4 ms·
Requiring skip is good, but the part about focusing on illegal ads is better. If all ads were for soda, cars, and other legitimate products, that would be one t
by datadrivenangel 10mo ago
Requiring skip is good, but the part about focusing on illegal ads is better. If all ads were for soda, cars, and other legitimate products, that would be one thing, but so many ads are for straight up scams these days.
- xoxxala 10mo agoConsidering how unhealthy soda is to consume, I'd ban those ads in a heartbeat right along side tobacco and alchohol. The UK just banned all TV and online junk food ads and I'm alright with that.
- triceratops 10mo ago> The UK just banned all TV and online junk food ads Unbelievable, when you consider the sheer volume of betting ads they have.
- pacifika 10mo agoYeah but the gov relies on that income. £2.0-£2.5 billion
- triceratops 10mo agoIs that the income from gambling advertising or the income from gambling? This is also why taxes on vices should always, always, always be revenue neutral. Lawmakers should never have to choose between reducing demand for a vice and revenue.
- foolfoolz 10mo agoor maybe we can let people think for themselves
- wolvoleo 10mo agoSoda ads are actually banned in some jurisdictions so it's not really a cleanly legit product. You can make the same argument for ICE cars.
- andriamanitra 10mo agoMarketing for cars and soda isn't that far off from actual scams. Ads are a big part of why (especially American) car and food culture is so toxic. The ad-driven demand for sugary drinks and large, impractical, environmentally unconscientious cars has almost certainly caused more death and misery than many actual scams.