Insane state of today's advertising part 3

Post by tempestn » Fri, Sep 01, 2017, 10:07 AM UTC

icebraining wrote: post #244

mattmanser wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Crikey, guy shares an anecdote of how an ad helped him and all you can do is be really nasty about it, it's completely unnecessary. I bought a piano course from Udemy because of advertising on FB (and then spent an additional £150 on a keyboard). I'm really enjoying it. Please tell me what a horrible human being I am.

Honestly, in the context of the thread, I see the comment as downplaying and trivializing the serious concerns raised by oasfboasbfos. Besides, I didn't insult anyone, but the company as a whole; it seems absurd to me to take personal offense. Every company has its fair share of incompetence.

Post by enraged_camel » Fri, Sep 01, 2017, 10:07 AM UTC

recursive wrote: post #182

oasfboasbfos wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only good ad is a dead one. With very few exceptions, especially in the consumer space, you won't need advertising if you actually need something. You'll search it out or your friends will tell you what to buy. Advertising serves as a way for the capitalist class to exert veto power over other aspects of society by yanking funding at opportune moments (see the current Google snafu or Bill O'Reilly's departure fro…

Everyone thinks advertising doesn't work on them. And everyone is wrong.

Post by builditand » Fri, Sep 01, 2017, 10:12 AM UTC

strken wrote: post #221

tonyedgecombe wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I dislike relevant ads the most because they are most likely to influence my behaviour.

There must be a point between "advertisement for useless junk" and "useful advice + an affiliate link" where the two cross over, and as far as I can tell the only differences are relevance and directness. One example of advertising that I think is acceptable are the ads on the slatestarcodex.com sidebar, which are manually placed there by the author and targeted directly at the niche he writes in. If a computer could…

Post by bonqis » Fri, Sep 01, 2017, 10:16 AM UTC

mdpopescu wrote: post #254

bonqis wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I co-founded Flattr and one of the things we learned is that even a one-click is to much effort. So we now have a zero-click solution that measures attention and visits in your browser locally (as Archon810 wrote.) and then your monthly subscription is distributed based on that. Happy to answer anything and or give an invite.

Do you generate reports with how much was spent on each site? If I were using such a browser / add-on, that would make for an interesting reading at least once in a while.

Post by zimpenfish » Fri, Sep 01, 2017, 10:17 AM UTC

crummy wrote: post #269

mozumder wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yah your argument against adverting is bullshit. Even consumers love ads. Did you know that they even pay money because they want ads? Those 900 pages of Vogue that they buy every September, do you think they're filled with articles? Because they're about 870 pages of fashion ads. People specifically buy them because of the advertising. And did you know Sunday papers are a thing, filled with coupons, that are basical…

I think people buy Vogue (and all other advertising-sodden media) despite the ads, not because of it.