• Margot Robbie@lemmy.world
    841·
    1 year ago

    But just when you think you are safe from advertisements on your niche technology forum.

    The advertisements followed you here.

    Telling you to buy the “Barbie” movie, now available on Blu-Ray.

    A movie about rediscovering meaning in a meaningless, hypercommercialized world.

    A movie about reappropriating an advertisement into a New Sincerity, free from despair.

    And that’s what I’ve been trying to tell you here for months.

    • bearwithastick@feddit.ch
      69·
      1 year ago

      While the comic combined with the text has a bit of an edgy vibe, I agree with the overall message. Advertising was just decided upon to be an acceptable way to force people to look at whatever. And no, it’s not always an option to “just don’t look at it if you don’t like it”. I fucking hate those advertising TVs that get set up all over my city, they grab your attention even more than regular billboards.

      • seitanic@lemmy.sdf.orgOP
        43·
        1 year ago

        Let’s try that defense for public nudity. People can just choose to not look at it if they don’t like it!

          • jivandabeastA
            22·
            1 year ago

            That’s the point.

            They were making the point that public nudity is illegal even though you can just look away if you don’t agree

            But advertising in public spaces is legal on the basis that you could just look away if you didn’t want to see it

      • DudeDudenson@lemmings.world
        9·
        1 year ago

        They’ve been putting those blinding boards all over the place where I live, I think they’re supposed to dim at night but they’re not properly maintained and fuck whoever thought putting super bright moving images right next to roads is safe and should be allowed.

        That shit is distracting as fuck

        • shalafi@lemmy.worldEnglish
          7·
          1 year ago

          A 12 or 20 gauge shotgun with a 28" barrel, and maybe a full choke, holds a nice pattern when shot from distances, say like from a slowly moving car to something as tall as a billboard.

        • aesthelete@lemmy.world
          14·
          1 year ago

          fuck whoever thought putting super bright moving images right next to roads is safe and should be allowed.

          I agree fuck ads and all but 90% of the drivers are too distracted by their phones to even see the ad. 😜

          Though I guess this might grab the remaining 10% that were trying to actually pay attention to the road (a hypothetical percentage I cannot claim to personally have encountered).

    • redcalcium@lemmy.institute
      181·
      1 year ago

      Fucking up ads with an ad blocker?! Noooo! If you don’t like ads, then you should pay for the subscription to get rid of the ads!

      • Bizarroland@kbin.social
        8·
        1 year ago

        I’ll pay for all of the subscriptions required to not see ads when the companies I work for pay me enough money to afford it.

        Have you seen the prices on these subscription sites?

        Every single website you go to wants $20 a month to not show you ads, and for some all that will do is decrease the number of ads you are shown.

        If you cycle through the same 10 to 15 websites then that’s $200 to $300 a month just to look at the internet that you’re paying $100 a month to look at.

  • rebelsimile@sh.itjust.works
    415·
    1 year ago

    B-but according to lots of people we’re denying the content creators their revenue if we don’t stare at their ads like pathetic little sheep. Won’t somebody think of the advertisers???

    • StupidBrotherInLaw@lemmy.world
      254·
      1 year ago

      Not my fault they decided to work in an exploitative field.

      Abolish slavery? But who will employ the slave masters?!

      • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
        12·
        1 year ago

        Not my fault they decided to work in an exploitative field.

        I thought that was every field under capitalism

        • StupidBrotherInLaw@lemmy.world
          2·
          1 year ago

          I think some are more exploitative than most. I work in a field that isn’t directly exploitative but effectively facilitates exploitation by others. Fields like advertising directly exploit others.

      • AutistoMephisto@lemmy.world
        61·
        1 year ago

        Exactly! Whip cracking isn’t what anyone could call a transferrable skill! They went to school for years to learn how to use it, it’s all they know! If we get rid of slavery, their degrees go to waste!

        Learn to code, slaver!

    • deweydecibel@lemmy.worldEnglish
      122·
      1 year ago

      Content creators aren’t the enemy here, at least not the smaller scale ones. They often have no other sources of revenue.

    • NounsAndWords@lemmy.world
      34·
      1 year ago

      People are taking the piss out of you everyday. They butt into your life, take a cheap shot at you and then disappear. They leer at you from tall buildings and make you feel small. They make flippant comments from buses that imply you’re not sexy enough and that all the fun is happening somewhere else. They are on TV making your girlfriend feel inadequate. They have access to the most sophisticated technology the world has ever seen and they bully you with it. They are The Advertisers and they are laughing at you.

      You, however, are forbidden to touch them. Trademarks, intellectual property rights and copyright law mean advertisers can say what they like wherever they like with total impunity.

      Fuck that. Any advert in a public space that gives you no choice whether you see it or not is yours. It’s yours to take, re-arrange and re-use. You can do whatever you like with it. Asking for permission is like asking to keep a rock someone just threw at your head.

      You owe the companies nothing. Less than nothing, you especially don’t owe them any courtesy. They owe you. They have re-arranged the world to put themselves in front of you. They never asked for your permission, don’t even start asking for theirs.

  • CapeWearingAeroplane@sopuli.xyz
    222·
    1 year ago

    Honestly, this makes me feel good about my habit for peeling off / throwing away those little ad stickers and cards whenever I see them somewhere and people aren’t looking.

    It ain’t much, but it’s honest work.

  • fosforus@sopuli.xyz
    312·
    1 year ago

    I kinda agree with some of the sentiment here, but if you hate the city, is it necessary to live there? I think it’s usually even more expensive than outside the city so you cannot explain it with money.

    • jol@discuss.tchncs.de
      182·
      1 year ago

      Yes, if you like living with people. Why is it OK for cities to be plastered with ads? It’s been shown they are not necessary.

      And it’s not like TV or Youtube where ads are subsidising my experience. Outdoor ads are very rarely subsidising the thing you are experiencing. Sure, maybe ads on buses and bus stops help lower bus costs. But most ads are on buildings and billboards where the city doesn’t benefit from them. And you can’t opt out from riding a bus plastered with ads that cover even the windows making you even more depressed. There’s no bus premium subscription.

  • thorbot@lemmy.world
    534·
    1 year ago

    I can see the headlines now. “This just in! Global advertising halted because of some shitty vandalism! World saved from crushing depressive corporatocracy!”

    Yeah yeah. Fight the power.

    I’m tired of fighting.