4 ms·

Nooo, noo, markets claim to offer information about what people want but the way they are laid out right now, with all the manufactured consent peppering choice

by rexpop 9y ago

Nooo, noo, markets claim to offer information about what people want but the way they are laid out right now, with all the manufactured consent peppering choices, it's not really fair to claim that capitalism reflects "what people want" in the industrialized world, today.

edanm 9y ago
Errrr, why? I mean, I don't think markets literally tell us what everybody wants in that there are plenty of coordination problems, ridge cases, etc. But on the whole I think markets do a great job and, more importantly, I don't know of a better mechanism.
- TeMPOraL 9y ago
  The basic mechanism of market economy does in fact an excellent job of figuring out what people want at the very moment, and how much they want it relative to each other. The important thing is, this mechanism does not exist in vacuum. It doesn't really distinguish between sources of "wants", i.e. whether a consumer wants something because that is their genuine need, or because it's a manufactured marketing-based need, or whether they're forced by circumstances into choosing this particular product (e.g. lack of choice). I think we should both appreciate the effectiveness of this system and also talk about its failure modes when employed in the wider context of human society.
  - zeamaize 9y ago
    «manufactured marketing based need» This reeks of paternalism and fascism. You claim you know what people actually want despite their own claims to the contrary? So what, you'll tell people when they "don't really want" what they say they want?
    - mjw1007 9y ago
      There's no need to go around telling people anything. We could just stop believing that « capitalism is just another way of saying "what people want" ».
    - TeMPOraL 9y ago
      There are only two possibilities - either it's what people actually want, at which point the whole half-a-trillion-dolar marketing industry is a huge waste of time, or marketing actually works and people want different things than they'd want if not influenced by it. I don't think it's "paternalistic" to recognize the power imbalance present here. I think it's stupid not to.
      - kqr 9y ago
        This is an oversimplified view on marketing. Imagine there is a human desire X in some people, and there are three products A, B and C designed to fulfill that desire. Do you honestly think the marketing industry is stupid enough to primarily be engaged in trying to sell product B to people who DON'T have desire X? Of course not. The idea is to convince people that product B does a better job of fulfilling desire X than competing products A and C. Or at least that it optimises some other variable – it might not be universally better, but it may be a whole lot cheaper, or easier to get a hold of, or have better customer support. Real[1] marketing is mostly concerned with finding the people who have a particular need, and making sure they are aware of a product that fulfills that need, and what the strengths of that product are. Marketing is fundamentally about increasing sales as much as possible with as little expenses as possible. The most efficient way to do this is to find people who already would have wanted your product if only they were aware that it exists, and make them aware that it exists. Convincing people to buy things that fulfills needs they never had is possible, but takes a lot of effort. Too much to be worth it, in most cases.[2] ---- [1] This may sound like I'm moving the goalposts, but all I'm really trying to do is guard myself against the obvious "but I got this viagra marketing spam email which does not fit your description" rebuttal. [2] Yes, there are plenty of "artificial needs" to go around, but most of them are created by culture, of which only a smaller part is marketing. They're rarely created by a single, hugely effective marketing campaign. (I say rarely, because De Beers comes to mind...)
        rexpop 9y ago
        [1] no true scotsman is exactly what you are doing. [2] it's nonsense to say "artificial needs are created by culture, of which only a smaller part is marketing," when marketing, consumerism, and commercialism are so thoroughly pervasive in our culture. Hell, even religious holy days have become utterly commercialized. Industrialized people are inundated with advertising. I think you're absolutely right about "real" marketing, but I think you're giving it too much credit. "unreal" marketing is much more real.
  - rexpop 9y ago
    I couldn't agree more.

by rexpop 9y ago

edanm 9y ago

Errrr, why? I mean, I don't think markets literally tell us what everybody wants in that there are plenty of coordination problems, ridge cases, etc. But on the whole I think markets do a great job and, more importantly, I don't know of a better mechanism.

TeMPOraL 9y ago
The basic mechanism of market economy does in fact an excellent job of figuring out what people want at the very moment, and how much they want it relative to each other. The important thing is, this mechanism does not exist in vacuum. It doesn't really distinguish between sources of "wants", i.e. whether a consumer wants something because that is their genuine need, or because it's a manufactured marketing-based need, or whether they're forced by circumstances into choosing this particular product (e.g. lack of choice). I think we should both appreciate the effectiveness of this system and also talk about its failure modes when employed in the wider context of human society.
- zeamaize 9y ago
  «manufactured marketing based need» This reeks of paternalism and fascism. You claim you know what people actually want despite their own claims to the contrary? So what, you'll tell people when they "don't really want" what they say they want?
  - mjw1007 9y ago
    There's no need to go around telling people anything. We could just stop believing that « capitalism is just another way of saying "what people want" ».
  - TeMPOraL 9y ago
    There are only two possibilities - either it's what people actually want, at which point the whole half-a-trillion-dolar marketing industry is a huge waste of time, or marketing actually works and people want different things than they'd want if not influenced by it. I don't think it's "paternalistic" to recognize the power imbalance present here. I think it's stupid not to.
    - kqr 9y ago
      This is an oversimplified view on marketing. Imagine there is a human desire X in some people, and there are three products A, B and C designed to fulfill that desire. Do you honestly think the marketing industry is stupid enough to primarily be engaged in trying to sell product B to people who DON'T have desire X? Of course not. The idea is to convince people that product B does a better job of fulfilling desire X than competing products A and C. Or at least that it optimises some other variable – it might not be universally better, but it may be a whole lot cheaper, or easier to get a hold of, or have better customer support. Real[1] marketing is mostly concerned with finding the people who have a particular need, and making sure they are aware of a product that fulfills that need, and what the strengths of that product are. Marketing is fundamentally about increasing sales as much as possible with as little expenses as possible. The most efficient way to do this is to find people who already would have wanted your product if only they were aware that it exists, and make them aware that it exists. Convincing people to buy things that fulfills needs they never had is possible, but takes a lot of effort. Too much to be worth it, in most cases.[2] ---- [1] This may sound like I'm moving the goalposts, but all I'm really trying to do is guard myself against the obvious "but I got this viagra marketing spam email which does not fit your description" rebuttal. [2] Yes, there are plenty of "artificial needs" to go around, but most of them are created by culture, of which only a smaller part is marketing. They're rarely created by a single, hugely effective marketing campaign. (I say rarely, because De Beers comes to mind...)
      - rexpop 9y ago
        [1] no true scotsman is exactly what you are doing. [2] it's nonsense to say "artificial needs are created by culture, of which only a smaller part is marketing," when marketing, consumerism, and commercialism are so thoroughly pervasive in our culture. Hell, even religious holy days have become utterly commercialized. Industrialized people are inundated with advertising. I think you're absolutely right about "real" marketing, but I think you're giving it too much credit. "unreal" marketing is much more real.
- rexpop 9y ago
  I couldn't agree more.