President Murmu’s Message to Film Stars: Why Celebrity Endorsements Are Under the Spotlight Again

New Delhi: Celebrity advertising has once again become a subject of public discussion after President Droupadi Murmu urged popular film personalities to avoid endorsing products that could be harmful to public health.

Speaking at the 72nd National Film Awards ceremony in Ekta Nagar, Gujarat, on September 22, 2026, President Murmu highlighted the enormous influence that successful actors and artists have on children and young people. She said celebrities can encourage positive lifestyle choices and appealed to them to be careful about the products they associate themselves with.

Her remarks have attracted particular attention because they come amid renewed scrutiny of advertisements associated with pan masala and so-called surrogate advertising.

Why Did President Murmu Raise the Issue?

The central point of the President's message was not limited to one particular brand or actor. Instead, she focused on the broader influence of celebrities.

According to reports of her speech, Murmu said successful artists can influence millions of young people when they speak about disciplined and healthy lifestyles. She therefore urged popular artists not to endorse products harmful to people's health.

Her comments put the spotlight on an important question: Does celebrity advertising carry responsibilities beyond the commercial agreement between an actor and a brand?

For major film stars, an advertisement can reach millions of people within a short period. That makes celebrity endorsements particularly powerful in shaping brand recognition.

The Pan Masala Advertising Debate

The issue has become more complicated because some pan masala companies have promoted products such as elaichi or mouth fresheners using branding closely associated with their wider product portfolio.

This is commonly discussed in the context of surrogate advertising.

In simple terms, surrogate advertising refers to promoting another product using the branding, identity or imagery of a product whose advertising is restricted or prohibited. The Indian Express explained that regulators have examined whether advertisements for products such as elaichi can indirectly maintain consumer recognition of a pan masala brand.

This distinction is at the heart of the current debate.

An advertisement may formally present one product, while regulators and critics may question whether the larger brand association is also being reinforced.

Why Are Film Stars So Important in This Debate?

Actors are not ordinary advertising personalities.

A successful star can have an enormous fan base, and their public image often extends beyond movies into fashion, lifestyle, fitness and consumer products.

This is particularly significant when advertisements reach younger viewers.

President Murmu specifically referred to the ability of film personalities to influence children and young people. Her remarks therefore broaden the conversation from “What product is being advertised?” to “What message does a celebrity's association with that product communicate?”

At the same time, celebrity endorsements are commercial contracts, and questions about advertising responsibility also involve brands, advertising agencies, broadcasters and regulators.

Recent Regulatory Attention

President Murmu's remarks came shortly after action by the Maharashtra Food and Drug Administration involving three prominent Bollywood actors.

In August 2026, Maharashtra FDA issued show-cause notices to Shah Rukh Khan, Ajay Devgn and Tiger Shroff concerning their participation in an advertisement for Vimal Elaichi. The regulator questioned whether the advertisement could amount to surrogate promotion of Vimal Pan Masala.

The notices do not themselves establish wrongdoing; they are part of the regulatory process in which the individuals and other parties can respond to the allegations.

The episode nevertheless demonstrates why celebrity advertising has moved back into the spotlight.

Why Surrogate Advertising Is Difficult to Understand

For consumers, the distinction between a brand's different products may not always be obvious.

A familiar logo, colour scheme, slogan, celebrity or advertising style can contribute to brand recognition even when the advertisement technically promotes a different product.

That is why regulators can examine not only the words used in an advertisement but also the broader branding and the possible connection between products.

The debate is therefore more complicated than simply asking whether an advertisement contains tobacco.

Celebrities Face a Commercial Choice

For actors, endorsements are an important part of the entertainment business.

A major celebrity can promote everything from automobiles and mobile phones to clothing, food, financial services and lifestyle products. Brands, meanwhile, pay for access to the trust and attention associated with popular personalities.

This creates a commercial calculation for both sides.

However, President Murmu's remarks underline another consideration: the long-term public image of a celebrity and the potential social impact of the products they promote.

The decision ultimately involves the celebrity, the brand and the applicable advertising and regulatory framework.

The Bigger Question: Who Should Be Responsible?

The renewed discussion has produced two connected questions.

First: Should celebrities exercise greater caution before accepting certain endorsement deals?

Second: If a product is considered harmful or its advertising is restricted, should responsibility primarily rest with the companies and regulatory system rather than individual celebrities?

These questions have different dimensions.

Celebrity responsibility concerns the influence of public figures. Regulation concerns what products can legally be manufactured, sold and advertised. Advertising standards concern how products and brands can be presented to consumers.

The recent debate shows that all three areas can overlap.

What President Murmu’s Message Means for the Film Industry

The President's comments are significant because they place celebrity responsibility within a larger conversation about the social influence of Indian cinema.

Her National Film Awards speech also addressed issues such as the treatment and social security of workers, assistants and smaller artists in the film industry, as well as women's representation on award juries.

The endorsement remarks were therefore part of a broader message about the responsibilities that accompany influence and visibility.

For audiences, the episode is another reminder that a celebrity advertisement is not simply about selling a product. It can also shape how a brand is perceived, particularly among younger consumers.

Final Takeaway

President Droupadi Murmu's appeal has brought celebrity endorsements back into the national conversation at a time when regulators are already examining the relationship between pan masala brands and surrogate advertising.

The controversy is unlikely to be resolved simply by asking whether a particular advertisement promotes elaichi, pan masala or another product. The larger issue is how branding, celebrity influence, advertising rules and public-health concerns intersect.

As India's entertainment industry continues to expand its influence across television, cinema and social media, the question of how celebrities use that influence is likely to remain an important part of the advertising debate.