3 ms·

Are commercials during saturday morning cartoons not ads targeted at children? When I was growing up at least, it was all for candy, toys, and sugary cereal, a

Are commercials during saturday morning cartoons not ads targeted at children? When I was growing up at least, it was all for candy, toys, and sugary cereal, and often had kids or cartoon characters featured in the commercial.

fedeb95 2y ago
it's a matter of threshold. There's a point up to which targeted advertising doesn't cause harm, after that, it does. Ads on smartphones cross that threshold. Doesn't matter if TV also does: if it does, it should be limited too, otherwise, it doesn't matter. Why smartphones and related software cross that threshold? They're specifically designed to increase use time, i.e. to be addictive. It's a drug.
- signatoremo 2y ago
  What are the thresholds for tv and the web? Does FCC have any specific guidelines? How about other countries?
- ndriscoll 2y ago
  The fact that companies making sugary cereals haven't gone out of business and the current obesity crisis suggest to me that those TV commercials are also quite harmful. Something causes people to switch off their brains and feed their kids cookies and marshmallows for breakfast as long as the TV says it's okay and normal.
  - fedeb95 2y ago
    Maybe also TV. But that doesn't mean that targeted web advertising doesn't also, or that it's more harmful, or at the same level. Let's cut both. On another note, obesity isn't widespread everywhere there are TV commercials.
pyrale 2y ago
There's a difference between placing a sports shoes ad in front of a gym, and getting to know the history and habits of every person that ever entered that gym, and showing each a different ad. I mean, 30 years ago, we were horrified by the extent to which Stasi spied on their own people. Now, we'd call them amateurs.
- mattmcknight 2y ago
  People were horrified because of what they did with the data. This is why it is different when there is a person listening, as their interests get involved. If it is just something telling me the shoes I looked at last week are on discount, instead of some random ad, who cares? I used to get a long distance phone bill in the mail with the list of every number I called so I could verify the charges. Was it wrong for MCI to have this data?
  - acdha 2y ago
    MCI retaining your phone call records for billing purposes has a legitimate use: they need to be able to justify charging you. Where it gets controversial is retention time and reuse: ten years from now, there’s no billing justification but you might not want President Donner to demand they turn over the list of everyone who called a political rival. Similarly, you might not care if they have that data but still object to them sharing it with marketing partners (they called LL Bean, you can advertise your outdoors wear to them!) or making it available to other companies who can use it to look up your interests when you are on the phone or applying to something. This can be deeply personal: your car insurance company would definitely pay to know who calls alcohol addiction treatment numbers, an employer of a certain vein might be interested in calls to adult services, etc. Once that data is out, there’s no way to un-breach it.
  - pyrale 2y ago
    Of course, Google would never give this data to a government that engages in targeted killing, Meta would never help out a junta repress their population, etc. The extent of the data collected and systemic consolidation between different sources is the problem, because we've seen again and again any data collection is dangerous regardless of the original intent.
mattmcknight 2y ago
Absolutely, pretending like this is some Google/Meta only thing. Newspapers filled their for kids sections with advertising targeted at children. Comic books featured scammy ads targeted at kids.
- izacus 2y ago
  Some of the most popular nostalgic shows were outright blatant toy advertisements (see: Transformers). This is absolutely not a new problem and its sad to see it hasn't really been addressed.
burkaman 2y ago
Yes those are also bad and should not be allowed.

fedeb95 2y ago

it's a matter of threshold. There's a point up to which targeted advertising doesn't cause harm, after that, it does. Ads on smartphones cross that threshold. Doesn't matter if TV also does: if it does, it should be limited too, otherwise, it doesn't matter. Why smartphones and related software cross that threshold? They're specifically designed to increase use time, i.e. to be addictive. It's a drug.

signatoremo 2y ago
What are the thresholds for tv and the web? Does FCC have any specific guidelines? How about other countries?
ndriscoll 2y ago
The fact that companies making sugary cereals haven't gone out of business and the current obesity crisis suggest to me that those TV commercials are also quite harmful. Something causes people to switch off their brains and feed their kids cookies and marshmallows for breakfast as long as the TV says it's okay and normal.
- fedeb95 2y ago
  Maybe also TV. But that doesn't mean that targeted web advertising doesn't also, or that it's more harmful, or at the same level. Let's cut both. On another note, obesity isn't widespread everywhere there are TV commercials.

pyrale 2y ago

There's a difference between placing a sports shoes ad in front of a gym, and getting to know the history and habits of every person that ever entered that gym, and showing each a different ad. I mean, 30 years ago, we were horrified by the extent to which Stasi spied on their own people. Now, we'd call them amateurs.

mattmcknight 2y ago
People were horrified because of what they did with the data. This is why it is different when there is a person listening, as their interests get involved. If it is just something telling me the shoes I looked at last week are on discount, instead of some random ad, who cares? I used to get a long distance phone bill in the mail with the list of every number I called so I could verify the charges. Was it wrong for MCI to have this data?
- acdha 2y ago
  MCI retaining your phone call records for billing purposes has a legitimate use: they need to be able to justify charging you. Where it gets controversial is retention time and reuse: ten years from now, there’s no billing justification but you might not want President Donner to demand they turn over the list of everyone who called a political rival. Similarly, you might not care if they have that data but still object to them sharing it with marketing partners (they called LL Bean, you can advertise your outdoors wear to them!) or making it available to other companies who can use it to look up your interests when you are on the phone or applying to something. This can be deeply personal: your car insurance company would definitely pay to know who calls alcohol addiction treatment numbers, an employer of a certain vein might be interested in calls to adult services, etc. Once that data is out, there’s no way to un-breach it.
- pyrale 2y ago
  Of course, Google would never give this data to a government that engages in targeted killing, Meta would never help out a junta repress their population, etc. The extent of the data collected and systemic consolidation between different sources is the problem, because we've seen again and again any data collection is dangerous regardless of the original intent.

mattmcknight 2y ago

Absolutely, pretending like this is some Google/Meta only thing. Newspapers filled their for kids sections with advertising targeted at children. Comic books featured scammy ads targeted at kids.

izacus 2y ago
Some of the most popular nostalgic shows were outright blatant toy advertisements (see: Transformers). This is absolutely not a new problem and its sad to see it hasn't really been addressed.

burkaman 2y ago

Yes those are also bad and should not be allowed.