7 ms·

Of course advertising works. And this is a very bad thing, not a good thing.

by stale2002 9y ago

Cthulhu_ 9y ago
Depends. How many products are you using which you first heard from via HN? That's a form of advertising too, albeit a lot less sleazy.
- stale2002 9y ago
  Aggregation sites, that use crowd sourcing to bubble up interesting content and products is a fundamentally different beast than paid advertising.
  - icelancer 9y ago
    Is it? Can you easily differentiate fake "bubbled up" content? That is what the best advertising agencies have their hands around and have for some time.
  - Nition 9y ago
    It is until advertisers conspire to bubble their own content up.
fourneau 9y ago
Can you explain why it's a bad thing? From my perspective, I've found various things via advertising that I would have never come across by other means. A lot of people argue that "you'll just search for what you want" except I'm tired of searching for "shirt" and then scrolling for days looking for something that may work. Every once in a while I'm hit with a really good ad, and I'll click it, and maybe even buy.
- vanderZwan 9y ago
  > From my perspective, I've found various things via advertising that I would have never come across by other means. If you want to make a fair comparison, that should be compared to all the things you didn't find because useless ads took up your time and mental space. Also, whether or not you found something through an ad is not the point; one isn't not going to convince a smoker to quit smoking by trying to convince them that nicotine doesn't make them feel good - it's the other shit about it that is bad. In the case of advertising, there's a lot of cynical manipulation going on. The nagging factor in children's advertising comes to mind as one really evil example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hi63rXnuWbw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hi63rXnuWbw I've been TV- and ad-free since 2001 (yes, yes, I know: the "how do you know someone doesn't watch TV? They'll tell you"-smugness curse strikes again). In my case it was accidental however: I was living in a student appartment with no access to TV and Internet for over a year, having only books to read and rented movies to watch. Even when forced upon you you start noticing the difference pretty quickly, and wondering how you ever was capable of considering this normal. Nowadays ads just feel invasive, like strangers shouting at me on the street claiming they want to have a conversation while really they just want to get into my pockets.
  - mozumder 9y ago
    > If you want to make a fair comparison, that should be compared to all the things you didn't find because useless ads took up your time and mental space. Why would you save mental space for non-adverised products? Are you supposed to be a product researcher? Is that your job? Is time not valuable for you? Because efficient people buy the first thing they recall, for crap that doesn't matter. > I've been TV- and ad-free since 2001 (yes, yes, I know: the "how do you know someone doesn't watch TV? They'll tell you"-smugness curse strikes again) How many newspapers and magazines have you bought that contained ads? Because your complaint is about user-experience, not advertising. And yes, the anti-advertising smugness is the worst. Everybody advertises, always have, always will. I mean, you had Roman gladiators in ancient times that were sponsored by brands.
    - builditand 9y ago
      People do awful things to each others from the beginning of time, yes. Should we embrace it? No, we should learn to behave better.
    - vanderZwan 9y ago
      > Why would you save mental space for non-adverised products? Are you supposed to be a product researcher? Is that your job? Is time not valuable for you? Because efficient people buy the first thing they recall, for crap that doesn't matter. So many implicit assumptions and premises I hardly know where to begin... You're equating "spends a big budget on branding" with "quality", which is a ridiculous fallacy. Yes, my time is valuable. So buying something that is sub-par for the job is a terrible investment of time and money. The idea that I need an advertisement to help decide which product to buy when I can compare products in the store (both physically or on-line) is also ridiculous. Plus, the most efficient thing is to not buy crap that doesn't matter in the first place. And I'm a lot better at deciding what matters to me since invasive ads are out of my life. > How many newspapers and magazines have you bought that contained ads? Because your complaint is about user-experience, not advertising. First: no it's not. Ads are not equal across media. The amount of manipulation possible through moving pictures and sound is vastly worse than it is through paper advertisement. And for the record: almost none, I barely read the news, and when I do it's on-line, and the few magazines I read are imported so they target people from another country. > And yes, the anti-advertising smugness is the worst. Everybody advertises, always have, always will. I mean, you had Roman gladiators in ancient times that were sponsored by brands. This is starting to sound like That One Guy At The Party who gets uncomfortable because one other guest is a vegetarian, and then tries to prove the vegetarian friend is a hypocrite.
- icebraining 9y ago
  Fine, then you won't mind installing an extension or enabling an option that opts you in into being served ads while you browse. I'm sure most of us anti-ads advocates have no problem with that.
  - fourneau 9y ago
    I /technically/ opt-in by not running ad-block on my laptop, so I guess that's true.

Of course advertising works. And this is a very bad thing, not a good thing.

Depends. How many products are you using which you first heard from via HN? That's a form of advertising too, albeit a lot less sleazy.

stale2002 9y ago
Aggregation sites, that use crowd sourcing to bubble up interesting content and products is a fundamentally different beast than paid advertising.
- icelancer 9y ago
  Is it? Can you easily differentiate fake "bubbled up" content? That is what the best advertising agencies have their hands around and have for some time.
- Nition 9y ago
  It is until advertisers conspire to bubble their own content up.

fourneau 9y ago

Can you explain why it's a bad thing? From my perspective, I've found various things via advertising that I would have never come across by other means. A lot of people argue that "you'll just search for what you want" except I'm tired of searching for "shirt" and then scrolling for days looking for something that may work. Every once in a while I'm hit with a really good ad, and I'll click it, and maybe even buy.

vanderZwan 9y ago
> From my perspective, I've found various things via advertising that I would have never come across by other means. If you want to make a fair comparison, that should be compared to all the things you didn't find because useless ads took up your time and mental space. Also, whether or not you found something through an ad is not the point; one isn't not going to convince a smoker to quit smoking by trying to convince them that nicotine doesn't make them feel good - it's the other shit about it that is bad. In the case of advertising, there's a lot of cynical manipulation going on. The nagging factor in children's advertising comes to mind as one really evil example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hi63rXnuWbw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hi63rXnuWbw I've been TV- and ad-free since 2001 (yes, yes, I know: the "how do you know someone doesn't watch TV? They'll tell you"-smugness curse strikes again). In my case it was accidental however: I was living in a student appartment with no access to TV and Internet for over a year, having only books to read and rented movies to watch. Even when forced upon you you start noticing the difference pretty quickly, and wondering how you ever was capable of considering this normal. Nowadays ads just feel invasive, like strangers shouting at me on the street claiming they want to have a conversation while really they just want to get into my pockets.
- mozumder 9y ago
  > If you want to make a fair comparison, that should be compared to all the things you didn't find because useless ads took up your time and mental space. Why would you save mental space for non-adverised products? Are you supposed to be a product researcher? Is that your job? Is time not valuable for you? Because efficient people buy the first thing they recall, for crap that doesn't matter. > I've been TV- and ad-free since 2001 (yes, yes, I know: the "how do you know someone doesn't watch TV? They'll tell you"-smugness curse strikes again) How many newspapers and magazines have you bought that contained ads? Because your complaint is about user-experience, not advertising. And yes, the anti-advertising smugness is the worst. Everybody advertises, always have, always will. I mean, you had Roman gladiators in ancient times that were sponsored by brands.
  - builditand 9y ago
    People do awful things to each others from the beginning of time, yes. Should we embrace it? No, we should learn to behave better.
  - vanderZwan 9y ago
    > Why would you save mental space for non-adverised products? Are you supposed to be a product researcher? Is that your job? Is time not valuable for you? Because efficient people buy the first thing they recall, for crap that doesn't matter. So many implicit assumptions and premises I hardly know where to begin... You're equating "spends a big budget on branding" with "quality", which is a ridiculous fallacy. Yes, my time is valuable. So buying something that is sub-par for the job is a terrible investment of time and money. The idea that I need an advertisement to help decide which product to buy when I can compare products in the store (both physically or on-line) is also ridiculous. Plus, the most efficient thing is to not buy crap that doesn't matter in the first place. And I'm a lot better at deciding what matters to me since invasive ads are out of my life. > How many newspapers and magazines have you bought that contained ads? Because your complaint is about user-experience, not advertising. First: no it's not. Ads are not equal across media. The amount of manipulation possible through moving pictures and sound is vastly worse than it is through paper advertisement. And for the record: almost none, I barely read the news, and when I do it's on-line, and the few magazines I read are imported so they target people from another country. > And yes, the anti-advertising smugness is the worst. Everybody advertises, always have, always will. I mean, you had Roman gladiators in ancient times that were sponsored by brands. This is starting to sound like That One Guy At The Party who gets uncomfortable because one other guest is a vegetarian, and then tries to prove the vegetarian friend is a hypocrite.
icebraining 9y ago
Fine, then you won't mind installing an extension or enabling an option that opts you in into being served ads while you browse. I'm sure most of us anti-ads advocates have no problem with that.
- fourneau 9y ago
  I /technically/ opt-in by not running ad-block on my laptop, so I guess that's true.