So no, Time Warner, Cox, Comcast and the like aren't charging you and then showing you ads. They're charging you because you would like access to see the ads your favorite network is showing.
My mom has Comcast cable tv at her house and there is an ad on the channel browser, both the big one and the small one at the bottom of the screen.
+2
Options
jeffinvaKooglercoming this summerRegistered Userregular
Saying "there's ads in everything else" is extremely disingenuous because there's so many layers to most of those other examples that people don't realize.
You know who makes roughly zero dollars from the ads on television? Your cable provider.
NBC, however, is making a ton because it's their network.
When cable companies are giving you access to channels, that's all they're doing - providing you a way to see that television network. They have no control over anything that actually is appearing on the network, like ads. They are literally the middleman getting you a way to see The Food Network. And they make their money off you, by charging you a subscription fee. And maybe a few bucks on the preview channel or whatever they have to tell you whats on now. That's the entire reason every year we see disputes between cable providers and channels.
So no, Time Warner, Cox, Comcast and the like aren't charging you and then showing you ads. They're charging you because you would like access to see the ads your favorite network is showing.
Now if every time you booted up your cable box you were met with a grid of boxes that had random ads in it for McDonalds and State Farm and other stuff before you could get to the channel you wanted? That would be wrong.
And stuff like newspapers and magazines have ads just because its a deeply entrenched business model from way before anyone had television to show ads on. You opened a store, you bought an ad in the paper. Newspapers and magazines cost such little money that there's no way you could EVER charge enough to sustain yourself without a second revenue stream.
But again, if there was a newspaper that had no ads whatsoever, and was doing fine, and supporting itself just fine based on people buying newspapers alone, then that's the one I'd go with because if it was similarly priced to the newspaper full of ads, I would pick the experience that didn't inconvenience me, no matter how slightly.
Cable companies hijack commercials all the time to air stuff they've been paid to air. If you ever see a commercial for your cable/satelitte provider while you're using it, it's most likely one of those commercial slots that they're using for themselves rather than for someone else. Here's Comcast's ad buying website if you want to take a look. They're not only limited to hijacking commercials, they also send messages to your cable/satelitte box to let you know when pay per view movies and shows are happening, their guides often have ads in them, and they'll have popup messages while you're watching stuff that says basically "Press this button on your Remote to get advertised at some more"
The problem with your last conjecture is that there's absolutely no way it'd ever happen in reality due to the way selling advertising works. Companies wouldn't buy adspace on a newspaper that wouldn't get any eyeballs due to being stupid enough to charge as much as the ad-free competition. The point behind selling advertising is to move part of the cost to a behind-the-scenes mechanism so the you have a variable money stream that's seperate from the cost of the good you are selling. This allows you to increase the amount of ads and/or the cost of ads to cover your costs while retaining the same outward cost to the consumer.
Only thing I can really contribute is remembering when I played through Rainbow 6 Vegas 2 around launch and during a section taking place on Freemont street and not being minded by all the current ads because it was pretty true to the location.
But then I popped it back in a few months (maybe a year or two) later and get back to that section and some of the ads were advertisements for "Shoot'em Up". I found that both weird and kinda interesting at the time. And also hearing about Need for Speed and/or Burnout doing something similar.
Oh and then there was Battlefield 2014 that gave you targeted ads based on browser history. I'm sure someone will post the realavent comic shortly...
"Oh you know, Subway. Eat fresh..."
My entire browser history is porn. Your move, EA.
Don't worry they have that covered.
My biggest issues with Xbox ads was the fact that until recently, you had no way of telling MS that you were not interested.
Example: one time I rented Zach and Miri Make a Porno off Xbox. For the next two years I was bombarded with ads for every low budget knockoff of American Pie.
It got to the point where I actually felt my Xbox was insulting my intelligence level.
Edit: Or how about that one time you accidentally clicked on a MLP vid and now all your Youtube suggestions are for MLP?
I guess I just really don't liking targeted ads because they assume to know me much more than they actually do.
Saying "there's ads in everything else" is extremely disingenuous because there's so many layers to most of those other examples that people don't realize.
You know who makes roughly zero dollars from the ads on television? Your cable provider.
NBC, however, is making a ton because it's their network.
When cable companies are giving you access to channels, that's all they're doing - providing you a way to see that television network. They have no control over anything that actually is appearing on the network, like ads. They are literally the middleman getting you a way to see The Food Network. And they make their money off you, by charging you a subscription fee. And maybe a few bucks on the preview channel or whatever they have to tell you whats on now. That's the entire reason every year we see disputes between cable providers and channels.
So no, Time Warner, Cox, Comcast and the like aren't charging you and then showing you ads. They're charging you because you would like access to see the ads your favorite network is showing.
Now if every time you booted up your cable box you were met with a grid of boxes that had random ads in it for McDonalds and State Farm and other stuff before you could get to the channel you wanted? That would be wrong.
And stuff like newspapers and magazines have ads just because its a deeply entrenched business model from way before anyone had television to show ads on. You opened a store, you bought an ad in the paper. Newspapers and magazines cost such little money that there's no way you could EVER charge enough to sustain yourself without a second revenue stream.
But again, if there was a newspaper that had no ads whatsoever, and was doing fine, and supporting itself just fine based on people buying newspapers alone, then that's the one I'd go with because if it was similarly priced to the newspaper full of ads, I would pick the experience that didn't inconvenience me, no matter how slightly.
Cable companies hijack commercials all the time to air stuff they've been paid to air. If you ever see a commercial for your cable/satelitte provider while you're using it, it's most likely one of those commercial slots that they're using for themselves rather than for someone else. Here's Comcast's ad buying website if you want to take a look. They're not only limited to hijacking commercials, they also send messages to your cable/satelitte box to let you know when pay per view movies and shows are happening, their guides often have ads in them, and they'll have popup messages while you're watching stuff that says basically "Press this button on your Remote to get advertised at some more"
The problem with your last conjecture is that there's absolutely no way it'd ever happen in reality due to the way selling advertising works. Companies wouldn't buy adspace on a newspaper that wouldn't get any eyeballs due to being stupid enough to charge as much as the ad-free competition. The point behind selling advertising is to move part of the cost to a behind-the-scenes mechanism so the you have a variable money stream that's seperate from the cost of the good you are selling. This allows you to increase the amount of ads and/or the cost of ads to cover your costs while retaining the same outward cost to the consumer.
Indeed. The problem with the conjecture about ad-free experiences is that what companies have figured out is that people, in aggregate, would rather deal with ads then pay more for a service. The whole point of ads is to increase revenue without costing your consumer any extra. Because people are far more sensitive to increased costs then to increased ads most of the time.
Only thing I can really contribute is remembering when I played through Rainbow 6 Vegas 2 around launch and during a section taking place on Freemont street and not being minded by all the current ads because it was pretty true to the location.
But then I popped it back in a few months (maybe a year or two) later and get back to that section and some of the ads were advertisements for "Shoot'em Up". I found that both weird and kinda interesting at the time. And also hearing about Need for Speed and/or Burnout doing something similar.
Oh and then there was Battlefield 2014 that gave you targeted ads based on browser history. I'm sure someone will post the realavent comic shortly...
"Oh you know, Subway. Eat fresh..."
My entire browser history is porn. Your move, EA.
Don't worry they have that covered.
My biggest issues with Xbox ads was the fact that until recently, you had no way of telling MS that you were not interested.
Example: one time I rented Zach and Miri Make a Porno off Xbox. For the next two years I was bombarded with ads for every low budget knockoff of American Pie.
It got to the point where I actually felt my Xbox was insulting my intelligence level.
Edit: Or how about that one time you accidentally clicked on a MLP vid and now all your Youtube suggestions are for MLP?
I guess I just really don't liking targeted ads because they assume to know me much more than they actually do.
On the youtube thing, you can delete parts of your viewing history (or the whole thing), and the recommendations will adjust accordingly.
Edit: One thing I don't think has been mentioned is how different cultures view political ads. I know that in Japan, political discussion is viewed as tacky and somewhat taboo. I don't know if Microsoft is unaware of this, or (more likely) that they simply don't care.
I think the political ads became a big deal for more specific reasons, though. With a targeted ad for a local politician, you *know* that in some way, your data was tracked so they know your location.
This is called an "IP address"
It is broadcast and logged (though typically not for very long) literally every time you visit anything that requires an internet connection
Then, there's the problem where if the tracking wasn't good enough, they target you with a politician you disagree with (ads are really for brand awareness, meaning you want to advertise to your base and/or you-leaning neutrals), people are going to have the double-down of feeling like they're being tracked *and* that their Xbox is pushing an ideology they don't support.
I get ads for politicians I don't support all the time. They're physical pieces of paper mailed to my mailbox. So I don't see what the issue would be with having them pop up on my XBOX too, although I've never owned an XBOX.
All of our systems have stores in them now, so I don't have a problem with little boxes that say "Here's whats new or on sale in our store." But ads for shit that is completely unrelated? No. That's intrusive and annoying and I don't care for it.
Aw, a bit late, but here's my take: If the ad doesn't impede my gaming in any way (having to move my cursor even one extra space counts) then I don't even acknowledge it. I don't mind product placement though.
That's not just for games to me, though. I pretty much apply that across the board. Advertise all you want as long as it doesn't alter what I'm doing. For some of the more aggressive offenders I will actively avoid their product and try moderately to get a handful of others to do the same.
Marketing needs a massive overhaul. All it is is a bunch of "professionals" that know the correct combination of pretty lights. It's as if awareness is all that matters.
It's the whole paid service with un-related ads thing that gets to me. Ads for games? Sure. Heck, even ads for some of those silly movies or whatever that they offer, why not? But stuff like mcdonalds, in-line with the actual usual UI? That plays videos with sound no less? I'd be annoyed with that on a free service, much less one that you actually pay for
They did this a while back with some older games giving them away for free - far cry, prince of persia, I think one or two more. Ads (actually mcdonalds ones IIRC) but only in the main menu, not the game
Xbox doing not quite gaming ads that were tied back into gaming hasn't bothered me. Toyota wants to tell me about the new car, so I get a free mini-game about driving. Or the Army wants to recruit me so I get something for a shooter. Or even they want to do political stuff last election, so you get some avatar shit. It's obnoxious, but it's at least thematic.
Wholesale introduction of ads into my GAMING space specifically that aren't related to gaming annoys me. Although I guess I agreed already that the One wasn't just for gaming, it was a multimedia hub, so this is them getting back at me?
Xbox doing not quite gaming ads that were tied back into gaming hasn't bothered me. Toyota wants to tell me about the new car, so I get a free mini-game about driving. Or the Army wants to recruit me so I get something for a shooter. Or even they want to do political stuff last election, so you get some avatar shit. It's obnoxious, but it's at least thematic.
Wholesale introduction of ads into my GAMING space specifically that aren't related to gaming annoys me. Although I guess I agreed already that the One wasn't just for gaming, it was a multimedia hub, so this is them getting back at me?
Hey, you are paying for the PRIVILEGE of seeing their ads, right?
It's one of the same problems I have with Hulu. I watch the occasional TV show on Hulu on their free service, but I expect ads when things are free (GAWD Cosmos had so many ads... I wish I watched the Fox stream instead, but I didn't know that the Fox stream had less/no ads). It's paying for a service and then getting ads on top of that... I have a problem with that.
I also don't think "But everything else has ads!" is an excuse, either. I'm not sure where I stand on ads on video game consoles, but I do know that I prefer PlayStation and Steam compared to Xbox because of the decreased (in terms of scope and size) ad space. There are some advertisements on their interface, but they always advertise for another product in the PlayStation®Store or elsewhere on Steam, so I feel like they get a pass on that (rightly or wrongly so).
My first contact with ads in video games was way back when Anarchy Online went Free-To-Play, and they started having ad-space in-game on the bulletin boards to help subsidize the free-to-play content. If you were a subscriber, you could block off the ads, and the positions of the billboards were such that it felt like it was a "natural" part of the landscape (You expect billboards to be on the side of highways or all over Times Square, for example). They even had some weird "in-game concert" on the billboards one time.
I also love the claim "Advertising doesn't affect me", because that's the Lake Wobegone effect or "I'm Special" bias at work. I'm not going to ever say that advertising doesn't work on me, because there is no way for me to know, unless I was the subject of an advertising psychology study (and even then, the results would only be for that specific study). Advertising most likely affects me, because I'm a human being with all the foibles and faults of being human (which includes being susceptible to advertising). Around 40-50% of people believe in the delusion that they are not affected by ads, so this is a common belief, to say the least.
All ads are unacceptable, some ads are unfortunately unavoidable.
But I'm hopeful for a future where we all live in an augmented reality that provides Adblock in meatspace.
No store logos unless you are looking for a specific store or indicated you are looking for a product sold in that store. No "<your city> single? call to be scammed!" signs on telephone poles. No bums begging in the median with their carefully aged cardboard, I'm replacing them with cactaurs!
Imagine how much better the world would be if we didn't have to spend so much of our mental processing power blocking out people who don't give a shit about us except as means to enrich themselves.
Banksy has the best quote about advertising (excerpt)
"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."
Imagine how much better the world would be if we didn't have to spend so much of our mental processing power blocking out people who don't give a shit about us except as means to enrich themselves.
We spend literally no additional 'mental processing power' to filter out advertising in our day to day life
Imagine how much better the world would be if we didn't have to spend so much of our mental processing power blocking out people who don't give a shit about us except as means to enrich themselves.
We spend literally no additional 'mental processing power' to filter out advertising in our day to day life
Imagine how much better the world would be if we didn't have to spend so much of our mental processing power blocking out people who don't give a shit about us except as means to enrich themselves.
We spend literally no additional 'mental processing power' to filter out advertising in our day to day life
Yes you do; you're just not aware of it anymore.
No, it's more that it gets filtered out much like nearly all sensory information does that isn't relevant to us in the moment
Imagine how much better the world would be if we didn't have to spend so much of our mental processing power blocking out people who don't give a shit about us except as means to enrich themselves.
We spend literally no additional 'mental processing power' to filter out advertising in our day to day life
Yes you do; you're just not aware of it anymore.
No, it's more that it gets filtered out much like nearly all sensory information does that isn't relevant to us in the moment
Yes, and that takes mental processing power. Even more for ads which tend to jump up unannounced and unwanted and require you to shift gears suddenly; the "annoyance" feeling at a sudden ad.
They specifically tailor ads to be as eye drawing and attention getting as possible. Most other sensory information doesn't work so specifically along those lines.
Imagine how much better the world would be if we didn't have to spend so much of our mental processing power blocking out people who don't give a shit about us except as means to enrich themselves.
We spend literally no additional 'mental processing power' to filter out advertising in our day to day life
Yes you do; you're just not aware of it anymore.
No, it's more that it gets filtered out much like nearly all sensory information does that isn't relevant to us in the moment
Yes, and that takes mental processing power. Even more for ads which tend to jump up unannounced and unwanted and require you to shift gears suddenly; the "annoyance" feeling at a sudden ad.
They specifically tailor ads to be as eye drawing and attention getting as possible. Most other sensory information doesn't work so specifically along those lines.
Pop up ads for sure will take more effort because like you said the annoyance and weird forcing it into relevance so you process it in at least short term memory. (There is a better term for this but it escapes me)
And yes advertising are usually designed by be attention grabbing (otherwise youre wasting time) and eye catching in visual mediums but the research Ive read and looked at posits that the majority of advertising gets lost into the same noise as individual blades of grass.
Attention in advertising gets a lot of academic research and I can't comment on pop up advertising or similar advertising forced upon you and how a consumer processes it
And yes advertising are usually designed by be attention grabbing (otherwise youre wasting time) and eye catching in visual mediums but the research Ive read and looked at posits that the majority of advertising gets lost into the same noise as individual blades of grass.
To counter that assertion, there is research that shows that even when a consumer is not looking at an ad, they can recall the content of the ad, and that this brand recall is better the longer the user is viewing a page: http://adage.com/article/dataworks/chartbeat-aims-show-publishers-ads-work/240361/
"When an article that contained an ad was placed in front of a reader for five seconds, only 50% of readers were able to identify the advertiser afterward. But when Chartbeat extended viewing time to 15 seconds, about 70% of readers recalled the brand's name. "
It's not well-studied, and it varies based on media viewed (TV ads are different from online ads). But the brain doesn't actually "filter out" anything. Your conscious thought may filter things out (which produces neat things like inattentional blindness), but I don't think we have real control over what we recall from ad exposure.
It's fascinating stuff, and pretty much cutting-edge behavior/psychology/neurology research. Which means that there are fewer definitive answers and more unknown questions.
All ads are unacceptable, some ads are unfortunately unavoidable.
But I'm hopeful for a future where we all live in an augmented reality that provides Adblock in meatspace.
No store logos unless you are looking for a specific store or indicated you are looking for a product sold in that store. No "<your city> single? call to be scammed!" signs on telephone poles. No bums begging in the median with their carefully aged cardboard, I'm replacing them with cactaurs!
Imagine how much better the world would be if we didn't have to spend so much of our mental processing power blocking out people who don't give a shit about us except as means to enrich themselves.
Banksy has the best quote about advertising (excerpt)
"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."
Do you really have to exert yourself to avoid ads in your life? Are they that cumbersome in your daily routine?
And that Banksy quote... is something else. The logic that you can own something because you lay eyes on it? What? And no one asked for permission to place ads on THEIR buildings or on THEIR land because they own it. Why would a company owe us anything? I don't 'follow' this Banksy guy, but he sounds like a rebel without a cause. Hating corporations just for existing.
Ads provide revenue.
Revenue provides resources.
Resources provide jobs.
Jobs create products.
Ads advertise the product.
It's fine to not like ads, that isn't a problem, but I would like to see how economics would work in this ad-free world. How would you learn about new products? How would the little guy get a chance to provide his services in competition with the big guy? I'm not saying it isn't a workable scenario, but we would be hard pressed to gut that kind of system from the world.
I mean, the technology to augment reality to have this "Life ad-block" would mean that someone would have to invest in the tech. Build and test the devices, and then make them producible to the mass market. Once they have the product done, how do you buy it? How do you find about it? How does the investment get returned?
Remove for-profit companies from the equation, and you're left with research groups and charities. How do they spread the word that they are curing disease and need money to help fund sick children and things of that nature?
I for one don't see an issue in properly placed ads in gaming or other mediums for that matter. It's a driving force of modern economics and no one is hitting you in the head with a billboard like someone would a rock.
I get ads for politicians I don't support all the time. They're physical pieces of paper mailed to my mailbox. So I don't see what the issue would be with having them pop up on my XBOX too, although I've never owned an XBOX.
The politician paid to mail me something I immediately throw out. His call really
Im paying fifty bucks for live and the fuckers already lock of PAID streaming media and basic communication behindcthe pay wall. You basically have to buy gold to get any use out of a live account. Why should I have to endure ads? Especially political ones?
I have a podcast now. It's about video games and anime!Find it here.
I get ads for politicians I don't support all the time. They're physical pieces of paper mailed to my mailbox. So I don't see what the issue would be with having them pop up on my XBOX too, although I've never owned an XBOX.
The politician paid to mail me something I immediately throw out. His call really
Im paying fifty bucks for live and the fuckers already lock of PAID streaming media and basic communication behindcthe pay wall. You basically have to buy gold to get any use out of a live account. Why should I have to endure ads? Especially political ones?
Well, you're paying rent so you can have a mailbox too. And if you had a PO Box they'd be mailing ads to that.
I get ads for politicians I don't support all the time. They're physical pieces of paper mailed to my mailbox. So I don't see what the issue would be with having them pop up on my XBOX too, although I've never owned an XBOX.
The politician paid to mail me something I immediately throw out. His call really
Im paying fifty bucks for live and the fuckers already lock of PAID streaming media and basic communication behindcthe pay wall. You basically have to buy gold to get any use out of a live account. Why should I have to endure ads? Especially political ones?
Well, you're paying rent so you can have a mailbox too. And if you had a PO Box they'd be mailing ads to that.
That is a terrible comparison, it is not your landlord/the post office (ie whoever you are paying) that is sending you the mailers. Microsoft profits from your gold subscription and then profits again from the ads.
+1
Options
Dhalphirdon't you open that trapdooryou're a fool if you dareRegistered Userregular
All ads are unacceptable, some ads are unfortunately unavoidable.
But I'm hopeful for a future where we all live in an augmented reality that provides Adblock in meatspace.
No store logos unless you are looking for a specific store or indicated you are looking for a product sold in that store. No "<your city> single? call to be scammed!" signs on telephone poles. No bums begging in the median with their carefully aged cardboard, I'm replacing them with cactaurs!
Imagine how much better the world would be if we didn't have to spend so much of our mental processing power blocking out people who don't give a shit about us except as means to enrich themselves.
Banksy has the best quote about advertising (excerpt)
"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."
Do you really have to exert yourself to avoid ads in your life? Are they that cumbersome in your daily routine?
And that Banksy quote... is something else. The logic that you can own something because you lay eyes on it? What? And no one asked for permission to place ads on THEIR buildings or on THEIR land because they own it. Why would a company owe us anything? I don't 'follow' this Banksy guy, but he sounds like a rebel without a cause. Hating corporations just for existing.
Ads provide revenue.
Revenue provides resources.
Resources provide jobs.
Jobs create products.
Ads advertise the product.
It's fine to not like ads, that isn't a problem, but I would like to see how economics would work in this ad-free world. How would you learn about new products? How would the little guy get a chance to provide his services in competition with the big guy? I'm not saying it isn't a workable scenario, but we would be hard pressed to gut that kind of system from the world.
I mean, the technology to augment reality to have this "Life ad-block" would mean that someone would have to invest in the tech. Build and test the devices, and then make them producible to the mass market. Once they have the product done, how do you buy it? How do you find about it? How does the investment get returned?
Remove for-profit companies from the equation, and you're left with research groups and charities. How do they spread the word that they are curing disease and need money to help fund sick children and things of that nature?
I for one don't see an issue in properly placed ads in gaming or other mediums for that matter. It's a driving force of modern economics and no one is hitting you in the head with a billboard like someone would a rock.
Wait, who is Banksy? I get arguing about ads in specific places, but arguing against ads existing at all? That just screams "30 year old basement dweller rebel without a cause" to me.
All ads are unacceptable, some ads are unfortunately unavoidable.
But I'm hopeful for a future where we all live in an augmented reality that provides Adblock in meatspace.
No store logos unless you are looking for a specific store or indicated you are looking for a product sold in that store. No "<your city> single? call to be scammed!" signs on telephone poles. No bums begging in the median with their carefully aged cardboard, I'm replacing them with cactaurs!
Imagine how much better the world would be if we didn't have to spend so much of our mental processing power blocking out people who don't give a shit about us except as means to enrich themselves.
Banksy has the best quote about advertising (excerpt)
"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."
Do you really have to exert yourself to avoid ads in your life? Are they that cumbersome in your daily routine?
And that Banksy quote... is something else. The logic that you can own something because you lay eyes on it? What? And no one asked for permission to place ads on THEIR buildings or on THEIR land because they own it. Why would a company owe us anything? I don't 'follow' this Banksy guy, but he sounds like a rebel without a cause. Hating corporations just for existing.
Ads provide revenue.
Revenue provides resources.
Resources provide jobs.
Jobs create products.
Ads advertise the product.
It's fine to not like ads, that isn't a problem, but I would like to see how economics would work in this ad-free world. How would you learn about new products? How would the little guy get a chance to provide his services in competition with the big guy? I'm not saying it isn't a workable scenario, but we would be hard pressed to gut that kind of system from the world.
I mean, the technology to augment reality to have this "Life ad-block" would mean that someone would have to invest in the tech. Build and test the devices, and then make them producible to the mass market. Once they have the product done, how do you buy it? How do you find about it? How does the investment get returned?
Remove for-profit companies from the equation, and you're left with research groups and charities. How do they spread the word that they are curing disease and need money to help fund sick children and things of that nature?
I for one don't see an issue in properly placed ads in gaming or other mediums for that matter. It's a driving force of modern economics and no one is hitting you in the head with a billboard like someone would a rock.
Wait, who is Banksy? I get arguing about ads in specific places, but arguing against ads existing at all? That just screams "30 year old basement dweller rebel without a cause" to me.
I think you're getting it wrong if you summarise Banksy's point as "Get rid of advertising", because that is literally not what he's saying. "It’s yours to take, re-arrange and re-use" is an entirely different point." It's about subverting advertising, being creative with it, remixing and reframing it in real life - which, admittedly, from the perspective of the advertisers, means defacing it. That's still an (naively?) idealistic anti-consumerist, anti-capitalist stance (reclaiming public space vs. privatising it), but it's primarily about not being the passive recipient of advertising. Saying that his argument is about "Ads are bad, get rid of them" is a strawman - Banksy's critique is more subtle than that.
Thirith on
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
I get ads for politicians I don't support all the time. They're physical pieces of paper mailed to my mailbox. So I don't see what the issue would be with having them pop up on my XBOX too, although I've never owned an XBOX.
The politician paid to mail me something I immediately throw out. His call really
Im paying fifty bucks for live and the fuckers already lock of PAID streaming media and basic communication behindcthe pay wall. You basically have to buy gold to get any use out of a live account. Why should I have to endure ads? Especially political ones?
Well, you're paying rent so you can have a mailbox too. And if you had a PO Box they'd be mailing ads to that.
That is a terrible comparison, it is not your landlord/the post office (ie whoever you are paying) that is sending you the mailers. Microsoft profits from your gold subscription and then profits again from the ads.
They pay the post office to send out mail to every address in a region/zip code/county/etc and you get the mail, exactly how the politicians would pay Microsoft to target all of the accounts that are in their state and match up with whatever profile they have for your habits. The comparison is identical if you're paying for a PO Box but not really that close if you aren't since I don't think the Post Office gets a cut of property taxes (which would then make it comparible) especially now that they're no longer fully a government entity.
I get ads for politicians I don't support all the time. They're physical pieces of paper mailed to my mailbox. So I don't see what the issue would be with having them pop up on my XBOX too, although I've never owned an XBOX.
The politician paid to mail me something I immediately throw out. His call really
Im paying fifty bucks for live and the fuckers already lock of PAID streaming media and basic communication behindcthe pay wall. You basically have to buy gold to get any use out of a live account. Why should I have to endure ads? Especially political ones?
Well, you're paying rent so you can have a mailbox too. And if you had a PO Box they'd be mailing ads to that.
That is a terrible comparison, it is not your landlord/the post office (ie whoever you are paying) that is sending you the mailers. Microsoft profits from your gold subscription and then profits again from the ads.
They pay the post office to send out mail to every address in a region/zip code/county/etc and you get the mail, exactly how the politicians would pay Microsoft to target all of the accounts that are in their state and match up with whatever profile they have for your habits. The comparison is identical if you're paying for a PO Box but not really that close if you aren't since I don't think the Post Office gets a cut of property taxes (which would then make it comparible) especially now that they're no longer fully a government entity.
Property tax is state/local iirc The post office is federally funded.
Really though its not comparable. You dont "pay" for mail service .
I have a podcast now. It's about video games and anime!Find it here.
He's no different from the advertisers, only at least they pay the people whose property they deface.
Only if you want to be reductive about it. In Banksy's view, *anyone* has (or should have) the right to do what he does, while the advertising company wants exclusive rights. For him, private ownership of public space is a contradiction in terms. You can absolutely discuss the validity of this, you can criticise him, but that criticism should be based on something accurate.
Thirith on
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
Posts
My mom has Comcast cable tv at her house and there is an ad on the channel browser, both the big one and the small one at the bottom of the screen.
... to tell you there's nothing they can or ever would do for anyone, ever, hahaha, no refunds.
Cable companies hijack commercials all the time to air stuff they've been paid to air. If you ever see a commercial for your cable/satelitte provider while you're using it, it's most likely one of those commercial slots that they're using for themselves rather than for someone else. Here's Comcast's ad buying website if you want to take a look. They're not only limited to hijacking commercials, they also send messages to your cable/satelitte box to let you know when pay per view movies and shows are happening, their guides often have ads in them, and they'll have popup messages while you're watching stuff that says basically "Press this button on your Remote to get advertised at some more"
The problem with your last conjecture is that there's absolutely no way it'd ever happen in reality due to the way selling advertising works. Companies wouldn't buy adspace on a newspaper that wouldn't get any eyeballs due to being stupid enough to charge as much as the ad-free competition. The point behind selling advertising is to move part of the cost to a behind-the-scenes mechanism so the you have a variable money stream that's seperate from the cost of the good you are selling. This allows you to increase the amount of ads and/or the cost of ads to cover your costs while retaining the same outward cost to the consumer.
Don't worry they have that covered.
My biggest issues with Xbox ads was the fact that until recently, you had no way of telling MS that you were not interested.
Example: one time I rented Zach and Miri Make a Porno off Xbox. For the next two years I was bombarded with ads for every low budget knockoff of American Pie.
It got to the point where I actually felt my Xbox was insulting my intelligence level.
Edit: Or how about that one time you accidentally clicked on a MLP vid and now all your Youtube suggestions are for MLP?
I guess I just really don't liking targeted ads because they assume to know me much more than they actually do.
Indeed. The problem with the conjecture about ad-free experiences is that what companies have figured out is that people, in aggregate, would rather deal with ads then pay more for a service. The whole point of ads is to increase revenue without costing your consumer any extra. Because people are far more sensitive to increased costs then to increased ads most of the time.
On the youtube thing, you can delete parts of your viewing history (or the whole thing), and the recommendations will adjust accordingly.
Edit: One thing I don't think has been mentioned is how different cultures view political ads. I know that in Japan, political discussion is viewed as tacky and somewhat taboo. I don't know if Microsoft is unaware of this, or (more likely) that they simply don't care.
Steam: pazython
If history is any indicator, eventually you will Christianize, settle down, and become know for your neutrality, odd furniture and miniature food.
Well my point was more along the lines of "and people wonder why Japanese people don't buy XBox's".
Steam: pazython
Those Christian monasteries aren't going to pillage themselves!
Want to play co-op games? Feel free to hit me up!
Same here!
This is called an "IP address"
It is broadcast and logged (though typically not for very long) literally every time you visit anything that requires an internet connection
This is sort of a weird double-standard
That's not just for games to me, though. I pretty much apply that across the board. Advertise all you want as long as it doesn't alter what I'm doing. For some of the more aggressive offenders I will actively avoid their product and try moderately to get a handful of others to do the same.
Marketing needs a massive overhaul. All it is is a bunch of "professionals" that know the correct combination of pretty lights. It's as if awareness is all that matters.
They did this a while back with some older games giving them away for free - far cry, prince of persia, I think one or two more. Ads (actually mcdonalds ones IIRC) but only in the main menu, not the game
Wholesale introduction of ads into my GAMING space specifically that aren't related to gaming annoys me. Although I guess I agreed already that the One wasn't just for gaming, it was a multimedia hub, so this is them getting back at me?
It's one of the same problems I have with Hulu. I watch the occasional TV show on Hulu on their free service, but I expect ads when things are free (GAWD Cosmos had so many ads... I wish I watched the Fox stream instead, but I didn't know that the Fox stream had less/no ads). It's paying for a service and then getting ads on top of that... I have a problem with that.
I also don't think "But everything else has ads!" is an excuse, either. I'm not sure where I stand on ads on video game consoles, but I do know that I prefer PlayStation and Steam compared to Xbox because of the decreased (in terms of scope and size) ad space. There are some advertisements on their interface, but they always advertise for another product in the PlayStation®Store or elsewhere on Steam, so I feel like they get a pass on that (rightly or wrongly so).
My first contact with ads in video games was way back when Anarchy Online went Free-To-Play, and they started having ad-space in-game on the bulletin boards to help subsidize the free-to-play content. If you were a subscriber, you could block off the ads, and the positions of the billboards were such that it felt like it was a "natural" part of the landscape (You expect billboards to be on the side of highways or all over Times Square, for example). They even had some weird "in-game concert" on the billboards one time.
I also love the claim "Advertising doesn't affect me", because that's the Lake Wobegone effect or "I'm Special" bias at work. I'm not going to ever say that advertising doesn't work on me, because there is no way for me to know, unless I was the subject of an advertising psychology study (and even then, the results would only be for that specific study). Advertising most likely affects me, because I'm a human being with all the foibles and faults of being human (which includes being susceptible to advertising). Around 40-50% of people believe in the delusion that they are not affected by ads, so this is a common belief, to say the least.
But I'm hopeful for a future where we all live in an augmented reality that provides Adblock in meatspace.
No store logos unless you are looking for a specific store or indicated you are looking for a product sold in that store. No "<your city> single? call to be scammed!" signs on telephone poles. No bums begging in the median with their carefully aged cardboard, I'm replacing them with cactaurs!
Imagine how much better the world would be if we didn't have to spend so much of our mental processing power blocking out people who don't give a shit about us except as means to enrich themselves.
Banksy has the best quote about advertising (excerpt)
"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."
We spend literally no additional 'mental processing power' to filter out advertising in our day to day life
Want to play co-op games? Feel free to hit me up!
Yes you do; you're just not aware of it anymore.
No, it's more that it gets filtered out much like nearly all sensory information does that isn't relevant to us in the moment
Want to play co-op games? Feel free to hit me up!
Yes, and that takes mental processing power. Even more for ads which tend to jump up unannounced and unwanted and require you to shift gears suddenly; the "annoyance" feeling at a sudden ad.
They specifically tailor ads to be as eye drawing and attention getting as possible. Most other sensory information doesn't work so specifically along those lines.
Pop up ads for sure will take more effort because like you said the annoyance and weird forcing it into relevance so you process it in at least short term memory. (There is a better term for this but it escapes me)
And yes advertising are usually designed by be attention grabbing (otherwise youre wasting time) and eye catching in visual mediums but the research Ive read and looked at posits that the majority of advertising gets lost into the same noise as individual blades of grass.
Attention in advertising gets a lot of academic research and I can't comment on pop up advertising or similar advertising forced upon you and how a consumer processes it
Want to play co-op games? Feel free to hit me up!
Want to play co-op games? Feel free to hit me up!
http://adage.com/article/dataworks/chartbeat-aims-show-publishers-ads-work/240361/
"When an article that contained an ad was placed in front of a reader for five seconds, only 50% of readers were able to identify the advertiser afterward. But when Chartbeat extended viewing time to 15 seconds, about 70% of readers recalled the brand's name. "
It's not well-studied, and it varies based on media viewed (TV ads are different from online ads). But the brain doesn't actually "filter out" anything. Your conscious thought may filter things out (which produces neat things like inattentional blindness), but I don't think we have real control over what we recall from ad exposure.
It's fascinating stuff, and pretty much cutting-edge behavior/psychology/neurology research. Which means that there are fewer definitive answers and more unknown questions.
Do you really have to exert yourself to avoid ads in your life? Are they that cumbersome in your daily routine?
And that Banksy quote... is something else. The logic that you can own something because you lay eyes on it? What? And no one asked for permission to place ads on THEIR buildings or on THEIR land because they own it. Why would a company owe us anything? I don't 'follow' this Banksy guy, but he sounds like a rebel without a cause. Hating corporations just for existing.
Ads provide revenue.
Revenue provides resources.
Resources provide jobs.
Jobs create products.
Ads advertise the product.
It's fine to not like ads, that isn't a problem, but I would like to see how economics would work in this ad-free world. How would you learn about new products? How would the little guy get a chance to provide his services in competition with the big guy? I'm not saying it isn't a workable scenario, but we would be hard pressed to gut that kind of system from the world.
I mean, the technology to augment reality to have this "Life ad-block" would mean that someone would have to invest in the tech. Build and test the devices, and then make them producible to the mass market. Once they have the product done, how do you buy it? How do you find about it? How does the investment get returned?
Remove for-profit companies from the equation, and you're left with research groups and charities. How do they spread the word that they are curing disease and need money to help fund sick children and things of that nature?
I for one don't see an issue in properly placed ads in gaming or other mediums for that matter. It's a driving force of modern economics and no one is hitting you in the head with a billboard like someone would a rock.
The politician paid to mail me something I immediately throw out. His call really
Im paying fifty bucks for live and the fuckers already lock of PAID streaming media and basic communication behindcthe pay wall. You basically have to buy gold to get any use out of a live account. Why should I have to endure ads? Especially political ones?
That is a terrible comparison, it is not your landlord/the post office (ie whoever you are paying) that is sending you the mailers. Microsoft profits from your gold subscription and then profits again from the ads.
Wait, who is Banksy? I get arguing about ads in specific places, but arguing against ads existing at all? That just screams "30 year old basement dweller rebel without a cause" to me.
Banksy's a famous graffiti artist.
Which really summarizes his argument nicely.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
He's no different from the advertisers, only at least they pay the people whose property they deface.
Steam: adamjnet
Property tax is state/local iirc The post office is federally funded.
Really though its not comparable. You dont "pay" for mail service .
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
http://www.amusingplanet.com/2013/07/sao-paulo-city-with-no-outdoor.html