4 ms·
I think an important part of your statement is “interested consumers”. A consumer who is not interested should not have to be bombarded with advertisements. At
by lumb63 4y ago
I think an important part of your statement is “interested consumers”. A consumer who is not interested should not have to be bombarded with advertisements. At this point (making someone do something they do not want to), is where it becomes manipulation.
For instance, I have no interest in receiving snail-mail ads for credit cards. I am happy with the ones that I have right now, and regularly research on my own via trusted third parties to see if any are available which would be of interest to me. Still, I am unable to stop receiving mail advertising credit cards to me. There is not even recourse I can take because states have fallen for the same “connecting producers to consumers” argument as above, in the most broad sense, where every human is a potentially interested consumer for every single product.
The business is worse off (because they pay to advertise to me, and I will not get one of their credit cards), I am worse off (because I am upset I receive this mail), the planet is worse off (deforestation), others are worse off (perhaps the time spent by postal workers delivering me junk mail could improve service to others or reduce costs).
So while I agree that advertising is not inherently manipulative, when the audience is captive and uninterested, it becomes manipulation.
- invig 4y agoCaptive? At what point does personal accountability matter? Everyone's choosing to be there and look at this stuff.
- amelius 4y agoPsychological manipulation is a thing. People write dissertations on this stuff. These people are then hired by advertising companies. Often the people they target are children or adolescents.
- lumb63 4y agoIt matters at the point when an individual is accountable for having seen the ad. There are countless situations where you cannot possibly perform any normal function of life (shy of sitting in the house and having someone else do all interaction with the outside world): - Billboards. You cannot possibly keep these out of your peripheral (or center of) vision while driving without endangering everyone else on the road. - Mailed advertisements. You have to check your mail, for example, for legal summons, that you are required by law to respond to. - Public transit (lest I be auto-shamed). You cannot, where I am, even look toward where a train arrives, without seeing ads. To remediate just these three advertising venues, you have to drive and board public transit with your eyes closed and not check your mail. These aren’t even activities I’d consider voluntary - people need to get to work to support themselves, and check their mail for legal purposes. Unless your argument is that we all make choices to participate in our sovereign nation’s legal structure and to have jobs that require leaving the home (not everyone can work in a cushy remote role).
- bagacrap 4y ago"making someone do something"? what kind of ad does that describe?
- lumb63 4y agoAny ad that is sent to a person does not want to see it, in an intrusive way such that they cannot avoid it. The “something” is “looking at it.”
- thatguy0900 4y agoWhat's the line between "were making someone do something" and "We have an army of psychologists hard at work to convince someone they need to do something"? Is that line different when it's directed to a 14 year old? Or a senior citizen? Or someone you know is likely a addict of what you're selling?
- throwaway742 4y agohttps://consumer.ftc.gov/articles/prescreened-credit-insurance-offers https://consumer.ftc.gov/articles/prescreened-credit-insuran...