4 ms·

Most of us are employed producing goods and services for which people are not born with an innate desire. Approximately the only people who can bash advertisin

Most of us are employed producing goods and services for which people are not born with an innate desire. Approximately the only people who can bash advertising without hypocrisy are subsistence farmers. The rest of us are paid to satisfy artificially inseminated needs. Perhaps our specific industries and employers use classier, higher-quality, and more subtle forms of advertisement, but in a truly ad-free world, we'd not spend money on anything but staying fed, warm, and reproductive.

dwaltrip 10y ago
I'm curious what led you to such conclusions. That depiction does not match how I view the world at all. Just because an item doesn't prevent one from starving or freezing to death does not mean it is an "artificially inseminated need". Sure, GDP might drop 10% in the short-term if all advertising was banished. Who knows. What I do know is that people won't stop wanting things that make their life better, and in general will continue to buy such things. Advertising is not what keeps us from a peasant lifestyle.
- zanny 10y ago
  I don't buy for a second that the end of advertising would harm GDP. It would take generations of cultural turnover to move people away from consumerism. If people were not being psychologically manipulated into buying certain products they don't need or want, they will just buy what they want instead.
  - superuser2 10y ago
    How will people know where or how to buy what they want without advertising?
    - DavidWanjiru 10y ago
      How do people know where to find/make the things they do have an innate need for without advertisement as you seem to define it?
    - tszymczyszyn 10y ago
      Advertising does not equal flow of information.
      - superuser2 10y ago
        Sure it does. Advertising is the flow of information about what products and services are available, how much they cost, and where to purchase them. Some are crass, some are subtle, some are sprayed, some are targeted, and the very best (personal recommendations and such) aren't even paid for. They are all advertisements.
        dwaltrip 10y ago
        The way your post comes across, given the context: "It's impossible to learn about things in the world that one might pay money for without advertising" Is this what you actually mean? Because that's an absurd statement. Unless you dilute the meaning of the word "advertising" such that it covers literally every human action. But then we aren't having a useful conversation anymore. You're aware that a small number of years ago, in the scope of human civilization, most objects were not branded, billboards didn't exist, etc?
- superuser2 10y ago
  > people won't stop wanting things that make their life better, and in general will continue to buy such things. This is nonsensical. You can only buy something if you know that it exists for sale and where. The process by which you acquire this information is, by definition, advertising.
  - dwaltrip 10y ago
    I wanted a Bluetooth speaker. I sought out non-paid reviews by third parties (some of the being fellow consumers who had already bought the device), and then decided which speaker I thought would work best for me. I didn't make use of advertising in the process.
    - mos_basik 10y ago
      How did you know you wanted a Bluetooth speaker, or that such a thing exists? In your specific case it's possible that you knew what speakers are, and you knew what Bluetooth is, and you extrapolated from there that the combination might exist and you went looking for one (carefully avoiding paid reviews in the process). But it's also possible that you saw a post on techcrunch or HN years ago when Bluetooth speakers were first being developed that seeded the concept in your mind. Something changed between then and now such that you recently wanted to buy one, and that kicked off your ad-free research and purchasing process. Are you positive that no ads were involved in that original, long-past inception of the concept "Bluetooth speaker" in your mind? Or maybe one of those fellow consumers whose reviews you recently read originally bought their speaker because of an ad they saw. If I make a better mousetrap, but then tell no one and never leave my farm, will the world beat a path to my door? I think you might argue that there is a distinction between word of mouth flow of information and advertising, but the devil is in the details. Is publishing a peer-reviewed paper advertising? Is updating a blog about your project advertising? Is posting a limited number of access codes on a forum you don't own to a service you are launching advertising? Is cold calling advertising? Is sending unsolicited emails advertising? What makes advertising advertising, and how is it different from telling people about this thing you made that they don't know about but might add value to their lives? I don't know, but I suspect it has something to do with fuzzy concepts like social capital.
redial 10y ago
Apparently history counts for nothing. If you are trying to claim the entirety of the human experience as some kind of living advertisement you have one hell of a claim to prove. Entire cultures lived and died before the first word was ever even writen. They sang, they made language, they created art, all without even thinking about the concept of money. Advertisement, as is being discussed, is relatively new, and to try to muddle the discussion by positioning it as the cornerstone of civilization is to miss entirely the point.
- superuser2 10y ago
  If you believe the human experience before modern technology and economics was good enough, why aren't you living it? What in the world are you doing on a computer? Yes, many people lived and died in an era when there was no time for economic activity beyond extracting dinner from local fauna or the land. The process by which they first learned about and acquired farm implements, giving them the time to do other things, is called advertising.
  - redial 10y ago
    Nonsense. All you said is nonsense. > If you believe the human experience before modern technology and economics was good enough No rational person can take what I originally said and twist it to sound like this. > Yes, many people lived and died in an era when there was no time for economic activity beyond extracting dinner from local fauna or the land. Learn history. Art is older, if not as old as agriculture. > The process by which they first learned about and acquired farm implements, giving them the time to do other things, is called advertising. Farm implements first had to be invented. They first invented them. Everyone on this thread knows what is meant when the word Advertisement is used. It is not even close to what you are proposing.
    - bitJericho 10y ago
      Ironically, there's really good evidence to suggest humans only worked an hour or two a day to feed themselves before the advent of civilization.
notalaser 10y ago
The guys who spent money building on, say, the Colossus of Rhodos, on the development of scientific instruments and the pursuit of science itself, and generally, in every aspect of science and culture would beg to differ. Besides, nobody is bashing advertising because it's advertising things. We're bashing that advertising activity that's based on lies and deceit -- you know, like the flashing neon signs that invite you to buy this pill that's gonna make you beautiful like the other girls and it's basically half a gram of sugar mixed with ten grams of Matcha tea, and the sort of dubious activity that it mixes up in this scheme, like user tracking and outright malware (remember Forbes' blunder?). And I'm not even going to get into the part where it advertises stuff like cigarettes (and I'm a smoker, I'd just rather not see this vice being frickin' advertised!). I have every intention to keep bashing this shitty industry until it grows a spine.

dwaltrip 10y ago

I'm curious what led you to such conclusions. That depiction does not match how I view the world at all. Just because an item doesn't prevent one from starving or freezing to death does not mean it is an "artificially inseminated need". Sure, GDP might drop 10% in the short-term if all advertising was banished. Who knows. What I do know is that people won't stop wanting things that make their life better, and in general will continue to buy such things. Advertising is not what keeps us from a peasant lifestyle.

zanny 10y ago
I don't buy for a second that the end of advertising would harm GDP. It would take generations of cultural turnover to move people away from consumerism. If people were not being psychologically manipulated into buying certain products they don't need or want, they will just buy what they want instead.
- superuser2 10y ago
  How will people know where or how to buy what they want without advertising?
  - DavidWanjiru 10y ago
    How do people know where to find/make the things they do have an innate need for without advertisement as you seem to define it?
  - tszymczyszyn 10y ago
    Advertising does not equal flow of information.
    - superuser2 10y ago
      Sure it does. Advertising is the flow of information about what products and services are available, how much they cost, and where to purchase them. Some are crass, some are subtle, some are sprayed, some are targeted, and the very best (personal recommendations and such) aren't even paid for. They are all advertisements.
      - dwaltrip 10y ago
        The way your post comes across, given the context: "It's impossible to learn about things in the world that one might pay money for without advertising" Is this what you actually mean? Because that's an absurd statement. Unless you dilute the meaning of the word "advertising" such that it covers literally every human action. But then we aren't having a useful conversation anymore. You're aware that a small number of years ago, in the scope of human civilization, most objects were not branded, billboards didn't exist, etc?
superuser2 10y ago
> people won't stop wanting things that make their life better, and in general will continue to buy such things. This is nonsensical. You can only buy something if you know that it exists for sale and where. The process by which you acquire this information is, by definition, advertising.
- dwaltrip 10y ago
  I wanted a Bluetooth speaker. I sought out non-paid reviews by third parties (some of the being fellow consumers who had already bought the device), and then decided which speaker I thought would work best for me. I didn't make use of advertising in the process.
  - mos_basik 10y ago
    How did you know you wanted a Bluetooth speaker, or that such a thing exists? In your specific case it's possible that you knew what speakers are, and you knew what Bluetooth is, and you extrapolated from there that the combination might exist and you went looking for one (carefully avoiding paid reviews in the process). But it's also possible that you saw a post on techcrunch or HN years ago when Bluetooth speakers were first being developed that seeded the concept in your mind. Something changed between then and now such that you recently wanted to buy one, and that kicked off your ad-free research and purchasing process. Are you positive that no ads were involved in that original, long-past inception of the concept "Bluetooth speaker" in your mind? Or maybe one of those fellow consumers whose reviews you recently read originally bought their speaker because of an ad they saw. If I make a better mousetrap, but then tell no one and never leave my farm, will the world beat a path to my door? I think you might argue that there is a distinction between word of mouth flow of information and advertising, but the devil is in the details. Is publishing a peer-reviewed paper advertising? Is updating a blog about your project advertising? Is posting a limited number of access codes on a forum you don't own to a service you are launching advertising? Is cold calling advertising? Is sending unsolicited emails advertising? What makes advertising advertising, and how is it different from telling people about this thing you made that they don't know about but might add value to their lives? I don't know, but I suspect it has something to do with fuzzy concepts like social capital.

redial 10y ago

Apparently history counts for nothing. If you are trying to claim the entirety of the human experience as some kind of living advertisement you have one hell of a claim to prove. Entire cultures lived and died before the first word was ever even writen. They sang, they made language, they created art, all without even thinking about the concept of money. Advertisement, as is being discussed, is relatively new, and to try to muddle the discussion by positioning it as the cornerstone of civilization is to miss entirely the point.

superuser2 10y ago
If you believe the human experience before modern technology and economics was good enough, why aren't you living it? What in the world are you doing on a computer? Yes, many people lived and died in an era when there was no time for economic activity beyond extracting dinner from local fauna or the land. The process by which they first learned about and acquired farm implements, giving them the time to do other things, is called advertising.
- redial 10y ago
  Nonsense. All you said is nonsense. > If you believe the human experience before modern technology and economics was good enough No rational person can take what I originally said and twist it to sound like this. > Yes, many people lived and died in an era when there was no time for economic activity beyond extracting dinner from local fauna or the land. Learn history. Art is older, if not as old as agriculture. > The process by which they first learned about and acquired farm implements, giving them the time to do other things, is called advertising. Farm implements first had to be invented. They first invented them. Everyone on this thread knows what is meant when the word Advertisement is used. It is not even close to what you are proposing.
  - bitJericho 10y ago
    Ironically, there's really good evidence to suggest humans only worked an hour or two a day to feed themselves before the advent of civilization.

notalaser 10y ago

The guys who spent money building on, say, the Colossus of Rhodos, on the development of scientific instruments and the pursuit of science itself, and generally, in every aspect of science and culture would beg to differ. Besides, nobody is bashing advertising because it's advertising things. We're bashing that advertising activity that's based on lies and deceit -- you know, like the flashing neon signs that invite you to buy this pill that's gonna make you beautiful like the other girls and it's basically half a gram of sugar mixed with ten grams of Matcha tea, and the sort of dubious activity that it mixes up in this scheme, like user tracking and outright malware (remember Forbes' blunder?). And I'm not even going to get into the part where it advertises stuff like cigarettes (and I'm a smoker, I'd just rather not see this vice being frickin' advertised!). I have every intention to keep bashing this shitty industry until it grows a spine.