Advertising makes you unhappy with what you have, and even who you are. That's how it works. So, do we need to better regulate it?
This is the audio version:
This is the transcript:
Advertising makes you unhappy.
Let's be clear what I mean. The advertising industry is the only one in the world that sets out to deliberately make you unhappy to achieve its goals.
How does it do that? Well, very simply and very straightforwardly, what the advertising industry tries to do is persuade you that you are inadequate.
What it says is that whatever you have right now that is being used by you to fulfill your needs, or maybe your wants, is not good enough. You need something else, which is whatever it is, of course, that the advertising industry is trying to promote. And so, they try to make you feel as though you're unattractive, you're a failure, you're unsexy, whatever it might be.
It is giving you a message that without this product that they're trying to sell to you, your life is incomplete and the comparison between you and someone else is one where that other person is going to come off better and, therefore, you're worse.
And the consequence is very simple and very straightforward. You are induced to buy something which you would otherwise not wish to spend money on, so that you might restore your own sense of adequacy through consuming.
And we know that this happens. We know that people go out to literally binge shop to give themselves a dopamine hit to try to make themselves feel better, as if something is inadequate or wrong with their lives. But the hit is incredibly short-term. And for some people, this is incredibly dangerous.
Let's be clear. There are people in this world who can hardly manage to meet their own needs.
There are some people in the world who have so much wealth that they can consume to excess.
Advertising is deeply indiscriminate. A lot of it is aimed at all those audiences, because it is impossible for the advertiser to know precisely who is going to see what they produce.
For the person who has almost no spare ability to consume, those adverts are particularly pernicious, because it reminds them of just how unfair the world is to them, either because they are paid well below what they're worth in the job that they're doing, or because they are on a benefit which does not cover their costs of living, or whatever else it might be.
But for them, that advert reinforces their sense of being on the outside of society.
For the person with excess wealth, what is being induced is the idea that they can have it all, that they are so superior, that theirs is the world to command. There was, a while ago, a cosmetics advert - I cannot remember who by because I'm not that good at remembering adverts - but it said "because you're worth it" at the end of the advert, and that was the message it was trying to impart. You were superior because you used this product.
And the net consequence is that, of course, there is an increase in the sense of inequality in our society. And that is incredibly dangerous, because division is something that is exploited to create harm.
And there's another industry that is exploiting this situation, and that is the credit industry. The finance industry offers people the credit to buy things that they cannot afford. That is one reason why advertising is promoted in its own right. It's not just the product that is being sold by the advertiser. It's also the credit facility to buy the product that is being promoted. And in most cases, of course, the person who is selling the goods will get a kickback or a benefit from the credit facility that they can also sell. In fact, most car companies make more money out of the credit facility that they sell to buy a car than they ever do from making the car itself.
So what we're also seeing is a dangerous rise in indebtedness as a consequence of this advertising.
And, we're over-consuming our world. The threat to our long-term well-being from advertising is quite extraordinary. Those companies that are literally making products we don't need because they simply want to make more profit, to reallocate the world's resources in their favour, and to sell more finance, are doing so at cost to the planet and the people to come on this world. That is, perhaps, the most pernicious feature of advertising.
Now I get all the paradoxes of saying this, by the way. I understand that you're watching this on a channel that is paid for by advertising. I know that there is a conflict in this. I know I am living in an imperfect world. I know that this is a difficult thing for me to reconcile myself to. But despite that, I'm going to use this platform to say that we should take action to address the harms that advertising creates.
One of the great benefits of taxation is that it is a tool for the delivery of social policy. And if advertising is a tool that is designed to make us feel inadequate, make us feel harmed, make us feel as though we are suffering, and to make us feel that we must over consume beyond our means and therefore force us into debt, we should be taking action to prevent advertising achieving those goals.
And there are things that can be done to achieve that. For example, companies that are advertising products that are considered to be harmful - and that is the vast majority of advertising, excluding only those things that are effectively small ads for jobs and so on - they could be denied tax relief on their advertising expenditure. So the amount of the money they spend to artificially induce people to buy products that they don't really need could become a bigger cost in their accounts by them not getting tax relief on that spend, therefore inflating the cost by, in the UK at present, maybe a quarter.
And we could do that again by denying them the opportunity to reclaim the VAT that they are charged by those companies that carry the adverts so that the cost goes up once more.
Now that is entirely possible. That would effectively increase the cost of advertising by almost 50 per cent in total.
Now you could say that the consequence of that is that media would suffer as a result, and I agree it would, but the money that is lost by those companies having to pay more for their advertising would of course represent an increase in tax revenue for the government because they would not be giving the tax reliefs in question. And that money could be used to subsidise local media and the types of media that provide information for people rather than being the platform for excess consumption. So, we don't need to lose out in the way of not having newspapers, not having local radio, not having other such things which are currently dependent upon advertising. We could have them in another way.
And, we could also ban certain adverts. For example, ultra-processed foods clearly cause harm. They should be banned.
Or, gambling should be banned because it is addictive.
Likewise, for alcohol.
And there's a massive question about whether advertising targeted at children should ever be allowed.
So it's not just taxation, it's regulation as well.
My point is that advertising is so pernicious that the government should act.
And one final thought. When you are persuaded by an advert to buy something, just make a note of what it is that you want to buy. I often do this myself. I'm talking here about something that I do. I will watch a video or I'll see an advert on television and think, that looks good. But what I do is tell myself to wait for a few days and see if I still feel the same way. It's a deliberate choice on my part to check. Am I being persuaded by the advert, or do I really want this thing?
If I decide after a few days, I do really want this thing. I usually do a bit more research at that point, just to check myself out. But what I try to eliminate is the influence of the advert in itself, because then I'm making a conscious choice, not one that the advertiser is trying to make do without any conscious effort on my part.
You can take action to take back control of what you consume from those who would like to demand that you consume what they want you to buy. And that is deeply liberating.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
In this household, we have ‘zoned out’ on adverts many years ago, for exactly this reason. Nearly all the adverts are commodities you don’t need or already have. With approximately six minutes in every thirty minute programme being adverts, it gives you plenty of time for a loo break, social media, or putting the kettle on.
We mute all ad breaks
I’ve been housebound for a couple of weeks due to a broken leg but been following the IPL cricket in the afternoon and seeing magnificent athleticism from places I’d never heard of before like Guwahati, Visakhapatnam and Lucknow.
But the ad tracker knows what you’ve been doing online so when I go x on the hamster later it’s first suggestions are Indian because an algorithm hairily assumes I’m interested in that content. The internet is amazing but you’ve got to be careful what you do and say.
If you have the ability to pause live TV, then what I do is pause at the start of a programme for a number of minutes, then when each advert break comes on, I can fast forward through the adverts. Of course you can’t change channels – unless you have the option not just to pause, but record – then just watch the recording a few minutes behind, but can easily switch channels if needed without losing any recording.
I rarely watch live TV “live”, but often time delayed by minutes. Note not so good for Cricket if wanting to listen to TMS but watch on Sky or TNT – would need to resync at every advert break!
Yes – correct.
Advertising is good at convincing people that they are lacking something.
Which is why I bought another railway book yesterday (about Southern Railway Maunsell designed Class U/U1 2-6-0 moguls). Handsome, capable little engines, particularly when they added smoke deflectors).
Mind you, it was half price.
Is there any hope for any of us?
Advertising books is about expanding knowledge
Thanx Richard.
I must remember that when explaining it to my better half, but I will not mention your name, I promise.
🙂
She must not like me
@PilgrimSightReturn you are on the Strathwood email list!
I rather fancied the book about MacBraynes but not at £70!
I am not a fan of their own books – poor quality productions
John
Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!
It was an Irwell Press book which are superb really but I agree that the Strathwood ones can be a bit ropy.
What I love about the Irwell ones is the B&W photography, and how often the pictures of engines are contextualised by the built environment and countryside around them – they are real historical documents. We have lost so much infrastructure and with it, so many jobs.
I like the Southern locos because I lived in London for 6 years and fell in love with it really and its railways emanating to the south coast. One of the last train trips with my Dad before he died was behind a Maunsell 4-6-0 (an S or H15) on the NYMR in 2007. A superb beast. I have a book about them and since watching a Schools class 4-4-0 slipping as it left Goathland on one of the those Sunday lunch trains (what a bark they have, too much power for just 2 driving wheels), I got a book about them too.
Other than that, I’m a Midland man (Dad was LNER), I have books about Stanier 2-8-0s (they rock you to sleep when you ride behind them), Horwich Crabs and the Midland Beyer Garratts, with a book about the Riddles 9Fs for good measure. The Southern N/N1’s, U and U1s were built I think from the early 1900 to 1920s, some were re-framed in the 1950’s and were some of the last steam loco’s to operate on British Rail.
This is more than simple nostalgia. We don’t make stuff like that anymore. In this day and age, it is nice to be reminded that we did.
Camera kit – been there, done that, a real rabbit hole, I have simplified it now though.
I agree re Irwell books – usually very good, but my buying is almost entirely LNER, GWR and narrow gauge now. I got a whole set of the RCTS locos of the LNER (coming on for 20 volumes) from Oxfam recently for £80.
That waiting game you do is a smart one. I never suggested that to anybody because I didn’t come up with the idea in the first place. I now will!
Since I have never owned a TV I rarely see those ads but it is abysmal time and again when I do.
Luckily there are still browsers out there that allow blocking tools for ads on the internet and I can only encourage everyone to use these tools because its an entirely different information environment with/without. I even read most sites that do ads in “reading mode” only. No 3rd party pictures, no moving parts, just plain text. I am aware that this will reduce revenues even for causes I would like to support but there are other ways to do that, for those, who have the means, and in my experience many content creators are not shy pointing those out (nor should they be).
Just today I saw an ad for airport parking tickets (yes, even if you try really hard, ads are unavoidable). The picture doing the job is a lush green hilly meadow painted over with a very unobtrusive white parking rectangle and “P” for parking. What a psychological feat!
Indeed…
The absurd is being sold, often.
Ad breaks are an opportunity to do something else. I’ve also muted them for years. I also block ads on YouTube and online news websites.
If buying online, once you have your purchase, immediately unsubscribe from that company’s marketing emails or you will be deluged with unwanted ads.
Do you suffer from ADVERTIGO ? – The dizzying sensation that your life is marred by the constant annoying background noise of corporations trying to get you to buy, buy, buy…
Advertising is legalised lying,” said H.G. Wells—proof that even in the early 20th century, some people could see through the glittery nonsense before Instagram made it fashionable.
Let’s be honest: advertising is the only industry where success depends on how efficiently it can convince you that you’re a failure. It doesn’t just sell products—it sells you the idea that your life, your face, your fridge, and your sofa are all tragically behind the times. And the solution? A buy-now button and a 24-month credit agreement with 39.9% APR.
Like lawyers who expertly lighten your wallet while smiling warmly, advertisers offer the same service—minus the legal advice. One drains your bank account through loopholes; the other through emotional blackmail and shiny packaging.
It’s an astonishingly efficient business model: make people feel incomplete, sell them the illusion of wholeness, and if they can’t afford it—no problem! There’s a handy finance partner right there with a pen and a smile, and probably a clause in font size 4.
And the damage isn’t just personal—it’s planetary. We’re binging on products we didn’t know we needed, bought with money we don’t have, to impress people who are also trapped in the same dopamine-debt spiral. All while the planet sighs under the weight of “limited edition” everything.
The worst part? It’s everywhere. You can’t even read about the evils of advertising without being interrupted by—well, more advertising.
So maybe it’s time we stopped treating ads as cute little jingles and started treating them like what they are: a psychological arms race against your peace of mind. Let’s tax the lies, regulate the manipulation, and remind ourselves that happiness doesn’t come in a branded box.
Next time an advert whispers “Because you’re worth it,” whisper back: “I know. That’s why I’m not buying it
Much to agree with
Advertising, one needs a definition & I’d suggest that only focusing on “buy this/buy that” on the telly or on public transport is too narrow. Soap operas – e.g. “Succession” (never saw it btw why would I want to see summat about +/- the Murdochs?) supposedly “entertainment” but also about “life style” – look how the rich live – you could have that etc. Plenty of other daft stuff like that.
Grooming of populations extends far beyond daft ads (reaches the parts other beers fail to reach….) and into much of what is “consumed” as entertainment & indeed used as social interaction – I don’t use Facebook & have no idea what the ads look like – but they will be tailored to your proclivities. Youtube? – I use it and have an ad stripper which is very effective. We are all faillible humans – my weakness – woodworking tools (my work around?: so when do you plan to use it Mike?).
My weakness, books.
Thomas would say camera kit, but that has almost ceased – we have the kit we need now.
OMG Don’t talk about books to me! I have a huge pile waiting to be read! Eeek! A couple of biographies of Warren Zevon, a recent translation of Suetonius, the one I think I’ll prob read next is Material World by Ed Conway. That’s the chap who made the Sky News item on aluminium smelting in Fort William and tungsten mining in Devon that I shared a couple of weeks ago. I really like his writing – it’s clear, and makes even something that you might consider boring to be riveting.
I have a long history of “too many books” as my Mother always used to say! Mind you, my first job was a summer one in a bookshop in West Kirby. And when my kids were in primary school I ran the school bookshop. I’m still proud that I made enough money doing that for every child in the school to have a book of their choice on World Book Day one year.
Book addiction is a real thing! Laughs!
Agreed!
Books matter!!
(I asked for a book people had enjoyed reading for my last big birthday – got a wonderful collection).
But this book (about women in the 1930s in Kentucky who provided a mobile library service on horseback to poor farming families) showed me just how much they matter… https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/43925876-the-giver-of-stars
They really do….
“Material World by Ed Conway.” excellent read. I already knew quite a bit (e.g. semiconductors) but some of the detail was both interesting & thought provoking. You will enjoy it – he has a good style.
He’s good and works for a channel that encourages him to be so.
I am an avid book read/buyer who always has a pile of books I have not yet got round to read and yet still buy more. The Japanese have a word for this – Tsundoku.
I suffer from it.
Since the only programmes I watch live are sport events, I don’t see much in the way of advertising. All others are recorded, so I can whizz through the adverts. Although I’m so old I can remember Gibbs S.R from 1955.
What was Gibbs S.R.?
Toothpaste! Can’t remember if it was mainly for kids or for everyone.
I think that Gibbs S.R. was the first ad ever shown on UK TV.
It was a tube of toothpaste stuck inside an ice cube to show how refreshing it was.
The cube in fact was made of plastic.
Now I rememeber….
Toothpaste with a red stripe
Sorry Richard. Toothpaste.
Forgiven!
Toothpaste.
Viciously minty IIRC!
Gibbs SR was toothpaste.
The 1955 advert predates me but the toothpaste was around until at least the late ‘70s and I mourned its passing, having tried and preferred it among numerous others —without the influence of adverts. Maybe it disappeared because the active ingredient, Sodium Ricinoleate (hence SR), is chemically related to the poison Ricin, of Bulgarian umbrella fame. Even if chemically harmless, it might have had unfortunate connotations beyond the persuasive skills of the advertising creatives.
Your points about advertising are well made. I’ve long considered it to be one of the big burdens of the British economy, along with finance, property and fossil fuels. UK advertising revenue equates to over £10 per week for each adult and child in the country (£36.6 billion/year in 2023 according to https://www.statista.com/topics/1747/advertising-in-the-united-kingdom/ ). I suspect that, as usual, those who can least afford it are hit hardest.
Most of this is now digital and it seems to be the dominant source of income for social media companies. Currently we can avoid the adverts (like others here I employ brutal ad blocking), but we still have to pay to fund them when we buy anything that’s advertised. One might argue that there are benefits for the creative industries, but from what little I’ve seen of TV adverts over the last decade or two, they’re not even as entertaining as they used to be.
My weakness is reading and I have about 10,000 real books and approximately 12,000 e-books. I think I have read about 70% of them and the good ones several times. Being a speed reader helps.
Last year I finished building the bookcases in the extension I built, with some help.
I have several thousand books, but these days tend to only read novels on my iPad. It is reference works that I still buy in physical editions.
It is a weakness. I love the written word.
“You can take action to take back control of what you consume from those who would like to demand that you consume what they want you to buy. And that is deeply liberating.”
Content blocker browser extensions on the internet are deeply liberating – they are the single biggest consumer boycott of the 21st century. I know, it’s taking revenue away from publishers, but I refuse to be tracked and profiled to the n-th degree so that advertisers can pay to brainwash me.
If I’m watching TV and there’s unskippable ads, I’ll mute it and go do something else for a bit. I have developed “banner blindness” when reading things like newspapers. When I’m on planes I’ll even take the little carboard advertising cards that sit on the seat in front out of their holders and turn them around so no-one has to look at them. Advertisement is a scourge on our society, and I do everything I can to avoid it, to a fault.
As for the industry itself, it is built on fraud. Whether its online where you have a tiny handful of companies controlling the entire market, some like google even controlling the infrastructure that the internet runs on to make it more amenable to advertising. You have no concrete way of knowing if something sold because of an ad or not. An industry where the only way to get people to buy your stuff is to embellish it beyond recognition of the actual product (in any other context we would use the word “lie”). And because ads operate in a market, the businesses that are already successful have the most money to spread their message the widest, but if we really wanted competition and fairness you’d think the opposite would be more desirable.
Thank you for writing this Richard, your proposals are a good start. One place we could go further you did not mention is in school – we teach kids what peer pressure is, because recognising when it happens helps to relieve some of the pressure. We should be teaching them what advertising is and how it works for the same reasons.
I like your last point – and the rest.
[…] By Richard Murphy, Professor of Accounting Practice at Sheffield University Management School and a director of the Corporate Accountability Network. Originally published at Funding the Future […]
I’ve spent this current school year teaching marketing & communication to 16 – 19 year olds.
I decided to not put my contract up for renewal next year. A few things were behind my decision but a big decider was that I simply can’t get behind what I’m teaching.
I hope to go back to teaching Economics & Business/ EU business law.
Good luck
Hi Richard,
“Companies that are advertising products that are considered to be harmful (…) could be denied tax relief on their advertising expenditure.”
I totally support this. If the government was to list “products considered harmful”, how would they do this? And how would they avoid an endless number of lawsuits?
Given the climate harm of fossil fuels, if FF companies were red-listed, the Bank of England could issue credit guidance, preventing banks from lending to them for new projects.
The answer is blanket taxes on some media (television) plus by size or maybe price i.e. exempt small ads. This would achieve the goal without the litigation risk.
Books – had to pack them up to move, tried to rationalise, very hard.
Growing up mostly without television, my pet hate from a young age was the glossy newspaper Sunday supplements. With hindsight they seem fairly benign, at least you could fold the pages while reading and could bin them.