3 ms·

It seems like you and many other people are of the world view that everyone would behave ideally if only corporate forces weren't influencing them. This may be

It seems like you and many other people are of the world view that everyone would behave ideally if only corporate forces weren't influencing them. This may be true, there's no way to know for sure. It's also possible that most major corporations meet the demands of the market rather than create those demands. Art imitates life. The thing about brand advertising, like for Coca-Cola, is that its done mainly for commoditized products that consumers already want. People already want a cold soda on a hot day. The question is will they reach for a coke or a pepsi? A Big Mac or a Whopper? A dell or a macbook? It's not like none of those things would exist if evil corporations didn't make us want them. The cat is out of the bag now, people already want sodas and fast food. The global advertising empire is primarily fueled by getting people to choose company's product over another, not intentionally making you want things you can't afford. We cant blame society's ills on corporations, capitalism or any other system of behavior. All of these things are democratic, they reflect the will of the people. And human beings have been making themselves feel bad due to envy and desire for as long as there have been human beings. I would advocate for banning all advertising forever if I thought it would change things. But it won't.

RobertoG 11y ago
I agree with you that to blame corporations about every bad thing is going too far. But I also think that you go too far exculpating them. To say "all of these things are democratic, they reflect the will of the people", is a very naive comment. Tobacco is a good example of a need that was just created. Or in the news not so long ago: Coca-Cola 'spends millions on research to prove that fizzy drinks don't make you fat' ( http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/retailandconsumer/11920984/Coca-Cola-spends-millions-on-research-to-prove-that-fizzy-drinks-dont-make-you-fat.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/retailandcon... ) We could find so many examples as you need.
imakesnowflakes 11y ago
>The question is will they reach for a coke or a pepsi? How about plain old cold water? Is a Cola much better at quenching thirst than plain cold water? EDIT for clarity: The point is, the first question is not "Will they reach for a coke or pepsi", but "Will they reach for a bottle of cold water or a cola", then only the question of choosing between pepsi or coke comes. So you first need to convince people that you should drink a cola when you are thirsty. This is where the "evil" part comes from.

RobertoG 11y ago

I agree with you that to blame corporations about every bad thing is going too far. But I also think that you go too far exculpating them. To say "all of these things are democratic, they reflect the will of the people", is a very naive comment. Tobacco is a good example of a need that was just created. Or in the news not so long ago: Coca-Cola 'spends millions on research to prove that fizzy drinks don't make you fat' ( http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/retailandconsumer/11920984/Coca-Cola-spends-millions-on-research-to-prove-that-fizzy-drinks-dont-make-you-fat.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/retailandcon... ) We could find so many examples as you need.

imakesnowflakes 11y ago

>The question is will they reach for a coke or a pepsi? How about plain old cold water? Is a Cola much better at quenching thirst than plain cold water? EDIT for clarity: The point is, the first question is not "Will they reach for a coke or pepsi", but "Will they reach for a bottle of cold water or a cola", then only the question of choosing between pepsi or coke comes. So you first need to convince people that you should drink a cola when you are thirsty. This is where the "evil" part comes from.