3 ms·

You're putting up a bit of a strawman, early. I didn't say it "should be banned," at least not yet. It is possible for something to be evil -- or let's put it l

by jrm4 4y ago

You're putting up a bit of a strawman, early. I didn't say it "should be banned," at least not yet. It is possible for something to be evil -- or let's put it lighter -- a net negative, and still one could see that trying to ban it is a bad thing. Let's try it this way: Does "marketing," as a paid business practice, cause more harm than good? (NGL, when someone argues that their thing isn't evil by arguing e.g. "any practice can be good or evil" and not a direct and clear explanation of why their thing is good, big red flags.)

Gustomaximus 4y ago
> Does "marketing," as a paid business practice, cause more harm than good? I would have criticised it more as a false dilemma than strawman :) But I did that because I think it shows exactly your question. Imagine a world where there was zero marketing. I suspect you'd see far more entrenched companies e.g. as how does the new start-up get the word out fast enough to not flame out while they hope the market realises they exist. Far less competition as companies cant promote their prices leading to the entrenched companies charging higher margins and all that entails. It democratised many services like watching videos or email as this is ad funded so all people can utilise these services rather than the people that can afford.... though I guess you could position this is a bad thing due to the rise of social media. There's a few... how much better do you think the world would be without marketing?