this post was submitted on 19 Sep 2023
1176 points (98.8% liked)

Antiwork

9031 readers
2 users here now

  1. We're trying to improving working conditions and pay.

  2. We're trying to reduce the numbers of hours a person has to work.

  3. We talk about the end of paid work being mandatory for survival.

Partnerships:

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 44 points 2 years ago (2 children)

The entire marketing industry

[–] dingus@lemmy.ml 50 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

The entire marketing industry is gross and needs to die.

But let's not act like it's pointless. Propaganda (advertising) works, and works well.

[–] Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 16 points 2 years ago (2 children)

it works, but it only works because we're propping up capitalism with the bodies of workers. Marketing serves no fundamental purpose for society

[–] dingus@lemmy.ml 29 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Nah, it works because our understanding of human psychology is real, and lots of people are susceptible to the messaging of advertising.

Propaganda (what advertising is at its core) still works under communism, it doesn't suddenly stop working because capitalism no longer exists. If that was true, images like the one below wouldn't have needed to exist to help promote the communist message. (Propaganda isn't always inherently evil, sometimes it's purpose is to help spread a political message that can be positive.)

I agree, marketing serves no fundamental purpose for society, because it's essentially just lies to sell a product or service. However I vehemently disagree it only works because of capitalism.

[–] meyotch@slrpnk.net 4 points 2 years ago

Good framing of the issue. It is just strategic dissemination of information. That is morally neutral. The strategy, however, can be motivated by good or ill intentions. This is a good distinction to make.

[–] JokeDeity@lemm.ee -3 points 2 years ago (2 children)

If your product is good, it will sell itself with the most minimal of advertising.

[–] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml 16 points 2 years ago (1 children)

This demonstrably untrue otherwise there would be no reason for huge market controlling products to advertise. I don't believe in the wisdom of the markets and I'm not sure why you do.

[–] scubbo@lemmy.ml 8 points 2 years ago

That's not the case. The following two statements can be simultaneously true:

  • a sufficiently-good product would sell through word-of-mouth
  • corporate executives are not satisfied with the small amount of purchases this would generate, because they want more profit.

Advertising is a way to generate morepurchases (and so more profit), but it might be increasing from a non-zero amount.

I don't think that the person you're replying to is entirely correct (some products or markets really do require advertising to make consumers aware), but they're closer to right than they are to wrong on a level playing field. But if the other side is using advertising, you basically have to do the same in order to remain competitive.

[–] idiomaddict@feddit.de 3 points 2 years ago

The fax machine was around in the 1800s. If they’d realized, they could have done wonders, but the product never really caught on until it was about thirty years from being replaced.