirements in such a heavy-handed and frankly unrealistic way, the Health Ministry managed to step clumsily on the toes of the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB), which is responsible for regulation of broadcasting. The mandatory insertion of health spots like this is both unnecessary and impractical, apart from being a questionable intrusion into MIB’s domain.

In addition to the requirement for tobacco warning spots at the beginning and midway point of films where smoking takes place, Indian media reports the regulations also require the insertion of a 20 second audio-visual disclaimer notice warning about the dangers of tobacco use, to be displayed before the film rolls. In scenes where smoking or tobacco consumption is depicted, static anti-tobacco warnings must be displayed throughout. This is a classic case of repetitive overkill. The editing and physical requirements to insert all these warning into the streaming content is no small matter. Existing global catalogue will need to be reviewed and re-edited if the content is to be shown in India. Of course nothing is impossible, even if impractical, but the result will likely be that if the insertion requirement is maintained, many films will not be shown in India. The cost of compliance will be just too great to justify the benefit of providing that particular film. Responsible members of the Indian viewing public will be the losers; others will resort to accessing pirated content to view the movies they want to see. Piracy in India is already a major issue. This proposal has the potential to supercharge it.

This sledgehammer approach is excessive and certainly not needed. Films on OCC platforms already contain warnings about depiction of smoking (as well as other relevant warnings regarding the nature of the content to be shown). Moreover, online curated content (OCC) is different from content broadcast over-the-air or distributed by cable or satellite. It is “on demand” content that is “pulled” by viewers from a menu rather than being “pushed” by broadcasters. As a result, there is a much greater element of choice and judgement on the part of the consumer. No one is going to be surprised by accidentally tripping over a film where the heroine lights up a fag or the erudite detective puffs away on a pipe. Nor is this likely to make them rush out and stock up on bidis. Viewers know in advance what they are going to watch and choose appropriately labelled and classified content accordingly.

Indeed, the “rub your nose in it” repetitive flashing of anti-smoking warnings runs the risk of turning off OCC consumers, who will tune out messages of this nature as they find themselves constantly bombarded with anti-smoking messages as they scroll for what they want to watch. For customers who routinely browse content across several streaming platforms to find their viewing preference, this could well turn them off the streaming experience altogether, just as streaming is starting to get traction in India. It is far better to deliver the message through categorization and clear labelling of content so that viewers are aware of what they will be exposed to—and are prepared to make judgements accordingly.

There is no question that smoking needs to be combatted, and that India has a smoking problem. A 2015 study identified India as the world’s second largest market for tobacco products (after China) with a smoking rate of 48% among males and 20% among females. India has already taken steps to address this problem. It was one of the first countries to ratify the World Health Organization’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, in 2003.

The Convention calls for a range of measures to combat smoking, including prohibiting advertising for tobacco products that is false, misleading, or deceptive and by requiring health warnings on tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorships. It also requires restrictions on incentives to purchase tobacco and prohibition, if legally possible, of tobacco sponsorship of international events and activities. Guidelines attached to the Framework Convention suggest the elements of a comprehensive ban on tobacco advertising should include “implementing a ratings or classification system that takes tobacco depictions into account.” That is what international streamers and OCC providers in India are committed to and already provide.

Indian consumers of streaming entertainment content need to be treated as adults who, having been notified of what they are about to watch, can make informed judgements without having their viewing experience interrupted with audio visual inserts before and during the film while static messages distract their attention. There is no need for the Health Ministry to drag out its big cannons to blow holes into carefully curated and suitably labelled content, trampling on the jurisdiction of the Ministry of record in the process while creating havoc in the film industry to the detriment of creators and viewers alike. By all means combat the public health scourge of smoking, but do it in a responsible, proportionate and balanced way.

This article was first published on Hugh Stephens Blog