5 ms·

There are so many aspects of adtech that are ethically neutral. Just as advertising itself - there are even ads created by great creators that are works of mode

There are so many aspects of adtech that are ethically neutral. Just as advertising itself - there are even ads created by great creators that are works of modern art. It's only when it's abused adtech becomes evil.

arthurcolle 6y ago
Wow, I bet I'll miss out on so much important culture by not getting visual pollution all over the place unless its regulated out of existence. No thanks, I'll continue to block it everywhere that I can, and even going further and inspecting elements to get rid of obnoxious paywalls as well! Wow, am I a hypocrite? Maybe develop real, sustainable revenue models that aren't dependent on clickbait and being a lobbyist for corporations in the form of selling eyeballs to the highest bidder. Just yuck. I'll be inclined to buy into $WHATEVER if you just let me use it for a bit, if I find it of my own means. I promise you I'm not going to buy a Swatch because of your fucking banner ad. Seriously, I promise. If I just bought a book I promise you I'm not going to buy it again if I see it appear in my side banner. 100%. Or maybe I'll just grow less dependent on external services every time I have to consider another subscription... wow! We'll see!
croes 6y ago
Have you checked the art vs bullshit ratio?
- arthurcolle 6y ago
  That probably costs extra
beefield 6y ago
It may be "many" but it does not mean that the defining nature of advertising is ethically neutral. I think I just quote Banksy/Tejaratchi: "People are taking the piss out of you everyday. 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 and they are laughing at you. You, however, are forbidden to touch them. Trademarks, intellectual property rights and copyright law mean advertisers can say what they like wherever they like with total impunity. Fuck that. Any advert in a public space that gives you no choice whether you see it or not is yours. It's yours to take, re-arrange and re-use. You can do whatever you like with it. Asking for permission is like asking to keep a rock someone just threw at your head. 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." Edit: Credits also to Tejaratchi
- arthurcolle 6y ago
  This is such a great quote. I've checked out a couple books on Banksy but haven't ever run into it before. Thanks so much for sharing!
- Teever 6y ago
  One time I saw a fascinating article about how scientists were working to grow skin complete with natural looking hair from stem cells for burn victims and such. I thought the article was really neat and I was in a hurry so I emailed a the link to myself. The next time I logged into my gmail to read it I happened to be at a machine without adblock and I saw that google was serving me ads for garbage treatments for male pattern baldness. Fuck you Google and your shitty advertising. There's nothing wrong with going bald and I don't need you to try and make me feel insecure about my hairline when I'm trying to read about scientists helping burn victims.
  - dna_polymerase 6y ago
    The ad probably promoted a product that could regrow hair for bald people. You just took that B̶a̶n̶k̶s̶y̶ Sean Tejaratchi quote and applied it to them. You chose to be offended by it. Sure baldness isn't wrong. But a lot of people like hair better and therefore a market exists for this type of product. Nothing wrong about that.
    - Teever 6y ago
      Repeated viewing of these kinds of ads is precisely what introduces the insecurity in people that makes them seek out the kinds of products being advertised. It's the same thing with skinny models and anorexia in girls. Advertising is the cause of the 'problem' that they can conveniently solve. Besides some of these 'cures' for baldness have alarming side effects and there should be regulations around advertisement for these products. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-merck-propecia-suicide-exclusive-idUSKBN2A32XU https://www.reuters.com/article/us-merck-propecia-suicide-ex...
  - lupire 6y ago
    Why are burn survivors unacceptably ugly to you, but baldness survivors are acceptable looking?
arthurcolle 6y ago
> so many Please name 5
- dvfjsdhgfv 6y ago
  OK. Let's separate the ad industry from ad technology for now. So as for the latter, have a look at the Revive ad server [0]. It allows you to deliver ads with intricate rules as to when they should be served, on which websites and so on. It allows you to be less dependent on Google/FB duopoly. You can host the ads either on your own websites or contact the owners of other popular websites and arrange an ad deal that doesn't involve user tracking. Yes, this is the opposite of what modern ad networks are doing. In any case, advertising without user tracking is, in my opinion, one of the most ethically neutral forms of making your product/service known, in contrast to morally dubious methods such as advertising with user tracking, product placement, advertorials, advertising disguised as articles/videos etc. [0] https://www.revive-adserver.com/features/ https://www.revive-adserver.com/features/
llarsson 6y ago
There is a difference between the medium (ads) and the targeting and distribution technology (adtech). A great ad evokes some kind of feeling, can live with you for a long time, and even bring back memories that you cherish. Yes, I agree with you, it can be a form of art in that regard. Adtech, however, is an intentionally invasive technology that exploits any means necessary and technologically feasible to more narrowly target potential consumers. You can have ads without adtech. But you can't have (commercially successful) adtech without invasion of privacy.
- dvfjsdhgfv 6y ago
  > But you can't have (commercially successful) adtech without invasion of privacy. I think we (as a society, not just tech people) specifically need to take care of this point. Removing tracking will make it less effective, so what. We've had advertising without tracking since 19th century.

arthurcolle 6y ago

Wow, I bet I'll miss out on so much important culture by not getting visual pollution all over the place unless its regulated out of existence. No thanks, I'll continue to block it everywhere that I can, and even going further and inspecting elements to get rid of obnoxious paywalls as well! Wow, am I a hypocrite? Maybe develop real, sustainable revenue models that aren't dependent on clickbait and being a lobbyist for corporations in the form of selling eyeballs to the highest bidder. Just yuck. I'll be inclined to buy into $WHATEVER if you just let me use it for a bit, if I find it of my own means. I promise you I'm not going to buy a Swatch because of your fucking banner ad. Seriously, I promise. If I just bought a book I promise you I'm not going to buy it again if I see it appear in my side banner. 100%. Or maybe I'll just grow less dependent on external services every time I have to consider another subscription... wow! We'll see!

croes 6y ago

Have you checked the art vs bullshit ratio?

arthurcolle 6y ago
That probably costs extra

beefield 6y ago

It may be "many" but it does not mean that the defining nature of advertising is ethically neutral. I think I just quote Banksy/Tejaratchi: "People are taking the piss out of you everyday. 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 and they are laughing at you. You, however, are forbidden to touch them. Trademarks, intellectual property rights and copyright law mean advertisers can say what they like wherever they like with total impunity. Fuck that. Any advert in a public space that gives you no choice whether you see it or not is yours. It's yours to take, re-arrange and re-use. You can do whatever you like with it. Asking for permission is like asking to keep a rock someone just threw at your head. 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." Edit: Credits also to Tejaratchi

arthurcolle 6y ago
This is such a great quote. I've checked out a couple books on Banksy but haven't ever run into it before. Thanks so much for sharing!
Teever 6y ago
One time I saw a fascinating article about how scientists were working to grow skin complete with natural looking hair from stem cells for burn victims and such. I thought the article was really neat and I was in a hurry so I emailed a the link to myself. The next time I logged into my gmail to read it I happened to be at a machine without adblock and I saw that google was serving me ads for garbage treatments for male pattern baldness. Fuck you Google and your shitty advertising. There's nothing wrong with going bald and I don't need you to try and make me feel insecure about my hairline when I'm trying to read about scientists helping burn victims.
- dna_polymerase 6y ago
  The ad probably promoted a product that could regrow hair for bald people. You just took that B̶a̶n̶k̶s̶y̶ Sean Tejaratchi quote and applied it to them. You chose to be offended by it. Sure baldness isn't wrong. But a lot of people like hair better and therefore a market exists for this type of product. Nothing wrong about that.
  - Teever 6y ago
    Repeated viewing of these kinds of ads is precisely what introduces the insecurity in people that makes them seek out the kinds of products being advertised. It's the same thing with skinny models and anorexia in girls. Advertising is the cause of the 'problem' that they can conveniently solve. Besides some of these 'cures' for baldness have alarming side effects and there should be regulations around advertisement for these products. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-merck-propecia-suicide-exclusive-idUSKBN2A32XU https://www.reuters.com/article/us-merck-propecia-suicide-ex...
- lupire 6y ago
  Why are burn survivors unacceptably ugly to you, but baldness survivors are acceptable looking?

arthurcolle 6y ago

> so many Please name 5

dvfjsdhgfv 6y ago
OK. Let's separate the ad industry from ad technology for now. So as for the latter, have a look at the Revive ad server [0]. It allows you to deliver ads with intricate rules as to when they should be served, on which websites and so on. It allows you to be less dependent on Google/FB duopoly. You can host the ads either on your own websites or contact the owners of other popular websites and arrange an ad deal that doesn't involve user tracking. Yes, this is the opposite of what modern ad networks are doing. In any case, advertising without user tracking is, in my opinion, one of the most ethically neutral forms of making your product/service known, in contrast to morally dubious methods such as advertising with user tracking, product placement, advertorials, advertising disguised as articles/videos etc. [0] https://www.revive-adserver.com/features/ https://www.revive-adserver.com/features/

llarsson 6y ago

There is a difference between the medium (ads) and the targeting and distribution technology (adtech). A great ad evokes some kind of feeling, can live with you for a long time, and even bring back memories that you cherish. Yes, I agree with you, it can be a form of art in that regard. Adtech, however, is an intentionally invasive technology that exploits any means necessary and technologically feasible to more narrowly target potential consumers. You can have ads without adtech. But you can't have (commercially successful) adtech without invasion of privacy.

dvfjsdhgfv 6y ago
> But you can't have (commercially successful) adtech without invasion of privacy. I think we (as a society, not just tech people) specifically need to take care of this point. Removing tracking will make it less effective, so what. We've had advertising without tracking since 19th century.