Live data from Hacker News

How Fear and Outrage Are Sold for Profit

medium.com

201–210 of 262 posts

Re: How Fear and Outrage Are Sold for Profit

#201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had similar thinking about how alien that would be in a previous discussion around service culture in the US vs. Germany. In the US, it is expected that employees in service businesses (think coffee shops, grocery stores, etc.) put on a smiling face and pretend to love their jobs. In Germany, I was told that is unheard of because it is thought of as inhumane to force someone to pretend they love their job like that…

If I had to work a shit job like grocery store clerk, I'd much prefer an ineffectual dolt of a boss telling me to smile than I would a German realist boss telling me a smile isn't a requirement of my employment.

Or you'll have an American realist Walmart boss telling you to "cheer" up. I see it as unvalued emotional labor, and degrading to those who do it as they are non-negotiably expected to do it.

Some people are into this, and some aren't -- but if you are poor and working retail, then you must smile and sometimes sing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOkQJm_UGM4

Re: How Fear and Outrage Are Sold for Profit

#202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll get myself in trouble, but the main difference between Fox News and the NYT is that the NYT is far more effective at disguising its bias. Let's face it, Fox News doesn't even try. My advice to you is to follow foreign news services and compare the news you get. The biggest challenge, unfortunately, is that you have to dig a bit because lately English language news is dominated by stories from Reuters and AP. You…

Which sources would you recommend? The BBC and The Guardian are foreign and have their own news gathering networks but for the most part seem similar to the NYT. If it helps I can read French as well as English. When I was a kid I listened to Radio Moscow and to go honest found it not that much different from the BBC..

Al jazeera is worth watching. Both the BBC and the Guardian, while being foreign regurgitate a lot of stuff out of Reuters (especially BBC when it comes to foreign news). Take a look at NHK -- seemingly highly influenced by the Japanese government, but worth watching for the contrast.

The key here is not to try to find the truth. Rather try to find different reports of the same events (or different editing wrt to what makes the final cut). It's quite hard if you are stuck in English because a huge amount of English language news reports come from the same pool of reporters. These reports are then packaged up differently, but the bias often exists prior to it getting to the final news service. It is interesting (and instructive), to try to find the source of news stories and then write down the names of the reporters whose stories make it into your news. What I've found (YMMV) is that only 3-4 reporters write most of the English language news for reports in certain regions. Those reports are then recycled through all of the news services.

I first started doing this for Japanese news stories when I found serious factual errors in English language news stories related to Fukushima and nuclear power in Japan. In one instance, all of the news outlets reported that the power station near me was restarting within 2 weeks. So I went down to the power station and asked them. They denied the story and in fact, more than 6 years later, they are still not operating (though they do plan to restart soon). When I traced back all of the stories that I could find provenance for in the western press, I found that it all came back to 3 Japanese reporters for Reuters. Since then I've off and on checked western news reports and still find that those 3 reporters dominate all of the western news reports about Japan.

Now, it's crap of me to say all this and not provide any proof. In my defence, I really don't want to get involved in the "fake news" thing going on in the US. It's not my intent to make any accusations, but rather to encourage people to look for themselves. I have not put forth the kind of effort necessary to make accusations that might affect somebody's career. What I'm saying is that it didn't take much effort at all for me to notice that something was not right, so if you look I think you'll also have no trouble seeing it either.

Or I might be mistaken. It wouldn't be the first time it happened.

Re: How Fear and Outrage Are Sold for Profit

#203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The territory government here asked for public submissions regarding the possibility of relaxing restrictions on outdoor display advertising. It received more submissions than any other it appears: http://www.parliament.act.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004... While I haven't read every one, most submissions seem to be against relaxing restrictions and in favor of tightening them up.

The problem is that companies can tangibly prove the benefit, even if it's minuscule (imagine if 1:10000 car ads will generate a sell at best, that's still better than no advertising), but the citizenry have a hard time proving the opposite - that having a sanctuary from advertising is actually a good thing. And because of that, I fully suspect ads to continue infiltrating our American (and British, and Australian) l…

I suppose I might object that "making a sale" is a tangible benefit but that is a different conversation about the value of commerce in general. Let's not go there today!

I heartily agree with your thesis though - making the case that 'nothing' is a good thing is incredibly difficult. It took decades to prove cigarettes dangerous then get rid of cigarette advertising and that was linked to an observable medical problem.

I don't hold hope that we'll manage with advertising.

Re: How Fear and Outrage Are Sold for Profit

#204
post #74

"Regardless of the dramatic drop in crime over the last 30 years, more than half the population believes crime is worse than it was in years past." "The children now love luxury. They have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise." - Socrates This argument keeps popping up. To confirm it we would need a control group. It is likely that even before soci…

As far as I can tell, "things are worse now" (or put the other way, "everything was better in the past") is a generally accepted thing throughout time and space. Including absurdities like "people were happier" or "there was less pollution".

Re: How Fear and Outrage Are Sold for Profit

#205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I had to work a shit job like grocery store clerk, I'd much prefer an ineffectual dolt of a boss telling me to smile than I would a German realist boss telling me a smile isn't a requirement of my employment.

Or you'll have an American realist Walmart boss telling you to "cheer" up. I see it as unvalued emotional labor, and degrading to those who do it as they are non-negotiably expected to do it. Some people are into this, and some aren't -- but if you are poor and working retail, then you must smile and sometimes sing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOkQJm_UGM4

Haha, that video is pathetic.

https://youtu.be/Z8zNsUTWsOc

Re: How Fear and Outrage Are Sold for Profit

#206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had similar thinking about how alien that would be in a previous discussion around service culture in the US vs. Germany. In the US, it is expected that employees in service businesses (think coffee shops, grocery stores, etc.) put on a smiling face and pretend to love their jobs. In Germany, I was told that is unheard of because it is thought of as inhumane to force someone to pretend they love their job like that…

Agreed. A friend mocked British service standards the other day and I said that this showed people hadn't completely given up. It's a form of resistance.

I have oft said that the people who give me dour customer service (which is a lot) have been to the Huddersfield School of Customer Service.

Disclaimer: I live in Huddersfield and it is sometimes grim up north.

Re: How Fear and Outrage Are Sold for Profit

#207

As a kid, I grew up in a country with almost no advertising. Repeat after me: No ads in the streets, in the TV, in the radio, nowhere. One day we found a magazine (from another country), which contained ads. Two people smoking cigarettes in a strangely alien world, some kind of jungle - or a safari, maybe. This image was so strange in many ways: Why is it there in a magazine, that was about something completely diffe…

I have no TV. When I see an advert if I'm round someone's house or something like this, when you have not seen adverts for a while, they just look ridiculous. Some person telling you with utmost urgency about something so trivial. I don't know why this is, but when you step back and are not used to adverts, when you do see them they just seem so transparently pathetic.

I turn the sound off when ads come on. I am always completely bewildered by them.

Re: How Fear and Outrage Are Sold for Profit

#208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no TV. When I see an advert if I'm round someone's house or something like this, when you have not seen adverts for a while, they just look ridiculous. Some person telling you with utmost urgency about something so trivial. I don't know why this is, but when you step back and are not used to adverts, when you do see them they just seem so transparently pathetic.

I turn the sound off when ads come on. I am always completely bewildered by them.

Used to do that too, when I was watching TV. It's strange how the perspective changes with no sound. You can block your sight by looking elsewhere, but you can't stop from hearing an open TV or radio. If you cut the sound, you cut their teeth.

Re: How Fear and Outrage Are Sold for Profit

#209

As a kid, I grew up in a country with almost no advertising. Repeat after me: No ads in the streets, in the TV, in the radio, nowhere. One day we found a magazine (from another country), which contained ads. Two people smoking cigarettes in a strangely alien world, some kind of jungle - or a safari, maybe. This image was so strange in many ways: Why is it there in a magazine, that was about something completely diffe…

Advertising is a fact of life, though. Without it, there's no way to inform potential customers of a new brand or product. I mean, imagine if it all disappeared tomorrow. Wouldn't people just stick to the megacorps and established brands they already know? Wouldn't this make it even that much tougher for a Netflix to compete with a Comcast, or an Uber/Lyft to compete with an entrenched taxi industry? How would Dollar…

> Without it, there's no way to inform potential customers of a new brand or product.

What about word of mouth, observing other people, searching for a product online?

Re: How Fear and Outrage Are Sold for Profit

#210

As a kid, I grew up in a country with almost no advertising. Repeat after me: No ads in the streets, in the TV, in the radio, nowhere. One day we found a magazine (from another country), which contained ads. Two people smoking cigarettes in a strangely alien world, some kind of jungle - or a safari, maybe. This image was so strange in many ways: Why is it there in a magazine, that was about something completely diffe…

> Image a day in your life without coming across an ad

I have had such days. I read a lot of stuff online, and I have adblockers. My entertainment is supplied by books and TV, where I watch either channels like Netflix or recorded shows, where I can skip through commercials. It's not exactly not encountering ads - and I surely encounter billboards when I drive around (though I don't think I can recall any of them, the mind filters them out by now), but it's pretty close and I'm sure I've had days where I didn't see ads. The thing is, they didn't feel much different from the days where I saw some.

> society, that overproduces things and where a large part of your survival depends on your skill to sell

That is preferable to the society which underproduces things and where large part of your survival depends on you skill in finding how to satisfy basic needs - food, shelter, etc. I'd rather watch ads than be hungry. My deepest hope is to always live in the former kind of society - where productivity is so high that it's ok to spend resources on convincing people to consume stuff. I've lived in another kind of society - where people spend resources on finding way to get decent food, clothes, books, etc. and where ads convincing people to consume some luxurious goods could not be taken but as a cruel joke. I'd much rather take the overproducing one.

Post reply on HN