271–280 of 657 posts
Jokes aside, advertisement itself maybe not a "cancer on society", but click-based advertisement is definitely ruining the internet and damaging the society. Can't wait until its era is over.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've worked at an organization that failed to advertise its products, causing massive inefficiency & waste - lots of people have access to our technology but don't know about it and end up implementing the same basic CRUD app over and over. Don't underestimate the economic loss caused by people just not knowing there's a better way.
The main thesis of the article: Real world advertising is not about informing, it's about convincing. Over time, it became increasingly manipulative and dishonest. It also became more effective. In the process, it grew to consume a significant amount of resources of every company on the planet. There's a huge difference between informational advertising, which I support, and manipulative advertising, which is reprehe…
The good old survival bias. You did it thus it's possible for all!
Sadly the truth is, word of mouth doesn't always work, you are just lucky.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wow. Banning something unhealthy. That didn’t work out so well for alcohol or drugs. The last thing I want is more government power.
Rather than banning, how about having an age minimum, something that’s worked fairly well* for alcohol and cigarettes? *depending on your definition of working fairly well
It’s the same consequences. Little Johnny with well connected parents and a judge who doesn’t want to ruin the life of someone “who could be his kid” gets off easy while they expel little Jerome who is just “going to turn out to be a thug anyway.”
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> For example, everybody on the planet is now familiar with soft drinks. If anybody has never tasted Coke, it's not by accident. But Coke's ad budget is enormous. If all soft drink companies stopped advertising tomorrow, society would not be worse off. And we'd have billions of dollars [1] to spend on something useful. Not that I disagree, but where do you draw the line? Sure, if Coke stopped advertising we'd have bi…
As a doctor, I'm all for banning soft drinks, recognizing that it probably will never happen. But, the health externalities associated with drinking such beverages should get priced in and be used to offset eventual health complications. This is not easy because no one likes taxes, but you get what you pay for.
Just curious, what are some of your hobbies? Things you like to do in your spare time?
LOL, looks like some people can see where I'm going with this.
This is a dogmatic viewpoint I think often seen in very technical people who are unwilling to see the interconnectedness of how our society works. I bet there's any number of things this person values that simply wouldn't exist without advertising. It's a childish and immature opinion really. Anyone who hates advertising this much should show their commitment by working at an organization that does not advertise. Loa…
What valuable things wouldn't exist without advertising?
My SO escape room wouldn't exist without advertising either... I'm pretty sure that's true for PLENTY of business.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can have it - just don't expect me to pay for your coronary. A long and painful death that costs millions. Was it worth it?
Thank god, an argument against universal healthcare. I’ll eat the snacks I want. I’ll pay for the healthcare I want and need. You do what you need. And neither one of us is responsible for the other. Now leave me be.
They will die without treatment. They can be saved, but not for free. What action, if any, do you recommend?
Long, long ago, someone suggested their extremely simple fix for advertising: stop letting companies declare it as a business expense. The Law of Unintended Consequences always gets you in weird ways, and I'm not a lobbyist or a public policy person, nor do I know anyone highly placed in those fields. But one of the ways companies slowly fail is by choosing to sell harder instead of making their product better. If we…
i can only imagine that consumers love the advertisements, otehrwise, why would they buy the product?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhrnMbhMgmw
It makes a really important point, though: where do you draw the line at what is considered "advertising"? It's a pervasive part of humanity.
> Real world advertising is not about informing, it's about convincing.
That's life, though, isn't it? Me convincing my employer I'm the best person for the job. Convincing my wife I'm the best choice for a husband. Ultimately, everything becomes a sort of "advertisement". It's a very slippery slope.
It's even more interesting that this article even says:
> When I say "advertising", I use this term somewhat loosely...
Which is a problem when you want to make bold claims like "Advertising as cancer".
Advertising (Which appears to be defined in your broad doc as anything that gets your attention without asking for it first) is the worst way to get people to pay attention to things, except for all the other ways. The alternative to "advertising" is the rate of people discovering new things dropping to 1% of what it is now. 1% of products have natural virality and will be found on their own. The other 99% of product…
Something that could possibly replace the function of advertising would be an independent organization that would provide tools for picking the best product given your situation. And information channels for new high-quality products (i.e. there's a new restaurant in your neighbourhood).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just tax sugar.
Small funny story about that. In Finland we do (or did, it might have changed on 2017) tax sugar. Then they added artificial sweeteners and even mineral water under the tax because it’s ”fair” that way. Thus negating the original point.