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.

  • frezik@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    13 minutes ago

    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.

  • O_R_I_O_N@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    36 minutes ago

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

    • pelley@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      20 minutes ago

      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).

      • ThePantser@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 minutes ago

        I’ve been saying that for a long time about MI, were a tourist state for its natural beauty but it’s ruined by all the billboards fucking up our views.

  • buddascrayon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    3 hours ago

    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.

      • RangerJosey@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 hour 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.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 hour ago

      “We need a large group of ideologically committed bureaucrats willing to impose policy in the face of a defiant, intractable established opposition” is simultaneously true and not terribly helpful, unless you can show where these people are coming from.

      Like, we’ve seen instances of this happen before. Elon’s DOGE is a great current example of a group of ideologically dedicated barn burners. The OG FBI was another great example of a department effectively founded to militantly oppose a well-financed and popular opposition. FDR’s court appointees (and his arm-twisting with the threat to further pack the courts) could be considered another.

      But who in the modern political system wants to go head-to-head with multinational corporations (other than the Trump Tariff goons, I guess)? Dems are Pro-Business. Republicans are Pro-Fascist Business. There is no leadership, outside of a handful of die-hards like AOC and Bernie - who could conceivably be both willing and able to execute on these kinds of reforms.

      I wish there was. But this is just pie-in-the-sky dreaming until you can find a municipal or state government with the kind of people engaged enough to rally for it and seek promotion to the federal level on this kind of platform.

      • Initiateofthevoid@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        39 minutes ago

        But who in the modern political system wants to go head-to-head with multinational corporations

        Very few people currently in the modern political system could or would be willing to take them on, true. But we have 2026 to start filling the next House and a third of the Senate with people who would be up to the challenge. We need to primary strong candidates and we need to platform third-party candidates wherever they can actually win.

        To those who say “there will be no more elections” - yes, that’s what they wanted, but what they have actually done was dismantle the government and set the US careening towards economic collapse. With Trump’s brain failing and his administration making idiotic mistakes left and right, we shouldn’t assume they’re going to get everything they wanted exactly how they wanted it.

        These are unprecedented times, but the 1930s were unprecedented times too.

        Progressive government by its very terms must be a living and growing thing, that the battle for it is never-ending and that if we let up for one single moment or one single year, not merely do we stand still but we fall back in the march of civilization.

        Then-governor Franklin D. Roosevelt, May 1930

  • Sunsofold@lemmings.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 hours ago

    YEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSS!

    This feels like I wrote it. I’ve hated advertising for about as long I have been aware of it but I’ve been telling people we should ban it since the first time I saw one of those articles about how everything was becoming clickbait because of advertising. In all that time, the ONLY thing I have ever thought of which would be a negative effect from a ban is the difficulty of getting the word out about a small business. Any other arguments are just dumb. Advertising is inherently harmful to everyone exposed to it, even the advertisers, who have to burn money to make it happen.

  • the16bitgamer@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    6 hours ago

    As someone who had designed and attempted to sell things. On of my key takeaways has always been the lack of awareness or knowledge of my things exists.

    Granted if I put a 50ft build board in the sky it wouldn’t change much. But if I did more than I did… or am doing it would help.

    I saw a metaphor in this thread comparing advertising to Smoking. But I think Sugar is a better comparison. Is it needed? No. But a little will go a long way, and some dishes wouldn’t exists without it. Add to much and it ruins the flavour of the dish and isn’t healthy for the consumer.

    What is needed is balance and where everything has hyper sugar in it isn’t good for anyone. So I do we need a rethink, but eliminating it outright isn’t the solution.

    • FreddyNO@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Wondering about a world where advertising is only allowed on purchasing platforms. Say the consumer wants shoes. They go on this platform to search for shoes, and at that point advertisement is allowed. On this platform you can get related ads, front page ads etc. The moment you step off that platform however no ads are allowed.

      The platforms can be like digital malls. Maybe owned by the government, or possibly functioning like a decentralised platform.

  • FinishingDutch@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    6 hours ago

    I’m definitely in favor of a ban of advertising in public spaces. Spaces that are owned by the collective ‘us’ should remain free of it. Like public squares, roadways, public transit, etc. Those should be commercial free.

    A total ban would be wildly difficult and impractical. It would also widen certain gaps like the rural-urban divide. How would someone in a rural area know an iPhone exists, if the nearest store is a hundred miles away? Or other products that might be beneficial to them?

    I live in a city of 160.000 people. And even here, we simply don’t have every store or every product available. Advertising broadens that horizon considerably.

  • Lit@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    6 hours ago

    I think some kind of mix approach, example some countries ban some kind of advertising. Advertising medical prescription drugs and treatments is illegal in some countries.

    Alternatively companies should pay me to watch their advertisements. Organize events to pay people to watch their advertisement.

    With smart glasses AR and AI we should be able to block out all billboard, posters or it could go the opposite way glasses show all kind of adverts… hmm. We need open source AR smart glasses with adblock.

  • Robbity@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    10 hours ago

    People talk about tech giants, but Facebook and Google are actually advertising giants. They pour much more money into their advertising than they do into r&d.

    Many brands have a cost structure where, for each product sold, more money goes to advertising than to the person who actually made the product. Sometimes 2 or 3 times more. That’s where the battle for attention is taking us, a place where attention from customers is worth much more than the effort of the worker.

    None of this is inevitable, advertising should be heavily taxed and regulated.

  • ZMoney@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Sao Paolo did this in 2006.

    Under the cult of the “Invisible Hand of the Free Market”, the prevailing ideology of neoclassical economics and the modern global economy, advertising is not necessary. Why should a firm have to convince me to buy anything if the market dictates prices and the flow of commodities? Yet here we are.

  • sfu@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Los Angeles county vs Orange county.

    LA allows billboards, OC doesn’t. It just feels so much cleaner and like a breath of fresh air as you drive from LA into OC.

    • JoeBigelow@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Same with Maine, state banned billboards. Makes it super weird when you head south and get assaulted by them in Mass

      • sfu@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        I don’t have a problem with ads, but sometimes it does get be too much and feels a bit assaulty.

  • Lka1988@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    10 hours ago

    I would like meaningful regulation on advertising. Something to the effect of “STOP BLASTING MY FACE WITH ADS EVERY CHANCE YOU GET YOU SCUMFUCKERS”

    There is a gas station nearby who runs non-stop unmutable ads. I don’t go to that gas station anymore.

    • sfu@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      9 hours ago

      I HATE when I am forced to watch commercials, in front of my face on the gas pump, while I am pumping gas into my vehicle. I should really get a discount on my gas for that.