Live data from Hacker News

Researchers find inverse correlation between advertising and life satisfaction

hbr.org

141–150 of 359 posts

Re: Researchers find inverse correlation between advertising and life satisfaction

#141
post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s to get rid of the shame he feels about having an older inferior phone, frequently from peers who’ve been exposed to advertising

I personally would feel quite ashamed to have the latest IPhone, I'd feel that I'd fallen prey to apple's marketing. I live pretty well with a 5 year old SE. For the same reason I refuse to wear visibly branded clothes and am not ashamed to buy some used items. Living frugally by choice gets you back some freedoms.

Certainly, but you're also a product of an environment which values that sort of self-expression. If every time you went and hung out with your friends they shamed you, saying you look homeless, you might think differently. Its certainly a sign of maturity to not really care about those things, but depending on your life trajectory different values will hit. And clearly, a lot of people value a new iphone.

OTOH - its a device that you use for hours and hours a day, for entertainment, organization, communication, and a camera. Having a "better" one is a decent investment if it helps all those areas.

Re: Researchers find inverse correlation between advertising and life satisfaction

#143

I spent a lot of time in Vermont many years ago. I'd been there a little while, blissfully unaware, before someone told me "yeah, they banned billboards here in the sixties - you didn't notice?" I hadn't consciously noticed, no, but I'd spent my time there until that comment driving around stunned at how beautiful the place was. Now I knew the reason for that (well, partial reason - billboards or not, it's a pretty p…

This is why I take 280 instead of 101 when traveling to and from SF to South Bay even though it's slightly longer.

Driving 280 in 1983 was one of the most significant events in getting me to want to move here from Chicago.

I don't think it was the lack of billboards. But if there were billboards, it sure would feel different.

Re: Researchers find inverse correlation between advertising and life satisfaction

#144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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,…

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

You go on after this question to explain what manipulation is, so it seems like you understand the concept, and can probably figure out how it doesn't apply to this conversation.

> 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.

If your actual goal is to help people find things they would benefit from, then what's the best way to do that? Some ideas:

1. Review sites that try to be unbiased and share expert opinions on possible solutions to your problem. Obviously there are pitfalls here: the best solutions are ones where the site receives money from consumers, not companies with products to sell.

2. Word of mouth recommendations from friends and family, who intimately know your actual needs and genuinely want you to be successful.

3. People often know their own needs and go out to find solutions to their own needs, soliciting advice from 1 and 2, but also by asking experts (doctors, mechanics, etc.) who they pay to give them good advice.

4. A minimalist movement that views the entire idea of purchasing something with skepticism. I'm not against paying for products, but I do think it's important to see that paying for products is a tradeoff. Paying for a solution isn't always the best way to solve a problem, and in fact isn't always better than the problem itself.

Literally no part of a reasonable solution for helping people involves showing them only your product (not your competitors'), and/or only the positive aspects of your product. And that's the absolute best case for advertising.

And to be clear, that's not honest, it's lying by omission. If you're any good at your job, you know who your competitors are, and you know their strengths, but you're not sharing that information with your target audience. That's information that's relevant to the wants/needs of your target audience, but you're withholding that information, because it benefits you/your clients. The idea that this is you trying to go out and help people find and choose the best products for their needs is very naive.

Contrary to your belief, advertising actively prevents people from finding products that best solve their problems. Worse products beat out better products if they have better advertising, and this is the norm, not the exception, because every dollar spent on advertising is a dollar not spent on producing the best product possible. In theory, a company that makes profit from advertising can reinvest that profit into R+D, but in practice the incentives don't lead in that direction. A company that makes a profit by advertising has no reason to take a risk by changing strategy.

Re: Researchers find inverse correlation between advertising and life satisfaction

#145
post #39

I was the first person in my family to do the "cord cutting" thing, where I only had an Amazon Prime and Netflix account, and a bunch of DVDs and Blu-Rays (around 2012). People asked me why, and I said that I think it's dumb to pay money for advertisements, and that I think ads are bad for you. My brother-in-law is overall a smart guy, but he works at Taco Bell full-time, making minimum wage in NYC (~$15/hour). He de…

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…

If you're basically rich and you choose to do things associated with being poor it's not really that negative because you aren't poor.

Like I mend clothes and something I do the visible mending stitch patterns. I'm sure people judge us and think we're poor, but I don't really care because I'm not. Alternatively, doing high effort things like mending clothes can seem kind of cute and novel if you aren't poor.

Re: Researchers find inverse correlation between advertising and life satisfaction

#147
post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s to get rid of the shame he feels about having an older inferior phone, frequently from peers who’ve been exposed to advertising

I personally would feel quite ashamed to have the latest IPhone, I'd feel that I'd fallen prey to apple's marketing. I live pretty well with a 5 year old SE. For the same reason I refuse to wear visibly branded clothes and am not ashamed to buy some used items. Living frugally by choice gets you back some freedoms.

> I live pretty well with a 5 year old SE.

I love my SE. I really don't want a phone any bigger than the SE.

Re: Researchers find inverse correlation between advertising and life satisfaction

#148
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…

I don't I know the answer is that difficult.

1) Prime Directive: don't introduce knowledge that will make someone's life harder or more complicated if you don't have to.

2) If they have the means to get that knowledge, you're now obligated to fill in the disparity between your quality of life, such that they can be at least as happy as you are.

Re: Researchers find inverse correlation between advertising and life satisfaction

#149

the goal of advertising is to make you want something you don't have. QED

Using advertising to create demand is only a tiny part of the advertising market, and arguably the worst way to spend your ad budget. Most advertising is to maintain your market share in already established and very competitive markets. E.g., Coca-Cola plastering their logo everywhere to prevent Pepsi from doing the same. It's certainly not to convince those who don't drink Coke to start doing so.

> Coca-Cola plastering their logo everywhere to prevent Pepsi from doing the same.

Why would Pepsi do want to do it? Solely to prevent coca-cola from doing it?

If it isn't to convince people to drink Pepsi for those who don't drink Pepsi, why would it matter if they did Pepsi instead of Coca-cola?

Post reply on HN