• bearwithastick@feddit.ch
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      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
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        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
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            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
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        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.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          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
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          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
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      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
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        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.