4 ms·

There's only one sure way to eliminate fraud in advertising: stop advertising. Google is attempting to make it more difficult for malefactors to use its systems

There's only one sure way to eliminate fraud in advertising: stop advertising. Google is attempting to make it more difficult for malefactors to use its systems, but this disregards the fact that advertising is not a socially beneficial activity and all advertising is an attempt to psychologically manipulate the public. Therefore, a harm reduction justification is insufficient as it presumes there is some benefit worth the harms being introduced. In fact, there is no benefit and Google is only reducing harm slightly.

larrysalibra 7y ago
> the fact that advertising is not a socially beneficial activity and all advertising is an attempt to psychologically manipulate the public That's not a fact, that's your opinion. Advertising is a form of communication and like most communication, the person originating the communication often has a goal or desired outcome in mind. That you or me might not like their goals or the message that they communicate doesn't mean that no one finds it valuable, nor does it mean that we should ban all communication.
- Nextgrid 7y ago
  To be fair, when it comes to being valuable, criminals consider violence like armed robbery and murder valuable because it helps them achieve their goals, and yet we agree that those things are not a benefit to society and created laws to discourage and punish such acts.
  - matz1 7y ago
    Certainly the criminals doesn't agree don't you think ? One side just happen to have more power to forced the other side to comply. There is no agreement. The more powerfull one get to decide what the law is.
- carapace 7y ago
  > Advertising is a form of communication and like most communication, the person originating the communication often has a goal or desired outcome in mind. So what? It's still "an attempt to psychologically manipulate the public". Advertising is adversarial, it's fundamentally bullshit. Leela : Didn't you have ads in the 21st century?" Fry : Well sure, but not in our dreams. Only on TV and radio, and in magazines, and movies, and at ball games... and on buses and milk cartons and t-shirts, and bananas and written on the sky. But not in dreams, no siree. How is that "a socially beneficial activity"?
  - ipsum2 7y ago
    > "an attempt to psychologically manipulate the public". So does a persuasive essay, but I don't see any calls for bans for those.
    - effingwewt 7y ago
      Persuasive essays aren't shoved everywhere you go in an attempt to separate you from your money, usually via deceit, at least in the US. Just look at how they all have asterisks and fine print unable to be read. Also I can choose not to read an essay, it's harder to tune out all advertising.
      - cameronbrown 7y ago
        Uhh, pretty much everything the media writes nowadays is an advert in some way... Ever visited Medium.com? "No ads" but full of them.
      - Nasrudith 7y ago
        There are many groups out there dedicated to spreading their ideals and ideas as well. Religions, paleo diets, and fringe political ideas are shoved at you everywhere you go as well without any monetary transactions involved with advertising, let alone the single party ones like business signage. I am afraid advertising isn't unique in those objections.
  - joshuamorton 7y ago
    > So what? It's still "an attempt to psychologically manipulate the public". Advertising is adversarial So is what you just wrote. Should we ban discussion on HN because it is (or can be) adversarial?
    - Nextgrid 7y ago
      HN has balanced discussions because of the voting system, moderators (banning voting rings and spammers) and that anyone can voice their counter-arguments. Advertising on the other hand is one-sided. If there was a universal ad platform where people could vote on ads (where overly negative feedback would get the ad taken down) and comment below them then it wouldn’t be that much of a problem. Finally HN is something you choose to participate in in your own time. Advertising doesn’t give you a choice on whether you want to see it.

larrysalibra 7y ago

> the fact that advertising is not a socially beneficial activity and all advertising is an attempt to psychologically manipulate the public That's not a fact, that's your opinion. Advertising is a form of communication and like most communication, the person originating the communication often has a goal or desired outcome in mind. That you or me might not like their goals or the message that they communicate doesn't mean that no one finds it valuable, nor does it mean that we should ban all communication.

Nextgrid 7y ago
To be fair, when it comes to being valuable, criminals consider violence like armed robbery and murder valuable because it helps them achieve their goals, and yet we agree that those things are not a benefit to society and created laws to discourage and punish such acts.
- matz1 7y ago
  Certainly the criminals doesn't agree don't you think ? One side just happen to have more power to forced the other side to comply. There is no agreement. The more powerfull one get to decide what the law is.
carapace 7y ago
> Advertising is a form of communication and like most communication, the person originating the communication often has a goal or desired outcome in mind. So what? It's still "an attempt to psychologically manipulate the public". Advertising is adversarial, it's fundamentally bullshit. Leela : Didn't you have ads in the 21st century?" Fry : Well sure, but not in our dreams. Only on TV and radio, and in magazines, and movies, and at ball games... and on buses and milk cartons and t-shirts, and bananas and written on the sky. But not in dreams, no siree. How is that "a socially beneficial activity"?
- ipsum2 7y ago
  > "an attempt to psychologically manipulate the public". So does a persuasive essay, but I don't see any calls for bans for those.
  - effingwewt 7y ago
    Persuasive essays aren't shoved everywhere you go in an attempt to separate you from your money, usually via deceit, at least in the US. Just look at how they all have asterisks and fine print unable to be read. Also I can choose not to read an essay, it's harder to tune out all advertising.
    - cameronbrown 7y ago
      Uhh, pretty much everything the media writes nowadays is an advert in some way... Ever visited Medium.com? "No ads" but full of them.
    - Nasrudith 7y ago
      There are many groups out there dedicated to spreading their ideals and ideas as well. Religions, paleo diets, and fringe political ideas are shoved at you everywhere you go as well without any monetary transactions involved with advertising, let alone the single party ones like business signage. I am afraid advertising isn't unique in those objections.
- joshuamorton 7y ago
  > So what? It's still "an attempt to psychologically manipulate the public". Advertising is adversarial So is what you just wrote. Should we ban discussion on HN because it is (or can be) adversarial?
  - Nextgrid 7y ago
    HN has balanced discussions because of the voting system, moderators (banning voting rings and spammers) and that anyone can voice their counter-arguments. Advertising on the other hand is one-sided. If there was a universal ad platform where people could vote on ads (where overly negative feedback would get the ad taken down) and comment below them then it wouldn’t be that much of a problem. Finally HN is something you choose to participate in in your own time. Advertising doesn’t give you a choice on whether you want to see it.