Obviously, if you could just delete the ads without changing anything else the world would be better, but that's not how it works.

Lots of businesses sustain themselves on ad revenue - would the world be a better place if we had no ads, but

- TV was twice the cost

- Google, YouTube, etc. (insert your favorite ad-supported website here) didn't exist or cost a monthly subscription

- All news was paywalled

- Any ad-supported website providing basic information (e.g. the weather) was paywalled or didn't exist

- etc etc

▲

elevatortrim 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

I actually think so, yes, the world would be better off with everything you listed happening.

When we used to pay for newspapers, the informational value of the news was a lot higher, news and news-like social media posts were not the primary tool to spread stupidity.

	▲	taffer 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		> When we used to pay for newspapers Some newspapers were 50% advertising. You still had to pay for them.

▲

Levitz 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Yes. I'm not even sure it's a question anymore. Yes it would be a better world.

Not even because of the first order consequences of the ads, but because since there are ads, we have an entire media ecosystem based on grabbing your attention.

So that TV displays series and movies meant for people with the attention span of a goldfish. This applies to Netflix and Hollywood by the way. All of it. Even music changes for radio, meaning more ads.

Google, Youtube, etc, along with news, along with social networks, depend on ragebait, being the first to spout whatever factoid, true or false, polarization of thought and basically a good chunk of what is very evidently wrong in today's society.

I trust we could support a weather app with donations. For the rest? If I could remove either ads or cancer from this world I would sit a long time thinking about the decision, but gut feeling? Ads. The actual cost of the ad industry is enormous and incalculable, not even mentioning the actual purposes ads serve.

As for the rest, I'm very much a fan of the Bill Hicks standup bit regarding the subject.

▲

kelnos 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Given that companies often spend a significant fraction of their budgets on advertising, I wonder if some products would be cheaper if advertising was banned. Sure, maybe some ad-supported services would be paywalled, but it might end up being a wash in the end.

At the very very very least, every ad-supported service should be required to offer an option to pay and see no ads. I do pay for services I use regularly when they offer it as an option to avoid ads.

	▲	taffer 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		Companies spending money on advertising is just another way of acquiring customers. If they were unable to do that, they would need to resort to other, more costly ways of acquiring customers. I doubt that higher costs would result in lower prices for customers.