Summary
President Droupadi Murmu presented the 72nd National Film Awards at Ekta Nagar, Gujarat, the first time the ceremony has been held outside Delhi. In her address she urged popular artistes not to endorse products harmful to health.
She pointed out that millions of children and young people copy successful stars and said a true star spreads light, not darkness. She also asked the film industry to provide social security for small-scale workers and to include more women on award juries.
The appeal comes as state food regulators and the Central Consumer Protection Authority act against pan masala endorsements. Those actions raise the question of where a star's commercial freedom ends and their moral responsibility begins.
WHY IN NEWS FOR UPSC & STATE PCS
On September 22, 2026, while presenting the National Film Awards for 2024, the President appealed to film stars not to endorse products harmful to health. The appeal follows recent public backlash and regulatory notices, including from the Maharashtra FDA, against leading actors endorsing pan masala brands.
Surrogate advertising is prohibited under the CCPA framework made under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. Endorsers can be held accountable for misleading advertisements.
Standard News
You Were Paid to Say "Mouth Freshener." Your Fans Heard Something Else.
Imagine you are the star. A brand offers you a large fee to appear in an advert for its "cardamom mouth freshener." The product in the advert is legal. Your lawyers have checked the contract. You know two other things as well: the brand name is best known for a pan masala sold in the same packaging and your fans include schoolchildren who copy what you wear, say and buy. The easy answer would be "Just refuse, obviously." It isn't obvious.
You also have real claims of your own.
Why the dilemma is real
The case for signing: Endorsements are lawful work. Film careers are short and uncertain and many actors support families and crews on brand income. The product being advertised is legal. Adults are entitled to make their own choices and a society that treats every celebrity as a moral guardian risks paternalism, deciding for grown people what they may be shown.
The case against: Influence is not neutral. As the President said, "millions of children and young people" emulate successful artistes. A surrogate advert is built to use your credibility to keep a harmful brand familiar in the same shops where the harmful version is sold. The fan who copies you is not buying cardamom.
Both sides lose something real: a career income and freedom of contract on one side, a teenager's health on the other.
Legal permission and moral accountability The law marks the outer limit.
CCPA guidelines under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 prohibit surrogate advertising and require endorsers to exercise due diligence. But the law only settles what you may do, not what you should do. An advert can be carefully drafted to stay legal while still achieving exactly what the law prohibits.
This is where Gandhian trusteeship applies directly. Gandhi argued that wealth beyond one's needs is held in trust for society. Apply that to fame: a star's reach was created by audiences, cinema halls and public attention.
It is held in trust and a trustee may not use trust property against the people it came from. Taking a surrogate fee spends the trust against its beneficiaries. A Kantian check reaches the same point from another direction.
Using fans' admiration to deliver a harmful habit treats them merely as means to a fee, not as ends in themselves.
The resolution I would decline the surrogate endorsement, while defending the star's right to endorse lawful products that do not carry a harmful brand. The line is not "only healthy products." It is: do not lend your credibility to a brand whose recognition depends on something harmful. This choice has costs. It gives up significant income and the principle has grey areas: sugary drinks, fantasy gaming, fast food. It also relies on individual conscience in an industry where one star's refusal is another star's contract. But the President framed it correctly. The measure of a star is what their influence does to the people who follow them, not how much the influence earns.
Quick Facts
Key numbers & takeaways — revise these first
-
The 72nd National Film Awards, for 2024, were presented on September 22, 2026 at Ekta Nagar (Kevadia), Gujarat.
-
It was the first time the ceremony was held outside New Delhi.
-
Veteran Kannada actor Anant Nag received the Dadasaheb Phalke Award.
-
Surrogate advertising means promoting a banned or harmful product under the cover of another product that carries the same brand name.
-
The Consumer Protection Act, 2019 established the Central Consumer Protection Authority, whose guidelines prohibit surrogate advertising.
-
Endorsers can be held accountable for misleading advertisements under the CCPA framework.
-
The Statue of Unity at Ekta Nagar is 182 metres tall.
Connect the dots for your UPSC preparation.
Standard news covers the event. Log in to read our comprehensive analysis and uncover the hidden constitutional, structural, and ethical dimensions of this topic:
The four structural reasons surrogate endorsements continue despite the CCPA ban, from shared brand names to fee structures.
How Gandhian trusteeship and the Kantian means-end test apply to a star's fame and where each framework reaches its limit.
What is working and what is failing in India's regulation of endorsements, including the endorser due-diligence duty and the grey-area products the law does not cover.
A short-term and long-term way forward that combines regulation, industry self-restraint and public awareness.
Included in this analysis
Join thousands of aspirants analyzing the news deeply.
Unlock Premium — Rs.699 AnnuallyDon't have an account? Sign up for free