6 ms·

This needs a collective defense, i.e. state action: An advertising tax to take the profit out of most of it.

Spivak 9y ago
You're not wrong. The individual right to 'choose' is not strong enough to enact real change in this space. But a tax is a short sighted and there's no reason to believe that any state dislikes the current state of advertising enough to effectively ban it outright.
- vincnetas 9y ago
  Google "city without ads sao paulo". IIRC there are no outdoor ads in the city.
  - virtualmic 9y ago
    Almost true for Chandigarh in India, as well.
  - tyfon 9y ago
    That is wonderful. I wish there was a ban on ads in public spaces here as well.
kk_cz 9y ago
I agree in instances where ads pollute public spaces, but nobody is forcing you to use Echo or watch TV. If you don't like ads you have a personal choice to do something about it, no government involvment is necessary IMHO.
- frgtpsswrdlame 9y ago
  Yes but my personal choice is limited because the government refuses to step in. Right now I can choose between an Echo which tries to sell me and my kids Colgate toothpaste or not having an Echo at all. With government action I could choose between an Echo (without ads) or not having an Echo at all. In this way government has actually created better options for me to exercise my personal choice on.
  - kk_cz 9y ago
    > Yes but my personal choice is limited because the government refuses to step in. Wow. Do you really believe that it's government job to guarantee ad-free Echo?
    - frgtpsswrdlame 9y ago
      That's not exactly how I would phrase it but basically. I mean you would agree that a bunch of people could organize a boycott of Echo with ads and eventually Amazon would stop selling it and sell Echo without ads and that would be fine right? So why don't we just do that? It's because we lack a coordination mechanism, the incentive of individual boycotters is to cheat. Luckily humans have developed a great coordination mechanism called 'democracy' and we can use it when coordination in the market place has failed.
      - dbmikus 9y ago
        Or someone can make another audio-controlled device that doesn't sell ads and that can be a separate company. I don't see why you would immediately go towards having the government step in and regulate whether Amazon can make the Echo prefer their own products quite yet. It's still a new device and there are some other competitors. I could agree that companies be required to have a disclaimer when they provide preference to a certain product set over another.
        frgtpsswrdlame 9y ago
        >Or someone can make another audio-controlled device that doesn't sell ads and that can be a separate company. Sure, that's one possibility. Probably not a very realistic one but it's there. >I don't see why you would immediately go towards having the government step in and regulate whether Amazon can make the Echo prefer their own products quite yet. Why should we immediately go towards another company/market-oriented solution? What is it about government that requires we wait around for the market to fail? Why not just go do what we want?
- belorn 9y ago
  Government involvement is necessary when minor consumer awareness would have major change in consumer behavior. So would there be a major difference in consumer behavior if it was generally known that the advice given by the echo is paid advertisement? If Yes -> then governments should take notice. If No -> then interference would just inhibit the market.
- reaperducer 9y ago
  > nobody is forcing you to use Echo or watch TV At one time nobody was forcing us to pay private health insurance conglomerates every month, yet here we are. All it takes is some clever lobbyists and some cash, both of which Amazon has in spades.
  - kk_cz 9y ago
    I can promise you that in a world where goverment forces you to use Amazon Echo I will join forces with OP and fight for "government guaranteed" ad-free Echo experience. Also I will very strongly demand that government does something about those damn flying pigs.

You're not wrong. The individual right to 'choose' is not strong enough to enact real change in this space. But a tax is a short sighted and there's no reason to believe that any state dislikes the current state of advertising enough to effectively ban it outright.

vincnetas 9y ago
Google "city without ads sao paulo". IIRC there are no outdoor ads in the city.
- virtualmic 9y ago
  Almost true for Chandigarh in India, as well.
- tyfon 9y ago
  That is wonderful. I wish there was a ban on ads in public spaces here as well.

kk_cz 9y ago

I agree in instances where ads pollute public spaces, but nobody is forcing you to use Echo or watch TV. If you don't like ads you have a personal choice to do something about it, no government involvment is necessary IMHO.

frgtpsswrdlame 9y ago
Yes but my personal choice is limited because the government refuses to step in. Right now I can choose between an Echo which tries to sell me and my kids Colgate toothpaste or not having an Echo at all. With government action I could choose between an Echo (without ads) or not having an Echo at all. In this way government has actually created better options for me to exercise my personal choice on.
- kk_cz 9y ago
  > Yes but my personal choice is limited because the government refuses to step in. Wow. Do you really believe that it's government job to guarantee ad-free Echo?
  - frgtpsswrdlame 9y ago
    That's not exactly how I would phrase it but basically. I mean you would agree that a bunch of people could organize a boycott of Echo with ads and eventually Amazon would stop selling it and sell Echo without ads and that would be fine right? So why don't we just do that? It's because we lack a coordination mechanism, the incentive of individual boycotters is to cheat. Luckily humans have developed a great coordination mechanism called 'democracy' and we can use it when coordination in the market place has failed.
    - dbmikus 9y ago
      Or someone can make another audio-controlled device that doesn't sell ads and that can be a separate company. I don't see why you would immediately go towards having the government step in and regulate whether Amazon can make the Echo prefer their own products quite yet. It's still a new device and there are some other competitors. I could agree that companies be required to have a disclaimer when they provide preference to a certain product set over another.
      - frgtpsswrdlame 9y ago
        >Or someone can make another audio-controlled device that doesn't sell ads and that can be a separate company. Sure, that's one possibility. Probably not a very realistic one but it's there. >I don't see why you would immediately go towards having the government step in and regulate whether Amazon can make the Echo prefer their own products quite yet. Why should we immediately go towards another company/market-oriented solution? What is it about government that requires we wait around for the market to fail? Why not just go do what we want?
belorn 9y ago
Government involvement is necessary when minor consumer awareness would have major change in consumer behavior. So would there be a major difference in consumer behavior if it was generally known that the advice given by the echo is paid advertisement? If Yes -> then governments should take notice. If No -> then interference would just inhibit the market.
reaperducer 9y ago
> nobody is forcing you to use Echo or watch TV At one time nobody was forcing us to pay private health insurance conglomerates every month, yet here we are. All it takes is some clever lobbyists and some cash, both of which Amazon has in spades.
- kk_cz 9y ago
  I can promise you that in a world where goverment forces you to use Amazon Echo I will join forces with OP and fight for "government guaranteed" ad-free Echo experience. Also I will very strongly demand that government does something about those damn flying pigs.