4 ms·

Same way you prevent any anti-social activity which is highly profitable?!? How do developed countries stop people cutting their products with cheaper alternat

Same way you prevent any anti-social activity which is highly profitable?!? How do developed countries stop people cutting their products with cheaper alternatives? How do we enforce weights and measures legislation so every shop visit doesn't require you to lug along your own standard weights and scales? How do we stop investments being all scams (ok so this one has failed a bit in the US.) The answer is competent regulation with active enforcement. Tie reviews to a government issued ID. Enforce stiff penalties for any company found to be pissing in the communal data pool.

Super_Jambo 3y ago
A better question is: "How do you get legislation passed to regulate advertising when it controls almost every media and social media platform through which voters can get informed on the topic?" And if you have an answer to that I'd dearly love to hear it - I work at a campaign for electoral reform in the UK and we have near enough the exact same problem.
- ToucanLoucan 3y ago
  I mean, historically to correct major inequalities and abuse of power by the ruling class, rail unions for example carried out bridge bombings. I'm not saying that's the answer. I'm not saying it's not the answer.
ToucanLoucan 3y ago
The fact that so many people are so mystified at the idea of designing a society we want to live in is so much more depressing than any of the problems we face as a collective. We do not need tech innovators, corporations or pioneering extroverted CEOs to market-innovate solutions to the problems we have. We can simply lean on expertise and scientific consensus and mandate that it apply to various industries and our world as a whole, and drive society forward. The legal pen has power too and we can use it for more than just ensuring Disney has infinite copyrights, and in fact, should. It's not going to fix everything, of course. But a lot of major issues could see huge improvements if we simply used our Governmental processes to demand them. We KNOW how to make vehicles more efficient. We KNOW how to reduce other emissions. We KNOW that certain building practices and city policies are making numerous social ills worse. We know all of these things and we know how to stop them, but our politicians are content to ride out the collapse and cash their checks in the meantime and retire before the world falls apart.
- RandomLensman 3y ago
  Could we better, for sure. But some enlightened dictatorship will not solve our problems. I really don't understand how these old and defunct dreams of the new society and the new human can still be that attractive. None of these problems are really new and have been looked for millennia by now.
  - ben_w 3y ago
    That this conversation went: "Let's ban advertising" "How?" "Laws" "It's depressing people can't think of this" "Enlightened dictatorship isn't going to help" …suggests thinking in a false dichotomy. We don't need a dictatorship, enlightened or otherwise, to have laws.
    - RandomLensman 3y ago
      The suggestion was some expert based system...
      - ben_w 3y ago
        Name a government which doesn't use experts when determining the law. (No Brexit jokes allowed :P)
        RandomLensman 3y ago
        Their impact is often low or even ignored. They are not in charge.
        ben_w 3y ago
        That would still be the case; I don't see what justification you could have for describing the suggestion above a dictatorship.
        ToucanLoucan 3y ago
        Well if you expand that slightly to "Name a government which use experts who don't have ties to the private sector they stand to benefit from by watering down regulations" the number of governments drops substantially.
RandomLensman 3y ago
Any and all advertising is antisocial? A bold and unsubstantiated claim.
- redder23 3y ago
  Its common sense, its does not tell you anything about a companies ethics, it tricks people into supporting shit #1 they do not need. #2 support the most unethical and inhuman practices. #3 Lets companies dominate just on the basis of how much money they have to buy ads, rather then quality of their products or any concern about production chains or how local they are. #4 I think its even legal to lie and to say you are better then the competition is some countries in ads. Ads appeal to the lowest of the low of human animalistic desires to buy the "cheapest" shit shipped all the way across the world while their neighbors struggle to make a living producing the same kind of product. I totally agree, advertising is antisocial and unethical by definition.
  - RandomLensman 3y ago
    Lot of judgement about your fellow human beings, their desires and needs.
  - coding123 3y ago
    Can you paste a link to that definition?
- ben_w 3y ago
  Doesn't seem so bold to me. That said: I don't think of "public information campaigns" as advertising, yet also I mention this specifically because I can see the poorly defined boundary between awareness and manipulation — most advertising feels to me like government propaganda, just from a different master, and propaganda can be information as well as disinformation.
  - RandomLensman 3y ago
    A sign outside a shop is anti-social? Seriously? I would think that view rather anti-social.

Super_Jambo 3y ago

A better question is: "How do you get legislation passed to regulate advertising when it controls almost every media and social media platform through which voters can get informed on the topic?" And if you have an answer to that I'd dearly love to hear it - I work at a campaign for electoral reform in the UK and we have near enough the exact same problem.

ToucanLoucan 3y ago
I mean, historically to correct major inequalities and abuse of power by the ruling class, rail unions for example carried out bridge bombings. I'm not saying that's the answer. I'm not saying it's not the answer.

ToucanLoucan 3y ago

The fact that so many people are so mystified at the idea of designing a society we want to live in is so much more depressing than any of the problems we face as a collective. We do not need tech innovators, corporations or pioneering extroverted CEOs to market-innovate solutions to the problems we have. We can simply lean on expertise and scientific consensus and mandate that it apply to various industries and our world as a whole, and drive society forward. The legal pen has power too and we can use it for more than just ensuring Disney has infinite copyrights, and in fact, should. It's not going to fix everything, of course. But a lot of major issues could see huge improvements if we simply used our Governmental processes to demand them. We KNOW how to make vehicles more efficient. We KNOW how to reduce other emissions. We KNOW that certain building practices and city policies are making numerous social ills worse. We know all of these things and we know how to stop them, but our politicians are content to ride out the collapse and cash their checks in the meantime and retire before the world falls apart.

RandomLensman 3y ago
Could we better, for sure. But some enlightened dictatorship will not solve our problems. I really don't understand how these old and defunct dreams of the new society and the new human can still be that attractive. None of these problems are really new and have been looked for millennia by now.
- ben_w 3y ago
  That this conversation went: "Let's ban advertising" "How?" "Laws" "It's depressing people can't think of this" "Enlightened dictatorship isn't going to help" …suggests thinking in a false dichotomy. We don't need a dictatorship, enlightened or otherwise, to have laws.
  - RandomLensman 3y ago
    The suggestion was some expert based system...
    - ben_w 3y ago
      Name a government which doesn't use experts when determining the law. (No Brexit jokes allowed :P)
      - RandomLensman 3y ago
        Their impact is often low or even ignored. They are not in charge.
        ben_w 3y ago
        That would still be the case; I don't see what justification you could have for describing the suggestion above a dictatorship.
      - ToucanLoucan 3y ago
        Well if you expand that slightly to "Name a government which use experts who don't have ties to the private sector they stand to benefit from by watering down regulations" the number of governments drops substantially.

RandomLensman 3y ago

Any and all advertising is antisocial? A bold and unsubstantiated claim.

redder23 3y ago
Its common sense, its does not tell you anything about a companies ethics, it tricks people into supporting shit #1 they do not need. #2 support the most unethical and inhuman practices. #3 Lets companies dominate just on the basis of how much money they have to buy ads, rather then quality of their products or any concern about production chains or how local they are. #4 I think its even legal to lie and to say you are better then the competition is some countries in ads. Ads appeal to the lowest of the low of human animalistic desires to buy the "cheapest" shit shipped all the way across the world while their neighbors struggle to make a living producing the same kind of product. I totally agree, advertising is antisocial and unethical by definition.
- RandomLensman 3y ago
  Lot of judgement about your fellow human beings, their desires and needs.
- coding123 3y ago
  Can you paste a link to that definition?
ben_w 3y ago
Doesn't seem so bold to me. That said: I don't think of "public information campaigns" as advertising, yet also I mention this specifically because I can see the poorly defined boundary between awareness and manipulation — most advertising feels to me like government propaganda, just from a different master, and propaganda can be information as well as disinformation.
- RandomLensman 3y ago
  A sign outside a shop is anti-social? Seriously? I would think that view rather anti-social.