3 ms·

Why is advertising "fundamentally manipulative and dishonest?" People aren't stupid. Give them more credit. Truly effective advertising gives more credit to its

by gfodor 12y ago

Why is advertising "fundamentally manipulative and dishonest?" People aren't stupid. Give them more credit. Truly effective advertising gives more credit to its viewers than you seem to. Have you ever run an advertising campaign? Do you know anything about marketing a product? Cynically manipulating people may help you in the short run, but good sales and marketing is about informing people of value you can provide in a way that respects their time and intelligence.

eevilspock 12y ago
The Co-Founder and CTO of Adtuitive, an ad platform startup, defending advertising! You make Upton Sinclair proud! Like I said, "When I talk to anyone who's livelihood doesn't rely on advertising or marketing, there is near unanimous agreement that advertising is fundamentally manipulative and dishonest." People can be stupid. People can be manipulated. Propaganda works. Take political ads. Which ones work best, the ones that manipulate your perceptions and emotions and ignorance, or the ones that "respect [your] time and intelligence" with the honest whole truth?
- gfodor 12y ago
  Nice ad hom, but it turns out my ad tech startup (which was now many years ago) focused on ads that simply delivered product names, images, and prices that were contextually relevant. So pretty much the most non-manipulative form of advertising possible, and it worked well. I think working in this space for a few years at one point in my career (but no longer) lends more credibility to my argument, not less. I never said there isn't such a thing as manipulative advertising, what I said was that advertising is not inherently manipulative and dishonest. It's a tool for communicating, and in my experience in general people see though manipulation tactics, such like they do when you try to sell them something by bullshitting them. Well written Google ads, well written marketing for websites, etc, all generally flow from a central theme of communicating clearly and honestly to the reader what value you are offering, and giving them reasons to want to pursue your business. It's salesmenship, and I guess only if you think salesmanship is inherently dishonest and manipulative then you'd think advertising is too.
  - mercer 12y ago
    Maybe your startup is on the 'good' side of advertising, but is it really so unreasonable to state that advertising, in the vast majority of cases, is manipulative and dishonest? (whether that's by definition a bad thing is another issue, though)
wpietri 12y ago
I think he's generally right. Look at the informational content of most ads. What is Coca-Cola telling you about their products that you don't already know? Nothing. They changed their product once, 25 years ago, and it was a disaster, so they changed it back. There's nothing new to say. They spend $4 billion per year not to inform people of the value they provide, but to manipulate people into purchasing more Coca Cola. And it works. If they stop, then Pepsi will spend more, capture Coca Cola customers, and Coke will shrink. Or people will say, "Hey, maybe I should drink something more healthy," and stop buying sugar-water altogether. Can't have that! So Coke will keep burning money on manipulating people.

by gfodor 12y ago

eevilspock 12y ago

The Co-Founder and CTO of Adtuitive, an ad platform startup, defending advertising! You make Upton Sinclair proud! Like I said, "When I talk to anyone who's livelihood doesn't rely on advertising or marketing, there is near unanimous agreement that advertising is fundamentally manipulative and dishonest." People can be stupid. People can be manipulated. Propaganda works. Take political ads. Which ones work best, the ones that manipulate your perceptions and emotions and ignorance, or the ones that "respect [your] time and intelligence" with the honest whole truth?

gfodor 12y ago
Nice ad hom, but it turns out my ad tech startup (which was now many years ago) focused on ads that simply delivered product names, images, and prices that were contextually relevant. So pretty much the most non-manipulative form of advertising possible, and it worked well. I think working in this space for a few years at one point in my career (but no longer) lends more credibility to my argument, not less. I never said there isn't such a thing as manipulative advertising, what I said was that advertising is not inherently manipulative and dishonest. It's a tool for communicating, and in my experience in general people see though manipulation tactics, such like they do when you try to sell them something by bullshitting them. Well written Google ads, well written marketing for websites, etc, all generally flow from a central theme of communicating clearly and honestly to the reader what value you are offering, and giving them reasons to want to pursue your business. It's salesmenship, and I guess only if you think salesmanship is inherently dishonest and manipulative then you'd think advertising is too.
- mercer 12y ago
  Maybe your startup is on the 'good' side of advertising, but is it really so unreasonable to state that advertising, in the vast majority of cases, is manipulative and dishonest? (whether that's by definition a bad thing is another issue, though)

wpietri 12y ago

I think he's generally right. Look at the informational content of most ads. What is Coca-Cola telling you about their products that you don't already know? Nothing. They changed their product once, 25 years ago, and it was a disaster, so they changed it back. There's nothing new to say. They spend $4 billion per year not to inform people of the value they provide, but to manipulate people into purchasing more Coca Cola. And it works. If they stop, then Pepsi will spend more, capture Coca Cola customers, and Coke will shrink. Or people will say, "Hey, maybe I should drink something more healthy," and stop buying sugar-water altogether. Can't have that! So Coke will keep burning money on manipulating people.