Personal tools
 
Views

Debate: Ban on advertising

From Debatepedia

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
Revision as of 13:18, 6 March 2010 (edit)
Lenkahabetinova (Talk | contribs)
(See also)
← Previous diff
Current revision (13:45, 9 February 2011) (edit)
Lenkahabetinova (Talk | contribs)
(See also)
 
Line 3: Line 3:
|colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style=""| |colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style=""|
===Should advertising be banned?=== ===Should advertising be banned?===
-|} 
- 
-{| style="width:100%; height:100px" border="0" align="center" 
-|__TOC__ 
|} |}
Line 13: Line 9:
|bgcolor="#F7F7F7" colspan="2" style= "border:1px solid #BAC5FD"| |bgcolor="#F7F7F7" colspan="2" style= "border:1px solid #BAC5FD"|
-===Background and Context of Debate:===+===Background and context ===
|} |}
Line 22: Line 18:
|- |-
|colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"| |colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"|
- 
===Morality: Is advertising in principle immoral?=== ===Morality: Is advertising in principle immoral?===
Line 36: Line 31:
*'''Advertising creates an attitude of wastefulness.''' There is no justification for encouraging the "psychological obsolescence" of products currently in use. *'''Advertising creates an attitude of wastefulness.''' There is no justification for encouraging the "psychological obsolescence" of products currently in use.
 +*'''Many adverts are not justifiable on moral basis.''' There is no justification for promoting products that effectively ruin people's health (cigarettes, alcohol) and cause several millions of deaths annually. Worse still, it cannot be ensured that such advertisements do not reach and affect children.
 +|WRITE CONTENT FOR THE "Pro" BOX ABOVE THIS CODE width="45%" bgcolor="#F2FAFB" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top: 0.5em;"|
 +====Con====
 +*'''Advertising leaves everybody better off.''' Not only do the consumers benefit from the products they buy thanks to adverts, but also the whole economy benefits from these "impulsive" buys, thus leaving everybody better off (both the producers and consumers). Thus, advertising cannot be really immoral.
 +*'''Advertising boosts the economy.''' The economy is boosted by the economy in many ways. First, it promote consumers from buying products from producers. Many companies, especially new, upcoming business, could not survive without advertising Second, the advertising industry is huge. Not only does it keep vast amounts of money cirulating throughout the economy, it also employs many workers responsible for generating the advertisments.
 +|-
 +|WRITE CONTENT FOR THE "Con" BOX ABOVE THIS CODE colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top: 0.5em ;"|
 +===Economics: Is advertising vital for growth of our economy?===
 +|-
 +|WRITE SUBQUESTION BETWEEN "=== ===" width="45%" bgcolor="#FFFAE0" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"|
 +====Pro====
 +*'''Advertising curbs imperfect information.''' Advertising is necessary for consumers, as it not only promotes new products, but it also provides essential information. Imperfect information can result in market failure, therefore anything that limits it should be encouraged.
- +*'''The more is produced, the more needs to be consumed.''' Without advertising, people wouldn't be buying things they do not necessarily need, which would slow the economy down, as economy cannot grow unless people consume.
|WRITE CONTENT FOR THE "Pro" BOX ABOVE THIS CODE width="45%" bgcolor="#F2FAFB" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top: 0.5em;"| |WRITE CONTENT FOR THE "Pro" BOX ABOVE THIS CODE width="45%" bgcolor="#F2FAFB" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top: 0.5em;"|
 +====Con====
 +*'''Advertising exacerbates imperfect information.''' Advertising always presents one point of view and thus does not help consumers make more informed decisions, quite the contrary.
-====Con====+|-
-*'''Advertising leaves everybody better off.''' Not only do the consumers benefit from the products they buy thanks to adverts, but also the whole economy benefits from these "impulsive" buys, thus leaving everybody better off (both the producers and consumers). Thus, advertising cannot be really immoral.+|WRITE CONTENT FOR THE "Con" BOX ABOVE THIS CODE colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top: 0.5em ;"|
 +===Freedom: Are advertisements a valuable form of expression? ===
 +|-
 +|WRITE SUBQUESTION BETWEEN "=== ===" width="45%" bgcolor="#FFFAE0" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"|
 +====Pro====
 +''Click "edit" and write arguments here''
Line 52: Line 66:
 +
 +
 +|WRITE CONTENT FOR THE "Pro" BOX ABOVE THIS CODE width="45%" bgcolor="#F2FAFB" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top: 0.5em;"|
 +====Con====
 +*'''Advertising is a mere distraction, disturbance.''' Omnipresent advertising merely annoys people, as it effectively destroys beauty of historic centres in cities, distracts drivers (and thus poses a threat to their security), and - for example - takes up space in newspapers (in place of articles).
|- |-
|WRITE CONTENT FOR THE "Con" BOX ABOVE THIS CODE colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top: 0.5em ;"| |WRITE CONTENT FOR THE "Con" BOX ABOVE THIS CODE colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top: 0.5em ;"|
-===Economy: Is advertising vital for growth of our economy?===+===Enforcement: Is the ban feasible?===
|- |-
Line 61: Line 80:
====Pro==== ====Pro====
-*'''The more is produced, the more needs to be consumed.''' Without advertising, people wouldn't be buying things they do not necessarily need, which would slow the economy down, as economy cannot grow unless people consume.+''Click "edit" and write arguments here''
Line 72: Line 91:
|WRITE CONTENT FOR THE "Pro" BOX ABOVE THIS CODE width="45%" bgcolor="#F2FAFB" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top: 0.5em;"| |WRITE CONTENT FOR THE "Pro" BOX ABOVE THIS CODE width="45%" bgcolor="#F2FAFB" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top: 0.5em;"|
====Con==== ====Con====
 +*'''There is no way to ban advertising.''' Taking into consideration that adverts are omnipresent in today's society, it is not feasible to regulate them. The Internet, newspapers, TV, billboards, posters, radio, magazines,... - all media are packed with advertising, a flourishing business.
 +
 +*'''Difficult to "draw the line".''' Are informative leaflets going to be banned as well? And negative adverts? And if there are colourful posters without an inscription, is it considered an advert (if the product for which it is a promotion is linked to the posters after some time)? Are "112" posters informing about police/ambulance/fire fighters also "an advert"?
 +
 +|-
 +|WRITE CONTENT FOR THE "Con" BOX ABOVE THIS CODE colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top: 0.5em ;"|
 +===Slippery slope: Does the ban not lead to unforeseen harmful consequences?===
 +
 +|-
 +|WRITE SUBQUESTION BETWEEN "=== ===" width="45%" bgcolor="#FFFAE0" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"|
 +====Pro====
''Click "edit" and write arguments here'' ''Click "edit" and write arguments here''
Line 80: Line 110:
 +
 +|WRITE CONTENT FOR THE "Pro" BOX ABOVE THIS CODE width="45%" bgcolor="#F2FAFB" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top: 0.5em;"|
 +====Con====
 +*'''Dangerous precedent.''' Ban on advertising is in effect a restriction on freedom of expression and freedom of press, which not only goes against the basic values of modern societies, but it also sets a precedent for censorship of media. Therefore, it would be made much easier for governments to control media and thereby deny their citizens basic human freedoms.
|- |-
|WRITE CONTENT FOR THE "Con" BOX ABOVE THIS CODE colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top: 0.5em ;"| |WRITE CONTENT FOR THE "Con" BOX ABOVE THIS CODE colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top: 0.5em ;"|
-===Write Subquestion here...===+===Gain: Would any gain from the ban be significant?===
|- |-
|WRITE SUBQUESTION BETWEEN "=== ===" width="45%" bgcolor="#FFFAE0" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"| |WRITE SUBQUESTION BETWEEN "=== ===" width="45%" bgcolor="#FFFAE0" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"|
- 
====Pro==== ====Pro====
''Click "edit" and write arguments here'' ''Click "edit" and write arguments here''
Line 99: Line 132:
|WRITE CONTENT FOR THE "Pro" BOX ABOVE THIS CODE width="45%" bgcolor="#F2FAFB" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top: 0.5em;"| |WRITE CONTENT FOR THE "Pro" BOX ABOVE THIS CODE width="45%" bgcolor="#F2FAFB" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top: 0.5em;"|
- 
====Con==== ====Con====
''Click "edit" and write arguments here'' ''Click "edit" and write arguments here''
Line 115: Line 147:
*[[Debate: Ban on advertising targeting children]] *[[Debate: Ban on advertising targeting children]]
*[[Debate: Advertising for tobacco products should be banned]] *[[Debate: Advertising for tobacco products should be banned]]
 +*[[Debate: Shock Marketing]]
 +*[[Debate: Ban on negative political ads]]
 +*[[Debate: “Behavioural” ad-targeting and privacy]]
 +*[[Debate: Advertising]]
==External links and resources:== ==External links and resources:==
==Books== ==Books==
Line 120: Line 156:
|} |}
-[[Category:Underdeveloped debates]]+ 
[[Category:Consumerism]] [[Category:Consumerism]]
[[Category:Society]] [[Category:Society]]

Current revision

[Digg]
[reddit]
[Delicious]
[Facebook]

Should advertising be banned?

Background and context

[Edit]
[Delete Subquestion section]
[Add new subquestion section]
[Move subquestion section down]

Morality: Is advertising in principle immoral?

[Add New]

Pro

  • Advertising promotes non-rationality. There is nothing moral about encouraging customers to be non-rational and impulsive in spending.
  • "Advertising manipulates small children even before they reach the age when they are legally responsible for their actions." [Vance Packard, "The Hidden Persuaders"]
  • Advertising exploits our deepest fears, sensitivities and yearning. There is nothing moral about such actions, the less for commercial purposes.
  • Advertising creates an attitude of wastefulness. There is no justification for encouraging the "psychological obsolescence" of products currently in use.
  • Many adverts are not justifiable on moral basis. There is no justification for promoting products that effectively ruin people's health (cigarettes, alcohol) and cause several millions of deaths annually. Worse still, it cannot be ensured that such advertisements do not reach and affect children.
[Add New]

Con

  • Advertising leaves everybody better off. Not only do the consumers benefit from the products they buy thanks to adverts, but also the whole economy benefits from these "impulsive" buys, thus leaving everybody better off (both the producers and consumers). Thus, advertising cannot be really immoral.
  • Advertising boosts the economy. The economy is boosted by the economy in many ways. First, it promote consumers from buying products from producers. Many companies, especially new, upcoming business, could not survive without advertising Second, the advertising industry is huge. Not only does it keep vast amounts of money cirulating throughout the economy, it also employs many workers responsible for generating the advertisments.
[Edit]
[Delete Subquestion section]
[Add new subquestion section]
[Move subquestion section down]
[Move subquestion section up]

Economics: Is advertising vital for growth of our economy?

[Add New]

Pro

  • Advertising curbs imperfect information. Advertising is necessary for consumers, as it not only promotes new products, but it also provides essential information. Imperfect information can result in market failure, therefore anything that limits it should be encouraged.
  • The more is produced, the more needs to be consumed. Without advertising, people wouldn't be buying things they do not necessarily need, which would slow the economy down, as economy cannot grow unless people consume.
[Add New]

Con

  • Advertising exacerbates imperfect information. Advertising always presents one point of view and thus does not help consumers make more informed decisions, quite the contrary.
[Edit]
[Delete Subquestion section]
[Add new subquestion section]
[Move subquestion section down]
[Move subquestion section up]

Freedom: Are advertisements a valuable form of expression?

[Add New]

Pro

Click "edit" and write arguments here





[Add New]

Con

  • Advertising is a mere distraction, disturbance. Omnipresent advertising merely annoys people, as it effectively destroys beauty of historic centres in cities, distracts drivers (and thus poses a threat to their security), and - for example - takes up space in newspapers (in place of articles).
[Edit]
[Delete Subquestion section]
[Add new subquestion section]
[Move subquestion section down]
[Move subquestion section up]

Enforcement: Is the ban feasible?

[Add New]

Pro

Click "edit" and write arguments here





[Add New]

Con

  • There is no way to ban advertising. Taking into consideration that adverts are omnipresent in today's society, it is not feasible to regulate them. The Internet, newspapers, TV, billboards, posters, radio, magazines,... - all media are packed with advertising, a flourishing business.
  • Difficult to "draw the line". Are informative leaflets going to be banned as well? And negative adverts? And if there are colourful posters without an inscription, is it considered an advert (if the product for which it is a promotion is linked to the posters after some time)? Are "112" posters informing about police/ambulance/fire fighters also "an advert"?
[Edit]
[Delete Subquestion section]
[Add new subquestion section]
[Move subquestion section down]
[Move subquestion section up]

Slippery slope: Does the ban not lead to unforeseen harmful consequences?

[Add New]

Pro

Click "edit" and write arguments here





[Add New]

Con

  • Dangerous precedent. Ban on advertising is in effect a restriction on freedom of expression and freedom of press, which not only goes against the basic values of modern societies, but it also sets a precedent for censorship of media. Therefore, it would be made much easier for governments to control media and thereby deny their citizens basic human freedoms.
[Edit]
[Delete Subquestion section]
[Add new subquestion section]
[Move subquestion section up]

Gain: Would any gain from the ban be significant?

[Add New]

Pro

Click "edit" and write arguments here





[Add New]

Con

Click "edit" and write arguments here





See also

External links and resources:

Books

  • Vance Packard - The Hidden Persuaders

Problem with the site? 

Tweet a bug on bugtwits
.