6 ms·

Anyone who tries to manipulate anyone in any matter is a fool. Sales is necessary to every organisation however. There is no "built it and they will come". Ma

by karles 2y ago

Anyone who tries to manipulate anyone in any matter is a fool. Sales is necessary to every organisation however. There is no "built it and they will come". Marketing in my mind should be about providing easy access to the right information so that human beings can make informed decisions. Sometimes you have to "push" that information or your message to the people you want to reach. Not everyone will magically find your wisdom.

auggierose 2y ago
So in what category were those commercials for smoking? Clearly these campaigns were based on disinformation, manipulation, and they were highly successful.
- throw0101d 2y ago
  > So in what category were those commercials for smoking? Awareness, (increasing) interest and desire: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purchase_funnel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purchase_funnel Smoking dates back millennia: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_smoking https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_smoking It is was just more productized in the (mid-)1900s, just like everything else was.
  - auggierose 2y ago
    If you were aware, you would never smoke. Same for interest. Why would you be interested in a black lung. Furthermore, desire. Not sure what a cowboy riding on a horse has to do with smoking. So, none of those commercials teach you what smoking is actually about. It is about getting you addicted so you become an ATM for big tabacco.
    - throw0101d 2y ago
      > If you were aware, you would never smoke. Not in the 1950s, 60s, and 70s. The Marlboro Man first appeared in 1954: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marlboro_Man https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marlboro_Man
      - auggierose 2y ago
        Not sure what your comment is supposed to mean. If you mean that in 1954 nobody knew about the effects of smoking, you are wrong. The cigarette industry was well aware of it: https://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/21/2/87 https://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/21/2/87
- karles 2y ago
  It seems that your argument is, that some marketing is somewhat malicious - and I agree. But to say that all marketing is ill-intended and manipulative seems way to extreme. "Providing good documentation" could be considered a marketing move, if that was what would set a product apart, and make it interesting to buyers. Making bad ad-copy and intrusive advertising in general is not something I find very interesting personally. That doesn't mean, that it doesn't work, or isn't morally wrong (you mention smoking). Selling and promoting your product is necessary for most companies. And it can be done in a tasteful, informative and non-intrusive manner.
  - auggierose 2y ago
    I just responded to your > Anyone who tries to manipulate anyone in any matter is a fool. and provided a counter example. Of course, commercials don't have to be malicious, and can be informative and a net positive. But commercials rarely are honest sources of information.

by karles 2y ago

auggierose 2y ago

So in what category were those commercials for smoking? Clearly these campaigns were based on disinformation, manipulation, and they were highly successful.

throw0101d 2y ago
> So in what category were those commercials for smoking? Awareness, (increasing) interest and desire: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purchase_funnel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purchase_funnel Smoking dates back millennia: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_smoking https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_smoking It is was just more productized in the (mid-)1900s, just like everything else was.
- auggierose 2y ago
  If you were aware, you would never smoke. Same for interest. Why would you be interested in a black lung. Furthermore, desire. Not sure what a cowboy riding on a horse has to do with smoking. So, none of those commercials teach you what smoking is actually about. It is about getting you addicted so you become an ATM for big tabacco.
  - throw0101d 2y ago
    > If you were aware, you would never smoke. Not in the 1950s, 60s, and 70s. The Marlboro Man first appeared in 1954: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marlboro_Man https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marlboro_Man
    - auggierose 2y ago
      Not sure what your comment is supposed to mean. If you mean that in 1954 nobody knew about the effects of smoking, you are wrong. The cigarette industry was well aware of it: https://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/21/2/87 https://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/21/2/87
karles 2y ago
It seems that your argument is, that some marketing is somewhat malicious - and I agree. But to say that all marketing is ill-intended and manipulative seems way to extreme. "Providing good documentation" could be considered a marketing move, if that was what would set a product apart, and make it interesting to buyers. Making bad ad-copy and intrusive advertising in general is not something I find very interesting personally. That doesn't mean, that it doesn't work, or isn't morally wrong (you mention smoking). Selling and promoting your product is necessary for most companies. And it can be done in a tasteful, informative and non-intrusive manner.
- auggierose 2y ago
  I just responded to your > Anyone who tries to manipulate anyone in any matter is a fool. and provided a counter example. Of course, commercials don't have to be malicious, and can be informative and a net positive. But commercials rarely are honest sources of information.