Incredible how many people believes that one big technology corporation has “better ethics” than another big technology corporation.
That maybe GOOG is managed by people that wants to improve human knowledge, AAPL wants to improve “Life”, FB wants that everyone has more friends or AMZN wants that everyone can pay less for whatever. All while these companies have better data than governments, squeeze competitors all over the world and funnel taxes into fiscal paradises making mid and lower classes over the world pay for the shared services like education and healthcare.
The 1% that owns the majority of these public companies in the meantime does not seem to agree on which one has more value. Money speaks by itself better than many people.
Incredible how many people believes that one big technology corporation has “better ethics” than another big technology corporation.
People aren't directly judging the ethics of the company's management but they are making reasonable inferences based on the company's basic business model and the ethical implications thereof. Even the most ethical person, if he or she is put in charge of a business whose profitability depends on how much personal information it can gather will be pushed by the profit-making motive to skirt and then cross ethical boundaries.
So are some companies intrinsically more or less ethical than others? We don't really know the answer to that but evidently some companies choose to be in a business where it is harder to remain on an ethical path and other companies choose not to.
To just label all companies as equally unethical is an act of mental laziness that benefits the less ethical companies. Like it or not, the standard of living we enjoy today depended on society finding a way to assemble knowledge, material resources, and manpower into productive entities and apparently the most successful mode of organization is the mega-corporation. Unfortunately these entities, if left free to go their own merry ways can easily cause considerable damage, but on the other hand we don't know of any other way to achieve the same level of productivity. (In the previous century, China and the USSR tried a different path but that didn't go well.) So to encourage good behavior and discourage the bad, we are required to constantly regulate corporations through both formal legislation and public opinion. We cannot do this if we don't make any distinctions and just nihilistically toss them all in the 'bad company' pile.
Well. Here people is saying that knowing what users think to target advertising (FB business model broadly) is worst ethically than creating very good technology & services that work well together excluding almost everyone else from the fat margins pie (AAPL business model - also broadly) and you can say similar things on GOOG/AMZN and MSFT.
While I believe that a guns producer or Monsanto can have even lower standards than mega tech I hardly see a lot of differences between them (even if I prefer to use Apple products To whatever else).
Other than that, I do not believe that communism is an alternative, I believe (or hope) In a less unequal capitalism that should be regulated by governments in Supra national agreement. The current “countries” model has many flaws (tax elusion by global corporations and richest 1% probably the biggest one).
Please don't abuse me here … I hate a lot of online advertising.
But on the other hand, I'm not sure what to do post iOS 14.
We sell compact and portable car seats for children so the seat can stay with the child, not the car. This is important as more and more parents choose to 'use' cars, rather than own cars (Uber, Lyft, Zipcar, Turo, etc.)
But we are a small and new startup, there is very little awarenesses of what we offer. In order for us to save the lives of children in cars, we need to advertise to the people who are most likely to be our relevant market.
Facebook, Instagram and Google allows us to get our messages in front of parents and other caregivers of children aged 4+.
What should we do to cost-effectively generate awareness now?
What would you have done pre-internet? Would you have put an ad in Wired magazine? Men's Health? Guns and Ammo? Would you have made a commercial for your product and slotted that into WWE or Wimbledon? That wouldn't make sense right? You'd have wanted an ad in Good Parenting, or the commercial appearing in a show with a high probability to include viewers that may be interested in your product.
Targeted advertising is chasing people around, showing them an ad frequently completely out of context with what they are currently focused on. It is highly invasive and people do not appreciate "the convenience" of potentially slightly more applicable ads.
Would you appreciate a supermarket employing people to monitor what you buy, either surreptitiously in person or from an array of cameras saturating the store, and then sending you mail or targeted advertising? Some people might say 'sure that seems swell, I want a discount on lemons, I like lemons.' That person would be happy right up to the point they begin receiving repeated flyers for hemorrhoid cream, adult diapers, or generic viagra. I would be willing to go out on a limb and suggest that the majority of people have a negative impression of targeted ads, even those lovers of lemons, because the ads are chasing them and appearing out of context.
What should you do to generate awareness now? Try focusing on targeting a more proper venue for your ads, locations where everyone visiting that page/location has the potential to be interested in your product, as opposed to chasing the users with individual targeted advertising. Go back to the pre-internet advertising roots and apply those to internet advertising.
Please don't abuse me here … I hate a lot of online advertising.
But on the other hand, I'm not sure what to do post iOS 14.
We sell compact and portable car seats for children so the seat can stay with the child, not the car. This is important as more and more parents choose to 'use' cars, rather than own cars (Uber, Lyft, Zipcar, Turo, etc.)
But we are a small and new startup, there is very little awarenesses of what we offer. In order for us to save the lives of children in cars, we need to advertise to the people who are most likely to be our relevant market.
Facebook, Instagram and Google allows us to get our messages in front of parents and other caregivers of children aged 4+.
What should we do to cost-effectively generate awareness now?
What did marketers do before they could spy and track potential customers? Do that.
Please don't abuse me here … I hate a lot of online advertising.
But on the other hand, I'm not sure what to do post iOS 14.
We sell compact and portable car seats for children so the seat can stay with the child, not the car. This is important as more and more parents choose to 'use' cars, rather than own cars (Uber, Lyft, Zipcar, Turo, etc.)
But we are a small and new startup, there is very little awarenesses of what we offer. In order for us to save the lives of children in cars, we need to advertise to the people who are most likely to be our relevant market.
Facebook, Instagram and Google allows us to get our messages in front of parents and other caregivers of children aged 4+.
What should we do to cost-effectively generate awareness now?
What did marketers do before they could spy and track potential customers? Do that.
Nobody reads newpapers or magazines anymore so that's out. Radio? That's a waste, and has been for years.TV? Too expensive for a nationwide campaign.
Old style Direct mail (and email) relies on "spying and tracking" data from you and me and everyone else, and worse the data that makes it possible is collected from on-line, off-line, public/government sources, transactions. etc, and sold outright. That hardly seems "better" unless the on-line ad company, Facebook for instance, also sells data.
I think you mentioned your company is a start-up too? How do they market?
Please don't abuse me here … I hate a lot of online advertising.
But on the other hand, I'm not sure what to do post iOS 14.
We sell compact and portable car seats for children so the seat can stay with the child, not the car. This is important as more and more parents choose to 'use' cars, rather than own cars (Uber, Lyft, Zipcar, Turo, etc.)
But we are a small and new startup, there is very little awarenesses of what we offer. In order for us to save the lives of children in cars, we need to advertise to the people who are most likely to be our relevant market.
Facebook, Instagram and Google allows us to get our messages in front of parents and other caregivers of children aged 4+.
What should we do to cost-effectively generate awareness now?
Just brings up the other issue that Google has the world by the b*lls. Getting noticed on the web means having better [targeted] SEO than your competitors, per Google’s mystery rules, or you can bypass that by paying Google scores of cash to show up in AdWords. They own you. Or you can try FaceCrook ads...AdRoll...yatta yatta.
Comments
The 1% that owns the majority of these public companies in the meantime does not seem to agree on which one has more value. Money speaks by itself better than many people.
So are some companies intrinsically more or less ethical than others? We don't really know the answer to that but evidently some companies choose to be in a business where it is harder to remain on an ethical path and other companies choose not to.
To just label all companies as equally unethical is an act of mental laziness that benefits the less ethical companies. Like it or not, the standard of living we enjoy today depended on society finding a way to assemble knowledge, material resources, and manpower into productive entities and apparently the most successful mode of organization is the mega-corporation. Unfortunately these entities, if left free to go their own merry ways can easily cause considerable damage, but on the other hand we don't know of any other way to achieve the same level of productivity. (In the previous century, China and the USSR tried a different path but that didn't go well.) So to encourage good behavior and discourage the bad, we are required to constantly regulate corporations through both formal legislation and public opinion. We cannot do this if we don't make any distinctions and just nihilistically toss them all in the 'bad company' pile.
just my 2c
Targeted advertising is chasing people around, showing them an ad frequently completely out of context with what they are currently focused on. It is highly invasive and people do not appreciate "the convenience" of potentially slightly more applicable ads.
Would you appreciate a supermarket employing people to monitor what you buy, either surreptitiously in person or from an array of cameras saturating the store, and then sending you mail or targeted advertising? Some people might say 'sure that seems swell, I want a discount on lemons, I like lemons.' That person would be happy right up to the point they begin receiving repeated flyers for hemorrhoid cream, adult diapers, or generic viagra. I would be willing to go out on a limb and suggest that the majority of people have a negative impression of targeted ads, even those lovers of lemons, because the ads are chasing them and appearing out of context.
What should you do to generate awareness now? Try focusing on targeting a more proper venue for your ads, locations where everyone visiting that page/location has the potential to be interested in your product, as opposed to chasing the users with individual targeted advertising. Go back to the pre-internet advertising roots and apply those to internet advertising.
Old style Direct mail (and email) relies on "spying and tracking" data from you and me and everyone else, and worse the data that makes it possible is collected from on-line, off-line, public/government sources, transactions. etc, and sold outright. That hardly seems "better" unless the on-line ad company, Facebook for instance, also sells data.
I think you mentioned your company is a start-up too? How do they market?