Hacker News Reader

Comment by barrkel | Hacker News Reader

Ads are agents in a zero-sum war for your attention.

If you have focus, if you're not aimlessly wandering around, ads try to distract you. They attack your personal agency and sovereignty, trying to divert you from what you were doing, to pay attention to what they're pushing.

Because they're in a zero sum competition, the dynamics are to escalate. There's only so much inventory, and the winners of the bids for your attention need to have more and more effect on your behavior to justify the escalating costs. Text isn't enough, images are needed. Images aren't enough, videos are needed. Videos aren't enough, interstitials with tiny close buttons are needed, with mandatory pauses. If advertisers could reach out and physically grab you by the head, they would.

View on HN

All of this is true for a large portion of web ads.

Then there is the ad for your kids' school fundraiser.

Or the ad for a used car that your cousin would love.

Or the poster for the concert at your local community hall.

These ads also are "trying to divert you from what you were doing, to pay attention to what they're pushing".

Yet these feel ads differently despite also being "agents in a zero-sum war for your attention".

I don't think people appreciate how much good and positive advertising exists because they are conditioned and on-guard for the kinds of ads that you describe.

If I wanted notices about fundraisers it should be because I signed up for them.

If I want to know about concerts I would've subscribed to a feed.

If I wanted to help my cousin find a used car I'd actively go searching for one.

If I have a problem in need of a solution, I'll search for it.

All of that is true for all web ads. The friendly types of ads you're describing only work as offline ads.

If I am online I don't want any of that offline context following me around at the behest of a creepy surveillance industry. A web page knowing what is local to me or what I might be interested in is a bug. Frankly I categorize it in the realm of security vulnerabilities.

And that's still putting aside the question of why I would want to spend time/attention looking at any online ads. The ad for the local concert stuck on a bulletin board can be read while waiting for a burrito if I would otherwise be spacing out, or it can be ignored if I'm thinking about something else or otherwise don't feel like taking new input on new topics. Whereas web page ads are interspersed with what I'm already trying to do - it's like if I went to grab my burrito and the guy gave me a 30 second elevator pitch before he'd hand it over.

Whereas the alternative for online ads is blank 'white' space. If I am online, I'm positively engaged in doing something else. If I'm interested in local concert listings, then I will purposefully check out concert listings.

Upgrade to the Burrito+ community to eliminate pre-burrito adroll!

You are deliberately confusing ads with things that already have better names, such as notices or listings. They feel different because they ARE different.

Advertising is wildly successful because it's literally everywhere and we are conditioned from birth that the whole concept of "strangers using psychological tricks so you give them your money" is just a normal fact of everyday life. Most people are NOT conditioned to be on-guard against ads, and that is the whole problem. It's not until you make the choice to actively avoid ads where possible and give up ad-laden media consumption altogether for a while that you notice how bad (and bad for you) advertising is.

If you haven't tried switching to a low-advertising diet, you are probably missing out on the ability to focus on what really matters in life.

I am taking a broader definition of ad to include things that also have other names.

- job ads and classified ads that can also be called listings

- ads for events that can also be called notices

- product description on services like Amazon and Ebay

- websites describing products and services

- 1st hand and 2nd hand mentions of products and services online that can be as close to the

Some of the comments here seem to hold only for a narrow definition of ads.

I prefer to think of all of this as marketing, as ads are part of the marketing mix. As we see, the distinction between ads and other similar things is blurry.

I am not defending the volume of ads. There's way too much of it. I am making the unconventional and unpopular statement that sometimes marketing and ads do deliver value.

It's better to narrow the critique of ads the way you did because that leads to a more constructive conversation.

A huge distinguishing characteristic is that some of these things come to you, or are found passively, and some of them you seek out. I think that when the ad comes to you, there is a very good chance it has little or no value.

Job listings are useful, but I have to seek them out.

An event calendar is something I seek out.

Product descriptions are only shown to me when I seek details about the product.

An ad on the street is somewhere in the middle. For most people the acceptability of it is about setting (not in a nature park, please), and ignorability (LCD billboard vs. telephone pole flyer).

I think that is the distinction that people are making between marketing and what is being called ads.

I think you hit the nail on the head - people tend to think of push (outbound) marketing as "ads" while they don't think as much about passive ads.

It's true that it's harder to do push / outbound marketing in a way that does not feel annoying. I've seen it done and it seemed like the company was reading my mind in a good constructive way. That's rare though.

It can definitely be done in a way that people don’t mind/accept.

People love movie trailers to the point of seeking out good ones and sharing them. People have come to accept that broadcast media will have ads, but get very annoyed when ads are inserted where they are not expected (ads during an ad break are ok, sports betting ads mid play annoy the shit out of me).

Ads are vying for attention, true! I usually dislike commercial ads as much as anyone, especially online advertising, especially forced ads that block the thing I’m there for. That said, I don’t buy that they attack my agency and sovereignty, that’s a bit of a stretch. Online, a lot of free content comes with ads, and nobody’s forcing me to choose free content, so online at least I can avoid a lot of ads by avoiding the free content that comes with ads. When I’m not online, ads like posters or billboards rarely if ever block me in any way.

HN comments are also vying for our attention and pushing narratives, so are they ads and are they a personal attack? Usually not for money, but you didn’t make a distinction and GP comment was pointing at ads like posters for free community events. The community dance poster does want your attention, of course, but is it an evil personal attack, or just information that you can do as you please with or ignore? Is it sometimes something you did want to know, and advertises something you would like?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com