I have now changed my ad-blocker settings to include the following:
- also block the fucking “you’re using ad-ad-blocker!”-whining (which is typically easily bypassed by way of Firefox’s “reader mode”, but still..)
- NOT even allow what ad-block considers as “unobtrusive” advertising.
- I fucking hate the entire field of “public relations in general, and Edward Bernays in particular.
- I recognize the fact that “Advertising” (as we commonly use the term) is explicitly designed to turn something which is at least notionally “human” into as close to a Pavlovian stinulus-response automaton as possible.
In other words: the sole purpose of “advertising” is to condition us out of all those pesky (and – not coincidentally – distinctively human) traits such as: evaluation, thrift, any attempt at foresight, goal-setting, etc. – and turn us into the sort of thing which will (reflexively and unthinkingly) begin salivating over your “brand” if and when you happen to ring the appropriate ‘bell”.
Quite frankly, the mere existence of such a field as “public relations” should both terrify and enrage all of us – especially those who self-designate as “libertarian”:
- It should terrify us that ANYONE is attempting (to whatever degree) to utilize elaborate systems which amount to what Pavlov inflicted on his dogs to “condition’ us in that manner. The ENTIRE “libertarian” ideological enterprise implicitly – or explicitly – rests on the notion that humans are (at least in principle) capable of rationality, and should thus be afforded at least some degree of “freedom’ from coercion and “herding” by Statists.
The repertoire of gimmicks upon which “Public relations” (and “advertising” more narrowly) depends are explicitly about the attempt to “short-circuit” exactly those attributes – to “shape” us in such a way that we reflexively “choose specific outcomes without our would-be puppeteers having to “resort” to (direct) coercion via brute force.
The same sort of issue crops up with regard to the concept of “tipping”:
- the only reason “tipping” even exists is because various levels of the Nation-State explicitly privilege some business-folks (restaurateurs, primarily) to be exempted from exactly the kind of “minimum wage” regulations imposed on those in other fields.
As a result, they are permitted to essentially, get away with NOT PAYING their own employees – on the premise that their CUSTOMERS will do so, directly (via “tipping”).
Now, this situation is (or at least should be) unconscionable from BOTH directions:
- It represents blatant favoritism extended toward SOME (notionally “private”) businesses (those where “tipping” is -regrettably – pervasive), vs. those which are actually required to pay their own employees (everything else).
- These privileges were – and continue to be – secured via “lobbying” (IE: the worst sort of cronyism and pull-peddling).
- It should infuriate advocates of either “minimum” (or “living”) wages, because it permits a certain class of victims/dupes (those employed in fields where “tipping” is permitted/pervasive) to continue to be exploited by “employers” who essentially fail to pay them for such “employment”.
- Worst of all, “tipping” tacitly sends the message that competent/courteous (or even adequate) service is “optional”. You get a “tip” (a ‘reward”) for actually doing your job. Rather than adequate performance being a condition of even remaining “employed” at all – adequate performance becomes seen as something which can be “incentivised” because somebody might happen to be a “big tipper”.
This sets up a vicious pattern where “good” (or even adequate) service becomes more likely to be directed toward those engaged in “peacocking” — wearing whatever clothing happens to be considered “fashionable”/exhibiting whatever happens to currently be seen as “status”-symbols (on the grounds that those people are -possibly – more likely to “tip” generously).
That sort of thing is “classist” as FUCK.
Ah fuck, I’m off-topic again. Oh well, it’s been one of those days.