Slashdot Mirror
The Next Frontier of Consumer Exploitation By Corporations
First time accepted submitter alisonuw writes "So what if Google knows where I'm planning my next vacation and suggests hotels for me? Sure, it's creepy, but is there really any harm in companies tracking my info to target ads to me? Professor Ryan Calo (UW law) is out with a new paper that demonstrates the real harm behind these practices, making consumers vulnerable to making decisions that go against their self-interest (ie: predatory lending, price inflation, etc). The Atlantic has an article today that outlines the new research."
The question is not does it, or does it not matter companies are tracking us, they ARE tracking us regardless
The real question is what are we, the consumers, going to do?
We can be passive - and let them (the corporations / governments ) manipulate our lives with all their suggestions/advises via their ad/marketing/propaganda campaign (as has been happening for the past few generations)
We can be on guard and do our best to make sure that our lives stays our lives, not the lives the governments / corporations want us to have
The society in the future will have a new gap, a gap in between people who live their lives as individuals, or, people who live their lives as sheeples
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
This goes way beyond mere advertising. It also involves the price you pay and which products are available in shops near you. Restaurants may increase the price of their meals if they know you are very hungry, it's unlikely that you will leave once you have been seated. Cigaret-vendors will lower their prices if they figure out you are trying to quit.
The old adagium "Knowledge is power" still holds.
Coke is a fresh sack of shit, it's not water, juice or milk and provides no significant benefits at a remarkable markup. The fact that this was your example is not even ironic, it's simply sad.
Not because of ads, but because of the choices they offer you. False dilemmas are the staple of politics today, and people are easily pushed into those false "either or" decisions. "For us or against us!" (really? I neither care 'bout you nor your terrorists, leave me alone!). "Bail banks out or the economy crumbles!" (nope, bail out the people holding saving accounts and let the bank fall flat on its face, worked well for Iceland. Remember Iceland? The country that started it all? They're through with their recession, we barely started ours).
I'm pretty sure the average reader can come up with more examples. We are presented false choices, where one is so horrible that we grudgingly accept the not quite that horrible one as the "right" choice.
What we fail to do is think about other options. There are usually plenty of them. But they are not as favorable for those that present us the false dilemma.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
No, your definition is bogus.
No, your definition is bogus.
Advertising (really marketing) is at least two things:
1) To inform you of options to fill a need.
2) To convince you that you have a need.
(1) is useful in society, (2) is destructive to society
The problem is that practically all marketing tends to (2) over time. For example, sexy girls in advertisements. When they are in ads for stereotypically men's products (like beer) its obvious they are of type 2, but even when they are in ads for women's products like clothing they are still manipulative because they tell women if you just had this product you would be sexy too.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.