3 ms·

Question for you then: Are you or are you not trying to manipulate me to share your point of view? If all advertising is manipulation, then so are all conversa

Question for you then: Are you or are you not trying to manipulate me to share your point of view? If all advertising is manipulation, then so are all conversations. Every debate, every argument, every statement of fact or opinion. I don't consider it manipulation if it's honest. If I run an ad that says "These burgers cost only $1.25" and they really do cost $1.25, that's hardly manipulation. If, on the other hand, I say "This burger cost only $1.25" but I was referring only to the patty, and not the bun and toppings and whatever else you see pictured, then that's manipulation (bordering on out-right lying). Bernays said a lot of things that simply weren't true because he didn't care about the truth. And yeah, a lot of PR and advertising people would share his immoral stance on things. But most of the people I know in the industry aren't like that. We strive to create honest work that is entertaining enough to catch your attention so we can tell you something true about the product. There's an idea out there that advertising is about selling you things regardless of whether you'd benefit from it or not. In my books, this is a stupid way to spend your advertising dollars. Instead, you should do the hard work of figuring out who, if anyone, would benefit from the product, and then create a campaign to reach them. Obviously, some advertisers have no such ethical dilemma. Not to point fingers, but there are plenty of products that only do damage to people's lives. I'd like to think the clients I currently work with do not fall into this category, but that hasn't always been the case and feel free to judge me for that.

kerkeslager 7y ago
> Question for you then: Are you or are you not trying to manipulate me to share your point of view? You go on after this question to explain what manipulation is, so it seems like you understand the concept, and can probably figure out how it doesn't apply to this conversation. > There's an idea out there that advertising is about selling you things regardless of whether you'd benefit from it or not. In my books, this is a stupid way to spend your advertising dollars. Instead, you should do the hard work of figuring out who, if anyone, would benefit from the product, and then create a campaign to reach them. If your actual goal is to help people find things they would benefit from, then what's the best way to do that? Some ideas: 1. Review sites that try to be unbiased and share expert opinions on possible solutions to your problem. Obviously there are pitfalls here: the best solutions are ones where the site receives money from consumers, not companies with products to sell. 2. Word of mouth recommendations from friends and family, who intimately know your actual needs and genuinely want you to be successful. 3. People often know their own needs and go out to find solutions to their own needs, soliciting advice from 1 and 2, but also by asking experts (doctors, mechanics, etc.) who they pay to give them good advice. 4. A minimalist movement that views the entire idea of purchasing something with skepticism. I'm not against paying for products, but I do think it's important to see that paying for products is a tradeoff. Paying for a solution isn't always the best way to solve a problem, and in fact isn't always better than the problem itself. Literally no part of a reasonable solution for helping people involves showing them only your product (not your competitors'), and/or only the positive aspects of your product. And that's the absolute best case for advertising. And to be clear, that's not honest, it's lying by omission. If you're any good at your job, you know who your competitors are, and you know their strengths, but you're not sharing that information with your target audience. That's information that's relevant to the wants/needs of your target audience, but you're withholding that information, because it benefits you/your clients. The idea that this is you trying to go out and help people find and choose the best products for their needs is very naive. Contrary to your belief, advertising actively prevents people from finding products that best solve their problems. Worse products beat out better products if they have better advertising, and this is the norm, not the exception, because every dollar spent on advertising is a dollar not spent on producing the best product possible. In theory, a company that makes profit from advertising can reinvest that profit into R+D, but in practice the incentives don't lead in that direction. A company that makes a profit by advertising has no reason to take a risk by changing strategy.
- nickelcitymario 7y ago
  First up: I just wanna say it wasn't my goal to be the defender of the ad industry. I started this comment thread to defend the idea of aspirations as a good thing. That being said: > The idea that this is you trying to go out and help people find and choose the best products for their needs is very naive. You're right, that would be naive. It's not what I said though. re: Review sites, word of mouth, contacting experts: That's all great. But to the business owner who's wondering how they're going to make payroll 3 months from now, that's not exactly helpful. Your recommendation to them is to just sit back and hope people stumble onto what they're selling? > You go on after this question to explain what manipulation is, so it seems like you understand the concept, and can probably figure out how it doesn't apply to this conversation. You haven't made any attempt to present the other side of the argument either. You say I'm dishonest for presenting my clients in the best possible light, yet you also pick and choose what to present in defence of your position. I'm fine with that, but it seems to me that if you held yourself to the same standard, you'd make an effort to consider the position of all the people involved in advertising. Maybe the world really would be better if it were free of advertising. I'm not sure. I don't think such a world has existed in thousands of years, but it'd be interesting to see. In the meantime, we live in a world where advertising does exist, and therefor it's foolish not to participate in it, because doing so would give your competitors an unfair advantage.
  - kerkeslager 7y ago
    > First up: I just wanna say it wasn't my goal to be the defender of the ad industry. I started this comment thread to defend the idea of aspirations as a good thing. Okay, but I wasn't really attacking aspirations, either. I've criticized "conquering desire" before on HN as leading to useless monasticism. > re: Review sites, word of mouth, contacting experts: That's all great. But to the business owner who's wondering how they're going to make payroll 3 months from now, that's not exactly helpful. Your recommendation to them is to just sit back and hope people stumble onto what they're selling? No, I don't have a recommendation for them. I get it, business owners are somewhat forced to advertise, because their competitors are advertising. I'm saying that we as a society should not be pretending advertising is some positive thing, we should be removing advertising from our content, our public spaces, etc. Ultimately, this isn't necessarily bad for businesses. If advertising didn't exist and people found out about products by other means, businesses could compete on just producing the best products. > You haven't made any attempt to present the other side of the argument either. You say I'm dishonest for presenting my clients in the best possible light, yet you also pick and choose what to present in defence of your position. I'm fine with that, but it seems to me that if you held yourself to the same standard, you'd make an effort to consider the position of all the people involved in advertising. 1. Presenting all the opinions is not the same as presenting all the facts. In fact, presenting all opinions is counterproductive to providing a well-rounded summary of the facts: if you present flat earthers on the same level as cosmologists, you're dignifying non-truth as if it were truth. I'm not obligated to state opinions like "Advertisers are just trying to help you find what you want!" because that's just a lie, and stating it alongside the truth would make them seem like equal ideas. Leaving out incorrect opinions is not the same as leaving out facts. 2. Even if you could make it stick that I'm a hypocrite, so what? Just because someone is a hypocrite doesn't mean they're wrong. That's just an ad hominem attack on me. Let's stick to debating the topic, not my character. > In the meantime, we live in a world where advertising does exist, and therefor it's foolish not to participate in it, because doing so would give your competitors an unfair advantage. Sure--if you're a business owner it's foolish to play by the rules when nobody else is. But as humans and members of society, not as business owners, we can strive to create a world without advertising.

kerkeslager 7y ago

> Question for you then: Are you or are you not trying to manipulate me to share your point of view? You go on after this question to explain what manipulation is, so it seems like you understand the concept, and can probably figure out how it doesn't apply to this conversation. > There's an idea out there that advertising is about selling you things regardless of whether you'd benefit from it or not. In my books, this is a stupid way to spend your advertising dollars. Instead, you should do the hard work of figuring out who, if anyone, would benefit from the product, and then create a campaign to reach them. If your actual goal is to help people find things they would benefit from, then what's the best way to do that? Some ideas: 1. Review sites that try to be unbiased and share expert opinions on possible solutions to your problem. Obviously there are pitfalls here: the best solutions are ones where the site receives money from consumers, not companies with products to sell. 2. Word of mouth recommendations from friends and family, who intimately know your actual needs and genuinely want you to be successful. 3. People often know their own needs and go out to find solutions to their own needs, soliciting advice from 1 and 2, but also by asking experts (doctors, mechanics, etc.) who they pay to give them good advice. 4. A minimalist movement that views the entire idea of purchasing something with skepticism. I'm not against paying for products, but I do think it's important to see that paying for products is a tradeoff. Paying for a solution isn't always the best way to solve a problem, and in fact isn't always better than the problem itself. Literally no part of a reasonable solution for helping people involves showing them only your product (not your competitors'), and/or only the positive aspects of your product. And that's the absolute best case for advertising. And to be clear, that's not honest, it's lying by omission. If you're any good at your job, you know who your competitors are, and you know their strengths, but you're not sharing that information with your target audience. That's information that's relevant to the wants/needs of your target audience, but you're withholding that information, because it benefits you/your clients. The idea that this is you trying to go out and help people find and choose the best products for their needs is very naive. Contrary to your belief, advertising actively prevents people from finding products that best solve their problems. Worse products beat out better products if they have better advertising, and this is the norm, not the exception, because every dollar spent on advertising is a dollar not spent on producing the best product possible. In theory, a company that makes profit from advertising can reinvest that profit into R+D, but in practice the incentives don't lead in that direction. A company that makes a profit by advertising has no reason to take a risk by changing strategy.

nickelcitymario 7y ago
First up: I just wanna say it wasn't my goal to be the defender of the ad industry. I started this comment thread to defend the idea of aspirations as a good thing. That being said: > The idea that this is you trying to go out and help people find and choose the best products for their needs is very naive. You're right, that would be naive. It's not what I said though. re: Review sites, word of mouth, contacting experts: That's all great. But to the business owner who's wondering how they're going to make payroll 3 months from now, that's not exactly helpful. Your recommendation to them is to just sit back and hope people stumble onto what they're selling? > You go on after this question to explain what manipulation is, so it seems like you understand the concept, and can probably figure out how it doesn't apply to this conversation. You haven't made any attempt to present the other side of the argument either. You say I'm dishonest for presenting my clients in the best possible light, yet you also pick and choose what to present in defence of your position. I'm fine with that, but it seems to me that if you held yourself to the same standard, you'd make an effort to consider the position of all the people involved in advertising. Maybe the world really would be better if it were free of advertising. I'm not sure. I don't think such a world has existed in thousands of years, but it'd be interesting to see. In the meantime, we live in a world where advertising does exist, and therefor it's foolish not to participate in it, because doing so would give your competitors an unfair advantage.
- kerkeslager 7y ago
  > First up: I just wanna say it wasn't my goal to be the defender of the ad industry. I started this comment thread to defend the idea of aspirations as a good thing. Okay, but I wasn't really attacking aspirations, either. I've criticized "conquering desire" before on HN as leading to useless monasticism. > re: Review sites, word of mouth, contacting experts: That's all great. But to the business owner who's wondering how they're going to make payroll 3 months from now, that's not exactly helpful. Your recommendation to them is to just sit back and hope people stumble onto what they're selling? No, I don't have a recommendation for them. I get it, business owners are somewhat forced to advertise, because their competitors are advertising. I'm saying that we as a society should not be pretending advertising is some positive thing, we should be removing advertising from our content, our public spaces, etc. Ultimately, this isn't necessarily bad for businesses. If advertising didn't exist and people found out about products by other means, businesses could compete on just producing the best products. > You haven't made any attempt to present the other side of the argument either. You say I'm dishonest for presenting my clients in the best possible light, yet you also pick and choose what to present in defence of your position. I'm fine with that, but it seems to me that if you held yourself to the same standard, you'd make an effort to consider the position of all the people involved in advertising. 1. Presenting all the opinions is not the same as presenting all the facts. In fact, presenting all opinions is counterproductive to providing a well-rounded summary of the facts: if you present flat earthers on the same level as cosmologists, you're dignifying non-truth as if it were truth. I'm not obligated to state opinions like "Advertisers are just trying to help you find what you want!" because that's just a lie, and stating it alongside the truth would make them seem like equal ideas. Leaving out incorrect opinions is not the same as leaving out facts. 2. Even if you could make it stick that I'm a hypocrite, so what? Just because someone is a hypocrite doesn't mean they're wrong. That's just an ad hominem attack on me. Let's stick to debating the topic, not my character. > In the meantime, we live in a world where advertising does exist, and therefor it's foolish not to participate in it, because doing so would give your competitors an unfair advantage. Sure--if you're a business owner it's foolish to play by the rules when nobody else is. But as humans and members of society, not as business owners, we can strive to create a world without advertising.