|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:I think they mean more that old ads told you about specific products and attributes you might want from the product, real or implied. Ok, I guess to help clarify where Im coming from: Most companies now run two kinds of ads, so called "Brand" and usually something like "Campaign" or "Product" or "Response" whatever ads. These aren't always clear cut categories; most automotive ads do both which is why you get some weird aspirational short film and then an intercut about local leasing pricing, but they're how most think about it. The reason that split occurs now in a more pronounced way is not for any particularly insidious reason but technological. In the old days, most ads had to do double duty. In a pre-video, pre national media environment ads need to contain text to explain themselves, as there was no additional source to compliment. The first newspaper ad, for instance, was all text and nothing else. As more tech and info can be presented to consumers, the need for that declines. A company can run an ad with product dimensions, but for the person who needs that, its on Amazon why waste the time? In the old days if Im ordering out of a catalog, I drat well need more details and theres no "click here for more info" so an ad needs to convey that to me in the one chance it gets. Even then, without looking it up its probably hard to figure out what the below is for, but its part of the advertising that created the aspirational ideal for men* of the Leyendecker Man back in the 1920s. All thats clear is these are sharp, working men and the brand name and its not particularly a rare example. Most holiday themed things from the era like all that Santa art people love is just old ad material. This isn't even touching various patriotic propaganda which has been around since time immemorial with no words that hangs around the museums of the world. Propoganda is typically the ultimate branding exercise; nations are brands and must be defended. So to me, the modern advertising trend with more cleanly defined "branding" elements isn't particularly new or inventive. Its just at this particular point in time the people making and receiving ads understand them in a shared language** and the landscape which those ads inhabit allow them to be constructed this way. That all said, corporate brand messaging is typically a big ol waste of money imo. *Leyendecker was gay as hell a fact seemingly lost on conservatives who still use imagery directly inspired by him to define masculinity and I laugh every time it happens. I love my big gay Chad **Viewers today understand how films are constructed, so a short ad doesn't have to explain montage to people so that it can use it to show many happy people or have a voice over go " this people are happy due to brandisol" Barudak fucked around with this message at 08:53 on Jan 21, 2021 |
#
?
Jan 21, 2021 08:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 22:33 |
|
|
Since political ads came up again, reminder that politicians are exempt from the do not call list. Also, I think older ads sold a "brand" just as much as modern ones do. Maybe not so much as a brand but an image associated with that brand, which is close to the same thing. I'm thinking of The Marlboro Man (tough macho guy), Tang (astronauts drink it!), Sears kitchen appliances (Superwife: cooking and housework are FUN!), Colt45 (for smooth black guys), Lowenbrau (a higher class beer), Prell shampoo (for really pretty girls!) and "Designer" Jeans like Jordache vs. tough guy/workin man jeans like Wrangler or Levis. Lava Soap: for hard workin manly men. Stuff like that. Where the brand becomes the person's identity, or at least part of it. Right Guard deodorant and Old Spice cologne were for manly men. Those other brands are for pussies who don't get laid. You don't wanna be a pussy do you? You can ascertain a lot about a person just looking at their items at a grocery check out counter, in part based on the brands. You can generally tell if they're single, have kids, are on a tight budget, have pets, certain health concerns, etc. Sure, a lot of that is just based on the items themselves but part of it is also the brands they select, many of which have been absorbed into that person's identity. I need the story on how this guy got a modeling gig. Jesus Christ. "Yeah, hello, talent agency? Yeah, I need guy that gives me that Gabe Kaplan, Sonny Bono look but it's a music ad so maybe mix in some Frank Zappa, John Oates and Jim Croce. Croce just died, right? Also, if we could get a Groucho Marx mustache and maybe just a touch of Doug Henning, that'd be great. We really don't want him to look goofy wearing these headphones. Thanks." BiggerBoat fucked around with this message at 12:29 on Jan 21, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2021 12:25
|
|
|
CMYK BLYAT! posted:Yah old ads are nice and quaint with their text descriptions of what the product is: Yeah, now you have like, steakums twitter going for like 8 months as near purely posting legitimately good lessons on media literacy then calling their own product beef sheets and saying they are gross and make you fat. Just never even mentioning the product and not even positively when they do. New advertising just wants you to engage with the company and doesn’t even care about even mentioning anything specific
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2021 13:10
|
|
|
Those wordy ads from the past are interesting, because as much as they were full of misinformation or even outright lies, they sold the product by telling you about its features and benefits, how it would help you in your daily life or provide some other real tangible benefit, whether that was easier dishwashing or better fuel economy or something else. They made an actual case for why you should buy something, even if their relationship to the truth was often very loose. Newer ads cut down on the text, because as Barudak wrote, they were no longer trying to sell you on the merits of the product itself, they were trying to sell you an identity and a feeling. Marketers realized that people respond much better to feelings than facts. Then text-filled ads came back, but now they're literally trying to masquerade as editorial content of whichever magazine or website runs them, with barely visible "advertising" or "sponsored content". So what seems to be an article about weight loss is just a full page ad about a specific product, worded to initially seem like a proper article, before transitioning to a "but luckily there's a new product that can help you" message. The completely underhanded version of this is of course marketers paying magazines/websites to astroturf. I wish advertising and marketing would just die off completely, but if ads have to exist, I want them to be clearly marked and clearly delineated from editorial content, and I want them to be limited in how eye-catching they can be. Text-only ads preferable. BiggerBoat posted:I need the story on how this guy got a modeling gig. Jesus Christ. It was the 1970s.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2021 13:32
|
|
|
Other countries outside the US manage significantly more restrictive and transparent influence peddling advertising, its not an impossible dream. That said by a pretty wide margin I would assume text only ads to be the best performing ones so switching to that is not going to do as much as you might hope. A somewhat amusingish thing is that GDPR forced companies to transition their advertising models to a more effective one and improve their entire business which they were (and are) still resisting as hard as they can because it takes work instead of lazily wasting money. Barudak fucked around with this message at 14:20 on Jan 21, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2021 14:17
|
|
|
I'd completely forgotten about those cheesy print ads that were laid out and designed to look like a feature in whatever publication it was. And then the tiny 6 point "ADVERTISEMENT" at the bottom. Not sure why but feels like a special type of lovely deception in a medium filled with lovely deception. EDIT: How does everyone feel these days about filling up their gas tank? I don't know about you, but I love having to "see cashier" when my card won't read but that TV screen loads up a big as telling me I need a 32 oz soda! I wonder what they could pay their workers if they didn't have to install a computer screen telling me to buy more poo poo I don't need? How about some lottery tickets, poor person? BiggerBoat fucked around with this message at 00:52 on Jan 22, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2021 14:47
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:
Hate it. It’s usually second or third button down to mute the autoplaying videos. I pay for no-ads on the sites I use regularly, including youtube, run pihole at home, have 1Blocker on my phone (btw it can hide comments on a ton of sites, which is a huge quality of life increase), and I still see ads in places like gas pumps. It’s so frustrating and the first implementation of AR that blocks ads in realtime can have all my money. That being said, my livelihood depends on my employer continuing to grow, and they rely on advertising as part of that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2021 18:45
|
|
|
Brain Curry posted:Hate it. It’s usually second or third button down to mute the autoplaying videos. Everyone's does. It loving sucks. I'm gonna look up 1Blocker so thanks for that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2021 19:45
|
|
|
Anyone see cable TV ads recently? I hadn't in forever, and going back, they're so much more obnoxious than I remember. The ad breaks are as long as the program, and often as not it's the same loving goddam ads every single break. How much money can this possibly be making in 2021?
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2021 20:53
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:Anyone see cable TV ads recently? I hadn't in forever, and going back, they're so much more obnoxious than I remember. The ad breaks are as long as the program, and often as not it's the same loving goddam ads every single break. How much money can this possibly be making in 2021? Not really, thank god. I canceled my cable 4 years ago and haven't missed it once. I used to enjoy football on it but already wrote about that and don't really miss that either. If there's really something I want to see, there's always a way and I'll see it eventually. Even now my Netflix and Prime queues are filled with enough unwatched poo poo to see me thru a COVID lockdown. But every once in a blue moon I'll happen by a TV playing somewhere and, good lord, you're right. Radio is the same way. I listen to local sports talk every now and again and the station plays the same 5 ads. Not even exaggerating. Local issues affecting my community seem to be: Buying a gun IRS debt/Consolidation Buying dirt for your property (?) Suing your HOA Cleaning your heating and air ducts PIP prints things
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2021 21:12
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:Not really, thank god. I canceled my cable 4 years ago and haven't missed it once. I used to enjoy football on it but already wrote about that and don't really miss that either. If there's really something I want to see, there's always a way and I'll see it eventually. Even now my Netflix and Prime queues are filled with enough unwatched poo poo to see me thru a COVID lockdown. Radio is so chock-full of ads these days, and I don't think the streaming model for artists is really fair, so I still buy CD's (or buy digitally through Bandcamp). At least on the radio the ads are for a general audience. As a 30 year old woman, on the internet all I see are ads for:
For the record, I am not pregnant, I have no plans to get pregnant, my spelling and grammar are fine for someone who spends too much time on the internet, I have no interest in buying in on a scam diet plan and my skincare regime hasn't changed at all in the past few years. This doesn't seem so bad, until you think about this: What if you're a woman who would like to have a child, yet cannot? Can you imagine how unbelievably hurtful it is to be on the receiving end of targetted ads about pregnancy, motherhood, etc and be reminded that something that comes naturally for a substantial proportion of your demographic does not for you? At least if you hate children/don't want them, you can laugh and click 'not interested', but these ads eventually do come back into your feed depending on what data companies collect about you, meaning there is a good chance sensitive topics end up appearing in your social media/general internet experience again. This week I looked up buying a pocketknife for my brother for his birthday and now I get Leatherman ads, and at least it's for something that's kinda cool? But if my brother had died or been seriously hurt after being stabbed with a Leatherman pocket knife, I wouldn't be thrilled even though I know they're a tool, not a toy. I don't really hate ads so much as I don't like people making assumptions based upon my age/gender/etc and trying to use that to market to me. Sometimes, ads can be useful - like I don't mind if I've signed up for the fan page for a band and I receive ads about them coming to play in my town, because that information might be something I'm actually interested in, but there's something really uncool about receiving unsolicited baby-having ads. As a side note - ads making everything terrible isn't exactly new. The Star Wars Holiday Special became the monstrosity it was partially because so many advertisers wanted to get on board they had to stretch a 60 minute show into 98 minutes of content.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2021 03:33
|
|
|
I don't recall ever seeing a Leatherman ad, but like a Nintendo Switch, it's not something you have to advertise. Having watched those "anti-"smoking ads, I've come to the conclusion that they're designed to make non-smokers smoke out of spite.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2021 03:38
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:Anyone see cable TV ads recently? I hadn't in forever, and going back, they're so much more obnoxious than I remember. The ad breaks are as long as the program, and often as not it's the same loving goddam ads every single break. How much money can this possibly be making in 2021? BiggerBoat posted:Not really, thank god. I canceled my cable 4 years ago and haven't missed it once. So did a ton of other people. TV advertising is way less useful than it used to be. For consumer products, it used to be a direct tie to sales. Now, not so much.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2021 03:55
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:So did a ton of other people. It's still the primary method of funnelling political donations to various subhumans.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2021 04:01
|
|
|
Tubgoat posted:Having watched those "anti-"smoking ads, I've come to the conclusion that they're designed to make non-smokers smoke out of spite. I honestly think there needs to be research on this, because you're at least the third person in this thread to mention that (or at least to make former-smokers go back). I also think the plain packaging laws for tobacco that we have now in Canada are counter-effective. For one thing, they've made it very austere, adult, and classy. White text on a military green/brown background. It places it as a luxury product, not requiring the lurid, colorful advertising of other products. And this is a lesson that could've been learned from Iceland, where Brennevin was sold by law with white text on a black background. That regulation has since been eliminated, but that label has been maintained and is now somewhat iconic all over the world. I feel like if they wanted to make the packs visually unpleasant, orange and green stripes with pink Comic Sans text on it probably would've been more effective.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2021 04:12
|
|
|
I like your packaging idea, that sounds wretched. I can see why it would trigger former smokers, but they're so over-the-top lame and dumb that surely they're designed to cause teenagers to say "Oh yeah? gently caress you!" and grab their parents' cigarettes and start smoking it to the filter in one drag.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2021 04:29
|
|
|
The value of advertising is that it tells you the exact opposite of what the advertiser actually thinks. For example: If the advertisement says "This is not your father's Oldsmobile," the advertiser is desperately concerned that this Oldsmobile, like all other Oldsmobiles, appeals primarily to old farts like your father. If an advertisement shows a group of cool, attractive youngsters getting excited and high-fiving each other because the refrigerator contains Sunny Delight, the advertiser knows that any real youngster who reacted in this way to this beverage would be considered by his peers to be the world's biggest dipshit. And so on those rare occasions when advertising dares to poke fun at the product-as in the classic Volkswagen Beetle campaign-it's because the advertiser actually thinks the product is pretty good. If a politician ever ran for president under a slogan such as "Harlan Frubert: Basically, He Wants Attention," I would quit my job to work for his campaign. (From the voluminous wisdom of Dave Barry)
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2021 04:30
|
|
|
Tubgoat posted:I like your packaging idea, that sounds wretched. The oddest thing is that white text on a dark green background, specifically in the Canadian context, is classic. Export, one of the biggest brands here, started out like that and didn't really move so far from it at any point, and if you could smoke the "green death" then you were a badass, a real man. Banning slim cigarettes in conjunction with that seems to be aiming at stopping women from smoking, while feeding into literally every aspect of toxic masculinity that's led to men smoking for decades.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2021 04:35
|
|
|
Women should smoke jazz cigarettes exclusively. So should men, and everyone within or outside the binary Unless they have an allergy, I suppose.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2021 04:41
|
|
|
I remember I caught the tail end of a radio program about advertising and what/who it's for, what it's actually trying to achieve and how it works. But the bit I heard was about how advertising was viewed by the ordinary person in the last decades of the Soviet Union. Obviously it was a centrally planned and organised economy, so there was less variety and less choice for any given category of 'stuff', and even products sold under different brand names were often identical to each other in design and function but just made in different factories. In the 70s and 80s the central planning resolutely failed to keep track of demand, with the result that virtually all consumer goods, luxuries and non-essentials were in short supply. Fixed official prices led to a thriving black market that was widely used but never publicly acknowledged. The result was that advertising was entirely unnecessary - buyers knew what limited range of stuff was theoretically available and you couldn't actually buy it if you wanted to while producers could shift everything they made and then some several times over. For several generations of people in the Soviet bloc advertising had the exact opposite effect that it's supposed to - it discouraged you from buying whatever was being advertised. Because the only reason that the (state-controlled) media would carry an advert was if a product was so terrible that even hard-up comrades didn't want it so the system had surplus production. Anything being advertised was something so useless, outmoded or undesirable that it wasn't even being sold on the black market.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2021 05:16
|
|
|
BalloonFish posted:I remember I caught the tail end of a radio program about advertising and what/who it's for, what it's actually trying to achieve and how it works. And yet tobacco companies from the west made huge, huge inroads very quickly. Because they were able to sell a functionally identical product -- cigarettes -- that promised you would be cool and good and sophisticated if you smoked them. Then there was a backlash and JTI made a brand based on Russian patriotism, to pick up that side of the market too.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2021 05:24
|
|
|
Cigarettes are a product where, pretty much inherently, any packaging law will result in that style seeming cool. It is cool to dress and look like rebels. By the way my favorite current metric I have to pretend like I give a poo poo about is "cost per friend" because my god its just funny on its face.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2021 10:14
|
|
|
Barudak posted:Cigarettes are a product where, pretty much inherently, any packaging law will result in that style seeming cool. It is cool to dress and look like rebels. What's a friend run you these days? Does a page follow cost something more or less than a group membership? Is it still 1 like = 1 prayer?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2021 11:29
|
|
|
Fuschia tude posted:What's a friend run you these days? Does a page follow cost something more or less than a group membership? Is it still 1 like = 1 prayer? Depends on the brand but around 100-300 yen or so. The best part is I have access to the reporting as well so I can see how many "friends" have blocked the account and let me just say not many people are getting invited to [brand]'s birthday party. People are very stupid but they're not stupid the way lots of marketing managers think.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2021 11:59
|
|
|
I think plain packaging should be mandated for everything, as basic as possible and optimized for the lowest overall environmental impact. Plain brown/off-white paper/cardboard with a standardized typeface and text sizing/placement. Standardized reusable bottles for liquids, refill stations at stores for liquids that customers can safely handle. Standardized containers for bulk purchases of flour and other dry goods. One can dream of such a wonderful system.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2021 13:58
|
|
|
Of the top of my head, there's a number of problems with that system, some of which already exist with the plain tobacco packaging law: 1) It's more difficult to make sure you get the thing you're actually after, because without the ability to communicate that graphically, two similar products can look hugely alike. This has been a particular problem with tobacco products; it's a nightmare for smokers and employees alike to locate the specific product someone is asking for. Everything would have to be organized alphabetically, and god forbid something got out of order. 2) It entrenches the most established brands, making loads of money for the largest companies with some of the worst practices and making it harder for smaller producers to compete. To add to the issue above, I can imagine companies paying money for better shelf-placement (and by imagine it, I mean they already do and it will get worse). 3) It's incredibly easy to make counterfeit goods when packaging is standardized. To use plain tobacco packaging as an example again: now that every pack looks exactly the same and those standards are public, organized crime can trivially produce packs that look identical to the real thing -- and they are doing it. 4) It's not accessible. Lots of people, more than you'd expect, struggle with literacy. Without providing the means to visually differentiate packaging, you've just made life a lot more difficult for those people. 5) Contamination and freshness will be an issue for bulk purchases of both liquids and dry goods, and the space/complexity required for such a system will eliminate a lot of smaller niche products. It occurs to me this would be a particular issue in the case of things like gluten-free items, and handling of potential allergens, but also for things that you simply don't need a lot of. For dishwashing liquid, this would probably work fine; for fish sauce, which no one is going through in huge quantities, the idea of having a large reservoir with a tap of some kind sounds absurd. I think there should absolutely be more standardization in sizes, materials, etc. to allow for reduced environmental impact, but I don't think that extends to making everything as plain as possible.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2021 15:33
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Of the top of my head, there's a number of problems with that system, some of which already exist with the plain tobacco packaging law: I agree with most of your points, but to be fair, organised crime is already doing this - apparently a substantial amount of olive oil consumed a year is fake. I believe the same goes for honey and some types of alcohol. Yeah sure a standardised bottle might make it slightly easier, but it's often happening long before it gets bottled/preserved/shipped.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2021 15:45
|
|
|
froglet posted:I agree with most of your points, but to be fair, organised crime is already doing this - apparently a substantial amount of olive oil consumed a year is fake. I believe the same goes for honey and some types of alcohol. Yeah sure a standardised bottle might make it slightly easier, but it's often happening long before it gets bottled/preserved/shipped. That's very true, and tobacco products were also being counterfeited well before the plain packaging law, it's just that this makes it so, so much easier and increases the number of points at which it can be successfully accomplished.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2021 15:49
|
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:I think plain packaging should be mandated for everything, as basic as possible and optimized for the lowest overall environmental impact. Isn't there a Canadian company that does that - a whole range of groceries that are packaged in plain bright yellow with black text that just says "Diet Soda", "Waffles", "Orange Juice" or whatever? Fake edit: I looked it up and it is the appropriately-named 'no name' range by Loblaw's. They now do gourmet stuff like escargot and French jam in the same style apparently. (A bit like here in the UK where posh supermarket Waitrose has its entry-level 'Essentials' range which includes stuff like Cypriot three-milk halloumi, a set of four large wine glasses and two sorts of pâté each from a different region of Belgium.) Of course that works as a marketing strategy when no one else is doing it, your packaging stands out on the shelves and the whole concept is so distinctive that it sticks in the mind of someone who lives 4000 miles away on another continent who has been to Canada once over a decade ago. Wouldn't be so strong if everything was like that. I absolutely agree with the principal though - there's a huge amount of wasted resources and effort in offering a profusion of mostly needless choice and then trying to get the customer to slavishly only buy one of the offerings. It occurred to me re-reading my USSR post that the thing of products being identical but only differing in name and the colour of the plastic it was moulded from isn't really all that different to the situation today where virtually everything on your average supermarket shelf is ultimately made by one of a handful of multinational conglomerates each of which owns half a dozen different brands of laundry powder.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2021 17:00
|
|
|
BalloonFish posted:Isn't there a Canadian company that does that - a whole range of groceries that are packaged in plain bright yellow with black text that just says "Diet Soda", "Waffles", "Orange Juice" or whatever? Yes, and we've made fun of it to create a Canadian gang tag just recently! But, that, in itself, is marketing. A basic package like that communicates that "this is a basic and affordable version of whatever the thing is, and it will satisfy the need you have for this product without being flashy about it." That may or may not actually be the case. Now, one thing I'd like to talk about is the "mostly needless choice" aspect of your post. Needless for whom? I would hazard a guess that it's an application of the Pareto Principle: 80% of distinctions are irrelevant to any one person, but the 20% which are relevant change from person to person.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2021 17:10
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Yes, and we've made fun of it to create a Canadian gang tag just recently! But, that, in itself, is marketing. A basic package like that communicates that "this is a basic and affordable version of whatever the thing is, and it will satisfy the need you have for this product without being flashy about it." That may or may not actually be the case. Here's a choice: one brand of whole wheat breakfast cereal, and nobody goes hungry, or 17 different variations on cheerios and, well, take a look around you today.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2021 17:19
|
|
|
I’m sure General Mills would hurl themselves into humanitarian aid and slash prices across the board if they became even more of a monopoly thanks to this bigbrain proposal
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2021 17:28
|
|
|
It's frankly astonishing how much the public consciousness tropes obvious [bad] manipulation such as MLM or Nigerian email scams, but ignores the more subtle and effective manipulation that we all are exposed to every day.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2021 17:29
|
|
|
hexate posted:It's frankly astonishing how much the public consciousness tropes obvious [bad] manipulation such as MLM or Nigerian email scams, but ignores the more subtle and effective manipulation that we all are exposed to every day. I have a whole separate hard on for MLM's and their tactics. It's come up a few times in the scam thread. ... Hey, anybody remember when you could go to the movies and the movie began at the scheduled start time? I don't. Actually I do but it was a long time ago. Previews are one thing but even those the theater used to show BEFORE the 8pm start time listed in the paper. It was letting you know "hey, movie's about to start. Grab your snacks, find your seat and get your poo poo together". I don't go to many movie theaters anymore (maybe 1 or 2x a year) but every time I go, this poo poo gets worse. You start with the Powerpoint slide show of local businesses which, ok, fine. This is 20 minutes before start time so no biggie. 8pm start time, what do we get? Car ad, soda ad, refreshment stand ad, PSA ad, another ad...then...10 or 15 more minutes of previews. I kind of like trailers but they go on and on and on. Then another ad. I can be almost 30 minutes late for a movie and not miss poo poo most times. If I see an 8:00 movie with a 90 minute run time I typically don't get out of there until 10:15 or so somehow.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2021 17:48
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:I’m sure General Mills would hurl themselves into humanitarian aid and slash prices across the board if they became even more of a monopoly thanks to this bigbrain proposal I mean of course it's a given that the food production and distribution chains are nationalized in this instance
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2021 17:49
|
|
|
hexate posted:It's frankly astonishing how much the public consciousness tropes obvious [bad] manipulation such as MLM or Nigerian email scams, but ignores the more subtle and effective manipulation that we all are exposed to every day. If's like complaining about day-to-day life; you're really just finding a million different ways to complain about capitalism. In my realised fully automated luxury gay space communism, we wouldn't have a infinite identical products under different brands, we'd have one kind of product and it would be the best possible of that substance or thing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2021 17:53
|
|
|
Lib and let die posted:I mean of course it's a given that the food production and distribution chains are nationalized in this instance A few notes here: 1) If you're trying to sell people on socialism, "there will only be one variety of breakfast cereal" is probably not the very best way to go about it. 2) In terms of "successful manipulation," here we have a person who has been so successfully manipulated by capitalists on the subject of socialism that, even though he supports socialism, believes obvious lies such as "there will be no consumer choice or brand differentiation." Tubgoat posted:If's like complaining about day-to-day life; you're really just finding a million different ways to complain about capitalism. The problem with that is that everyone's idea of what is the best possible version of that substance/thing is different. Maybe I like honey nut cheerios and you prefer plain cheerios because you think honey nut cheerios are too sweet. That doesn't make you wrong and me correct, or vise versa; it means we like different things. There is no reason that a cereal factory in a socialist system would produce exactly one variety of cereal; the efficiency of producing only one flavour of cheerios does not outweigh the fact that people will bitch and moan about it. What it does mean is that the factory will not be in competition with other factories, and can therefore focus on producing cereal of various types without having to take steps to ensure they sell more and make more money than a competing factory. I swear no one here has actually visited a socialist country. They, uh, have different brands of things, even if everything is ultimately state-owned.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2021 18:08
|
|
|
PT6A posted:A few notes here: Flavor variants are easy enough to set up, though. I figured you'd go for something obvious like wildly different features of vehicles, but even then, if the goal is not to destroy the planet (and it really seems like it's that, moreso than any nebulous idea of "profit"), parts could be made much more interchangably and easier to customise. You are correct that no one who is trapped in a capitalist hellword has ever been to a socialist country, lol.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2021 18:15
|
|
|
Tubgoat posted:Flavor variants are easy enough to set up, though. I figured you'd go for something obvious like wildly different features of vehicles, but even then, if the goal is not to destroy the planet (and it really seems like it's that, moreso than any nebulous idea of "profit"), parts could be made much more interchangably and easier to customise. Yes, that's exactly my point. Consumer choice doesn't simply vanish under a socialist system; if anything, it just means there's fewer bullshit distinctions between things which are very similar. There can even still be "prestige" brands, because money doesn't vanish, it just doesn't go towards enriching the capital class.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2021 18:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 22:33 |
|
|
Tubgoat posted:You are correct that no one who is trapped in a capitalist hellword has ever been to a socialist country, lol. Except plenty of people have. Is this going to start some "no-true-socialist" argument or... what? Socialist countries exist both presently and historically, it is possible to have visited them, and beyond that, to know things about them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2021 18:21
|
|