I would argue that the volume increase is part of the manipulation, in the sense that it means you cannot possibly ignore it.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
What's the point of adverts?
- Thread starter Rival
- Start date
Advertising, in and of itself, is a manipulation. Its purpose is to get me to buy something that I did not already intend on buying.
I certainly don't view it as a PSA.
Then I submit we ban adverts everywhere.
Then again I also support human extinction since I believe we've evil because of never-ending selfishness and having brains that actively make stuff up...
The point of advertising (businesses only) is to improve profits by improving sales. Yes, information may be a part or all of an ad: "Garage sale here this Saturday at 9AM."
Also, we see language that manipulates with imagery, often misleading, like the smiling, sexy model selling cars or people using a product shown beaming with happiness, as well as verbal imagery: "Rich buttery flavor."
There may also be indoctrination - repetition resulting in the passive reshaping of thought and desire: "Winston tastes good like a cigarette should."
And yes, people are very manipulable. Therein lies the power of critical thinking. Learn how to evaluate the speech in advertising and reduce it to the information component and make decisions on that alone. That doesn't mean that you might not be shown something that looks good, want it, and go purchase it, but we don't want the advertiser creating that state of mind in us unwittingly. The value of critical thought is not in accumulating demonstrably correct beliefs while avoiding false and unfalsifiable ones, but in the application of that knowledge to optimize experience, and the false promises of advertising generally lead to disappointment.
Consider these words in that context:
When I'm driving in my car
When a man come on the radio
He's telling me more and more
About some useless information
Supposed to fire my imagination
I can't get no satisfaction
'Cause I try, and I try, and I try, and I try
I can't get no, I can't get no
When I'm watchin' my TV
And a man comes on and tells me
How white my shirts can be
But, he can't be a man 'cause he doesn't smoke
The same cigarettes as me
I can't get no satisfaction
I can't get no girl reaction
'Cause I try, and I try, and I try, and I try
I can't get no, I can't get no
Last edited:
Secret Chief
Very strong language
Sorry, what were you saying?
Secret Chief
Very strong language
Yes. a long time ago I worked in marketing* and we regularly sent out (pre internet) bazillions of flyers. I questioned the cost of all this and was told only a teeny tiny % need to take the bait for the exercise to be more than worthwhile.
*I expect to be a weevil in my next life.
Then most services would shut down because they won't have the revenue to continue to operate.
Humans will ultimately become extinct anyway.Then again I also support human extinction since I believe we've evil because of never-ending selfishness and having brains that actively make stuff up...
But I don't believe they're inherently evil. As I said earlier in the thread, humans are slaves to ego. I would rather see humans learn how to manage/transcend their ego than see them become extinct as a result of it.
If your business cannot thrive without manipulating people to use it, it deserves to go under, imo.
I don't believe humans are capable.
This means all free internet services you currently use go away. YouTube and RF included. Is this something you're willing to sacrifice for the sake of eliminating advertising?
Yes and no.
I believe advertising can be done without manipulation, so that's not an issue.
If the advertisers are unwilling to stop using this tactic, yes. I do support humanity taking on monkish lifestyles as a whole, abandoning most of the world as we know it. After university I may consider doing such with my life.
So, yes, I guess.
Also, the UK has some of the tightest rules on advertising in the world. So we may have different cultural ideas of what adverts are.
How?
50 people grow tomatoes and "advertise" they're selling them. Which do you choose and why?
Whichever are easiest to get to.
Did you already plan on buying tomatoes?
Yes.
Rarely do I go out without a plan, in all honesty I'm far too lazy and lack motivation. It may be my dopamine deficiency. I'm not as bothered by those things. I don't particularly enjoy eating, for example, and can go days and days eating the exact same thing even though I can palate many foods. Equally, I can give up foods without much second thought. I remember I gave up tea and coffee for Lent once and found no desire to have them. For me it's like when you pay your mortgage, rent etc. You may make 50k and 2k goes on rent, so you don't even include that in your take-home pay, you auto deduct it, so you know you actually have 48k.
That's kind of how my brain works. It deducts things I've told it it can't have and forgets they exist.
I don't know about others.
Assuming you already know where tomatoes are sold, then you're already going to the place that's the easiest to get to to get them. How and why would you buy from someone else who advertises tomatoes that's harder to get to than that place get you to buy theirs?
They wouldn't.
I've tried this in real life. There's an Aldi and a Tesco within similar distance, but the Aldi is usually cheaper, has good food and is is slightly less distance (or should be...) to travel, but because that travel involves taking a needlessly long detour to cross a road safely I actually just don't bother, even though their food is cheaper and just as good, usually, as Tesco. I just will not go because I consider the detour a waste of my time to buy the exact same product.
I would apparently genuinely rather throw money away (mostly because I'm not as bothered by it) to complete a task faster because I ****ing hate food shopping.
So if Aldi advertised their tomatoes as you suggested above, and Tesco did not advertise at all, you would still buy food at Tesco even though Aldi is cheaper due to convenience?They wouldn't.
I've tried this in real life. There's an Aldi and a Tesco within similar distance, but the Aldi is usually cheaper, has good food and is is slightly less distance (or should be...) to travel, but because that travel involves taking a needlessly long detour to cross a road safely I actually just don't bother, even though their food is cheaper and just as good, usually, as Tesco. I just will not go because I consider the detour a waste of my time to buy the exact same product.
I would apparently genuinely rather throw money away (mostly because I'm not as bothered by it) to complete a task faster because I ****ing hate food shopping.
If so, why would Aldi pay for advertising if it was ineffective?
Alternately, since you already buy your tomatoes at Tesco and intend to shop at Tesco, wouldn't Aldi advertising their tomatoes are cheaper be a form of manipulation?
Yes.
To let people know it exists and sells tomatoes, I suppose.
Yes.
If both supermarkets merely gave their prices I wouldn't mind because we need to know how much things cost, but when they use prices against other supermarkets I find that a problem. It doesn't let people decide for themselves by giving them just the facts.
I hope this answers your question, it took me a while as I've OD'd on antihistamines so I can go to work....