Is commerce possible without advertising?

Great Debates
1

I like most things about our modern commercial-industrial society, but I hate living in our ad-saturated environment. There was a time in America – wasn’t there? – when you could get through a typical day without anybody trying to sell you anything, without even seeing a tastefully placed advertisement in the back of a newspaper. No more. Advertising is everywhere. You can’t get away from it. Tom Cruise in Minority Report, being bombarded by computer-animated ads even on the walls of an underpass, is probably a realistic picture of our future.

And look what a waste our advertising industry represents! Look how much brilliant, creative talent is tied up in it, talent that could be creating real works of art and enriching our culture!

It almost makes me want to say, to hell with the First Amendment! Let’s outlaw all commercial advertising of all kinds! Let’s shut down Madison Avenue for good!

Almost. But if we did that . . . what would happen to the economy? What would happen to all the TV stations and magazines and newspapers that get most of their revenue from ad sales? What would happen to the malls and department stores, if shoppers went there without previously having seen any of the goods for sale advertised? Could free-market commerce thrive outside of an ad-saturated environment? What do you think?

2

I’d say that the adverts in Minority report may be more advanced than todays, but they are not more intrusive. The way things are going - I predict the future will be adverts implanted into our brains, Switching off the computer or tv will be no good. we will get moving audible adverts virtually everywhere we go, and we won’t even be able to look away/cover our ears.

Something like 0.01 percent of the adverts I see are things I actually buy. and something like 90 percent of the things I buy, I don’t see adverts for. The decision to buy them is based almost entirely on seeing them in the shop and choosing them. Adverts actually discourage me from buying the advertised product. Because they make me feel like the product’s quality does not speak for it’self and so needs advertising. I wish more people could think something like this, then maybe we (the economy) could manage without them

But what do I know.

3

As annoying as advertising can be it actually serves a useful purpose to inform people about their choices. It’s been a long time but I have a vague recollection from an advertising class in college that illustrates this. IIRC Italy banned all cigarette advertising (not just broadcast as in the US but print as well). Cigarette smoking rates did not decrease but rather there was an increase in people smoking ‘heavier’ cigarettes (i.e. not light cigarettes). Advertising informed people of an option and while neither option in this case is healthy advertising served to tell people of a less risky (relatively speaking) alternative to regular cigarettes.

That said I wouldn’t mind a ban on telemarketing as I find it more intrusive compared to other forms of advertising. I also wouldn’t cry if billboards were all torn down but for me it’s just an aesthetic thing as I see them as a blight on the landscape and we have plenty of other forms of advertising to bombard us.

4

By way of contrast, I work for a manufacturer of household commodities that competes with Rubbermaid. We have a healthy business, and no advertising budget at all. No commercials, no print ads, nothing. Of all of our competitors, Rubbermaid is the only one that advertises to the public. All of our sales efforts are tied up in relationships with buyers at retailers. So, it’s not true that advertising is necessary for business success.

One caveat: we do actively seek advertising by our customers in circulars–a good ad will quadruple sales of the advertised item for the duration of the ad.

5

[hijack]

Part of me dreads the day telemarketing comes to my country.

Another part of me is secretly longing for it to happen . (the same part that wants to shout FUCK OFF!!! down a telephone. I will be taking out all my anger from popups, junk mail, 5 million year ad breaks on tv, synchronised ad breaks, shite in magazines and all other annoying advertising on the telemarketing operator. Don’t like it operator? get a less evil job, maybe as a dictator or something)

[/hijack]

6

We’d have to listen to Terry Gross’s (Fresh Air on NPR) irritatingly positive voice 24 hrs a day on every channel there is.:slight_smile:

Well, you’d pay a ton more for your newspaper, cable TV and (what would have to be invented) pay-per-listen radio. The rich would love it, and the poor would have to lump it.

And here I thought you were a champion of the downtroden. Looks like your just one of those elitist snobs after all.:slight_smile:

7

You know, I pay around $40/month for Time Warner cable, which includes about ten HBO channels, and I think the money is worth it just for the quality of that TV (with only internal advertising). HBO produces some excellent low and mid-budget movies and serials.

Eliminating advertising doesn’t seem awful to me in this case.

8

Well, I work for a small regional magazine publisher that gets all of its revenue from ad sales - and ad sales have gone in the tank lately, so the company likely will follow. Which means that a lot of our “specialty industry” clients will only find clients by word of mouth (and this is not really a “repeat business” type of industry, either), so many would fail. It also means that the printing business and distribution companies we employ would lose our business. So would the building management company, the telephone companies (land and wireless), CPA, attorneys, collection agency, office supply stores, health insurance provider, bank, freelance writers, photographers & artists, etc., etc.

Advertising is one of the first expenses that many smaller businesses will try to cut, and it’s hurting us. If we don’t make it, I (and others I work with) will most likely find other jobs. But I see where a huge section of our economy is affected directly by advertising activity, and I wonder what would take its place in the economy?

9

Look how much brilliant, creative talent gets to put their talent to good use instead of spending their lives peniless and nearly homeless while they doodle art that no one will ever see.

10

Light Speed Briefs.

(Okay, somebody here watches Futurama, right?)

11

I do all my shopping at Alien Overlord & Taylor.

12

Applause Bingo. [sub](Unless, of course, the government determines that said doodles ‘enrich society’ and throw money at them.)[/sub]

I’m a graphic designer (IOW, and artist that gets paid) because I love advertising. I love advertising because I love capitalism. Advertising is the engine that drives the free market. If an artist is supposed to express what he’s passionate about, well hey, lookit me! I do that and I’m getting paid for it! :cool:

You might have nightmares about a world where pop-up ads spring up in front of your face everywhere. I have nightmares about a world made up of completely generic products. Nothing but white boxes and black type as far as the eye can see. shudder How mind-numbingly boring.

WHEN? Gracious. Advertising has been around as long as people have exchanged money for services. Before the printing press, it was vendors shouting in the streets. Think how annoying THAT must have been, compared to TV used-car ads. At least you can turn the volume on those down.

13

I would think commerce would be difficult without advertising. How would people learn about a totally new product?

But I agree advertising has gotten way out of hand. I started using a VCR to skip commercials when Star Trek:TNG came on the air. 8 hours of regular TV has 2 hours of commercials. I can find better things to do with 2 hours. I don’t understand why at least 60% of Americans haven’t been skipping commercials for years.

I think most ads are garbage in terms of informing the consumer about the product.

http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~stu/fair/consumerism.html

Dal Timgar

14

Originally, when I came to this thread, having only read the title, I would say yes, that commerce, in general, is possible without advertising at all.

Now, could free market commerce survive?

Well, yes, it could. That is assuming that a free market is interpreted solely as a market where prices are decided by demand and availability of goods. In this system, the consumer would be able to pursue goods. If a consumer was not satisfied with a particular good, or they desire a more elaborate or finer quality good, they could locate them on their own will.

With regards to this situation, though, yes, consumer choice is hindered. There is little reason to explore for better choices beyond your local store or what not. Furthermore, it is obvious that the customer will have difficulty locating their ‘elaborate’ good if they do not know where to find it or, as was pointed out, learning of new goods.

This addresses only part of the issue, however - beyond the need for consumer information about where to pursue their desires, what does advertising do?

Modern advertising is designed to not only to inform, which it does to some degree, but, also, create. Advertising firms create a unique reaction - desire. So, it becomes crucial for a person to purchase this product or that one. This desire is furthermore unique since it is focused moreoften on unessential products.

The demand created by advertising feeds the free market as it is practiced currently since demand regulates the free market. So, commerce could and likely would happen in a free market without advertising (people need to eat, etc.). However, advertising is crucial to the modern business world where stock prices and profits are of high concern.

15

Perhaps a better rephrasing of the OP is: “Is commerce possible on the scale we have now without advertising?”

16

Never. Or at least not as long as there have been Europeans here. The book Snake Oil goes into the history of “patent medicine” and its advertising, and it goes back to the 1600s.

17

“Columns! We got columns! Doric! Ionic! Corinthian! Make your hovel look like a palace!”

Advertising has gotten more sophisticated and ubiquitous with mass media, but it has existed since the first specialist artisans started trading their goods for the surplus food of the hunters and farmers, back at the start of the agricultural age. Even if it was as simple as standing in front of the shop telling passers by what great bargains were available.

18

Yes, yes, of course advertising has existed since the beginning of commerce. When I said there was a time in America when you could get through a typical day without being exposed to any advertising, I was referring to the time when there was no TV or radio and most Americans lived on farms or ranches. I don’t think advertising started to become a ubiquitous feature in the average American’s daily life until, say, 1910 or 1920.

19

The only legitimate form of advertising is word of mouth between people who already know each other. All other forms of advertising are illegitimate and fraudulent (puffery is fraud where nobody is willing to admit reliance because it would be embarassing). As Bill Hicks said, if you are in advertising, kill yourself.

20

BG: When I said there was a time in America when you could get through a typical day without being exposed to any advertising, I was referring to the time when there was no TV or radio and most Americans lived on farms or ranches.

Well, I think that’s got more to do with the daily lives of most people being separated from commerce in general than with commerce being separated from advertising (which, as others have pointed out, has probably always existed on some scale). In the bygone era you speak of, most people got through the average day without buying or selling anything. When they drove into town to the market, though, or when the peddler came round, their lives were affected by advertising to some extent.

I think what you mean to complain about is the overwhelming presence of advertising in the parts of our lives that aren’t directly involved with commerce. In other words, I might be fine with seeing ads on the Shopping Channel or on storefronts, but why should I have to be distracted by them when I’m trying to concentrate on the news, or on a TV show, or on music or a movie, or on my driving?

In the “old days”, for the most part, advertising didn’t actually invade your daily life except in a very limited way; you had to go to where the commerce was to get a constant barrage of advertising. (That is still the case in many parts of the developing world; when I lived in India, the traditional forms of advertising (displaying or calling your wares) were limited in most residential areas to the regular visits of a few vendors—the vegetable seller, the knife sharpener, the spice grinder—only as many as the neighborhood would profitably support, which doesn’t make for a constant din of hawkers. For the constant din, you had to go to the Chowk or bazaar/commercial district, where there’s a huge variety of vendors. Of course, this system coexisted with adopted modern Western practices of TV/billboard/etc. advertising too, but it’s quite adequate to support a lot of commerce on its own.)

Maybe you could clarify the terms of the debate here: are you suggesting that our daily lives are too focused on commerce, or that there’s too much intrusion of advertising in the parts of our daily lives we’re trying to keep free of commerce? Or both?