this post was submitted on 06 Apr 2025
1412 points (98.2% liked)

Mildly Interesting

19804 readers
175 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
[–] [email protected] 25 points 6 days ago (4 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 17 points 6 days 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).

[–] ThePantser 6 points 6 days 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.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 15 points 6 days 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.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 6 days 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?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 days 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.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days 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.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 6 days ago

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

[–] [email protected] 11 points 6 days 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.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 6 days ago (2 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.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Adding “destructive fines” to my list

[–] [email protected] 9 points 6 days 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.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)

"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.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

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

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 14 points 6 days 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)
[–] [email protected] 14 points 6 days ago (3 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 6 days ago (3 children)

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.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 days ago

I'm yoinking that sugar analogy, explains the issue really well!

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 days ago (2 children)

I think you're drawing the wrong conclusions. Currently you need a lot of capital to market a new product. That shifts the balance of power away from entrepreneurs towards the capitalists. Marketing also has a larger impact on profits than engineering, which leads to non-engineers to gain more promotions and power.

Instead we could have reviews, testing institutions, forums where people exchange opinions. And "pay for play" would be illegal fraud. But there would be constant demand to learn and compare the quality of products, once the focus on emotional manipulation is gone.

And existing brands from conglomerates spend oodles of money to maintain their brands, so you would immediately see a shift in power towards entrepreneurs and new and better products. You'd gain far more than you'd loose.

Another issue is that we are hyperstimulating consumerism which has not just negative effects, but leads to existential risk now.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 6 days ago

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

[–] [email protected] 8 points 6 days 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.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 6 days ago

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

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 days 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...

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 days ago (4 children)

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

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (2 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?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 days 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 (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 6 days 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.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 days 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.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 6 days ago (5 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 6 days ago

I'd take a ban on ads in private spaces, leave my house the fuck alone...i'm trying to get some rest.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 days 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.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 days 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)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days 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.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 days 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.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

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

load more comments
view more: next ›