Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

French cities trying to ban public adverts

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 140 posts

Re: French cities trying to ban public adverts

#51

Post by a1369209993 »

jimbob45 wrote: post #22
colejohnson66 wrote: post #2

A general sentiment I see here is that ads should be banned, but what can be done in the US? The First Amendment protects truthful advertisements. In addition, we have the FTC for misleading and lying ads (although their success is not what it should be (case in point: OutBrain and Taboola)). So, what do we do? Further reading on the 1st Amendment and advertising: http://www.lawpublish.com/amend1.html https://en.wiki…

Nobody wants ads banned. The problem is that ads are being placed into previously unused places and louder than before. The result is that all companies have to compete with these new obnoxious ads or risk falling behind their competitors that are willing to put ads in distasteful places. In my opinion, the solution is to clearly define a discrete set of spaces for ads and make sure everyone is able to compete on equ…

> Nobody wants ads banned.

I do. Yes all ads. Yes literally all.

Yes, it's sometimes hard to tell whether something is a advertisement or not; it's also sometimes hard tell whether something is fraud or not, but I don't hear anyone claiming we shouldn't ban fraud.

Re: French cities trying to ban public adverts

#52

Post by i2amsam »

Twirrim wrote: post #18
q845712 wrote: post #5

It's kind of an open secret that the city of Santa Barbara (CA, US) has banned several forms of public outdoor advertising: we have no billboards, no promotional posters, no taxi toppers... It's delightful, and very high on my list of reasons why I enjoy living here. Every time I leave I'm reminded how noisy space is when it's filled with advertisements. I wholeheartedly recommend others advocate for similar policies…

Hawaii has a similar ban in place too. It's so nice not being bombarded by billboards in your day-to-day life. Definitely one of the things I've missed since moving from there.

Vermont as well. Really noticeable when you drive on the highway, much more relaxing and scenic.

Re: French cities trying to ban public adverts

#54

Post by AnthonyMouse »

lordlic wrote: post #38
BurningFrog wrote: post #37

OK, I'll make the case for ads: Ads are disruptive. They allow new businesses to break into markets owned by old dominant suppliers. This way they keep the market healthy and serving consumers. Based on that, you'd expect anti-ad initiatives to be aligned with powerful established industries. Not that I know how to confirm or refute that.

Ads allow whomever has the deepest pockets to dominate the public's attention. Incumbents will have more money to spend, chilling the influence of new competitors. Most of the "disruptor" success stories that come to mind started with some variation of "we didn't spend anything on advertising, relying on word of mouth."

> Ads allow whomever has the deepest pockets to dominate the public's attention.

Not necessarily. Advertising has diminishing returns -- we know this because companies don't buy unlimited advertising. If every ad dollar was as good as the first (i.e. it generated more than a dollar in profit) then everybody would buy an unlimited amount of advertising so they could make an unlimited profit. At some point you hit saturation and it costs more than it makes you.

Meanwhile the little guy needs it more because they're unknown, i.e. their baseline is further from the point of saturation so they have a higher cost/benefit ratio. If nobody advertises then people keep buying from the incumbent because they don't know of any alternatives.

The biggest problem with advertising isn't big vs. little, it's that it's a signaling war. If Coke spends a dollar and Pepsi doesn't, Pepsi loses $2 in sales. But if they both spend a dollar then they've each burned a dollar only to both stay where they started.

What would really help is to have some industry of trustworthy third parties whose job it is to tell you what to buy, but nobody has ever really cracked it, because the buyers don't want to pay for it and the sellers only want to pay if it will influence the results.

Re: French cities trying to ban public adverts

#55

Post by a1369209993 »

reificator wrote: post #48
munk-a wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Nobody wants ads banned. I want ads banned. They provide nothing of value and exist only to sway people into buying your product - a lot of advertising isn't overtly malicious but it all exists dependent on an assumption that being told to buy a product is a more valuable use of a time than whatever else you're doing. I suspect that being constantly bombarded with advertising has ill health effects by making it har…

> > Nobody wants ads banned. > I want ads banned. > They provide nothing of value and exist only to sway people into buying your product - a lot of advertising isn't overtly malicious but it all exists dependent on an assumption that being told to buy a product is a more valuable use of a time than whatever else you're doing. I'm a prolific adblocker, but I disagree with you here. I think if things were kept at a rea…

> Do you think that astroturfing will become more or less common after a ban on advertising.

A ban on advertising means the company can no longer tell the employee that their job is to astroturf, or fire them for not astroturfing, because that would be a admission that the company was engaging in advertising.

Re: French cities trying to ban public adverts

#56

Post by TeMPOraL »

sosborn wrote: post #11
ajna91 wrote: post #9

I think in the near future we'll have empirical evidence that most ads are malicious exploits of flaws in human psychology. Ideally, all ads should be plain text listing of facts. Pictures only allowed for demonstrative purposes. And they should be listed in "Ad sections", like a phone book.

> plain text listing of facts Coca-Cola tastes great! Coca-Cola gives you an extra pep in your step! Coca-Cola will rot you teeth! These are all true statements (the first one is subjective, I'll admit), but I suspect that many believe the effect of plain test listing of facts would only allow the third statement. > Pictures only allowed for demonstrative purposes. Wouldn't a photo of someone drinking a Coke and enjo…

Would like to see all three of your examples banned as well, because they're not statements of fact, they're opinions, of the kind you'd typically find in an ad today.

Useful listings of facts look like this:

- is carbonated (therefore acidic, refreshing, negatively impacting teeth)

- has x mg sugar per 100ml (therefore energizing to some extent, promoting weight gain)

- has x mg of caffeine per 100ml (therefore energizing to some extent)

- has Foobar taste (Foobar because I'm not sure if there's anything common with similar taste, so perhaps it's not even worth mentioning)

- it's intended to energize, refresh, help digest meals

"Will do X for you" statements are usually not true when taken at face value, and they're already manipulative. Statements of fact, lists of features, and descriptions of intended application is what I'd like to see instead.

Re: French cities trying to ban public adverts

#59

Post by notaregular »

jeffrallen wrote: post #30

In Lausanne, we have "le pub vous faites de-penser" stickers on many billboards. Translation: Advertising makes you de-think (a pun on "spend")

But also most of the billboards are ads for cultural events, theatre, city-organised events, museums etc. I quite like that actually, where else would I find about some shows or things to do.

Re: French cities trying to ban public adverts

#60

Post by nine_k »

deogeo wrote: post #46
dominotw wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

thats nice. They prbly have a good tax base that doesn't need this extra revenue stream. property tax is decent enough revenue where median home is > 1 mil. > I enjoy living here Yea its a given that its nice to live where people earn more and live in expensive homes :D

You assume advertising somehow helps the economy, but it is probably the reverse. If business A buys ads, it's competitor B is forced to do the some, or be slowly edged out of the market. Like peacock plumes, ads are mostly a tax that weighs down every business in the area.

But how can businesses may become known?

I see that maybe image ads are of the peacock feather type. Informative ads, like a new movie being out in theaters, can actually be net-positive financially, at the expense of the strain on public attention.

Post reply on HN