Researchers find inverse correlation between advertising and life satisfaction • Hacker News Board

Re: Researchers find inverse correlation between advertising and life satisfaction

#131

Post by geonnave » Wed, Jan 15, 2020, 6:07 PM UTC

throwawaymath wrote: post #63

xtracto wrote: post #8

This reminds me of an anecdote a friend told me: This friend dedicates his time in going to very rural areas/towns here in Mexico to implement government programs. At some point in the past he got to a town were the cantina had just gotten the only TV in town... apparently people in the town were generally happy, and they had everything they needed... so in their view they were not poor. But once they started watchin…

That raises profound and fascinating philosophical questions about the nature of knowledge and happiness. I wonder how many of those people would choose to forego the knowledge of what they don't have if it meant they would be happy again. On the other hand, is that even a meaningful question to ask, given it's not possible? Which of course leads to the ethical question: is it right for people to live in ignorance if…

The ethical question gets to the point of it. IMHO, I think they should be able to choose either or not to "take the red pill".

Thinking about long term, the life of their children, perhaps their children's children, is likely to be significantly enhanced when things like access to healthcare and education become a possibility.

Re: Researchers find inverse correlation between advertising and life satisfaction

#132

Post by kerkeslager » Wed, Jan 15, 2020, 6:08 PM UTC

throwawaymath wrote: post #99

kerkeslager wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have an alternative hypothesis for why advertising would be inversely correlated with satisfaction? If not, it seems like we should operate on our best hypothesis with evidence for it, not speculate about unknown unknowns. You did at one point say that advertising might not be causing the lower satisfaction, it might just be exacerbating other problems that cause lower satisfaction. While that possibility cert…

> If not, it seems like we should operate on our best hypothesis with evidence for it, not speculate about unknown unknowns. Nope! We shouldn't. Speculation is precisely what we should do! That's what a critical review of research involves. We should take this as excellent motivation for further research. It could be true, but we haven't done nearly enough work to conclude as much. I'm not saying it's wrong, I'm sayi…

> Nope! We shouldn't. Speculation is precisely what we should do! That's what a critical review of research involves. We should take this as excellent motivation for further research. It could be true, but we haven't done nearly enough work to conclude as much.

Nobody is proposing we stop researching, so let's not dignify that idea by discussing it further.

I'm proposing that as we continue researching, we proceed to take action with the best information we currently have.

> I'm not saying it's wrong, I'm saying it's uncertain, and it's strictly unscientific to proceed by assuming something uncertain is the truth...

It's not unscientific because of the nature of the truth, it's unscientific because science never tells you how to proceed, ever. It only tells you an approximation of the truth so you can make an educated decision on how you want to proceed. There is no should in science.

> ...just because it's intuitively compelling. Intuitively compelling narratives are very dangerous in science, because they make you believe you have a shortcut to the truth and they're vindicated right up until they aren't. It's not a good habit.

I'm not confused about these facts--you don't need to explain them. This is irrelevant, because this isn't why I want to take action on this study.

> Happiness is incredibly complicated. Contradicting evidence and results abound across studies of life satisfaction. Measuring the impact and success of advertising itself is highly complex; the researchers have shown this correlation under their current methodology.

> What are we to conclude if someone uses a different methodology to study the same topic, equally as valid, and comes away with a different conclusion?

If that happens, we change our minds.

What are we to conclude if someone uses a different methodology to study the same topic, equally as valid, and comes away with the same conclusion? Would you just call for more evidence?

This isn't the first study on related subjects, and so far I haven't found any that would lead me to a different conclusion.

> That's very possible, and we can't dismiss it. The researchers themselves hedge their claims and don't come out and say they've found causation.

It's also possible that the conclusions are true, and that by waiting to take action we let people suffer from the effects of advertising longer than necessary.

If we wait to take action until we're completely sure of the facts, we'll never take action, because evidence is almost never 100% conclusive.

The only information I have on this subject indicates that advertising is harmful. You are correct that this information is not 100% conclusive. However, just because we don't know something 100% conclusively, doesn't mean we should not take action on it--the vast majority of decisions in life are made with incomplete information.

We make decisions based on two things: 1. The best information we have, and 2. Our goals.

So there's basically two possibilities here: either you have some information I don't (in which case, please share that information with the class) or you have different goals (i.e. you would be pro-advertising even if it were proven that it makes people less happy).

Re: Researchers find inverse correlation between advertising and life satisfaction

#133

Post by nickelcitymario » Wed, Jan 15, 2020, 6:13 PM UTC

kerkeslager wrote: post #107

nickelcitymario wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Public relations != advertising. Ed Bernays != spokesperson for all PR professionals. There are shady people in every industry.

> Public relations != advertising. Not a distinction I care to make. The problems with both are fundamentally the same. > Ed Bernays != spokesperson for all PR professionals. Okay, but all PR professionals and advertisers are trying to manipulate people. That is literally the job. Everyone else in the industry has the same goals--Bernays may have been willing to do more unscrupulous things to achieve those goals, but…

Question for you then: Are you or are you not trying to manipulate me to share your point of view?

If all advertising is manipulation, then so are all conversations. Every debate, every argument, every statement of fact or opinion.

I don't consider it manipulation if it's honest. If I run an ad that says "These burgers cost only $1.25" and they really do cost $1.25, that's hardly manipulation.

If, on the other hand, I say "This burger cost only $1.25" but I was referring only to the patty, and not the bun and toppings and whatever else you see pictured, then that's manipulation (bordering on out-right lying).

Bernays said a lot of things that simply weren't true because he didn't care about the truth. And yeah, a lot of PR and advertising people would share his immoral stance on things. But most of the people I know in the industry aren't like that. We strive to create honest work that is entertaining enough to catch your attention so we can tell you something true about the product.

There's an idea out there that advertising is about selling you things regardless of whether you'd benefit from it or not. In my books, this is a stupid way to spend your advertising dollars. Instead, you should do the hard work of figuring out who, if anyone, would benefit from the product, and then create a campaign to reach them.

Obviously, some advertisers have no such ethical dilemma. Not to point fingers, but there are plenty of products that only do damage to people's lives. I'd like to think the clients I currently work with do not fall into this category, but that hasn't always been the case and feel free to judge me for that.

Re: Researchers find inverse correlation between advertising and life satisfaction

#134

Post by me551ah » Wed, Jan 15, 2020, 6:13 PM UTC

That's the core of Buddha's teaching right there. Craving leads to suffering/dissatisfaction and advertisement is all about increasing craving for a product. The more things you crave, the more things you cannot get. And the things you cannot get give rise to negative feelings like jealousy, sadness and even frustration.

Re: Researchers find inverse correlation between advertising and life satisfaction

#135

Post by cwivbly » Wed, Jan 15, 2020, 6:22 PM UTC

nickelcitymario wrote: post #127

newnewpdro wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Necessity, not aspiration, is the mother of invention. Please change careers.

I would, but the position of "snarky internet commentator" has been filled. If only I had pithy quotes that I could paste to make my arguments for me, rather than, I dunno, using original thought.

Sophistry's worse than snark.

Re: Researchers find inverse correlation between advertising and life satisfaction

#136

Post by therealdrag0 » Wed, Jan 15, 2020, 6:23 PM UTC

TheGallopedHigh wrote: post #17

xtracto wrote: post #8

This reminds me of an anecdote a friend told me: This friend dedicates his time in going to very rural areas/towns here in Mexico to implement government programs. At some point in the past he got to a town were the cantina had just gotten the only TV in town... apparently people in the town were generally happy, and they had everything they needed... so in their view they were not poor. But once they started watchin…

Said succinctly: Comparison is the thief of joy

Example: Comparing engineering salaries :/. It can be addictive and disheartening to look up salaries and see giant numbers.

Re: Researchers find inverse correlation between advertising and life satisfaction

#137

Post by chickenchaser » Wed, Jan 15, 2020, 6:26 PM UTC

tombert wrote: post #124

slumdev wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These stories are too common. I would guess that the median* wage on HN is probably around 5x what your brother-in-law makes. And I would also guess that many of us are perfectly content with old phones, old cars, and generally reduced consumption. Hell, I buy clothes at thrift/resale shops when I find something nice that fits. What are people of means (relatively) seeing? Is it because we have more leisure time and…

That's what I find strange too; I can afford to get the new iPhone every year or two if I wanted (most software engineers probably can), and yet I plan on keeping mine until it's dead, broken, or stolen. I don't own a car, but if I did it would probably the cheapest car in reasonably good shape that gets reasonably good gas mileage. There's a part of me that wonders if a lot of it boils down to education. My brother-…

>I can afford to get the new iPhone every year or two if I wanted

Maybe that's what the difference is. Being able to afford these things means you might not feel a similar need to posture that you can afford a certain lifestyle that you really can't. I'm guessing that at minimum wage most would struggle financially especially in a large city like NYC, so being able to pull the newest iPhone out of their pocket might be their way of assuring themselves and people around them that they are doing alright financially.

Re: Researchers find inverse correlation between advertising and life satisfaction

#138

Post by nickelcitymario » Wed, Jan 15, 2020, 6:27 PM UTC

nickelcitymario wrote: post #109

Dirlewanger wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of surreal coping and rationalization going on here. Comparing aspiration in "advertising" to inventing the wheel and harnessing fire??? Jesus Christ, man. What bizzaro world do you have to be in this say something like this? Oh, right: the advertising industry.

What bizarro world do you have to live in to think advertising is what's wrong with the world? Oh right: the tech industry. The one that thinks everything it does is going to change the world for the better.

I apologize fo the comment about the tech industry. I was going to edit it to simply take it out, but that wouldn't be terribly honest of me. So it stays. But I can't in good conscious say "hey, please don't be a jerk to me for being in advertising" and then turn around and mock the entire tech industry. That's BS on my part.

Re: Researchers find inverse correlation between advertising and life satisfaction

#139

Post by slumdev » Wed, Jan 15, 2020, 6:27 PM UTC

tombert wrote: post #124

slumdev wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These stories are too common. I would guess that the median* wage on HN is probably around 5x what your brother-in-law makes. And I would also guess that many of us are perfectly content with old phones, old cars, and generally reduced consumption. Hell, I buy clothes at thrift/resale shops when I find something nice that fits. What are people of means (relatively) seeing? Is it because we have more leisure time and…

That's what I find strange too; I can afford to get the new iPhone every year or two if I wanted (most software engineers probably can), and yet I plan on keeping mine until it's dead, broken, or stolen. I don't own a car, but if I did it would probably the cheapest car in reasonably good shape that gets reasonably good gas mileage. There's a part of me that wonders if a lot of it boils down to education. My brother-…

When I was very young and didn't make much money, there didn't seem to be any point in saving it. It could have been just immaturity on my part, but short-term thinking and the availability of unsecured debt made it too easy to spend. It was a defeatist mindset. In my mind, the amount of work involved in scrimping didn't justify the very small payout.

Now that I make more, I spend even less than I did before. The reward finally justifies the work. It doesn't bear out mathematically, only emotionally.

Re: Researchers find inverse correlation between advertising and life satisfaction

#140

Post by infogulch » Wed, Jan 15, 2020, 6:28 PM UTC

Advertising is an attack on your psyche. Its very existence is an assumption that you should be dissatisfied with your life, and any advertising 'tricks' (only showing happy, beautiful people using it etc, aka 95% of the content of most advertisements) beyond purely factual statements about the product are explicitly designed to hijack every possible unconscious bias in their target audience to make them want it.

Sure, if you are concentrating and paying attention to the effect an ad has on you and the tricks it's using to manipulate you, you can pretty easily analyze and counteract the effect. But can you keep that up for every moment of every day, ever vigilant resisting the imposition of another's will onto yours, wriggling into your mind one tiny crack at a time?

Don't blink.