7 ms·
> Advertising is a scourge upon society. I understand where you're coming from, but that's painting with a pretty broad brush. Advertising covers everything f
by kbenson 8y ago
> Advertising is a scourge upon society.
I understand where you're coming from, but that's painting with a pretty broad brush. Advertising covers everything from the signage stating the name of the mom-and-pop shop on the corner (which is why cities often limit the size of logos/names on building) to billboards on the side of the freeway. It covers movie trailers I seek out ant watch to see what's coming soon to commercials interspaced within a video that interrupts the flow.
I hate some of those, but i actively like, or at least value the utility of some of the others. A specific type of advertising has grown outsized that last couple of decades, and it's causing real problems. But let's not paint with too broad a brush just because we're fed up. That's how stupid laws get passed.
- baybal2 8y agoI am more on the position that advertising as a function of product promotion is dying, in all, but the most extreme overkill forms.
- scrollaway 8y agoIs it possible you just don't notice the non-extreme forms anymore, given how extreme the rest is?
- baybal2 8y agoMay well be, but that still means that non-extreme-ads are on the way out...
- scrollaway 8y agoPeople used to really notice when a movie, TV programme or video game was violent. Blood, graphic death, etc. As those things became more common and more extreme, people stopped noticing. Now we don't really talk about it at all anymore. Does that mean non-violent movies and video games are on their way out? (No it does not.)
- baybal2 8y agoYour line of thought here has its own merit
- vermilingua 8y agoAnd yet, the raison d'etre of movies and video games is not to be noticed. For advertising, it is. If the non-extreme forms of advertising are not being noticed, it means they are indeed dying out.
- kd5bjo 8y agoThe purpose of advertising isn’t to be noticed, it’s to make people give you their money. It’s an open question whether being consciously noticed is a prerequisite for this or not; can ubiquitous but ignored Coca-Cola logos successfully change someone’s answer to “What would you like to drink?”
- Cthulhu_ 8y agoIt is in a way, but that's because advertising has become underhanded and is inadvertently being done by the people at large. This is particularly prevalent in the media industry (TV and movies), where things like posters or TV commercials are not nearly as effective as the buzz a movie creates online. When I checked my Facebook the other day, at least half of the posts made by my friends were in some way expressing how much they like a movie, TV show or game. I mean on the one side that's fine, it's sharing and talking about what they enjoy, but on the other it's a form of marketing / advertising, and I'd rather they talk about themselves or politics or something that matters more.
- hopler 8y agoYou are the first person who has said they prefer politics over TV shows on Facebook. I definitely prefer TV shows.
- darkpuma 8y agoHave you tried not seeking out movie trailers and seeing how your life changes as a result? Between my television avoidance, adblocking, and theater avoidance, I've not seen a movie trailer in many years. Instead of deliberately blasting your brain with fast paced A/V propaganda for a minute or two, try learning about movies through word of mouth with people who share your general interests.
- simonh 8y agoYes, but then I miss stuff I would have wanted to watch, or more accurately miss it longer than I would have wanted to. If a show or movie is genuinely engaging or thought provoking then I want to know, because material like that has value to me.
- darkpuma 8y agoThere are ways of becoming aware of what's available other than watching trailers. For instance, reviewing lists of recent releases then reading the wikipedia pages for them. The A/V format of trailers is fundamentally more coercive than text.
- shawnz 8y agoTelevision commercials are fundamentally more coercive than radio commercials, so should we all transition back to radio just to avoid those small additional coercive factors? No, of course not, there are benefits to television that are more important than those factors.
- NeedMoreTea 8y agoNo, we should regulate advertising strongly enough to remove most of the coercion. In all mediums. When what's left is overwhelmingly truthful and simply informative, the balance and magnitude of punishment and fines are about right.
- deleted 8y ago
- dkersten 8y agoA’s Banksy said: > ...They butt into your life, take a cheap shot at you and then disappear. They leer at you from tall buildings and make you feel small. They make flippant comments from buses that imply you’re not sexy enough and that all the fun is happening somewhere else. They are on TV making your girlfriend feel inadequate. They have access to the most sophisticated technology the world has ever seen and they bully you with it. They are The Advertisers... > ...You owe the companies nothing. Less than nothing, you especially don’t owe them any courtesy. They owe you. They have re-arranged the world to put themselves in front of you. They never asked for your permission, don’t even start asking for theirs. Full quote here: https://trickygirl.wordpress.com/2012/03/01/quote-of-the-day-banksy-on-advertising/ https://trickygirl.wordpress.com/2012/03/01/quote-of-the-day...
- easytiger 8y agoSo no different than leering self interested political posturing masquerading as altruistic innocuity
- Tsubasachan 8y agoThis is fair. Both sides of the debate have made this ideological. The pro advertising side make it sound like it is your capitalist duty to suffer ads. No. Fuck that, I block annoyances in my life if I can. And I still buy crap don't worry.
- hopler 8y agoThere's a difference between consuming products that are funded by ads, where you can just it out of the product, and add that pollute public space.
- pluma 8y agoYou're right. Advertising is just a symptom of the root problem, capitalism. "Attention is currency in the marketplace of ideas" as they say. If everyone is supposed to vote with their dollar, you need to make them vote for you. The easiest way to do that is by fighting for your attention.
- shawnz 8y agoMore like, capitalism is just a symptom of the root "problem" that humans are fundamentally self-interested
- hutzlibu 8y agoThey are, but they are also also very social beings who sacrifice themself for others. Also, culture matters.
- shawnz 8y agoAnd capitalism enables occasional charity, if you want. So I'd say it's a pretty good parallel for our nature. Certainly though it's not the "root of the problem" when it comes to self-serving behaviour.
- pluma 8y agoCapitalism "enables" charity in the same way capitalism "creates" products. It doesn't. Wealth enables charity, labor creates products. Capitalism does however spread inequality, which in turn creates an opportunity for charity that wouldn't otherwise be necessary.
- shawnz 8y agoRight, capitalism enables personal ownership which creates an opportunity for charity. Which parallels how humans and other animals behave in general. They seek out personal possessions but also sometimes understand the value of sharing them.
- snarfy 8y agoI'm not against advertising, but I am against branding. The term was borrowed from the cattle industry, where a hot piece of metal scars the cattle with a logo of the owner. Branding in advertising is meant to scar your brain. I consider it a form of assault.
- marcosdumay 8y agoYou mean those laws that allows companies to get a reputation with their clients without a scammer being able to legally exploit it and confuse everybody?
- hutzlibu 8y agoBranding is ok. What I think is not OK but totally normal, is branding combined with advertisement. The name of the brand combined with all the perfect, beautiful and fun things of the world, so your name associates the brand with all the nice things. That is lying to me and I hate that it is the norm.
- marcosdumay 8y agoOh, ok. You dislike brand advertising, that's reasonable. I don't know if it's viable to separate good brand advertise (our soda tastes good, our bags last forever) from the bad kind (use our product and get all the pretty woman). Some regulation over emotional tone (and, of course, false info) may be much more successful than focusing on brands vs. unitary products.
- hutzlibu 8y agoI would not regulate it at all. I hope for more people to understand what is happening with their brains. Once you do understand it does not affect (as much). But with kids these days entrenched in their smartphone virtual reality consuming custom tailored ads .. the trend is unfortunately downwards.
- kbenson 8y ago