Mildly Interesting

19685 readers

1420 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

marcar@lemmy.world

WhatsHerBucket@lemmy.world

Jimbabwe@lemmy.ml

1287

What If We Made Advertising Illegal? (simone.org)

submitted 1 day ago by sundrei@lemmy.sdf.org to c/mildlyinteresting@lemmy.world

337 comments fedilink hide all child comments

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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 4 points 4 hours 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.

[–] Initiateofthevoid@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 4 hours 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

[–] buddascrayon@lemmy.world 1 points 35 minutes ago

FDR also came into the presidency after a devastating economical collapse which we are just one ecological disaster away from experiencing.