7 thoughts on “Noam Chomsky – Advertising”

  • >England tried to censor a newspaper but it didn't work. Reliance on advertising censored the newspaper successfully.

    So your solution to advertiser-caused censoring is to….censor with the government? Not only is that hilariously ironic, but your own argument stated that it wouldn't work! Not only that, but I've literally seen Peoples Of The Rose on reddit talk about how right wing content is not advertiser friendly and thus should be taken down.

    >it became obvious that you had to control ''people'' in their off-work time..

    You mean like doxxing online accounts to try to get employees fired because of their political opinions?

    >consumerism is superficial ergo bad

    wew if consumerism is superficial then wtf is the ethics of consumerism? It'd be the next level in superficiality.

    >all the effort goes into advertising and not the show

    I'm just going to give you the benefit of the doubt here and assume you mean ''most.'' In an economic sense that is true. The advertisement has production costs AND publication costs. The show only has production costs. Since ad publication costs must be greater than the show production costs to keep the channel afloat, advertisement agencies cannot spend as much on the ad production portion. Ad agencies must set aside more than enough capital that goes to fund entire shows, by definition.

    Seriously, imagine getting your worldview from a literal youtube video. Holy.

  • What!? No Illuminati? No Lizard People?
    'Manufacturing Consent' and 'People's History' should be taught (even just a little bit) in every high school in the country

  • But I wonder how much of this is actually true on ground. Do advertisers really have any say as pertains the content of entertainment?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *