4 ms·

Just another example on why marketing and advertisement is a scourge upon society, it is far to easy to manipulate from the background without oversight or any

Just another example on why marketing and advertisement is a scourge upon society, it is far to easy to manipulate from the background without oversight or any ethical or moral considerations and is known to be highly effective at making people act against even their own self interests.

andrepd 8y ago
My point exactly. Advertising is unethical/immoral, plain and simple.
- rankam 8y ago
  What if you are advertising to raise money/awareness for the poor/in-need? Is that unethical/immoral?
  - contravariant 8y ago
    If you were to ask Kant, yes. Assuming he'd agree that advertising was immoral, which he arguably would as advertising manipulates people in a way that might not be in their best interests, thereby using them as means and not as ends in and of themselves. It's an interesting case though as merely informing people is not immoral, far from it, you have a moral duty to spread information that you think would help others. The problem with advertising is that it's not furthering other people's goals, but instead uses them as means to further the advertisers goals, which violates Kant's principles.
    - dibstern 8y ago
      You’re just arguing from Kant’s authority here. In my view (and in the views of many others, including many renowned philosophers and many important legal systems) Kant’s views are deeply flawed (anyone can argue from some authority). But this is my view because there are many situations in which otherwise ‘bad’ actions may be easily justified. Sure, ethics is currently a matter of opinion, but I think the fact that some opinions on ethics are more easily lambasted than others suggests that their quality differs. And yours is certainly a minority opinion, a good thing in my view.
  - Nadya 8y ago
    Depending how the advertising is done - yes. Many campaigns that advertise for what are sometimes great causes rely heavily on emotional manipulation in their advertisements. Try watching just 10 seconds of this ad and tell me it isn't meant to be emotionally manipulative [0]. Or this other UNICEF advertisement [1] which is amazingly well made - but also very emotionally manipulative. In my eyes - the only morally decent advertisement are advertisements that are solely education of a product or service you may need exists. Such as a boring infomercial without the manipulative sense of urgency "buy now and receive blah blah blah". But because these ads aren't manipulative of the human psyche, they would be terrible at driving sales to the product/service especially when competing with advertisements that are manipulative. Which is why nobody makes ads like that - they all rely on manipulation. Advertisements, for centuries, have been a competition to see who is best at manipulating the human psyche - and I find that repugnant and immoral no matter the reason for doing so. Many advertisements today aren't to improve your life, but to fix flaws that don't actually exist but the company needs you to think they do exist so that you'll buy their "solution" to the often non-existent or heavily exaggerated problem. The best companies do this in subtle ways that many people don't realize. Memorable jingles, catchy slogans, smiling, happy, attractive people. What are you waiting for? Choose happiness [2] [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEtYsKCWnME https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEtYsKCWnME [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kEtI-MzRwkM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kEtI-MzRwkM [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1veWbLpGa78 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1veWbLpGa78
coliveira 8y ago
Advertisement is also a way to buy support in the media. For example, in the aftermath of the oil spill on the Gulf of Mexico, BP showered money on TV and magazines. The real reason they did that was to tone down the coverage, especially in a moment where TV was deeply in need of advertisement money due to the big depression of 2008.
- neka 8y ago
  Also case in point with Facebook's current PR campaign trying to soften the blow for their recent fallout. It's said that these adverts are placed with the threat to pull them if any unfavourable articles are published.

andrepd 8y ago

My point exactly. Advertising is unethical/immoral, plain and simple.

rankam 8y ago
What if you are advertising to raise money/awareness for the poor/in-need? Is that unethical/immoral?
- contravariant 8y ago
  If you were to ask Kant, yes. Assuming he'd agree that advertising was immoral, which he arguably would as advertising manipulates people in a way that might not be in their best interests, thereby using them as means and not as ends in and of themselves. It's an interesting case though as merely informing people is not immoral, far from it, you have a moral duty to spread information that you think would help others. The problem with advertising is that it's not furthering other people's goals, but instead uses them as means to further the advertisers goals, which violates Kant's principles.
  - dibstern 8y ago
    You’re just arguing from Kant’s authority here. In my view (and in the views of many others, including many renowned philosophers and many important legal systems) Kant’s views are deeply flawed (anyone can argue from some authority). But this is my view because there are many situations in which otherwise ‘bad’ actions may be easily justified. Sure, ethics is currently a matter of opinion, but I think the fact that some opinions on ethics are more easily lambasted than others suggests that their quality differs. And yours is certainly a minority opinion, a good thing in my view.
- Nadya 8y ago
  Depending how the advertising is done - yes. Many campaigns that advertise for what are sometimes great causes rely heavily on emotional manipulation in their advertisements. Try watching just 10 seconds of this ad and tell me it isn't meant to be emotionally manipulative [0]. Or this other UNICEF advertisement [1] which is amazingly well made - but also very emotionally manipulative. In my eyes - the only morally decent advertisement are advertisements that are solely education of a product or service you may need exists. Such as a boring infomercial without the manipulative sense of urgency "buy now and receive blah blah blah". But because these ads aren't manipulative of the human psyche, they would be terrible at driving sales to the product/service especially when competing with advertisements that are manipulative. Which is why nobody makes ads like that - they all rely on manipulation. Advertisements, for centuries, have been a competition to see who is best at manipulating the human psyche - and I find that repugnant and immoral no matter the reason for doing so. Many advertisements today aren't to improve your life, but to fix flaws that don't actually exist but the company needs you to think they do exist so that you'll buy their "solution" to the often non-existent or heavily exaggerated problem. The best companies do this in subtle ways that many people don't realize. Memorable jingles, catchy slogans, smiling, happy, attractive people. What are you waiting for? Choose happiness [2] [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEtYsKCWnME https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEtYsKCWnME [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kEtI-MzRwkM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kEtI-MzRwkM [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1veWbLpGa78 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1veWbLpGa78

coliveira 8y ago

Advertisement is also a way to buy support in the media. For example, in the aftermath of the oil spill on the Gulf of Mexico, BP showered money on TV and magazines. The real reason they did that was to tone down the coverage, especially in a moment where TV was deeply in need of advertisement money due to the big depression of 2008.

neka 8y ago
Also case in point with Facebook's current PR campaign trying to soften the blow for their recent fallout. It's said that these adverts are placed with the threat to pull them if any unfavourable articles are published.