It's very convenient to conclude "bad things happen to you? maybe you're a shitty person", but that's not how reality works.
Users may not want to pay for myriad of reasons, like unfair competition, or competition of lower quality where the user can't clearly determine the quality they receive, preconditioning and other existing biases, and so on.
How do you think our media found themselves in a continued decline over the last few decades? They were paid, but they had to focus on online presence and ads as low-quality blogs and fake news replaced them. People don't want to pay for quality journalism, because they can't tell the difference. This doesn't mean quality journalism doesn't provide value.
Furthermore, ads by themselves are not a bad service in our world. It's basically a business saying "hey I'm here, I have this to offer, if you want it". Is that such a bad concept? Of course there are scams, and so on. But that's not INHERENT to ads right? It's one thing to fight for higher quality ads, another to hate ads entirely.
I think that mostly ads are bad, but sometimes they’re fine. There are plenty of other cases of them being a negative for society, and, to me, a few where they’re good
exactly. duckduckgo has ads that don't track you. its okay. i see them whenever i search and sometimes maybe click on them to see what exactly is going on. Thing is they don't track and I am okay with it.
>"hey I'm here, I have this to offer, if you want it"
This is a lie to children. It's like saying the decision to drop nuclear bombs in WWII was made to bring Japan to surrender and not a show of force to Russia. It's simply a false dichotomy.
Ads exist to maximize profit and its done by pushing individual rights back. Nobody voted to give up privacy to the government or private sector.
The answer to your burning question is simple: people don't give a shit about your product or your ad. Sheep are shaped by what they see. You're paying for a stake in the perverse attention economy.
Users may not want to pay for myriad of reasons, like unfair competition, or competition of lower quality where the user can't clearly determine the quality they receive, preconditioning and other existing biases, and so on.
How do you think our media found themselves in a continued decline over the last few decades? They were paid, but they had to focus on online presence and ads as low-quality blogs and fake news replaced them. People don't want to pay for quality journalism, because they can't tell the difference. This doesn't mean quality journalism doesn't provide value.
Furthermore, ads by themselves are not a bad service in our world. It's basically a business saying "hey I'm here, I have this to offer, if you want it". Is that such a bad concept? Of course there are scams, and so on. But that's not INHERENT to ads right? It's one thing to fight for higher quality ads, another to hate ads entirely.