3 ms·
The problem is that companies can tangibly prove the benefit, even if it's minuscule (imagine if 1:10000 car ads will generate a sell at best, that's still bett
by awalton 9y ago
The problem is that companies can tangibly prove the benefit, even if it's minuscule (imagine if 1:10000 car ads will generate a sell at best, that's still better than no advertising), but the citizenry have a hard time proving the opposite - that having a sanctuary from advertising is actually a good thing. And because of that, I fully suspect ads to continue infiltrating our American (and British, and Australian) lives.
Even privacy is easier to advocate for than the intangible peace of mind an ad-free space offers. Even if studies end up proving that advertising rots the brain and keeps us too engaged, even if it is elucidated as one of the causes of obesity and poor sleep hygiene and attention deficit syndromes... companies will simply argue it's too big of a hit to their bottom line to quit, and that will be the end of the discussion.
...and people wonder why AdBlocking continues to grow online.
- jackvalentine 9y agoI suppose I might object that "making a sale" is a tangible benefit but that is a different conversation about the value of commerce in general. Let's not go there today! I heartily agree with your thesis though - making the case that 'nothing' is a good thing is incredibly difficult. It took decades to prove cigarettes dangerous then get rid of cigarette advertising and that was linked to an observable medical problem. I don't hold hope that we'll manage with advertising.