Advertising as a major source of human dissatisfaction (2019) [pdf]

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Cultural critiques and personal experiences

  • Many see modern advertising as a deep, almost invisible force shaping desires and anxiety, not just “see ad → buy product.”
  • Several cite documentaries and critical theory about propaganda and consumerism, describing advertising as central to how post‑WWII society and “the consumer self” were constructed.
  • People who’ve minimized exposure (adblockers, DNS filtering, no TV/radio, paid services) report that encountering ads again – especially cable TV or pre‑roll video – feels jarring, intrusive, even “assaultive.”

Is advertising inherently harmful?

  • Strong camp: advertising is described as abuse, “psychic violence,” and targeted persuasion for others’ benefit, often by amplifying insecurity, envy, and dissatisfaction.
  • Distinction is drawn between:
    • “Informational” / “scarcity” ads (e.g., something is available now) and
    • “Brand” / “abundance” ads that manufacture dissatisfaction and identity needs.
      Many argue the former is at least tolerable; the latter is seen as corrosive.
  • Some propose banning unsolicited “push” ads while allowing opt‑in catalogs, directories, reviews, and search‑based “pull” discovery.

Discoverability vs. manipulation

  • One side: without advertising, small and niche products become hard to find; discoverability is genuinely valuable.
  • Counter: history and examples (catalogs, trade mags, word of mouth, search, curated directories) show you can match buyers and sellers without constant intrusive messaging. Missing some products is considered an acceptable tradeoff for less manipulation.

Economic dependence on ads

  • Several note that huge swaths of digital media, “free” services, and content creators are ad‑funded; eliminating ads would radically reshape the economy and kill many businesses.
  • Others reject “jobs” as a justification for a harmful industry, arguing labor would and should transition to more productive work.

Evidence, causality, and this paper

  • Multiple commenters who read the paper stress its limits:
    • Only newspaper (and marginally magazine) ad spend correlates with lower happiness; TV/radio/film do not show clear effects.
    • Method is correlational; it does not demonstrate causality.
  • Others cite studies where specific health‑related ads improved outcomes, using this to argue advertising’s effects are heterogeneous and regulation may matter more than blanket condemnation.