4 ms·

I appreciate your 'concern', but reading those sorts of books, recommended to me by my former coworkers in the advertising space, is what lead me to conclude th

I appreciate your 'concern', but reading those sorts of books, recommended to me by my former coworkers in the advertising space, is what lead me to conclude that the industry is evil. The style advocated by that literature is insincere, cynical, and manipulative. Those who brushed up against it and didn't rejected it are irredeemable. Those who haven't yet corrupted themselves are the ones I hope to help, and I believe I can do so by creating a fanatical anti-advertising mob mentality that allows feelings of self-righteousness. (I am aware if the irony here, since these very techniques were turned into a science by the industry I want dismantled, but that's the way the world works.) > Once again: All I need to do is think of one counterexample where both parties gained value (monetarily and psychologically) You know damn well, but are unlikely to admit unless perhaps called on it, that an advertising professional that gives value to a consumer one day will be just as willing to take it the next. The advertising professional is not motivated by a desire to help the consumer and cases where that happens are incidental at best (and rare.) There is a lot of delusion in the industry too. Advertisers in the pharma space will swear themselves blue that they're helping consumers to find medication that will earnestly help them, but these advertisers are not altruists, they do I because they're paid. And more damning, their industry (pharma advertising) is illegal in other countries with good reason. But this is an industry that regularly turns its own techniques in on itself, using their rhetorical/persuasive skills on their own, to reassure their own that what they're doing is humanitarian.

BeetleB 7y ago
>I appreciate your 'concern', but reading those sorts of books, recommended to me by my former coworkers in the advertising space, is what lead me to conclude that the industry is evil. The style advocated by that literature is insincere, cynical, and manipulative. Claims without specifics or examples. >Those who brushed up against it and didn't rejected it are irredeemable. Very vague. No specifics. >Those who haven't yet corrupted themselves are the ones I hope to help, and I believe I can do so by creating a fanatical anti-advertising mob mentality that allows feelings of self-righteousness. Reminiscent of No True Scotsman. >You know damn well, but are unlikely to admit unless perhaps called on it, that an advertising professional that gives value to a consumer one day will be just as willing to take it the next. Attributing things to the other party in a conversation is a tried and tested method of making a conversation go downhill. >Advertisers in the pharma space will swear themselves blue that they're helping consumers to find medication that will earnestly help them, but these advertisers are not altruists, they do I because they're paid. I don't recall that advertisers claim to do things out of altruism. The grocery store owner down the road is not an altruist either. Nor is pretty much any non-profit entity out there. You're merely pointing out that advertisers are in the same category as all businessmen. Quite apparent in all your comments: A willingness to preach, and not a willingness to have a conversation. Even your response to me missed pretty much the entire point of my comment. Trying to convince me that advertising is bad is a clear sign of that.

BeetleB 7y ago

>I appreciate your 'concern', but reading those sorts of books, recommended to me by my former coworkers in the advertising space, is what lead me to conclude that the industry is evil. The style advocated by that literature is insincere, cynical, and manipulative. Claims without specifics or examples. >Those who brushed up against it and didn't rejected it are irredeemable. Very vague. No specifics. >Those who haven't yet corrupted themselves are the ones I hope to help, and I believe I can do so by creating a fanatical anti-advertising mob mentality that allows feelings of self-righteousness. Reminiscent of No True Scotsman. >You know damn well, but are unlikely to admit unless perhaps called on it, that an advertising professional that gives value to a consumer one day will be just as willing to take it the next. Attributing things to the other party in a conversation is a tried and tested method of making a conversation go downhill. >Advertisers in the pharma space will swear themselves blue that they're helping consumers to find medication that will earnestly help them, but these advertisers are not altruists, they do I because they're paid. I don't recall that advertisers claim to do things out of altruism. The grocery store owner down the road is not an altruist either. Nor is pretty much any non-profit entity out there. You're merely pointing out that advertisers are in the same category as all businessmen. Quite apparent in all your comments: A willingness to preach, and not a willingness to have a conversation. Even your response to me missed pretty much the entire point of my comment. Trying to convince me that advertising is bad is a clear sign of that.