I think there is much uncorroborated assertions about bias. Associating emotions to a product or getting attention is an old trick that existed before modern m

I think there is much uncorroborated assertions about bias. Associating emotions to a product or getting attention is an old trick that existed before modern marketing. The smoking example can be generalized for fashion and there are mechanisms like peer pressure involved that certainly incentivize consumption. But they are not overriding your will. Addictions can, but even then I would say there is still a free will involved. > but I sense this is more of a grey zone than most people are willing to admit. I do believe ads affect me, but the scope is limited and regulation would be more draconian than my natural inclination to give products an unjust bonus for boobs. However, it may not work, because I come to the conclusion that the product must lacking if you try to sell it with dirty tricks. > Isn't this the same as the authoritarian nightmares that we've been pointing fingers at? No, because people can make up their minds, otherwise they would have a lot of cars by now. They loose that, however, if you regulate too excessively because the decision is already made for you. There are sensible reasons for regulation, so it is a gray area, but I don't see it as helpful here. Empirical counter evidence in favor of my free will for any practical purpose: There is no irresistible ad.