this post was submitted on 25 Aug 2024
551 points (95.8% liked)

WTF

779 readers
1 users here now

The average c/WTF enjoyer

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 104 points 4 months ago (1 children)

This is basically the algorithms of the big tech companies but with extra steps. I guess it greatly illustrates how absurd they actually are and how weird it is to just shrug them off.

[–] [email protected] 83 points 4 months ago (1 children)
[–] blanketswithsmallpox 14 points 4 months ago (3 children)

The best part? Nobody can agree if advertising ala commercials actually works.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil 10 points 4 months ago (1 children)

"Nobody can agree"?

Is this kind of like how nobody can agree on whether we landed on the moon or whether climate change is real?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 months ago (1 children)

My thoughts too. It definitely works. That's why I despise advertising and block all attempts at it. Don't tell me what to think, assholes.

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

Yeah it's really bizarre how we just accept that there's this massive industry dedicated solely to emotionally manipulating people into buying shit. If it wasn't reality and we just saw it portrayed in a sci-fi movie, we'd think "this movie is dumb, why would people ever put up with that kind of bullshit existing?"

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 months ago

Right? Now we have people claiming you have a moral obligation to watch ads because they support X or Y. Bizarre is a good word.

[–] Buddahriffic 8 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Anecdotal, but I've boycotted products or stores because of annoying ads in the past. And even clever or entertaining ads eventually get annoying if they are shown too much.

I block most ads these days, so longer contribute to the negative ad returns like I used to, but I am curious about how many others like me are out there.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 4 months ago (1 children)

My spouse is like that; they're so anti-advertising that they'll close their mobile games once the ad. appears and re-open the game, just to not watch it.

And they're definitely the type to stop buying from a company because the ad.s were annoying.

[–] Buddahriffic 4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Anyone from Canada in the late 90s/early 00s might remember that Canadian Tire guy. His character was kinda a personified commercial, he was just so enthusiastic about the Canadian Tire product that could help this common problem that it was off putting. Even though those windshield wipers that were one curved piece that would conform to the shape of your windshield looked like exactly what I wanted, I didn't step foot in a Canadian Tire until years after they got rid of him.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

That's the one kind of advertisement I think is acceptable. "Here's a product you probably didn't know existed." That's actually informative. Be straight up with me, you have products I might need, tell me what they are and we're done.

The ones that are sneakily trying to make it so I trust a brand with music and high production values are the ones that are disturbing to me. I feel like most companies make both shit products and some good products too. These corporations are massive so it's not like it's just one extremely qualified team of people making all of their products. Different divisions different quality of products, so the brand is meaningless. But somehow branding is the big focus of marketing now and it's all a meaningless waste of time.

[–] Buddahriffic 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, those ads that feel meaningful but really aren't.

Though the worst ones are the ones that use emotional manipulation, like making parents think a new minivan or a can of ground coffee will bring their family back together. I think the "play cool music with extreme visuals to make teenagers think we're cool" also qualifies for emotional manipulation, though it feels a bit less sinister. But the more I think about it, the less I feel like it is more sinister, since they are all preying on complex desires that they imply they will help with but can't really deliver on.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I think the “play cool music with extreme visuals to make teenagers think we’re cool” also qualifies for emotional manipulation, though it feels a bit less sinister.

It's bit more sinister when you consider that they're emotionally manipulating children to buy their products. And they do this knowing that all they need to do is maintain branding to keep that teenager buying that product into adulthood, potentially for the rest of their lives. It's a get 'em while they're young and impressionable kind of approach.

It's all really fucked up when you think about it.

[–] Buddahriffic 1 points 4 months ago

Yeah, that's what I was getting at with the last bit: both are sinister, just one is more obvious than the other.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

That sounds like misinterpretation of studies if I had to guess. If anything maybe it would be how well they work at certain investment levels with breakpoints where it is no longer worth putting in additional money, or the efficacy of CERTAIN types of advertising. But IF they work at all? I am highly suspect of that even being a question. Brands that are well advertised are well known, and people who aren't bothered to do research into every single product they buy are more likely to buy a product they have heard of before.

And if you're an independent creative, like author, artist, musician, developer, and you DON'T advertise, you will sell zero copies of your work.