8 ms·

"This isn’t an ad; the beauty in the Assistant is that it invites our partners to be our guest and share their tales." It just boggles my mind that anyone coul

by 65827 10y ago

"This isn’t an ad; the beauty in the Assistant is that it invites our partners to be our guest and share their tales." It just boggles my mind that anyone could read nonsense like this and not immediately say "I want nothing to do with that". This is evil corporatist greed along the lines of Monsanto, Goldman Sachs, or Halliburton. Alphabet needs to start getting called out forcefully, especially by their own employees and other tech leaders, whenever they pull this crap.

username223 10y ago
Assuming they haven't developed a deep neural net to generate PR-speak, I really want to understand the human(s) who wrote that. How do these people operate? I would assume they know they're spouting pure bullshit, know that everyone knows that, and simply don't care, but I'm not in that business.
- WA 10y ago
  Maybe it's like a game for copywriters: Don't take yourself too seriously and see what you can get away with.
- eip 10y ago
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tvp97SMZc6M https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tvp97SMZc6M
- gumby 10y ago
  I assume they just breathe their own exhaust and so that statement was heartfelt. You can imagine that especially non-technical people can believe that "advertising is annoying and intrusive but we have deep learning and so much knowledge of the user that the users will be delighted when we add to their experience. We'll just keep out the annoying stuff." And really are we any different? Any YC entrepreneur should know how to cold call, and the only way to bring yourself to do it is to believe in your heart that the person you're calling really will be happier with the information you provide, delighted that you called, so you aren't interrupting them at all.
- RickS 10y ago
  > I really want to understand the human(s) who wrote that. How do these people operate? Picture a scummy 20 year old college guy who chases what he wants without considering that the other side has no interest. "Ask first? Why? They want it. Even if they say they don't, subconsciously, they really do. I'm different, once they get it, they'll see." The narrative in marketing circles focuses "content" and "engagement" and all kinds of gymnastic descriptors that omit the sections of reality where the answer is "no" and stays no regardless of further pleas. That version of reality doesn't make any money, and so there is no incentive to acknowledge it. Upton Sinclair nailed it: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it"
- RossM 10y ago
  "Be our guest" is a song used in the Disney version of Beauty and the Beast; and I'm sure I've seen it used as a tagline. They know what they're doing.
sk5t 10y ago
Indeed, the copy is insipid. It boggles the mind how someone (even a committee) could write "partners [...] our guest [...] share their tales" and expect to be taken seriously.
tgragnato 10y ago
I'm not that familiar with the North American legal system.. Is 'misleading advertising' something punished in the US?
- 6d6b73 10y ago
  One could argue that all advertising is misleading :)
  - tgragnato 10y ago
    It can be a realistic position, but not all legislators agree. > The Authority will protect businesses from misleading advertising by other companies and establishes the conditions under which comparative advertising is diffused by any means. > Advertising is misleading when it is able to mislead the undertaking to which it is addressed, jeopardizing the economic behavior, or when it is likely to injure a competitor. The deceptiveness may relate to the characteristics of the goods or services, such as their availability or date of manufacture, the price and conditions of supply. > Comparative advertising is instead that mode of advertising in which a company promotes its own goods or services comparing them with those of competitors. This type of advertising is permitted only when it is not misleading, compares homogeneous goods objectively, it does not create confusion among businesses, or cause discredit to the competitor. [https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pubblicità_ingannevole https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pubblicità_ingannevole] [http://www.agcm.it/consumatore/consumatore-competenza/4525-decreto-legislativo-2-agosto-2007-n-145.html http://www.agcm.it/consumatore/consumatore-competenza/4525-d...] Seems like a nice ground for a lawsuit or a class action.. (at least in EU)
- burkaman 10y ago
  It's not exactly punished, but the FTC can order you to stop running misleading ads, and in egregious cases order you to run new ads correcting the lie.
Navarr 10y ago
I interpreted that to mean "Disney didn't pay us for this, and since there are no actionable items (such as purchasing tickets) we make nothing out of putting this information out there. Google's follow up statement after that markety statement: > This wasn’t intended to be an ad. What’s circulating online was a part of our My Day feature, where after providing helpful information about your day, we sometimes call out timely content. We’re continuing to experiment with new ways to surface unique content for users and we could have done better in this case. So I'm unfamiliar with how exactly this is evil corporatist greed?
- raesene9 10y ago
  Did you read the original article? http://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2017/3/16/14948696/google-home-assistant-advertising-beauty-and-the-beast http://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2017/3/16/14948696/go... Disney have a new movie out, "Promotional content" doesn't have to explictly say "but tickets here" to be effectively an advert, and I'd be seriously surprised if Disney didn't pay Google for that placement.
  - Navarr 10y ago
    Yes, I did. My thoughts were based off the original article, which is what I quoted the follow up statement from. What's the difference between "advertisement" and unpaid product promotion the user is likely to be highly interested in knowing has been released?
    - raesene9 10y ago
      if a company is telling me about their products which I would have to pay to consume (e.g a movie), and I didn't specifically ask to be told about the (by active consent), that's an advert. Also really not sure why you don't think Disney paid for this, Google's wording was ambiguous on that topic at best and the idea they're doing this out of the goodness of their hearts stretches belief more than a little.
      - 10y ago

by 65827 10y ago

username223 10y ago

Assuming they haven't developed a deep neural net to generate PR-speak, I really want to understand the human(s) who wrote that. How do these people operate? I would assume they know they're spouting pure bullshit, know that everyone knows that, and simply don't care, but I'm not in that business.

WA 10y ago
Maybe it's like a game for copywriters: Don't take yourself too seriously and see what you can get away with.
eip 10y ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tvp97SMZc6M https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tvp97SMZc6M
gumby 10y ago
I assume they just breathe their own exhaust and so that statement was heartfelt. You can imagine that especially non-technical people can believe that "advertising is annoying and intrusive but we have deep learning and so much knowledge of the user that the users will be delighted when we add to their experience. We'll just keep out the annoying stuff." And really are we any different? Any YC entrepreneur should know how to cold call, and the only way to bring yourself to do it is to believe in your heart that the person you're calling really will be happier with the information you provide, delighted that you called, so you aren't interrupting them at all.
RickS 10y ago
> I really want to understand the human(s) who wrote that. How do these people operate? Picture a scummy 20 year old college guy who chases what he wants without considering that the other side has no interest. "Ask first? Why? They want it. Even if they say they don't, subconsciously, they really do. I'm different, once they get it, they'll see." The narrative in marketing circles focuses "content" and "engagement" and all kinds of gymnastic descriptors that omit the sections of reality where the answer is "no" and stays no regardless of further pleas. That version of reality doesn't make any money, and so there is no incentive to acknowledge it. Upton Sinclair nailed it: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it"
RossM 10y ago
"Be our guest" is a song used in the Disney version of Beauty and the Beast; and I'm sure I've seen it used as a tagline. They know what they're doing.

sk5t 10y ago

Indeed, the copy is insipid. It boggles the mind how someone (even a committee) could write "partners [...] our guest [...] share their tales" and expect to be taken seriously.

tgragnato 10y ago

I'm not that familiar with the North American legal system.. Is 'misleading advertising' something punished in the US?

6d6b73 10y ago
One could argue that all advertising is misleading :)
- tgragnato 10y ago
  It can be a realistic position, but not all legislators agree. > The Authority will protect businesses from misleading advertising by other companies and establishes the conditions under which comparative advertising is diffused by any means. > Advertising is misleading when it is able to mislead the undertaking to which it is addressed, jeopardizing the economic behavior, or when it is likely to injure a competitor. The deceptiveness may relate to the characteristics of the goods or services, such as their availability or date of manufacture, the price and conditions of supply. > Comparative advertising is instead that mode of advertising in which a company promotes its own goods or services comparing them with those of competitors. This type of advertising is permitted only when it is not misleading, compares homogeneous goods objectively, it does not create confusion among businesses, or cause discredit to the competitor. [https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pubblicità_ingannevole https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pubblicità_ingannevole] [http://www.agcm.it/consumatore/consumatore-competenza/4525-decreto-legislativo-2-agosto-2007-n-145.html http://www.agcm.it/consumatore/consumatore-competenza/4525-d...] Seems like a nice ground for a lawsuit or a class action.. (at least in EU)
burkaman 10y ago
It's not exactly punished, but the FTC can order you to stop running misleading ads, and in egregious cases order you to run new ads correcting the lie.

Navarr 10y ago

I interpreted that to mean "Disney didn't pay us for this, and since there are no actionable items (such as purchasing tickets) we make nothing out of putting this information out there. Google's follow up statement after that markety statement: > This wasn’t intended to be an ad. What’s circulating online was a part of our My Day feature, where after providing helpful information about your day, we sometimes call out timely content. We’re continuing to experiment with new ways to surface unique content for users and we could have done better in this case. So I'm unfamiliar with how exactly this is evil corporatist greed?

raesene9 10y ago
Did you read the original article? http://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2017/3/16/14948696/google-home-assistant-advertising-beauty-and-the-beast http://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2017/3/16/14948696/go... Disney have a new movie out, "Promotional content" doesn't have to explictly say "but tickets here" to be effectively an advert, and I'd be seriously surprised if Disney didn't pay Google for that placement.
- Navarr 10y ago
  Yes, I did. My thoughts were based off the original article, which is what I quoted the follow up statement from. What's the difference between "advertisement" and unpaid product promotion the user is likely to be highly interested in knowing has been released?
  - raesene9 10y ago
    if a company is telling me about their products which I would have to pay to consume (e.g a movie), and I didn't specifically ask to be told about the (by active consent), that's an advert. Also really not sure why you don't think Disney paid for this, Google's wording was ambiguous on that topic at best and the idea they're doing this out of the goodness of their hearts stretches belief more than a little.
    - 10y ago