I think ads targeted at minors should be banned outright. I think of ads as business proposals and minors cannot engage in business without their parent's approval.
Of course, things might get murky with regards to teens, because they also use products that adults use, but there are still products made especially for them.
Billboards are basically paid side-channel attacks on your mind.
Feel free to try and change my view on that, I'm very open for discussion!
I will concede that there can be "ad-adjacent" things that add value for society (newsletter-like information that creates awareness about a products existence), but that is IMO far from the main purpose of ads as they are now.
I don't disagree with anything he says here. It must be liberating to not have to defend advertising now that you have no association with Google.
Also, that memo is fascinating because it references work by Simon Baron-Cohen. That last name seemed too close to Sasha Baron-Cohen, and indeed, they are cousins.
I’m still shocked that the US allows pharmaceutical advertising and people there just take it as something normal. It shouldn’t be normal to see pills you should totally ask your doctor about on billboards during your commute. It’s not good for consumers or for doctors (except the ones getting kick-backs?). If there’s no will to regulate terrible things like this in the US, there is no hope.
There's no will to regulate such because those who would be regulated pay the most in "donations" and "campaign contributions" to those who would be regulated.
My proposal: if you, a corporation, is a recipient of at least $1 million in lifetime benefits, grants, tax exemptions, government contracts, you and your executives are unable to make any political contributions whatsoever.
If you as a corporation are unable to stand on your own without the government propping you up, you shouldn't be spending money on lobbying the government- you shouldn't even be in business. If your company is vital to national security, the idea of lobbying or donations shouldn't even cross your mind. It's sickening, honestly.
Perhaps I am a pessimist but I think most advertising, 90+% of it, is absolutely wasted and pointless. Adults, IMO, ignore advertising and have trained their brands to block it out, and dismiss it immediately. Some of us are even petty enough to mute them, or look away; I may be guilty of this too.
What is very interesting to me, however, is how much online advertising works on kids. We know advertising works on kids, you can get them to become excited and demand to buy just about anything. But I am curious if the kids of today, technically sophisticated, are not also learning how to block out ads.
When I was a kid I got ads from the tv, and while I could walk away, I had to wait for my programing to resume. Today kids can swipe away, look away, dual screen, etc. so I am curious if advertising works on kids today and how well..
Let’s say you’re correct, that only 10% of ads are effective.
How many ads do you see a day?
If you use social media or read articles online (without an ad blocker) I’d bet it approaches triple digits.
For children it’s even worse as most children content are, themselves, ads for toys and games. Many mobile games aimed at children are commonly vehicles for micro transactions too and thus laden with ads
Hell, the only reason I know of raid shadow legends or nord vpn is the insane number of YouTube ads they buy.
> Let’s say you’re correct, that only 10% of ads are effective.
You know, the biggest financial disasters in history have happened because of this reasoning. This is not how complex systems behave, and humans are very complex systems. Those turns out to be much closer to fixed points processes, which implies a very different:
Either ads are 0% effective, or they're 100% effective. Very little exists in between and events can cause even the very same ads to flip between 0% and 100%, and even the time when it flips will be very short (and won't be a simple linear 0% -> 100% move, but a fast, wild, oscillating process that at times looks small and controllable but is utterly unstoppable)
Which would imply the GP is right: for the vast majority of ads, it makes no sense to show them to anyone. It's just annoying and wastes everyone's time.
Oh and the reason it doesn't have effectiveness measures is that normal distribution requires independence. Whether I respond to or ignore an ad must be independent of whether you do, for all factors not taking into the calculation. Meaning even if I am your twin and we live together it must be independent. Otherwise, because things like average are really a way to refer to normally distributed events, it doesn't even make sense to say an ad is "10% effective". There is no mathematical meaning behind that, and it's no different from saying "Orange tomatoes shot Joe".
Speaking for my own experiences... I have no idea how many ads I see in a day. I ignore them, with a vegence. I use ad blockers on everything, and I block ads on social media.
You don't know that ads work, you only think they do because you can't ignore them and are effected in some way; you remembered them. That wasn't the argument I was making. The argument is that 90%+ doesn't work because people ignore them.
either it works on customers, or it works on business people - by duping them into spending alot of money ever since Edward Bernays. projected to be a trillion a year 2025
Technically the whole concept of marketing is kinda insidious - the goal is to turn non-users into users. I still think a great use case for AR glasses is blotting out ads instead of adding them.
Flyers should be 100% banned - just so much waste.
I'd like to see some form of regulation around % of visible screens/information presented in a public space needing to be specifically useful to the population vs pure advertising.
It's frustrating to be at a train station where every wall is an ad for something, and the actual information concerning the trains themselves is either tucked away on a much smaller, much lower quality screen in the corner, or worse, not working at all.
Basically I'd like to see some solutions to the problem that I'm generally being shown ads at the expense of the public service I'm trying to use.
I can understand advertisements in unpaid products (e.g gmail), but when I'm paying for a service and it shows me ads I always think that the company views me as another product they can "sell"
Readit News
Of course, things might get murky with regards to teens, because they also use products that adults use, but there are still products made especially for them.
Billboards are basically paid side-channel attacks on your mind.
Feel free to try and change my view on that, I'm very open for discussion!
I will concede that there can be "ad-adjacent" things that add value for society (newsletter-like information that creates awareness about a products existence), but that is IMO far from the main purpose of ads as they are now.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google%27s_Ideological_Echo_Ch...
I don't disagree with anything he says here. It must be liberating to not have to defend advertising now that you have no association with Google.
Also, that memo is fascinating because it references work by Simon Baron-Cohen. That last name seemed too close to Sasha Baron-Cohen, and indeed, they are cousins.
My proposal: if you, a corporation, is a recipient of at least $1 million in lifetime benefits, grants, tax exemptions, government contracts, you and your executives are unable to make any political contributions whatsoever.
If you as a corporation are unable to stand on your own without the government propping you up, you shouldn't be spending money on lobbying the government- you shouldn't even be in business. If your company is vital to national security, the idea of lobbying or donations shouldn't even cross your mind. It's sickening, honestly.
What is very interesting to me, however, is how much online advertising works on kids. We know advertising works on kids, you can get them to become excited and demand to buy just about anything. But I am curious if the kids of today, technically sophisticated, are not also learning how to block out ads.
When I was a kid I got ads from the tv, and while I could walk away, I had to wait for my programing to resume. Today kids can swipe away, look away, dual screen, etc. so I am curious if advertising works on kids today and how well..
How many ads do you see a day?
If you use social media or read articles online (without an ad blocker) I’d bet it approaches triple digits.
For children it’s even worse as most children content are, themselves, ads for toys and games. Many mobile games aimed at children are commonly vehicles for micro transactions too and thus laden with ads
Hell, the only reason I know of raid shadow legends or nord vpn is the insane number of YouTube ads they buy.
Ads work… it’s why they keep getting purchased.
You know, the biggest financial disasters in history have happened because of this reasoning. This is not how complex systems behave, and humans are very complex systems. Those turns out to be much closer to fixed points processes, which implies a very different:
Either ads are 0% effective, or they're 100% effective. Very little exists in between and events can cause even the very same ads to flip between 0% and 100%, and even the time when it flips will be very short (and won't be a simple linear 0% -> 100% move, but a fast, wild, oscillating process that at times looks small and controllable but is utterly unstoppable)
Which would imply the GP is right: for the vast majority of ads, it makes no sense to show them to anyone. It's just annoying and wastes everyone's time.
Oh and the reason it doesn't have effectiveness measures is that normal distribution requires independence. Whether I respond to or ignore an ad must be independent of whether you do, for all factors not taking into the calculation. Meaning even if I am your twin and we live together it must be independent. Otherwise, because things like average are really a way to refer to normally distributed events, it doesn't even make sense to say an ad is "10% effective". There is no mathematical meaning behind that, and it's no different from saying "Orange tomatoes shot Joe".
You don't know that ads work, you only think they do because you can't ignore them and are effected in some way; you remembered them. That wasn't the argument I was making. The argument is that 90%+ doesn't work because people ignore them.
Flyers should be 100% banned - just so much waste.
It's frustrating to be at a train station where every wall is an ad for something, and the actual information concerning the trains themselves is either tucked away on a much smaller, much lower quality screen in the corner, or worse, not working at all.
Basically I'd like to see some solutions to the problem that I'm generally being shown ads at the expense of the public service I'm trying to use.
Dead Comment