Live data from Hacker News

Advertising Is a Cancer on Society

jacek.zlydach.pl

581–590 of 657 posts

Re: Advertising Is a Cancer on Society

#581

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe I'm misinterpreting but didn't the movie show that everything Tyler does and says is 100% wrong?

No. The movie shows a very real problem that many people experience. It goes on to show a partial solution of getting in touch with your primal emotions (beating the shit out of each other). It then turns into a cult and cults have a tendency to go off the rails. It's a multi-layered story that resists simplistic interpretations, which is why it is so beloved by so many.

> It goes on to show a partial solution of getting in touch with your primal emotions (beating the shit out of each other).

Should be clear that the way the characters go about this is an awful, awful solution.

The reason it is beloved by many is that the simplistic story encourages "deep" interpretations.

Re: Advertising Is a Cancer on Society

#582

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So in your world where advertising went away and Facebook/Google/YouTube/etc are gone (don't pretend they'd survive without ads), where exactly do you do the screaming? In real world public spaces? That's an even more toxic form of advertising and far more wasteful.

You don't scream. You talk to people. They talk to other people. If your message is worth it, it'll organically reach those who'd benefit from it. Also, you could post your message in places where people interested in the kind of problems you're solving come to look for solutions. Trade shows, product catalogs, storefronts, and their on-line equivalents. > don't pretend they'd survive without ads I don't see why Face…

> You might end up having to actually pay a little bit for it, though.

How old are you? I'm from the 90's, I'm from the generation that was on MSN all the time. My parent would have never let me pay for anything online, with no access to credit cards...

There's no ways they would have paid 5$ a month for a social networks, even if "all my friends were on it", which wouldn't be true, just like Runescape in the past.

Re: Advertising Is a Cancer on Society

#583
post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would have agreed in the past but now that my SO has started an escape room, if your ideal world existed, she would be bankrupt right now. Most ads isn't about manipulation, it's just about getting your attention and reminding you that this product exists. Ads are the only way to reach her market. You could argue that search is a good one too (which is true), but sadly people have trouble paying to watch videos onl…

> if your ideal world existed, she would be bankrupt right now [citation needed] You're making a couple of mistakes here. One is imagining that in a world without ads, her experience would be the same as her not advertising. The other is that something that is bad for a given business is something that's bad for society. Both of these are at best unproven. > Most ads isn't about manipulation For every ad you see toda…

> [citation needed]

I can't really give financial, but believe me, after having to spend 30k$ more because of some problems, we only had about 6k$ to pay for 5k$ a month of expense. After a year, in a location surrounded by restaurants (more than a dozen), with quite a bit of event closeby, with quite a bit of people going around, the amount of people that found out about us outside of ads, is barely a handful.

After a full year, even while spending for ads, even if we can count on 1 hand the number of people that had a bad experience, we are still barely profitable and still, almost everyone only finds us with ads and not word of mouth. We still have a pretty big list of people that wait after our third room impatiently, I think there's not a day where there's not someone that mentions it.

The thing is, even if an escape room is fun, even if I think that anyone can enjoy them, sadly our public is a tiny fraction of the population and even if theses enthusiast talks about it to others, it just doesn't reach enough other enthusiast people.

> One is imagining that in a world without ads, her experience would be the same as her not advertising.

Then you would have to explain to me how she could reach people between 10 km to 300 km aways without ads in the first 6 months of existence.

> The other is that something that is bad for a given business is something that's bad for society.

Her business is great, people are all crazy about the experience, that's a few thousands of peoples that wouldn't have that experience that they enjoyed quite a bit, simply because they are too few in a huge market.

> For every ad you see today, ask yourself how much useful new information you have gained from it.

From the ads itself? More than 0. From the content that has been paid from it? More than thousands actually. I wouldn't have read your comment, simply because Hacker News is a place that advertize ycombinator startup.

> Note that the biggest spenders on ads are brands you've already heard of, suggesting that your theory needs some revision.

It's actually exactly what I'm talking about. You think about Coke regularly? I'm pretty sure you don't.

It's sad but in this world of so many choice, you need to keep reminding people you exist or else they may switch to another choice they may see more (doesn't even have to be ads related, could be just more people that consume it at that moment, could be a location that have a contract with that brand, etc..).

So both in a world where you are known or not, you need to remind people that you are a possibility to even be considered.

Even in the amazing marketing space that is a supermarket where you can extremly easily browse a good amount of choice, brands pay for the right of a specific shelf because that will sell more.

Imagine how much worse it is when you don't even have all the choices in front of you.

Re: Advertising Is a Cancer on Society

#584
post #485

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If I had the resources and know-how, I'd start a radio station on this premise. I've noticed that most radio stations feel like they play more commercials than actual music Of course. They're all owned by ClearChannel these days, so why should they play more music than ads? What are people going to do, switch to another (ClearChannel) radio station? You might also notice the ads are usually playing at the same time…

> The only people who still use/listen to/watch these things are dinosaurs who haven't moved on to streaming radio (or just buying your own music), cellphones, and streaming movies Or people like me who drive cars that predate the widespread availability of AUX jacks (which I've worked around by using one of those cassette adapters, but I know of at least some people who drive cars in that awkward phase where cars ha…

If you can't afford a newer car, that's understandable. If you have the means, though, cars that old are downright dangerous in a crash, and if you spend much time in your car it makes sense to upgrade to something newer that won't get you killed. People walk away from crashes in newer cars now that would have killed or severely maimed them in cars made 20 years ago.

Re: Advertising Is a Cancer on Society

#586
post #486

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it does. You don't get to choose how much sugar is in a can or fountain drink when you buy it, it's pre-made. You could buy reduced-sweetness soda I suppose, but I don't know where you're going to find that. Even the boutique brands are very sweet. You can also buy artificially-sweetened soda, but lots of studies are now showing that crap isn't any healthier for you.

No, it doesn't, not sure where you live, but I see low-calorie soda drinks in every supermarket I visit. You also, believe it, or not, are free to not buy any soda at all, in the same way you may decide not to put any sugar in your coffee. Probably, it's true to say that majority of buyers still prefer sugary sodas, because simply put people like sweet tastes a lot. Logically, it means that forced unavailability of s…

As I said, the zero-calorie stuff uses artificial sweeteners, which is just as unhealthy and likely to cause diabetes as the stuff loaded with sugar.

There's no option to just have less-sweet soda. It does not exist. (Unless perhaps you're counting the fact that artificially-sweetened drinks simply don't taste sweet to some people, but that's a different argument.)

Whether you want to believe it or not, it is very easy to control how much sugar you pour into your cup of coffee at work (and you don't have to put artificial sweetener in it either as the only alternative; you can simply not put anything in it). There's no such option with soda, because it's premade. I don't know why you're arguing about this, because it's a simple fact.

Re: Advertising Is a Cancer on Society

#587
post #570
post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would have agreed in the past but now that my SO has started an escape room, if your ideal world existed, she would be bankrupt right now. Most ads isn't about manipulation, it's just about getting your attention and reminding you that this product exists. Ads are the only way to reach her market. You could argue that search is a good one too (which is true), but sadly people have trouble paying to watch videos onl…

I would pay for the search and to watch videos as long as the price were reasonable. I already pay for SlingTV and Netflix for example. Yet there is free to watch PlutoTV, filled with annoying ads. There should at least be an option to pay for ad-free, tracking-free, service.

> I would pay for the search and to watch videos

We are sadly a tiny minority. I keep seeing people talking against Youtube Premium.

> There should at least be an option to pay for ad-free, tracking-free, service.

Agree completely, but the existence of ads isn't what stops that sadly.

Re: Advertising Is a Cancer on Society

#588
He could ad : ads kill information.

As an example, google "cbd oil vs cbd isolate" or "why is cbd isolate in powder form...", in order to understand the difference and the relation betweens the 2 components (knowing Canabidiol should already be an oil, as its name suggest) and why cbd isolate is under the form of powder and not liquid as CBD oil.

Everything that come in the first results pages are fake blog posts from commercial sites or commercial offers. We quickly understand one contains the other after reading the first 3 pages from the result. But we never find an article explaining the actual chimical nature of cbd isolate (or pure form of cbd) or even an actual scientific study about cbd.

It's only the same and repeated argument, "article" after "article" about one pure form contained in another... and that for the first several result pages from a meta-search engine like searx (searx.be in this example with setting settle to include in general results Bing, Google, Yahoo, Yandex, DuckDuckGo and StartPage).

The good information has been covered under a thick layer of low density infomertial bullshit.

It's like trying to watch a movie in the middle of car traffic : You can't hear anything from the movie original soundtrack.

It take to further research, like "why is cannabidiol a powder", to have access in the first result page to actual independant articles for cbd, but under the form of its less "commercial" name, "cannabidiol"... to learn that lot of claims about cbd are not founded on actual scientific researches.

In short, the word CBD have been hijacked by commercial entities for profit and lost the biggest chunk of its actual meaning.

Information is lost in the process.

And I still don't know why cbd isolate is in powder form.

Re: Advertising Is a Cancer on Society

#589
post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would have agreed in the past but now that my SO has started an escape room, if your ideal world existed, she would be bankrupt right now. Most ads isn't about manipulation, it's just about getting your attention and reminding you that this product exists. Ads are the only way to reach her market. You could argue that search is a good one too (which is true), but sadly people have trouble paying to watch videos onl…

I would disagree with the proposition that "most ads [aren't] about manipulation" (especially if we are talking about "most exposure time" rather than majority of ads being created regardless of the number of times they've been viewed). Of course, I don't have data to prove my statement, but I doubt you have any to prove yours either. And without ads and that "great tutorial", maybe you'd be something of greater valu…

> maybe you'd be something of greater value to society rather than the "developer you are today"

I'm a pretty great value for my works actually. Could do more? I don't actually believe it. I learned what I'm doing since I was 8. There's no way anyone would have paid for theses learning experience for me except advertisers.

You could certainly argue that I could have a more fun childhood if I didn't dedicate so much of it to learning. That could certainly be true, but I still enjoyed quite a bit my childhood doing theses crazy projects.

> Note that the original article does not complain about informative ads, but about manipulative ones.

> Advertising Is a Cancer on Society

Sure he talk against manipulative ones, but he fight against the whole advertising industry.

Re: Advertising Is a Cancer on Society

#590
post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would have agreed in the past but now that my SO has started an escape room, if your ideal world existed, she would be bankrupt right now. Most ads isn't about manipulation, it's just about getting your attention and reminding you that this product exists. Ads are the only way to reach her market. You could argue that search is a good one too (which is true), but sadly people have trouble paying to watch videos onl…

If the current ad model of the popular search engine(s) was made extinct by law. I would be extremely surprised if search simply disappeared rather than move to a paid model. Who wouldn't pay to have any information in the world reachable in the 30 seconds it takes to craft a query and scan the first page of results? It is a huge competitive advantage.

> I would be extremely surprised if search simply disappeared rather than move to a paid model.

Sure, but that would be available to the ones that can profit from it directly, not the mass population that would have an hard time seeing value created from it.

Instead they would expect word of mouth to be sufficent, and in a way they wouldn't be wrong in that world because in that world everything would depends from it. They just wouldn't have the luxury of having all theses others experience that depends on ads to exist, simply because ads wouldn't be there to allow them to exist.

Post reply on HN