32 ms·
TL;DR: Marketing ("The large-scale effort to .. capture and exploit your attention") is bad. OP should look inward. Him writing a blog post was an effort to ca
by soared 9y ago
TL;DR: Marketing ("The large-scale effort to .. capture and exploit your attention") is bad.
OP should look inward. Him writing a blog post was an effort to capture and exploit my attention. He wants more views on his post. What an immoral thing to do.
- LesZedCB 9y agothe exploitation is the critical element the author won't ever take your money. the ads will
- pmyteh 9y agoCute, but no. The blog post writer isn't doing it on a large scale, so isn't caught by their own definition. They're arguably not exploiting it, either (no return to them if you read it or not).
- soared 9y agoScale isn't truly relevant.. a tiny ad network is less bad than a large one? And I'd argue him checking the number of views on his post and chasing higher numbers is exploiting my attention.
- mistercow 9y agoWhy wouldn't scale be relevant? The harm that a tiny ad network causes is obviously smaller than the harm that a large ad network causes, so... yes, a tiny ad network is less bad than a large one.
- theonemind 9y agoI’d differentiate between trying to deliver value vs trying to extract value. Additionally, I’d differentiate between delivering information (like this article) and direct attempts at appealing to the “reptilian brain” and trying to bypass rational analysis. The latter, in each case, gets on shakier ethical ground, in my opinion.