Mildly Interesting

20028 readers

1243 users here now

This is for strictly mildly interesting material. If it's too interesting, it doesn't belong. If it's not interesting, it doesn't belong.

This is obviously an objective criteria, so the mods are always right. Or maybe mildly right? Ahh.. what do we know?

Just post some stuff and don't spam.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

marcar@lemmy.world

Jimbabwe@lemmy.ml

WhatsHerBucket@lemmy.world

1419

What If We Made Advertising Illegal? (simone.org)

submitted 2 weeks ago by sundrei@lemmy.sdf.org to c/mildlyinteresting@lemmy.world

390 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The idea feels like sci-fi because you're so used to it, imagining ads gone feels like asking to outlaw gravity. But humanity had been free of current forms of advertising for 99.9% of its existence. Word-of-mouth and community networks worked just fine. First-party websites and online communities would now improve on that.

The traditional argument pro-advertising—that it provides consumers with necessary information—hasn't been valid for decades.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Angry_Autist@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The salt that makes it propaganda and not just a convincing argument is the ulterior use of symbolism to unconsciously condition the victim

But I understand why children like you miss that nuance

[–] Koarnine@pawb.social 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Nuance that is not definitionally a part of what constitutes 'propaganda' whether you infantilize someone else for seeing things differently or not.

Go on, provide some examples and sources if you want to make such a grand claim.

Something being propaganda does not necessitate that it contains subliminal messaging, propaganda can be entirely overt and without unconscious conditioning techniques.

A convincing argument is propaganda, you just wrongly believe yourself to be above propaganda, the same way you seem to consider yourself above others generally...

[–] Angry_Autist@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

So either you are an LLM, have poor reading comprehension, or are just actively being stupid.

Never in my statement was nuance a part of the definition. I specifically stated that the difference between propaganda and a convincing argument is the ulterior use of symbolism to manipulate the victim's outcomes.

The nuance portion was purely stating that such mental children cannot grasp the difference between propaganda and a convincing argument.

I look forward to seeing how you actively misunderstand this post too, what a fun game!

[–] Koarnine@pawb.social 4 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Nowhere did I misunderstand your post, you stated it back to me?

I'm saying that the difference you are describing doesn't exist, thus the nuance you ascribe 'mental children' to lack to perceive is imaginary.

I understand words convey a meaning beyond definitionally, but definitionally there is no mention of such a requirement. Thus I asked you for any sources backing up such a claim.

I have not deviated from what I said previously. Nor misinterpreted you intentionally whatsoever. Rather, I disagree with you.

Also I am not an llm, and I intend to discuss with you calmly and fairly and not misinterpret what you are saying. If you are willing to engage

[–] MellowYellow13@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago

Dont even bother. Dude just trolls and makes angry comments to everyone

[–] Angry_Autist@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Yep, LLM. So sad. You can tell by the inability to follow context.

Some post-processing can fix that, but I guess this bot wrangler wasn't informed