Why don't we just ban advertising?
Why Don’t We Just Ban Targeted Advertising?
21–30 of 188 posts
Re: Why Don’t We Just Ban Targeted Advertising?
#22I think this is another example of wanting to ban a concrete outcome of problematic behavior. It's the tracking and targeting that should be illegal, in my opinion.
I've always found it weird that we don't explicitly recognize information about / profiles on people as property of the subject.
Re: Why Don’t We Just Ban Targeted Advertising?
#23The argument for massive Pigouvian taxes on advertising seems much clearer. Advertising imposes massive costs on society and the viewers. These costs aren't borne by the advertiser, so they should be captured through massive taxes and put to good use. And many brands wouldn't feel much of an impact: what matters to Coke is that it spends more than Pepsi. If their $6B on advertising only buys 1/10th as many ads as it…
And it's a shame really - I find most budget colas have a far richer cola flavour than either Coke or Pepsi. Coke especially is very bland.
Re: Why Don’t We Just Ban Targeted Advertising?
#24Why don't we just ban advertising?
> Why don't we just ban advertising? Newspapers would need to be subscription-only or patronage-based. Distributors become kingmakers. If the incumbent's product is in the grocery stores and the upstart can't advertise, there's no path to entry apart from winning over a distributor. Niche products become nonviable. If you can't reach out to your customers, they have to reach out to you. That requires they know (a) th…
>Newspapers would need to be subscription-only or patronage-based.
In my eyes, this would be a win. Journalism ideally should serve the readers. Aligning the business model (patronage/subscription-only) with the ideal seems like a good thing in the long run.
Journalism (including but not limited to print) is filled with essentially noise that wouldn't be economically viable if the publishers had to justify the value of their content to their audience.
Re: Why Don’t We Just Ban Targeted Advertising?
#25I'd add nuance to this:
Ban _involuntarily_ targeted advertising.
I am 100% ok with Google, Facebook etc. knowing that I live in Oxfordshire, UK; that I love cycling; that I play the church organ. That's who I am. If they want to target cycling, classical music, and local ads at me based on this information, that's great. I would happily log onto these sites and click checkboxes based on this (or do it via browser settings).
I am not ok with them building up a detailed personal profile of my anxieties, day-to-day worries and preoccupations. Nor with them selling my information to other sites to which I haven't explicitly volunteered the information.
Re: Why Don’t We Just Ban Targeted Advertising?
#26Why don't we just ban advertising?
> Why don't we just ban advertising? Newspapers would need to be subscription-only or patronage-based. Distributors become kingmakers. If the incumbent's product is in the grocery stores and the upstart can't advertise, there's no path to entry apart from winning over a distributor. Niche products become nonviable. If you can't reach out to your customers, they have to reach out to you. That requires they know (a) th…
>Newspapers would need to be subscription-only or patronage-based.
So be it.
>Distributors become kingmakers. If the incumbent's product is in the grocery stores and the upstart can't advertise, there's no path to entry apart from winning over a distributor.
>Niche products become nonviable. If you can't reach out to your customers, they have to reach out to you. That requires they know (a) they have the problem you solve, (b) you exist and (c) you solve the problem they have. That only happens organically for problems with scale.
Lots of speculation here, as if word of mouth didn't exist. Why is it so necessary that a brand tells me to buy things? Don't people have other ways to reach out to their audience that doesn't invade literally every public sphere, from billboards to websites?
Re: Why Don’t We Just Ban Targeted Advertising?
#27Why don't we just ban advertising?
I don't see how that would be possible.
It's very simple actually. No more sponsors, no more covering every square meter of public space with brands, no more commercials on TV, no more ads on websites. People will have to find other ways to make money, no one's entitled to a business model.
Re: Why Don’t We Just Ban Targeted Advertising?
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't see how that would be possible.
There are effective bans on advertising for certain products, e.g. cigarettes, in large parts of the globe.
Which are acceptable because people generally (in many places), are fine with discouraging, or certainly not promoting, the use of tobacco products (and some other product categories) even though they're legal. This is not true with the usage and purchase of most other legal products.
Re: Why Don’t We Just Ban Targeted Advertising?
#29I'd add nuance to this: Ban _involuntarily_ targeted advertising. I am 100% ok with Google, Facebook etc. knowing that I live in Oxfordshire, UK; that I love cycling; that I play the church organ. That's who I am. If they want to target cycling, classical music, and local ads at me based on this information, that's great. I would happily log onto these sites and click checkboxes based on this (or do it via browser se…
these questions are in earnest, not meant as a put-down of your position.
how would you draw a line between what's okay to collect and what isn't?
do you think a line could be drawn that would work for most people?
would sites offer different levels of invasive tracking, and the user opts-in as far as they want?
what incentive would users have to opt-in at all?
Re: Why Don’t We Just Ban Targeted Advertising?
#30I'd add nuance to this: Ban _involuntarily_ targeted advertising. I am 100% ok with Google, Facebook etc. knowing that I live in Oxfordshire, UK; that I love cycling; that I play the church organ. That's who I am. If they want to target cycling, classical music, and local ads at me based on this information, that's great. I would happily log onto these sites and click checkboxes based on this (or do it via browser se…
I don't think this will work well.
If you give them that leeway, they'll claim everything is voluntary.
"Oh, you can go into [random place in settings that changes every week] and disable each one of your anxieties. It will remain disabled for 72 hours"