Advertising Is a Cancer on Society • Hacker News Board

Re: Advertising Is a Cancer on Society

#521

Post by randcraw » Thu, Aug 01, 2019, 3:30 AM UTC

anoncake wrote: post #331

scarface74 wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow. Banning something unhealthy. That didn’t work out so well for alcohol or drugs. The last thing I want is more government power.

A government does not gain power by exercising it.

A government has power only if it does exercise it. If all government employees sat around all day and did nothing, the government would be powerless. The more a government exercises power, the more power it takes away from others (like the people).

It's only through action that power manifests (and the inaction of others to oppose the use and abuse of that power).

Re: Advertising Is a Cancer on Society

#522

Post by randcraw » Thu, Aug 01, 2019, 3:46 AM UTC

buboard wrote: post #326

derg wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I constantly think about how the world would look if even a fraction of the people doing creative for ads were free to be creative elsewhere.

They are free to. There s just no money in that.

No, there's plenty of money in alternative careers to advertising. It's absurd to claim otherwise.

But advertising is an easy way to make money fast, that is, if you're happy to sell people stuff they don't need at triple the commodity price. Or... you could turn your hand toward more constructive and lasting alternative endeavors like treating / defeating disease, cheaply desalinating sea water, or a zillion other ends that would do more than pry money out of the clueless hands of fools.

Re: Advertising Is a Cancer on Society

#523

Post by randcraw » Thu, Aug 01, 2019, 3:53 AM UTC

killjoywashere wrote: post #420

picometer wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the contrary, I think the author addresses this via the "cancer" metaphor: > It's a malignant mutation of an idea that efficient markets need a way to connect goods and services with people wanting to buy them. > Over time, it became increasingly manipulative and dishonest. It also became more effective. In the process, it grew to consume a significant amount of resources of every company on the planet. I interpre…

What makes the current system suboptimal? I mean, the markets are Dutch auctions, which penalize overvaluation. Compared to my youth, I'm definitely exposed to far less advertizing.

If advertising truly is an arms race, then the cost is money and effort wasted on keeping up with the competition -- building an excess of supply because you lose if you can't keep up.

Of course there are also plenty of opportunity costs to wasting billions annually on the overpromotion of overpriced products that are consumed in excess...

Re: Advertising Is a Cancer on Society

#524

Post by randcraw » Thu, Aug 01, 2019, 3:57 AM UTC

blodovnik wrote: post #96

kelnos wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There must be a way to do advertising that respects the consumer, and doesn't use some form of sketchy manipulation to achieve the desired goal. And yet the vast majority of advertising is (to me) offensive. > Anyone who hates advertising this much should show their commitment by working at an organization that does not advertise. That's a rather childish and immature rejoinder. The world of employment simply doesn't…

People were offended by advertising in the same way in the 1970s. Advertising offendees will always be offended no matter where advertising sophistication is at.

I won't be offended if advertisers can figure out which ads I won't respond to and then refrain from smacking me in the face with them. Or if they can avoid annoying me with moronic gimmicks like dancing lizards selling insurance.

I'm ready. Go ahead advertisers. Delight me with silence.

Re: Advertising Is a Cancer on Society

#525

Post by randcraw » Thu, Aug 01, 2019, 4:11 AM UTC

nxc18 wrote: post #103

blodovnik wrote: post #8

This is a dogmatic viewpoint I think often seen in very technical people who are unwilling to see the interconnectedness of how our society works. I bet there's any number of things this person values that simply wouldn't exist without advertising. It's a childish and immature opinion really. Anyone who hates advertising this much should show their commitment by working at an organization that does not advertise. Loa…

I've worked at an organization that failed to advertise its products, causing massive inefficiency & waste - lots of people have access to our technology but don't know about it and end up implementing the same basic CRUD app over and over. Don't underestimate the economic loss caused by people just not knowing there's a better way.

Informational promotion is not the same thing as advertising. A PSA is not an ad. There are many ways to inform the public of services or resources other than interrupting a media stream with ill-targeted spots. Getting someone credible to favorably review your product would be a far better way to differentiate your innovation than web ads or TV spots.

The waste you speak of sounds the result of misjudging demand rather than spamming too little. Or maybe people were informed about the merits of your better mousetrap, but just didn't care. Startups often guzzle that kool-aid.

Advertising is the last place I'd go to learn if someone's novelty is better. Who trusts ads?

Re: Advertising Is a Cancer on Society

#526

Post by lioeters » Thu, Aug 01, 2019, 4:12 AM UTC

kristopolous wrote: post #149

13415 wrote: post #68

I'd rather be worried about whether advertising is (cost-)effective. Couldn't there be an advertising industry bubble? I block all ads online nowadays, but when I didn't, I found it hard to believe that they could be worth the money.

The bubble theory on ads is interesting. Around 2009 I saw it as "unprofitable venture backed companies advertising on unprofitable venture backed platforms" as if it's some kind of matryoshka doll system that works as a baton passing from one generation of bad investments to the next - no revenue is trading hands, just poorly placed investor money: A kafkaesque anarchy of people siloed at companies named after adjec…

I see how invasion of privacy fits into this self-reinforcing kafkaesque matryoshka bubble: massive collection and statistics of people's personal data are being used as advertisement for the advertisers.

Re: Advertising Is a Cancer on Society

#527

Post by scarface74 » Thu, Aug 01, 2019, 4:34 AM UTC

randcraw wrote: post #519

SilasX wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It still has the same problems, in that people can bootleg it. Just at a smaller scale. Remember, they have low-grade turf wars in NYC over cigarette sales due to the really high taxes.

Cigarettes have cost $6 a pack in the US for over a decade and nobody bootlegs these. Same for beer, at $6-12 for a 6-pack. Bootlegging is generally a short term response to diminished access. But soon after the controls arise, demand generally shifts elsewhere to less inconvenient alternatives. I can think of no examples of continuing bootlegging in the US, aside from piracy of media, which is another kettle of fish…

This is the result of giving the police yet another tool to harass people for minor offenses.

Whether Eric Garner was bootlegging cigarettes or not - do you think it was worth it?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Eric_Garner

Re: Advertising Is a Cancer on Society

#528

Post by scarface74 » Thu, Aug 01, 2019, 4:35 AM UTC

zbyte64 wrote: post #362

scarface74 wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow. Banning something unhealthy. That didn’t work out so well for alcohol or drugs. The last thing I want is more government power.

Can't help but think the only reason for that attitude (government power is bad) is that the government isn't representative of its people.

Or if you belong to a demographic who is routinely stopped for the color of your skin or you look like you “don’t belong”....

Re: Advertising Is a Cancer on Society

#529

Post by davidivadavid » Thu, Aug 01, 2019, 4:51 AM UTC

gatherhunterer wrote: post #514

davidivadavid wrote: post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's probably because the author uses loaded language, and bases the whole article on an analogy with cancer, which has a slight tendency to evoke the worst kind of crap people can think of and want to entirely get rid of at all costs.

What loaded language? Loaded language appeals to a stereotype, this is just a provocative analogy. The use of an attention-grabbing title does not mean that one should be excused for creating a straw man instead of debating the actual content.

If you're going to bit nit-picky about words:

"In rhetoric, loaded language (also known as loaded terms or emotive language) is wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes."

Provocative analogies can use loaded language, for example when they appeal to emotions. Riddling your text with things like how advertising "infects", "destroys", "corrupts", is "industrial scale abuse" and so on, is loaded language that's not conducive to debate.

Regardless, I've debated the actual content elsewhere in this thread, and many times in the past directly with the author over Hacker News. I'm familiar with his position — it's hardly uncommon — and his arguments. They're not uninteresting, but I'm not sure they're helping push things forward much.

Re: Advertising Is a Cancer on Society

#530

Post by tsimionescu » Thu, Aug 01, 2019, 5:09 AM UTC

Aperocky wrote: post #84

wpietri wrote: post #23

He doesn't quite say it by name, but most advertising is a classic arms race. Especially given how the internet now makes information easily available, a great deal of advertising is about manipulating consumers to pick company A's products over those from competitors B, C, and D. This forces those other companies to spend to get and keep customers. It's pure waste. For example, everybody on the planet is now familia…

How do you define "Something useful" though? The advertisement money eventually makes it to Google, broadcasters, sites, TV-channels, sports events and people running those organization in term gets more money to spend on [Potentially useful stuff]. It's not like the money magically vanishes to never be seen again, and business to business transaction like this make the money flow faster instead of slower. Economy is…

A lot of advertising money is actually lost from the economy to profit for advertisers, stock buybacks, bonuses for the ultra-rich etc.