this post was submitted on 15 Feb 2025
418 points (98.4% liked)

World News

33435 readers
403 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
(page 4) 12 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 week ago (2 children)

If you mean more traumatic images in people's faces, fuck off.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

Do people want me to post 4chan gore here? Maybe some goatse and blue waffle and tubgirl? No? Then maybe you understand.

Forcing people to see that shit if they even stand near a legal-but-icky product is not worth these excuses. Tax it more to reduce consumption. Don't deliberately traumatize people, for any reason.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Why are you against this? I thought it was shown the advertising is reasonably affective?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (5 children)

Because it's traumatic imagery being shoved in people's faces. I don't give a shit whether it works.

I already don't smoke and never will - but I have to be exposed to that shit, just looking at the wrong part of a shelf. You could probably put pictures of exploded rat carcasses and starving children on there, apropos of nothing, and yeah no kidding it'll impact sales!

No practical goal justifies putting this Rotten.com gore and shock content on commodity consumer goods. You wanna reduce sales? Tax it more. Don't commit psychological warfare against anyone who glances upward at a gas station.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›