5 ms·

I know right? Additionally, ads do serve an economic purpose. As a reductio ad absurdum, picture a world with all advertisement banned. If you were an inventor

I know right? Additionally, ads do serve an economic purpose. As a reductio ad absurdum, picture a world with all advertisement banned. If you were an inventor or innovator who came up with a superior product or streamlined some process and inclined to start your own business to compete on cost or quality, your options are a lot more limited if you can't buy ads. People are rightfully concerned about the privacy invasion from precisely targeted ads. But they should decouple that concern from the benefits of more targeted ads which are more efficient, because that benefit is real. It does not just benefit businesses either (which are, after all, owned by people in the end), advertisement will increase consumer surplus in many cases as well.

seanwilson 9y ago
> As a reductio ad absurdum, picture a world with all advertisement banned. If you were an inventor or innovator who came up with a superior product or streamlined some process and inclined to start your own business to compete on cost or quality, your options are a lot more limited if you can't buy ads. Yeah, I don't understand what people who peddle this quote expect individuals/companies to do to get their product noticed if ads are unethical apparently. You're just meant to rely on word of mouth starting from nothing? I don't see what's wrong with telling people about your product to see if they're interested. Ads in specific newspapers, posters in a street, handing out leaflets in a certain area, ads during a specific TV show etc. are all forms of targeted marketing as well.
- blub 9y ago
  I think you must have missed the last ~15 years and where the advertising industry has turned more and more to spying on the customers of their real customers for profit. The misconduct of the players in the ad business is legendary. If I were you, I would try to educate myself before continuing to write here.
  - seanwilson 9y ago
    Obviously I'm against spying on people. You can show people ads in ways that isn't invading their privacy.
    - majewsky 9y ago
      It's not just privacy. It's also attention that's invaded. Among the many buzzwords of recent years is the "attention economy". It has already existed for quite a long time (newspapers selling ad space are actually selling their readers' eyeballs), but since a few years ago, ad companies have the technology to optimize for maximum attention. The effects of attention economy can be witnessed in reports of people quitting Facebook temporarily as a kind of detox, or the general uncluttering movement (caused by sensory overload which is in turn caused by attention parasites like social networks, and our generally hectic lifestyle). In my opinion, the costs of the attention economy outweigh its benefits.
      - seanwilson 9y ago
        > The effects of attention economy can be witnessed in reports of people quitting Facebook temporarily as a kind of detox, or the general uncluttering movement (caused by sensory overload which is in turn caused by attention parasites like social networks, and our generally hectic lifestyle). In my opinion, the costs of the attention economy outweigh its benefits. I don't think the solution here is to somehow stop people making products like Facebook though...if you're using Facebook to an unhealthy degree and letting it consume all your attention you should work on yourself in my opinion as you'll just find something else to fill that gap. Facebook has had a positive impact on my social life for example and I don't feel addicted to it.
    - kahnpro 9y ago
      You can, but there's a difference between how we hope things will turn out, and how people are actually behaving in the real world.
    - beagle3 9y ago
      You can, but it's more effective to show them in ways that do invade their privacy, so in the race to the profit (which is as unavoidable as races to the bottom), that's what every eyeball agency, lead by Google and Facebook, does. Unless this is curbed by regulation, which I think is extremely unlikely for the next 10 years at least, you can safely assume, and should assume, that all ads are privacy invading.
blub 9y ago
Advertising, and in particular online advertising is but one way of spreading the word about a product. If there were no ads, information about products would spread through specialist magazines or website, word of mouth, fairs, etc. Almost anything is better than an ad, which nowadays is just some abstract crap designed to feel one connected to the brand. Take the latest Google phone ad: it consists basically 99% of people doing (arguably) interesting things. It barely tells one what the product is and why it's useful. That's what ads are nowadays, attempts at emotional manipulation.
- dsacco 9y ago
  > Take the latest Google phone ad: it consists basically 99% of people doing (arguably) interesting things. It barely tells one what the product is and why it's useful. That's what ads are nowadays, attempts at emotional manipulation. As a counterpoint: if you consider that emotional manipulation, then there are many people (myself included) who enjoy being emotionally manipulated. I often consciously choose to "reward" ads that captured my attention in the first 3 seconds by not scrolling by or skipping them, and letting them get their full impression on me. Good on them for being interesting. I rather like feeling connected to the brands I enjoy.
  - icebraining 9y ago
    Great! So you wouldn't mind deliberately searching for and accessing such ads, much like everyone else does for the content they enjoy, right?
    - apetresc 9y ago
      No, that would be a waste of time. I'd rather just watch it as a form of payment for the thousands-of-dollars-worth of free services I access every day.
    - dsacco 9y ago
      That's a weird cognitive jump. On the one hand, to answer your direct charge - I absolutely don't mind seeking out and accessing some ads (I've gone to some brands' website or YouTube channel - such as Old Spice - just to watch their ads before, and I've sought out Superbowl ads to rewatch because they're funny). On the other hand, as a dialectic note, I find your reasoning to be strange and fallacious (specifically, a fallacy of excluded middle or false dilemma). I don't see any reason why someone must be compelled to seek out things they enjoy instead of enjoying them passively. Phrased another way, it is possible to enjoy things as a passive exercise when they would become tedious or unenjoyable as an active exercise. You don't seem to acknowledge this possibility.
ryandrake 9y ago
I'd agree with you if ads were only about discovering new products. But the vast, vast majority of advertisements we are fed everyday are about products we already know about. "Ford is selling cars! They come out with new ones from time to time." Seriously? You don't say! "Merck has a yet another drug for some disease they made up." Wow, really? Who knew? Coca-Cola is selling the same sugar water they've been selling for decades." Come on--get real, not Coca-Cola!
arximboldi 9y ago
I think you have an idealized and false idea of what advertising is. I don't remember ever seeing an ad showing a new invention. That is actually not the purpose of advertising. You can't understand a new concept in the time lapse of an ad. In fact, you'll see that new inventions normally become popular via other means (targeting niches firsts via specialized magazines, conferences, etc.) and only use advertising when they already have an established business and market. The fact is, most advertising is just about manipulating peoples feelings. The first kind is about brand aggrandizing, trying to change how people feel about a specific brand--this brand is "quality", "fresh", "young", "elite", whatever. The second one is about stimulating demand, normally trying to make people need things they did not need before: "you are fat! buy our cream!", "your life is boring! buy our holiday packages!", "you look ugly, buy our clothes!", "you could be healthier eating our pro-active meta-splendidous yogurt!", etc. In either case, the goal is to make you feel bad, incomplete, until you spend your money on more shit. Personally, I would love to live in a world with almost zero advertising. I am from Spain and one of the things I love about Berlin, where I live, is the low amount of advertising in the streets compared to anywhere I lived before. That is changing slowly though. But I have seen pictures of DDR Berlin and there is literally no ads. Of course, sadly that package came with the STASI and other horrible things. That aside, I would love to be able to walk the streets without having to look at ads telling me to buy shit over pictures impossible women in lingerie, rich men in expensive cars, smiling youngsters partying together, families on vacation in the Bahamas, etc. I know people that consider such world dull, gray, etc. But for me, it would bring some kind of new zen to urban life. Ironically now, thanks to the Internet, advertisers themselves (and security agencies) are tracking our lifes in ways the STASI could not even dream of. The grass is always greener on the other side, but if you try hard enough you can always get the worst of both worlds.
- jhoechtl 9y ago
  Concerning DDR Berlin: That era of time was operated in planing mode. Plans were made what to produce in what quantity. There was in theory no need for ad because there was little choice what to buy. Still I sympathisize with your comment in a very positive sense.
- icebraining 9y ago
gaius 9y ago
You can visit that world right now if you want. It's called Cuba. A couple of weeks there and returning to the ad-soaked West is VERY weird, let me tell you...

seanwilson 9y ago

> As a reductio ad absurdum, picture a world with all advertisement banned. If you were an inventor or innovator who came up with a superior product or streamlined some process and inclined to start your own business to compete on cost or quality, your options are a lot more limited if you can't buy ads. Yeah, I don't understand what people who peddle this quote expect individuals/companies to do to get their product noticed if ads are unethical apparently. You're just meant to rely on word of mouth starting from nothing? I don't see what's wrong with telling people about your product to see if they're interested. Ads in specific newspapers, posters in a street, handing out leaflets in a certain area, ads during a specific TV show etc. are all forms of targeted marketing as well.

blub 9y ago
I think you must have missed the last ~15 years and where the advertising industry has turned more and more to spying on the customers of their real customers for profit. The misconduct of the players in the ad business is legendary. If I were you, I would try to educate myself before continuing to write here.
- seanwilson 9y ago
  Obviously I'm against spying on people. You can show people ads in ways that isn't invading their privacy.
  - majewsky 9y ago
    It's not just privacy. It's also attention that's invaded. Among the many buzzwords of recent years is the "attention economy". It has already existed for quite a long time (newspapers selling ad space are actually selling their readers' eyeballs), but since a few years ago, ad companies have the technology to optimize for maximum attention. The effects of attention economy can be witnessed in reports of people quitting Facebook temporarily as a kind of detox, or the general uncluttering movement (caused by sensory overload which is in turn caused by attention parasites like social networks, and our generally hectic lifestyle). In my opinion, the costs of the attention economy outweigh its benefits.
    - seanwilson 9y ago
      > The effects of attention economy can be witnessed in reports of people quitting Facebook temporarily as a kind of detox, or the general uncluttering movement (caused by sensory overload which is in turn caused by attention parasites like social networks, and our generally hectic lifestyle). In my opinion, the costs of the attention economy outweigh its benefits. I don't think the solution here is to somehow stop people making products like Facebook though...if you're using Facebook to an unhealthy degree and letting it consume all your attention you should work on yourself in my opinion as you'll just find something else to fill that gap. Facebook has had a positive impact on my social life for example and I don't feel addicted to it.
  - kahnpro 9y ago
    You can, but there's a difference between how we hope things will turn out, and how people are actually behaving in the real world.
  - beagle3 9y ago
    You can, but it's more effective to show them in ways that do invade their privacy, so in the race to the profit (which is as unavoidable as races to the bottom), that's what every eyeball agency, lead by Google and Facebook, does. Unless this is curbed by regulation, which I think is extremely unlikely for the next 10 years at least, you can safely assume, and should assume, that all ads are privacy invading.

blub 9y ago

Advertising, and in particular online advertising is but one way of spreading the word about a product. If there were no ads, information about products would spread through specialist magazines or website, word of mouth, fairs, etc. Almost anything is better than an ad, which nowadays is just some abstract crap designed to feel one connected to the brand. Take the latest Google phone ad: it consists basically 99% of people doing (arguably) interesting things. It barely tells one what the product is and why it's useful. That's what ads are nowadays, attempts at emotional manipulation.

dsacco 9y ago
> Take the latest Google phone ad: it consists basically 99% of people doing (arguably) interesting things. It barely tells one what the product is and why it's useful. That's what ads are nowadays, attempts at emotional manipulation. As a counterpoint: if you consider that emotional manipulation, then there are many people (myself included) who enjoy being emotionally manipulated. I often consciously choose to "reward" ads that captured my attention in the first 3 seconds by not scrolling by or skipping them, and letting them get their full impression on me. Good on them for being interesting. I rather like feeling connected to the brands I enjoy.
- icebraining 9y ago
  Great! So you wouldn't mind deliberately searching for and accessing such ads, much like everyone else does for the content they enjoy, right?
  - apetresc 9y ago
    No, that would be a waste of time. I'd rather just watch it as a form of payment for the thousands-of-dollars-worth of free services I access every day.
  - dsacco 9y ago
    That's a weird cognitive jump. On the one hand, to answer your direct charge - I absolutely don't mind seeking out and accessing some ads (I've gone to some brands' website or YouTube channel - such as Old Spice - just to watch their ads before, and I've sought out Superbowl ads to rewatch because they're funny). On the other hand, as a dialectic note, I find your reasoning to be strange and fallacious (specifically, a fallacy of excluded middle or false dilemma). I don't see any reason why someone must be compelled to seek out things they enjoy instead of enjoying them passively. Phrased another way, it is possible to enjoy things as a passive exercise when they would become tedious or unenjoyable as an active exercise. You don't seem to acknowledge this possibility.

ryandrake 9y ago

I'd agree with you if ads were only about discovering new products. But the vast, vast majority of advertisements we are fed everyday are about products we already know about. "Ford is selling cars! They come out with new ones from time to time." Seriously? You don't say! "Merck has a yet another drug for some disease they made up." Wow, really? Who knew? Coca-Cola is selling the same sugar water they've been selling for decades." Come on--get real, not Coca-Cola!

arximboldi 9y ago

I think you have an idealized and false idea of what advertising is. I don't remember ever seeing an ad showing a new invention. That is actually not the purpose of advertising. You can't understand a new concept in the time lapse of an ad. In fact, you'll see that new inventions normally become popular via other means (targeting niches firsts via specialized magazines, conferences, etc.) and only use advertising when they already have an established business and market. The fact is, most advertising is just about manipulating peoples feelings. The first kind is about brand aggrandizing, trying to change how people feel about a specific brand--this brand is "quality", "fresh", "young", "elite", whatever. The second one is about stimulating demand, normally trying to make people need things they did not need before: "you are fat! buy our cream!", "your life is boring! buy our holiday packages!", "you look ugly, buy our clothes!", "you could be healthier eating our pro-active meta-splendidous yogurt!", etc. In either case, the goal is to make you feel bad, incomplete, until you spend your money on more shit. Personally, I would love to live in a world with almost zero advertising. I am from Spain and one of the things I love about Berlin, where I live, is the low amount of advertising in the streets compared to anywhere I lived before. That is changing slowly though. But I have seen pictures of DDR Berlin and there is literally no ads. Of course, sadly that package came with the STASI and other horrible things. That aside, I would love to be able to walk the streets without having to look at ads telling me to buy shit over pictures impossible women in lingerie, rich men in expensive cars, smiling youngsters partying together, families on vacation in the Bahamas, etc. I know people that consider such world dull, gray, etc. But for me, it would bring some kind of new zen to urban life. Ironically now, thanks to the Internet, advertisers themselves (and security agencies) are tracking our lifes in ways the STASI could not even dream of. The grass is always greener on the other side, but if you try hard enough you can always get the worst of both worlds.

jhoechtl 9y ago
Concerning DDR Berlin: That era of time was operated in planing mode. Plans were made what to produce in what quantity. There was in theory no need for ad because there was little choice what to buy. Still I sympathisize with your comment in a very positive sense.
icebraining 9y ago

gaius 9y ago

You can visit that world right now if you want. It's called Cuba. A couple of weeks there and returning to the ad-soaked West is VERY weird, let me tell you...