The Instigator
oreostar
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
TUF
Pro (for)
Winning
8 Points

Advertisements do more harm than good

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
TUF
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/21/2012 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 13,388 times Debate No: 20541
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (3)
Votes (2)

 

oreostar

Con

the levels of advertising are just too much these days. You cannot walk down the street, ride on a bus, watch television or read your email without seeing advertisements. People shouldn't have to have their lives attacked by a huge quantity of information they might not want.
TUF

Pro

I choose to accept this debate determined to disprove the position that advertisements do more harm then good.
My main points will be as follows:
1. People need advertisements.
2. Advertisements contribute to the economy.
3. Alot of free things are free because of advertisments.

My first point:
People need advertisements. What would a world without advertisements be like for humans? First of all alot of the worldy items that we want or need are given to us as a direct result from advertising!
How would we know where and how to get set up with the best prices and promos for the items we need, such as internet, tv, phone, groceries, etc! We see and hear advertisements that represent the best ways to get the items we need for cheap. As most people know, not every single person in this world has pockets full of money to spend on things. We need to know and hear about the things that will save us money, so we can be better, and more econmical with our spending. Without knowing how much to spend and where to spend at for the best ways to save, how would anyone have money to pay the bills? Advertisements are absolutely nessecary for this reason!

My second point:
Advertisements contribute to the economy. Pretty much every single business in the world, needs some sort of marketing ploy for it to be able to run properly. Marketing is run majorly off of advertising alone. Without advertisement, you wouldn't be able to get paid properly for the work you do. If people don't know about a product, then they will not buy your product plain and simple. If you want your business to prosper, you need advertisements, plain and simple. That's how businesses make money, and that's how you get paid for the hours to work everyday!
If no one were to spend money on products, are economy would collapse!

In this article I am providing, it will explain how to the consumer spending it what helps the economy thrive.
http://helpsavemydollars.com...

"Let's say you deposited this $1,000 into your savings account. Most likely, it's a win-win situation for you because you're probably earning interest on this money and you now have $1,000 in liquid cash that can be very helpful should you lose your job in the future or should you incur any unexpected expenses later on. It's also a win-win scenario for the bank. You just "gave" the bank $1,000 to loan out to other people/businesses. Remember, banks are here to make money and they do that by loaning out the money that you deposited. Since you deposited $1,000 into the bank, that bank can now loan it out to a pizza parlor, for example, to be used in part to buy a new pizza oven. Now because that pizza parlor replaced their old oven using that $1,000 loan from the bank, they can now make more pizzas at a faster rate, which would mean that the parlor now must purchase more dough, sauce and cheese from a food supplier. Now the food supplier benefits from all of this extra business and the food supplier will use the money it earns from selling dough, sauce and cheese to pay its employees. The employees of the food supplier now have money to pay their personal bills and they might even have some left over money to go to the movies. Since you saved that $1,000, as opposed to buying a new television, an even more impactful chain reaction occurred."

My third point:
Alot of free things are free because of advertisements. Alot of things we use every single day for are very own enjoyment, are only free as a directv result of advertisement. Many people listen to the radio on their way to school or work. Have you ever consindered how the radio stations make money if the radio is a free service to everyone? It's simply due to the fact that people and businesses will pay good money for their product to be mentioned by peoples favorite hosts, and during commercials. People who like to watch movies online for free also benefit for advertising. How to those sites benefit from making movies free to the public? Directly from advertising! The most famous movie site that comes to mind is a site called tubeplus.me.
This site offers almost every tv show or movie known to people, that millions of people are able to enjoy due to the fact that there are advertisement on the side. The same goes for virtually any website that a person would need to use. Music, games, tv companies, they all make their money from advertising.

Now i'm going to quickly move on to my opponent. My opponent states: "People shouldn't have to have their lives attacked by a huge quantity of information they might not want."

This is not true in the slightest. Business and companies that advertisement pay to have there information posted publicy. It's not forced on anyone and everyone has the ability to choose whether or not to read or listen to an advertisement. So how are people being 'attacked'?
Debate Round No. 1
oreostar

Con

thank you very good points

your first point is irrelevant were are debating if ads to more harm then good, your point explains why we advitisments are needed.

my opinion on your second point
i agree ads do contribute to the economy, inorder for business to succed in societys attention they need ads. but, nowdays business are brainwashing us with millions of ads. Consumers are exposed to hundreds of commercial messages per day in one form or another -- from the boring, copy-laden radio commercial to the easily skimmed, forgettable newspaper ad, and from the billboard on the side of the bus to the logo on the side of the building. The average American is exposed to 247 commercial messages each day.
Consumer Reports Website
http://www.consumerreports.org... CONTENT%3C%3Ecnt_id=18759&FOLDER%3C%3Efolder_id=18151
People cannot just choose to ignore advertising, because advertisers use many underhand methods to get their message across. Posters have attention grabbing words, or provocative pictures. Some adverts today are even being hidden in what seem like pieces or art or public information so people don't realise they are being marketed to. By targeting people's unconscious thoughts adverts are a form of brainwashing that take away people's freedoms to make choices. Advertising gives an unfair advantage to big businesses. Small companies might have much better products, but they cannot afford to advertise them as well and so people don't find out about them. This restricts the quality of products for consumers, and places a huge roadblock to the success of small businesses.

you last point is confusing in round three could you explain your point please and its relation to the debate topic? thank you
TUF

Pro

First to address my opponent.

"your first point is irrelevant were are debating if ads to more harm then good, your point explains why we advitisments are needed."

That response makes utterly no sense. By providing you with an answer as to why advertisements are needed, and then having you agree with me, then we have proved that advertisements are more good than bad. My first point in it's entirety explains why ads are good and what we need them for. How does that have nothing to do with the debate? Did you read the entire argument?

"I agree ads do contribute to the economy, in order for business to succeed in society's attention they need ads. but, nowadays business are brainwashing us with millions of ads."

So you agree that ads a beneficial? If you're agreeing that they contribute to society, then whether they are 'brainwashing' doesn't matter, because you are in fact agreeing that they cause more good than harm.
Also how exactly are advertisements brainwashing? People have the freedom of choice. People have the freedom to get up and change the channel on their tv's or radios if they don't want to hear advertisements. You could call it brainwashing, if we physically forced people into a room with a tv and restrained them while they watched each and every advertisement. Until we do that, advertisements are in no way 'brainwashing'.

"People cannot just choose to ignore advertising, because advertisers use many underhand methods to get their message across."

People don't have the choice to ignore advertising? Really? That's odd... Because I do it all the time.

"Some adverts today are even being hidden in what seem like pieces or art or public information so people don't realise they are being marketed to."

Now how exactly is that bad? If people are being advertised to and don't feel like there being harassed, your just proving to us that a lot of advertising can be a good thing!

"By targeting people's unconscious thoughts adverts are a form of brainwashing that take away people's freedoms to make choices."

I would say that is quite the contrary. By not allowing advertisements we would be taking away businesses rights and freedoms of speech. These consumers are making conscious decisions to call and make purchases from these advertisement. No on is 'forced' to do anything.

"you last point is confusing in round three could you explain your point please and its relation to the debate topic? thank you"

How is it confusing? Basically what I was saying is that without advertising many of the free entertainment world that most of us enjoy daily, would no longer be free. People pay radio stations and Internet sites to advertise their products, which is in fact how we are able to obtain these services for free. Music, tv, Internet sites, etc. All of it is made free because of advertisement.

You should vote for me in this debate for the following reasons:
1. My opponent skips over my first and second point and leaves them un argued, merely because he 'didn't understand them' and failed to put the time and effort into at least even making an effort to respond to them.

2. My opponent agrees with me several times in his response that advertising can be beneficial.

3. My opponent's grammar is very poor.

4. Conduct point should go to me as I addressed every point he has made, while he has only made an attempt at my second point.

We need advertising in our society, because advertising essentially runs our entire world! Please drag across my arguments in my first and second point, for further support in making your decision, as they were left untouched.
Thankyou!
Debate Round No. 2
oreostar

Con

you should vote for me for because i unquestionably proved my points to the fullest degree of understanding, its not fair that you are attack me personally, im new immigrant from japan in canada

first, i skipped over your ssome of your point because they merely do not relate well with the topic
second, i only agreed with your ideals with its relation to the economy, not as a fact of your opinion
third, your being very silly and rude.. this is a debate not a personal argument
4. your points are limited with examples from irrelevant websites that dont support your claim

again advisement are polluting society, because it harm individuality and thought. if you watched the documenty super size me, there is on scene where they show a picture of Christ and ronal McDonald, only a few kids recognized christ and all knew who Ronald McDonald was. it show that kid are being over bombarded with advetisments.For children and young people there are particular problems associated with the effects of advertising. They are the one who are often vulnerable to messages which are put forward in the advertisements. They like to measure up to their peer group and feel pressurized by the images that they see on screen. This leads to eating disorders, for example, associated with advertisements featuring idealized thinness. It is extremely important for parents to inculcate a feeling of high self esteem in their children, so that they can see the advertisements as a part of the commercial world. They should be made to understand the techniques used in advertising and taught to judge things themselves. sorry for my spelling errors
TUF

Pro

fair that you are attack me personally, im new immigrant from japan in canada"

I never attacked you personally, and I am sorry you took my arguments that way. But what does you having to be an immigrant from Japan have to do with anything?

"first, I skipped over your ssome of your point because they merely do not relate well with the topic
second, i only agreed with your ideals with its relation to the economy, not as a fact of your opinion
third, your being very silly and rude.. this is a debate not a personal argument"

How do they not relate to the topic? This debate was about advertisements doing more harm then good. Each and every single argument I made proved that they do more good than harm. Every debate involves an opinion. Even the statement you just made involved an opinion. What are you even talking about?
A debate is a personal argument lol.

"your points are limited with examples from irrelevant websites that don't support your claim"

Did you even look at the website? Did you understand what is what talking about? Apparently not... It was going in direct correlation of how consumer purchase helps make the economy thrive. Advertising is what pushes consumer purchasing.

"again advisement are polluting society, because it harm individuality and thought. if you watched the documenty super size me, there is on scene where they show a picture of Christ and ronal McDonald, only a few kids recognized Christ and all knew who Ronald McDonald was. it show that kid are being over bombarded with advetisments."

It's not showing that kids are being bombarded with advertisements. It's showing that their parents have poor parenting skills because they allow their kids to watch more tv, rather than getting them involved with more intellectual processes.
Advertising isn't result of poor knowledge, too much entertainment, rather than productive activity is.

"This leads to eating disorders, for example, associated with advertisements featuring idealized thinness. It is extremely important for parents to inculcate a feeling of high self esteem in their children, so that they can see the advertisements as a part of the commercial world. They should be made to understand the techniques used in advertising and taught to judge things themselves. sorry for my spelling errors"

Peer pressure falls into the exact same category. People should surround them selves with peers that will uplift them rather then tell them detrimental things, such that teens need to go to eating dis-orders. Advertisements provide alternate solutions to eating dis- orders. Your argument makes no impact on advertising being the problem.

Dear audience, please excused the rushed arguments and responses, this debate only has a 30 minute time limit. Generally I would go on to provide further evidence how how advertising is beneficial, but due to time restrictions I won't. Also given the fact that my opponent still hasn't argued two of my major points, I feel that is sufficient evidence in and of itself for you to cast your vote in my direction.
He hasn't opposed a single one of my voters either, so he must agree that I should win this debate off of those alone!

Please make the right decision, and vote pro!
Debate Round No. 3
oreostar

Con

1) Television is greatly abused for commercial purposes and other types of uses, in which audiences are constantly sold to: Advertisers try to convince the audience that the solution to a problem or the fulfilment of a desire can only be achieved through the purchase of a product. It is designed towards blind acceptance by the viewer. In this way TV negatively affects the human mind, by limiting the possibilities of conscious choice, and promotes a consumer society. It can be also misused to urge people to buy even things they do not need by subliminal advertising.
2)People spend the biggest part of their time view advetisments : According to the statistics, the average American child watches 262 views ads per week. That's how ads reduce the quality of real life by narrowing people's outlook, limiting the variety of free time activities, affecting family relations by reducing conversation, and even having an impact on health by discouraging exercise.

""Research has shown that young children—younger than 8 years—are cognitively and psychologically defenseless against advertising.6–9 They do not understand the notion of intent to sell and frequently accept advertising claims at face value.10 In fact, in the late 1970s, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) held hearings, reviewed the existing research, and came to the conclusion that it was unfair and deceptive to advertise to children younger than 6 years.11 What kept the FTC from banning such ads was that it was thought to be impractical to implement such a ban.11 However, some Western countries have done exactly that: Sweden and Norway forbid all advertising directed at children younger than 12 years, Greece bans toy advertising until after 10 PM, and Denmark and Belgium severely restrict advertising aimed at children."
Television
Children and adolescents view 400 00 ads per year on TV alone.13 This occurs despite the fact that the Children's Television Act of 1990 (Pub L No. 101–437) limits advertising on children's programming to 10.5 minutes/hour on weekends and 12 minutes/hour on weekdays. However, much of children's viewing occurs during prime time, which features nearly 16 minutes/hour of advertising.14 A 30-second ad during the Super Bowl now costs $2.3 million but reaches 80 million people.15

Movies
A 2000 FTC investigation found that violent movies, music, and video games have been intentionally marketed to children and adolescents.16 Although movie theaters have agreed not to show trailers for R-rated movies before G-rated movies in response to the release of the FTC report, children continue to see advertising for violent media in other venues. For instance, M-rated video games, which according to the gaming industry's own rating system are not recommended for children younger than 17 years, are frequently advertised in movie theaters, video game magazines, and publications with high youth readership.17 Also, movies targeted at children often prominently feature brand-name products and fast food restaurants.18 In 1997–1998, 8 alcohol companies placed products in 233 motion pictures and in 1 episode or more of 181 TV series.18

Print Media
According to the Consumer's Union,19 more than 160 magazines are now targeted at children. Young people see 45% more beer ads and 27% more ads for hard liquor in teen magazines than adults do in their magazines.20 Despite the Master Settlement Agreement with the tobacco industry in 1998, tobacco advertising expenditures in 38 youth-oriented magazines amounted to $217 million in 2000.21

The Internet
An increasing number of Web sites try to entice children and teenagers to make direct sales. Teenagers account for more than $1 billion in e-commerce dollars,22 and the industry spent $21.6 million on Internet banner ads alone in 2002.23 More than 100 commercial Web sites promote alcohol products.23 The content of these sites varies widely, from little more than basic brand information to chat rooms, "virtual bars," drink recipes, games, contests, and merchandise catalogues. Many of these sites use slick promotional techniques to target young people.23,24 In 1998, the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (Pub L No. 105–277) was passed, which mandates that commercial Web sites cannot knowingly collect information from children younger than 13 years. These sites are required to provide notice on the site to parents about their collection, use, and disclosure of children's personal information and must obtain "verifiable parental consent" before collecting, using, or disclosing this information.25

MARKETING TECHNIQUES

Advertisers have traditionally used techniques to which children and adolescents are more susceptible, such as product placements in movies and TV shows,26 tie-ins between movies and fast food restaurants,18 tie-ins between TV shows and toy action figures or other products,7 kids' clubs that are linked to popular shows, and celebrity endorsements.27 Cellular phones are currently being marketed to 6- to 12-year-olds, with the potential for directing specific advertisers to children and preteens. Coca-Cola reportedly paid Warner Bros. Studios $150 million for the global marketing rights to the movie "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone,"28 and nearly 20% of fast food restaurant ads now mention a toy premium in their ads.29 Certain tie-in products may be inappropriate for children (eg, action figures from the World Wrestling Federation or an action doll that mutters profanities from an R-rated Austin Powers movie).

Children's advertising protections will need to be updated for digital TV, which will be in place before 2010. In the near future, children watching a TV program will be able to click an on-screen link and go to a Web site during the program.30 Interactive games and promotions on digital TV will have the ability to lure children away from regular programming, encouraging them to spend a long time in an environment that lacks clear separation between content and advertising. Interactive technology may also allow advertisers to collect vast amounts of information about children's viewing habits and preferences and target them on the basis of that information.31

SPECIFIC HEALTH-RELATED AREAS OF CONCERN

Tobacco Advertising
Tobacco manufacturers spend $30 million/day ($11.2 billion/year) on advertising and promotion.32 Exposure to tobacco advertising may be a bigger risk factor than having family members and peers who smoke33 and can even undermine the effect of strong parenting practices.34 Two unique and large longitudinal studies have found that approximately one third of all adolescent smoking can be attributed to tobacco advertising and promotions.35,36 In addition, more than 20 studies have found that children exposed to cigarette ads or promotions are more likely to become smokers themselves.37,38 Recent evidence has emerged that tobacco companies have specifically targeted teenagers as young as 13 years of age.39

Alcohol Advertising
Alcohol manufacturers spend $5.7 billion/year on advertising and promotion.40 Young people typically view 2000 beer and wine commercials annually,41 with most of the ads concentrated in sports programming. During prime time, only 1 alcohol ad appears every 4 hours; yet, in sports programming, the frequency increases to 2.4 ads per hour.42,43 Research has found that adolescent drinkers are more likely to have been exposed to alcohol advertising.44–50 Given that children begin making decisions about alcohol at an early age—probably during grade school50—exposure to beer commercials represents a significant risk factor.46,50 Minority children may be at particular risk.51""

relevant website: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org...
bam! vote for me
TUF

Pro

My opponent merely copied and pasted his Whole entire argument from that site. Literally the only the my opponent wrote it this round is "Bam! vote for me"

I refuse to argue something that was copied and pasted, and had absolutely no opinion or debate infused in it.

You should vote for me because:
1. My opponent copied and pasted all his arguments in the last round. Didn't include one bit of his own intelligent information. Thus I get the conduct point.

2. He dropped every single argument I made in the last round and in the rounds before.

3. Given that none of my point were argued, he concedes to my arguments.

4. He agrees with my points several times.

5. Asks me to better explain an argument, then I do, and he still doesn't respond to it.

6. Again, he has horrible grammar, so I get the s/g point.

I thank the audience for reading this "debate" And strongly urge you to vote pro for all the reasons listed above!

Thankyou!
Debate Round No. 4
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by TUF 4 years ago
TUF
I know... The instigater of the debate messed that up, but I got the point from his first argument. Doesn't really matter either way.
Posted by Stephen_Hawkins 4 years ago
Stephen_Hawkins
Mixed up PRO/CON
Posted by vmpire321 4 years ago
vmpire321
Wtf? PRO, you are sposed to say advertisements are bad?
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Stephen_Hawkins 4 years ago
Stephen_Hawkins
oreostarTUFTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: He stolen the entire final round, and the second round reminded me a lot of the debatabase submissal. http://www.idebate.org/debatabase/topic_details.php?topicID=717 Due to the plagiarism on one account and lack of argument on the final account, I must award all points to TUF. He argued better, didn't steal, spelt better (ignoring CON's copy/paste parts) and his sources weren't just word-for-word copying off them. He deservedly wins the seven points, not just me votebombing.
Vote Placed by vmpire321 4 years ago
vmpire321
oreostarTUFTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Essentially, they both argued the wrong side. Pro is supposed to say that advertisements are bad and con is supposed to say that they are beneficial. Hence, I can only award the Conduct point to PRO due to the fact that con plagiarized/copy n pasted.