4 ms·
> It would make more sense to sue Kelloggs over Lucky Charms commercials, but we're all use to them so there's no outrage. Of all the examples you might offer
by swatcoder 3y ago
> It would make more sense to sue Kelloggs over Lucky Charms commercials, but we're all use to them so there's no outrage.
Of all the examples you might offer, it's ironic that you chose this one!
There's a TON of political history around breakfast cereal composition and advertising as well as ongoing reform campaigns and media criticism. In some cases, this has settled into formal regulations about things like what cereal boxes can look like and when advertisements can run. In other cases, it's involved collective industry "good behavior" meant to forestall regulation. But it continues to a problem because financial incentive always leads to optimizing for whatever can be gotten away with.
And yeah, social media companies are maturing as an industry and are now due to play that same perpetual game of government regulation, industry self-policing, and boundary-testing.
- cheriot 3y ago> due to play that same perpetual game of government regulation, industry self-policing, and boundary-testing. Does anyone think this stuff works, though? It's an cycle of outrage and performative regulation. I'm not sure the same path in another industry is a good idea. Lucky for parents today there's TV options without commercials.