4 ms·

I think because you're separate people it's hard to know quite what to reply to, but I don't really understand the idea that a corporation should not be allowed

I think because you're separate people it's hard to know quite what to reply to, but I don't really understand the idea that a corporation should not be allowed to speak. I'm not speaking specifically about the US, so I don't have particular large biases for or against Supreme Court decisions. I'm more talking practically - what does it mean for a corporation to be silent? A corporation is already held to a higher standard than an individual; e.g. it can be sued for false advertising for anything it says. Given that, shouldn't corporations be able to "speak" (or rather the people in the corporation speak or instruct people to make videos/billboards etc)?

cess11 2y ago
It does not need to be silent, only factual in the same sense it is in product information on the packaging and so on. Advertising as contrasted to information is deceitful, manipulative. It's what happens when two brands use the same factory but make people think one product is boring and for poor people and the other one is for sexy, richer people. The proliferation of this kind of mass communication comes from the project to invent and spread desires people otherwise wouldn't have, to satisfy the amount of productivity we've developed over the last century or so. Make people want stuff they don't need and rationally can't defend being in demand of, basically.
- robertlagrant 2y ago
  No, advertising is not an alternative to information. Advertising can be purely factual.
  - cess11 2y ago
    For the purpose of this conversation, no. There's a world of difference between you selling a bike or 'advertising' your availability for employment, and the corporate mass communication we're discussing here. Unless you have a good reason to confuse these many meanings of the word, maybe you shouldn't?
    - robertlagrant 2y ago
      > Advertising as contrasted to information is deceitful, manipulative This is what is confusing the many meanings of the word. There's no point doing terminology redefinition and then saying "See? Thing bad!" That's not the purpose of this conversation; that's just what you tried to do in an individual comment.
      - cess11 2y ago
        If constraints and precision make you confused, maybe that's a you problem. I'm not a member of the religion which stipulates that states can create people without bodies, if you are, good for you perhaps but I'd prefer you became an apostate temporarily to make it easier to converse on this topic.
        robertlagrant 2y ago
        Precision is the thing I'm asking you to adopt when you don't admit all types of advertising in your definition of the word.
        cess11 2y ago
        I think you should apply this tactic in everyday life. Explain to people that they are being imprecise when they say 'light' and don't talk about lightweight at the same time as they are talking about brightness. See how far you can take it.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]

cess11 2y ago

It does not need to be silent, only factual in the same sense it is in product information on the packaging and so on. Advertising as contrasted to information is deceitful, manipulative. It's what happens when two brands use the same factory but make people think one product is boring and for poor people and the other one is for sexy, richer people. The proliferation of this kind of mass communication comes from the project to invent and spread desires people otherwise wouldn't have, to satisfy the amount of productivity we've developed over the last century or so. Make people want stuff they don't need and rationally can't defend being in demand of, basically.

robertlagrant 2y ago
No, advertising is not an alternative to information. Advertising can be purely factual.
- cess11 2y ago
  For the purpose of this conversation, no. There's a world of difference between you selling a bike or 'advertising' your availability for employment, and the corporate mass communication we're discussing here. Unless you have a good reason to confuse these many meanings of the word, maybe you shouldn't?
  - robertlagrant 2y ago
    > Advertising as contrasted to information is deceitful, manipulative This is what is confusing the many meanings of the word. There's no point doing terminology redefinition and then saying "See? Thing bad!" That's not the purpose of this conversation; that's just what you tried to do in an individual comment.
    - cess11 2y ago
      If constraints and precision make you confused, maybe that's a you problem. I'm not a member of the religion which stipulates that states can create people without bodies, if you are, good for you perhaps but I'd prefer you became an apostate temporarily to make it easier to converse on this topic.
      - robertlagrant 2y ago
        Precision is the thing I'm asking you to adopt when you don't admit all types of advertising in your definition of the word.
        cess11 2y ago
        I think you should apply this tactic in everyday life. Explain to people that they are being imprecise when they say 'light' and don't talk about lightweight at the same time as they are talking about brightness. See how far you can take it.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]