Law in the Internet Society

View   r6  >  r5  ...
VinayPatelFirstEssay 6 - 18 Jan 2020 - Main.EbenMoglen
Line: 1 to 1
META TOPICPARENT name="FirstEssay"
Line: 23 to 23

Advertising as a Solution

While fear can be an effective motivator, it has not been successful for action against surveillance because the threat is either too small or too big. However, fear is not the only way to promote behavioral change. People may be more motivated to use free software if the pitch for it focuses on the positive rewards of better software rather than the negative effects of their current software. There must be bigger and better marketing and advertising for free software products (without using unethical behavior collection practices). People are likely to adopt new technology if someone they trust shows them it is better than what they are currently using. However, despite being inundated with ads my whole life, I had never heard of the free software programs discussed in class before this semester, and without seeing people I know use them, I still have little idea how they work. Among those without the benefit of this course, there is probably even greater ignorance of free software. Advertising which focuses on the higher quality of free software should be able to convince more people to try it. Describing the problem of surveillance may play a role in demonstrating the privacy benefits of free software, but the product should be at the center of the pitch, not the threat. When free software is always tied to the surveillance threat, it also becomes tied to the feelings of apathy and powerlessness that the threat creates. A positive advertising strategy for free software may be a solution. \ No newline at end of file
Advertising free software is the solution to the privacy problem? I don't see how to take that seriously. The scale of the problem is a little large for that, don't you think, even if advertising weren't the quintessence of the problem's toolkit.

You reworded some sentences in response to my comments. I think the invitation was to rethinking rather than rewording, but I may not have understood my own suggestions well enough to have given clear advice. Like the consent fallacy, this account continues to assume that our collective welfare should be based entirely on individual consumption decisions made by individuals in whose heuristics for making those decisions you don't show much trust. Your desire to be ruled by the market isn't justified, any more than your consumers' decisions are, to be sure, but the irony seems not to imperil the smoothness of the conclusion. Is the best approach to the social dominance of harmful or dangerous products a stronger advertising campaign for safe products? I don't think there's anyone on earth who thinks so, including you, but here you are advocating that conclusion.

 \ No newline at end of file

Revision 6r6 - 18 Jan 2020 - 15:17:16 - EbenMoglen
Revision 5r5 - 07 Jan 2020 - 00:15:06 - VinayPatel
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
Syndicate this site RSSATOM