Most active commenters

    ←back to thread

    990 points smitop | 18 comments | | HN request time: 1.213s | source | bottom
    Show context
    lcnPylGDnU4H9OF ◴[] No.44334626[source]
    The primary thing that makes advertisements disagreeable is their irrelevance. That’s not to say whether or not the advertisement is for a product or service for which the viewer is interested in purchasing but how it relates to the context in which it is viewed.

    People complain about billboards next to a countryside highway because it is entirely irrelevant to driving through the countryside. Actual complaints may be about how the billboards block a scenic view but that also seems like another way of complaining about the irrelevance. Similarly, if I am watching a Youtube video, I am never thinking that a disruptive message from a commercial business is relevant to my current activities (uh, passivities?). No advertisement is relevant, not even in-video direct sponsorships, hence SponsorBlock.

    If I go to Costco and see an advertisement for tires... well, I’m at Costco, where I buy stuff. Things are sold at Costco and people go there to have things sold to them. I might need tires and realize I can get that taken care of while I’m at Costco. Nearly every advertisement I see at Costco is relevant because it’s selling something I can buy in the same building, indeed usually something juxtaposed close to the advertisement.

    I don’t complain about advertisements at Costco because that would be insane. I complain about the advertisements on Youtube because they’re irrelevant and weird but somehow normalized.

    replies(56): >>44334670 #>>44334685 #>>44334694 #>>44334952 #>>44334957 #>>44334987 #>>44334991 #>>44335199 #>>44335364 #>>44335395 #>>44335516 #>>44335533 #>>44335619 #>>44335751 #>>44335761 #>>44335769 #>>44335918 #>>44335948 #>>44335981 #>>44336024 #>>44336035 #>>44336038 #>>44336099 #>>44336105 #>>44336411 #>>44336425 #>>44336575 #>>44337172 #>>44337482 #>>44337484 #>>44337658 #>>44338009 #>>44338035 #>>44338037 #>>44338155 #>>44338219 #>>44338274 #>>44338480 #>>44338508 #>>44338542 #>>44338654 #>>44338786 #>>44339608 #>>44340005 #>>44340171 #>>44340603 #>>44341020 #>>44342922 #>>44343098 #>>44344128 #>>44344304 #>>44345024 #>>44350462 #>>44351143 #>>44361807 #>>44367427 #
    CobrastanJorji ◴[] No.44334694[source]
    > The primary thing that makes advertisements disagreeable is their irrelevance.

    That's not true. We don't hate billboards because of their irrelevancy. We hate billboards because they're giant ugly attention grabbers that make the world look worse for everybody in exchange for making someone money. If the billboards were all about driving-related products, they'd still suck.

    The YouTube ads are hated because that's the whole point. YouTube has something we want (the video), and they're keeping it from us until they we do something we don't want to do (watch an ad). We dislike these ads almost by definition. If we liked them, we'd seek them out, and we'd call them something else, like "movie trailers" or "Super Bowl ads."

    replies(11): >>44334811 #>>44334821 #>>44335140 #>>44335152 #>>44335538 #>>44335609 #>>44337093 #>>44337455 #>>44337615 #>>44337999 #>>44339597 #
    1. Defletter ◴[] No.44335538[source]
    Steel-manning the argument, near where I live, it's not that uncommon to see small to moderately sized advertisements along the road, such as a sign outside/near the entrance of a farm that's selling eggs, meat, etc. I am wholly unopposed to this. In fact, I'm very supportive of this, and used them to find a farm to buy local honey from. Whereas the stereotypical massive slabs whose advertisements get wallpapered on, I think those are distracting menaces, particularly if the primary way you see them is by driving.
    replies(4): >>44335743 #>>44339086 #>>44340620 #>>44340655 #
    2. thejazzman ◴[] No.44335743[source]
    And where I live it's an ever growing hell of political signs, dominos pizza, and anyone else who realizes there is no enforcement against this wide scale littering. The signs are never removed and continue piling up. Abandoned / unmonitored lots are also a frequent target.

    And it's rapidly getting worse

    Glad you're cool with it though, I guess? Cuz I've considered running for office on the sole platform of having them perpetually removed and perpetrators prosecuted.

    There are literally signs advertising to hire people to place more signs.

    replies(7): >>44336359 #>>44337406 #>>44338189 #>>44339699 #>>44340750 #>>44344240 #>>44346849 #
    3. jonasdegendt ◴[] No.44336359[source]
    Driving through the south is always fun.

    > Go to church or the devil will get you!

    4. ndriscoll ◴[] No.44337406[source]
    Where I live, there are sign regulations (total 30 sqft of road signs per lot, or less for smaller lots, 6ft maximum height, minimum 200 ft spacing, up to 2 temporary signs/lot for a maximum 60 days/year, regulations around needing to look nice, etc.). There are signs, but they are much less noticable and more function as a navigation aid rather than a call for attention.
    5. jdeibele ◴[] No.44338189[source]
    In Portland, it's against the city code to staple signs to telephone poles.

    This is, of course, completely ignored.

    There are also signs stuck on wire next to freeway exits or other prime traffic areas. Typically they're on public land because a property owner would want permission or would just remove it.

    There are people who angry enough about the sign proliferation that they cut the sign in half so you can't read the phone number or address or whatever.

    You should be able to go online and pay a small fee (like $1 or even $.25) per sign that you put up for your garage sale or business. The money could be divided among the city, the pole owner, and people who are paid by the city to remove signs that don't have a QR code or has one that expired.

    The fee could be adjusted so that garage sale signs cost much less than business signs. Business signs could only be allowed for businesses who started less than X days ago. Etc.

    6. dietr1ch ◴[] No.44339086[source]
    On a few nice towns here there's no regular advertisements, but shops are allowed to have nice wooden signs matching the aesthetics of the town signs.

    You can still find your way around, and discover things, but looking around feels like you are finding things instead of looking at things yelling at you to find them.

    7. 2cynykyl ◴[] No.44339699[source]
    You'd get my vote! These boulevard signs are totally out of control. They are technically against bylaws in my town, but nobody enforces it. Two anecdotes about how insane these are:

    1. I saw one last week advertising a halloween party, so it's been in the ground for over 6 months. It is on a sidewalk near the university and is passed by about 1000 people per day, and in 6+ months not ONE SINGLE PERSON said "Oh, I should talk this down".

    2. I once saw a city employee get off their riding lawn mower to move one of these signs out of their way, cut the grass, then get off the mower again to put the sign back!

    And echoing the GPs comment, what really gets me about these is that we all have our lives diminished so that one person or company can earn a little extra...maybe. Or in other words, 1000's of people are subjected to this and perhaps 1 person might bite?

    I'll close with my favorite interpretation of advertising: Advertisers essentially steal your sense of self-satisfaction so they can sell it back to you.

    replies(3): >>44341033 #>>44352091 #>>44353021 #
    8. Terr_ ◴[] No.44340620[source]
    In Washington state, the law is that signs along the highway have to be things you can actually purchase in the same property.

    I think that rule helps strike a decent compromise: Adjacent local businesses can draw attention to themselves, but it blocks the business-plan of erecting a forest of billboards to auction off, flogging cell-phone providers or prescription drugs etc.

    https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=47.42.040

    replies(1): >>44340867 #
    9. macintux ◴[] No.44340655[source]
    Similarly, I’ve found numerous small businesses/attractions thanks to highway billboards while traveling. Yes, I find billboards tedious and a nuisance, but I’m happy with the tradeoff.

    Except digital billboards, especially those that can switch to blinding white backgrounds at night. Those can rot in hell.

    10. ◴[] No.44340750[source]
    11. exegete ◴[] No.44340867[source]
    Have other states adopted this? Definitely would change things in NJ.
    12. Eisenstein ◴[] No.44341033{3}[source]
    > It is on a sidewalk near the university and is passed by about 1000 people per day, and in 6+ months not ONE SINGLE PERSON said "Oh, I should talk this down".

    Weren't you one of those people? Why didn't you do it?

    13. Defletter ◴[] No.44344240[source]
    > Glad you're cool with it though, I guess?

    Just to be clear, the advertisements that I'm referencing are ones like this (https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-signs-at-roadside-advertis...), where the goods being sold are sold on the property the sign is on, ie, they're basically shop signs. They are usually pretty small too, with larger ones needing the approval of the local authority. There does seem to be pretty good enforcement on this too. I'm definitely against advertisement billboards: those big slabs that are just there to distract you with any arbitrary advertisement that paid to be wallpapered onto it.

    replies(1): >>44357233 #
    14. Der_Einzige ◴[] No.44346849[source]
    If you tried running for office on such a platform, expect locals to form significant organizations designed to make your life hell.
    15. 9rx ◴[] No.44352091{3}[source]
    > Or in other words, 1000's of people are subjected to this and perhaps 1 person might bite?

    Earlier you indicated nobody noticed (yourself excluded). Now 1,000s of people are being subjected to it?

    16. shiroiuma ◴[] No.44353021{3}[source]
    >I once saw a city employee get off their riding lawn mower to move one of these signs out of their way, cut the grass, then get off the mower again to put the sign back!

    Why wouldn't they? It's not their job to remove the sign and dispose of it. By leaving it in place, taking up space, eventually enough of these signs will pile up and cause such a problem that the powers-that-be will be forced to deal with the situation.

    replies(1): >>44355861 #
    17. 9rx ◴[] No.44355861{4}[source]
    There is nothing to indicate that the comment was from China, where the is a separate power. In this case, the powers-that-be are the very same people who didn't do anything about it.
    18. stirfish ◴[] No.44357233{3}[source]
    The first time I saw purple mountains in real life, they had a big billboard for a shopping outlet in front of them.