• merc@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    20 hours ago

    Google and Meta aren’t controlling propaganda. They’re just trying to make ad dollars.

    Propaganda is something you lose money doing, because you’re spending money (or using influence) to change minds.

      • merc@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 hours ago

        You’re still spending money because you employ the people doing the spreading. They could be doing other things, so even if they were slaves there’s an opportunity cost.

        • yermaw@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          12 hours ago

          Serious question; how are advertising and propaganda different, and are they different enough that the distinction matters?

          • merc@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 hours ago

            Yes, they’re different enough that the distinction matters.

            Advertising is about selling things. The company buying an ad simply wants to sell their product or service. The advertiser simply wants to make money by showing an ad. An advertiser might accept an ad from Palantir one day and one from Amnesty International the next day. Or, in the case of Meta or Google, selling ads for both simultaneously.

            Propaganda isn’t about making money. It’s a money-losing venture. The idea is to change people’s minds, typically by deceit. Some people might say that a piece about the dangers of drinking and driving is propaganda, I think most would say it’s an informational message.

            There are cases where advertising and propaganda overlap. But, there are also many cases where they don’t. It’s very useful to have two distinct words to describe the two different phenomena.