4 ms·

There’s a really blurry line that needs more clarity. When George Clooney tells me he uses Nespresso coffee pods, I don’t entirely believe him. If I found out

There’s a really blurry line that needs more clarity. When George Clooney tells me he uses Nespresso coffee pods, I don’t entirely believe him. If I found out that he didn’t, I can’t imagine trying to take legal action against him. But Chuck Norris endorsing a cryptocurrency? Should he be required to do due diligence on a client before doing paid advertising for them? That also seems unfeasible. Then what about the Kardashians advertising dieting pills? Supermodels advertising cosmetic surgery? It seems the line is affected by the fame of the celebrity, the product being advertised, and exactly what it is they say.

redavni 3y ago
It's almost as if marketing is inherently evil.
- kaibee 3y ago
  Marketing is like cryptocurrency, it isn't inherently evil, but... only just.
yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago
> When George Clooney tells me he uses Nespresso coffee pods, I don’t entirely believe him. If I found out that he didn’t, I can’t imagine trying to take legal action against him. If a person knowingly lies in order to make money, why shouldn't they be legally at fault for committing fraud? Like, fine, we can make allowances for people reasonably believing that they were telling the truth and I understand that there are fuzzy cases, but there are also just objectively factually incorrect statements that were completely obvious to everybody involved.
s1artibartfast 3y ago
In general, these also arent statement of fact. >"HyperVerse will be the leader of metaverse space"- Norris IF you actually think Chuck Norris has a godlike ability to know the future, and is making promissory statements of fact, the liability lies with you.
Nullabillity 3y ago
> There’s a really blurry line that needs more clarity. No, it isn't. At all. > When George Clooney tells me he uses Nespresso coffee pods, I don’t entirely believe him. If I found out that he didn’t, I can’t imagine trying to take legal action against him. So, he lied...? > But Chuck Norris endorsing a cryptocurrency? Should he be required to do due diligence on a client before doing paid advertising for them? Yes? > That also seems unfeasible. Then don't take the gig. > Then what about the Kardashians advertising dieting pills? Supermodels advertising cosmetic surgery? Then. Do. Not. Take. The. Gig. --- The only reason this could possibly seem blurry at all is if you approach it with the baffling prior that celebrities selling out their trust is a good thing that should be allowed to happen at any cost, and work backwards from there.

redavni 3y ago

It's almost as if marketing is inherently evil.

kaibee 3y ago
Marketing is like cryptocurrency, it isn't inherently evil, but... only just.

yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago

> When George Clooney tells me he uses Nespresso coffee pods, I don’t entirely believe him. If I found out that he didn’t, I can’t imagine trying to take legal action against him. If a person knowingly lies in order to make money, why shouldn't they be legally at fault for committing fraud? Like, fine, we can make allowances for people reasonably believing that they were telling the truth and I understand that there are fuzzy cases, but there are also just objectively factually incorrect statements that were completely obvious to everybody involved.

s1artibartfast 3y ago

In general, these also arent statement of fact. >"HyperVerse will be the leader of metaverse space"- Norris IF you actually think Chuck Norris has a godlike ability to know the future, and is making promissory statements of fact, the liability lies with you.

Nullabillity 3y ago

> There’s a really blurry line that needs more clarity. No, it isn't. At all. > When George Clooney tells me he uses Nespresso coffee pods, I don’t entirely believe him. If I found out that he didn’t, I can’t imagine trying to take legal action against him. So, he lied...? > But Chuck Norris endorsing a cryptocurrency? Should he be required to do due diligence on a client before doing paid advertising for them? Yes? > That also seems unfeasible. Then don't take the gig. > Then what about the Kardashians advertising dieting pills? Supermodels advertising cosmetic surgery? Then. Do. Not. Take. The. Gig. --- The only reason this could possibly seem blurry at all is if you approach it with the baffling prior that celebrities selling out their trust is a good thing that should be allowed to happen at any cost, and work backwards from there.