3 ms·
> So, we probably need to make ads prohibitively expensive, and legally risky, such that the volume of them decreases dramatically. i.e. those with lots of mon
by overfeed 11mo ago
> So, we probably need to make ads prohibitively expensive, and legally risky, such that the volume of them decreases dramatically.
i.e. those with lots of money get a lot of ad time and no one else gets any. I can think of a number of ways why this is inadvisable, across multiple axes, social, economic, and political.
- themafia 11mo agoAdvertising is not particularly expensive as it is, go look up the "rate card" for your favorite broadcaster, even if you increased those rates by an order of magnitude they would still be approachable by most clients. You would also expect that if the cost of ads go up then the number of "avails" for them would go down. Collective industry groups would advertise more and politicians would advertise a lot less.
- overfeed 11mo ago> Advertising is not particularly expensive I'm sure it's not expensive right now, but I was extrapolating the likely outcome from your hypothetical: >> ... we probably need to make ads prohibitively expensive
- themafia 11mo agoA poor choice of words. They're so cheap now advertisers can spam the channel. That's the behavior you want to prohibit, not overall access, which again, even facing an order of magnitude increase, would still be viable.