this post was submitted on 06 Apr 2025
1402 points (98.1% liked)

Mildly Interesting

19713 readers
1208 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
 

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.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] FrChazzz@lemm.ee 8 points 6 hours ago

I’ve had adblockers on my browsers for years and pay for ad-free streaming. I easily went over a decade without seeing an ad on a screen in my own home. But when I’d go to a restaurant that had TVs (or to my mom’s house where she’d run the TV constantly) I’d marvel at how unwatchable it was. Just a constant interruption.

My wife has a friend who produced a TV series for Tubi and so we signed up to check it out and, wow. I had to tap out of watching it because of the ads. Just completely obnoxious and loud.

[–] slappypantsgo@lemm.ee 5 points 6 hours ago

Let’s ban all persuasive advertising! No reason not to let people make a list of features or something, like a notification, but that’s it.

[–] rekabis@lemmy.ca 15 points 9 hours ago

#YES, PLEASE.

I have been fighting advertising in my own way since the early 2000s:

  • I abandoned broadcast radio in the mid-1990s. I can’t recall the last time I turned on a car radio.
  • I abandoned broadcast TV in 2001
  • I jumped on board with Adblock the moment it was released for Phoenix (now Firefox) back in 2004
  • The lone streaming service I actually subscribe to is the cheapest non-advertising tier available
  • Torrenting covers many of the remaining gaps
  • Even my Internet Radio stations are chosen primarily through lack of advertising.

It’s gotten to the point where stumbling across an ad is the mental equivalent to nails on a chalkboard.

[–] Ultraviolet@lemmy.world 3 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

How exactly do you define advertising? An overly broad definition would forbid, for example, a dentist from putting a sign in front of their office saying they're a dentist.

[–] Shayeta@feddit.org 3 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

Paying somone else to advertise for you. You yourself holding up a sign peomoting yourself is fine, paying someone else to hold up a sign for you is illegal.

[–] blorps@lemmy.world 12 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago)

The thing is I don't think I would mind advertising if it wasn't shoved down my throat 24/7. The fact I can't read a webpage without ads blocking everything, I can't watch TV without more than half of the show's runtime being ads in and out of segments, I can't even step outside without seeing the billboard or another 5 ads shoved in my mailbox!

I get 15 some-odd emails a day from different companies trying to get me to buy things. I block them and they pop up with a different email address. I can't even open my email without ads popping up masquerading as actual messages (Gmail). Don't get me started on the entire Google app thing.

I can't open an online map without getting SPONSERED listings. And places I use the app to order from try to advertise me their own food WHILE I'M ORDERING. Panda Express started asking me if I want a subscription to Starz or whatever.

NO. NO. NO.

I'm exhausted. I want to go to a store without being immediately inundated with ads or sellers. "Buy this!" NO. LEAVE ME ALONE.

I'm overwhelmed. I'm overstimulated. I'm done. I don't care how "quirky" or "flashy" or "hip" your ads are. I refuse to buy anything I see ads for now. It's too much. Shut up.

TL;DR: we need controls and limits to who, what, where, and how things are advertised. It should be an enforcable crime to have ads louder than a certain decibel for one. But it's not enforced and fines aren't more than a drop in the bucket. I doubt I'll see it in ny lifetime.

[–] Resol@lemmy.world 4 points 10 hours ago

I see advertising as a necessary evil. It helps small businesses take off and stay afloat (especially when alternatives for being funded aren't viable for them), but at the same time it basically promotes corporate greed by shoving ads down our throats.

Abolishing advertising entirely would be improbable. I just want it to be toned down to the point where we're all comfortable with it. Too much of a good thing inevitably becomes a bad thing. But too little of a good thing is also a bad thing. So things should be taken in moderation. In the case of advertising, the first statement applies; there's way too much of it, it's really in-your-face and disruptive, and we're all getting sick of it.

[–] yarr@feddit.nl 15 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

As I sat down this morning to enjoy my warm and full-flavored Folger's coffee, it got me thinking: traditional advertising might disappear, but something sneakier would inevitably fill the void: product placement.

[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 5 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (2 children)

Then you can ban paid product placement.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] isaaclyman@lemmy.world 15 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

“Online communities” are great, but how do you stop them from being infiltrated by corporate astroturfers within five minutes of creation? Doesn’t every major brand have a low-overhead keyboard farm posting social media and forum comments to make them look good?

[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 4 points 12 hours ago

Regulate and ban astroturfing campaigns. When corporations are caught doing so, have the penalties be similar to illegal dumping and include jail time for executives.

Ultimately some ads will become illegal as legit advertisers (large corps), get pissed off at all the dick pill ads mixed in with their content.

[–] O_R_I_O_N@lemm.ee 22 points 17 hours ago (4 children)

Just making billboards ads illegal. It would make every city and the places in-between instantly better

[–] FrChazzz@lemm.ee 2 points 6 hours ago

We don’t have billboards here on O’ahu and it’s great. When I went to visit my family on the continental US (Boston and Florida), it was very annoying and distracting to see them everywhere.

[–] pelley@lemmy.world 15 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

We have this in Maine and it’s wonderful. Any time I drive through another state, the gross billboards are such a jolting sight (and blight).

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Captain_Patchy@lemmy.world 8 points 14 hours ago (8 children)

OTA tv would no longer be possible, nor radio AM or FM.
Newspapers (what is left of them) would no longer be possible, neither wouild magazines.
A good deal of the internet is supported by ads too.
If you are willing to give up everything that is supported by ads, I suppose it could work.

[–] rapchee@lemmy.world 11 points 14 hours ago

either governments and/or individuals would need to support them, it's hardly impossible

[–] Mr_Dr_Oink@lemmy.world 2 points 10 hours ago

I sometimes wonder about this. If a company can't stay afloat without being paid for by advertisements, if their product can't make enough money on its own to keep the company working, then is that product that important?

I appreciate it doesn't work that way.

I just think if taxes could pay for water, gas, electric, healthcare, roads and infrastructure etc, then maybe we dont really need a fridge that can make a shopping list for us whilst i play doom on the screen.

Maybe we dont need slap chops and shakeweights.

Maybe we dont need all the crap out there that just isnt important.

Does my phone really need a folding screen or web access? Do we really need social media? Or youtube? In some cases, maybe, yes. But in the majority? No. I dont think we do.

[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 4 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Lol.

You are aware that newspapers and magazines currently exist that are entirely behind paywalls right?

Both private subscriptions exist, as does government funding.

It is entirely possible to exist in a world that both has the BBC and has The Guardian...

[–] Captain_Patchy@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago

You can call the cover price on a physical newspaper or magazine a paywall but it's a bit odd...

[–] Asfalttikyntaja@sopuli.xyz 4 points 14 hours ago (3 children)

There is state funded news media called European Broadcasting Union, which can do whatever without ads.

[–] Resol@lemmy.world 1 points 10 hours ago

Yet their flagship television program, the Eurovision Song Contest, is still being sponsored.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] grrgyle@slrpnk.net 4 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (1 children)

It's not a bad point, and also highlights how we're simultaneously spoiled for "free" platforms, while we're surveilled for content and metrics, and bombarded by general and targeted advertising.

It's like, imagine a world where there was a water fountain at the corner of every street, every parking lot, and every bus stop. How convenient that would be! But every time you walked near one they would squawk out a little ad.

Sure without the ads, you wouldn't have the water fountains. But given the choice, I'd rather put up with the inconvenience of having to carry a water bottle when I'm out for a long time.

To me the choice seems obvious. Maybe to some people the ads don't feel like such a intrusion, though?

[–] Captain_Patchy@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago

There is no mechanism by which OTA television can surveil you.

[–] GunValkyrie@lemmy.world 4 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Large corporate owned would be impossible. What you would see are more locally small businesses that get more customers. However things would be more expensive overall at a glance. But I bet we would see general living go up for all.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] frezik@midwest.social 13 points 16 hours ago (9 children)

Even with an adblock and the best privacy controls available, you cannot escape the effects of advertising. Article headlines will still be clickbait. Online recipes will still have long, unnecessary stories at the start. Companies will still want your email for trivial things so they can spam you. There are a hundred ways that advertising affects culture, and it's not something that can change based on individual effort.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] melfie@lemmings.world 6 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Ads are an odd concept—it’s someone paying money to toot their own horn, which most of the civilized world looks down upon. In fact, the best way to sell me your product is to have the humility to tell me its downsides or give me a nuanced explanation of when to buy your product vs. a competitor. Otherwise, it’s always much better to let someone else sing your praises. I do find documentation, videos, and other factual information about a product to be the best possible sales pitch—give me an accurate picture of it, and if it’s really any good, I might just buy it. If I think you’re trying to bullshit me, I’ll assume your product has to be shit, or otherwise you’d just tell me the facts.

[–] letzlo@feddit.nl 3 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

All you said might be true. But still, ads work. So well even that we run millions of websites from their earnings. Don’t even start on shows and sports. It’s insane.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 17 hours ago

Cool idea but we live under the violent imposition of capitalism.

[–] Nerrad@lemmy.world 18 points 19 hours ago

Lets try it and see what happens. No advertising seems like a reasonable response to advertising everywhere all the time.

[–] buddascrayon@lemmy.world 17 points 19 hours ago (4 children)

I would argue that what this article is advocating for isn't a definitive end to advertisement per se. Truthfully that would be impossible.

What we truly need are iron clad privacy laws that impose unbreakable regulations with destructive fines when violated by companies and organizations.

[–] InfiniteHench@lemmy.world 10 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Adding “destructive fines” to my list

[–] RangerJosey@lemmy.ml 9 points 17 hours ago

If fines aren't a percentage of quarterly or annual earnings they don't matter. Ten million to a company earning billions isn't even a rounding error. But 30% of their gross. They'd respect that. They'd have to.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›