What if Amazon had political ads?

[Trurl]

What is Amazon promoted one Presidential candidate over another?

I mean they are pretty good at showing things that I may be interested in. And they can change the price to influence me.

Bruce Schenier’s Data and Goliath book states that personal data is collected, shared, and sold. It has all your demographics and psychological profile. They can essentially read your mind.

But my questions are how are both candidates using this information? And.does it change your mind and influence your vote.

It doesn’t have to be a formal ad. For instance if I see the war in Ukraine is brutal and the people are fighting hard to fight Russia, but we limit what weapons and support we give them. And then the President of Ukraine want 6 billion dollars…I think there is something wrong…they have just created a war economy.

But then next time I watch the news Trump says he can end the war. We laugh at this. After all Trump and Putin are friends. They are dictators.

I try and apply scientific method: Trump’s term had no wars. But America would not fight or support an unjust war. And communism is bad.

I know we always think our own opinions are correct. But you can see this is debatable.

But our decisions could mean we were psyoped. I mean we don’t have perfect information. We only know what we are shown and they know how to influence us.

But why would they want us to pick a side and divide us. Instead of the truth they give us 2 incomplete descriptions and they know best.

Vote for what you believe in. I just wish there was science to combat the misinformation.

Maybe if we had Trump and Harris’s Internet profiles we could predict what they would do in office. And we could send them ads to influence decisions towards a better world.

[exchemist]

7 hours ago, Trurl said:

What is Amazon promoted one Presidential candidate over another?

I mean they are pretty good at showing things that I may be interested in. And they can change the price to influence me.

Bruce Schenier’s Data and Goliath book states that personal data is collected, shared, and sold. It has all your demographics and psychological profile. They can essentially read your mind.

But my questions are how are both candidates using this information? And.does it change your mind and influence your vote.

It doesn’t have to be a formal ad. For instance if I see the war in Ukraine is brutal and the people are fighting hard to fight Russia, but we limit what weapons and support we give them. And then the President of Ukraine want 6 billion dollars…I think there is something wrong…they have just created a war economy.

But then next time I watch the news Trump says he can end the war. We laugh at this. After all Trump and Putin are friends. They are dictators.

I try and apply scientific method: Trump’s term had no wars. But America would not fight or support an unjust war. And communism is bad.

I know we always think our own opinions are correct. But you can see this is debatable.

But our decisions could mean we were psyoped. I mean we don’t have perfect information. We only know what we are shown and they know how to influence us.

But why would they want us to pick a side and divide us. Instead of the truth they give us 2 incomplete descriptions and they know best.

Vote for what you believe in. I just wish there was science to combat the misinformation.

Maybe if we had Trump and Harris’s Internet profiles we could predict what they would do in office. And we could send them ads to influence decisions towards a better world.

Then they would lose half their customer base. 

That's the (really rather obvious) reason why retailers seeking to appeal to a wide customer base generally avoid taking overt political positions.

 

[swansont]

8 hours ago, Trurl said:

I try and apply scientific method: Trump’s term had no wars.

Where did you get that? Trump is not a credible source of data.

“At least 65 troops died in hostile action” under Trump

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/01/13/trump-falsely-claims-no-terrorist-attacks-no-wars-during-his-presidency/

He escalated engagement in existing conflicts

https://responsiblestatecraft.org/2021/01/20/trump-the-anti-war-president-was-always-a-myth/

[KJW]

15 hours ago, swansont said:

Trump is not a credible source of data.

He probably is if one assumes that what he says is NOT true.

 

[Trurl]

On 10/19/2024 at 7:20 AM, exchemist said:

Then they would lose half their customer base.

I did not explain this well. I mean not Amazon themselves choosing a candidate but an entity that could target ads like Amazon does for “things you may like.” I mean target ads like Amazon. I am glad some things aren’t political.

Bruce Schneier says stuff like this is possible in his book Data and Goliath.

I don’t have perfect knowledge of all the wars. They are not going to say what information influenced their decision. I only know what the news and media organizations say. And those are the same as the ones trying to influence me.

 I’m just figuring the real issues aren’t being addressed. Both sides are liers.

Then there is the issue that voting doesn’t scientifically work. But that is another issue.

[exchemist]

3 hours ago, Trurl said:

I did not explain this well. I mean not Amazon themselves choosing a candidate but an entity that could target ads like Amazon does for “things you may like.” I mean target ads like Amazon. I am glad some things aren’t political.

Bruce Schneier says stuff like this is possible in his book Data and Goliath.

I don’t have perfect knowledge of all the wars. They are not going to say what information influenced their decision. I only know what the news and media organizations say. And those are the same as the ones trying to influence me.

 I’m just figuring the real issues aren’t being addressed. Both sides are liers.

Then there is the issue that voting doesn’t scientifically work. But that is another issue.

I’m not sure I follow. I admit my experience of Amazon is limited (I try to avoid it and only use it perhaps twice per year), but my impression is they only suggest other goods you can buy from Amazon. Since people go to Amazon to buy goods rather than to watch entertainment - it’s not a media channel: nobody sane spends 20 minutes “watching” Amazon’s website - I can’t see any point in them starting to display ads for things they don’t sell. 
 

Now, if you want to talk about an entertainment channel like YouTube which  makes money by showing ads, that’s a different matter. YouTube most certainly does show ads targeted by what it thinks an individual viewer is interested in. This already includes political ads. We got some in the UK during the last election campaign. 

[iNow]

4 hours ago, exchemist said:

people go to Amazon to buy goods rather than to watch entertainment - it’s not a media channel

Prime video is an Amazon property

[exchemist]

1 hour ago, iNow said:

Prime video is an Amazon property

Ah so that’s what this is about. I didn’t realise Bezos was also into entertainment. This handful of oligarchs really do insert themselves into every aspect of our lives. 
 

And now one of them is trying to buy the US election, ironically on the pretext of “saving democracy”. 🤪

[Trurl]

Quote

I’m not sure I follow. I admit my experience of Amazon is limited (I try to avoid it and only use it perhaps twice per year), but my impression is they only suggest other goods you can buy from Amazon. Since people go to Amazon to buy goods rather than to watch entertainment - it’s not a media channel: nobody sane spends 20 minutes “watching” Amazon’s website - I can’t see any point in them starting to display ads for things they don’t sell.

I’m not saying put political ads on Amazon. People hate ads. But say Amazon recommends a product. It looks like a suggestion and not an ad. It is an ad. But the message of the ad was target to that specific shopper.

Now we have ad blockers and ignore ads. But  since the person targeting you the browser knows your browsing history they can influence you. The ad doesn’t have to be in the form of a pop-up. Like you mentioned in the form of YouTube or a news article. You could see if the browser searched Harris and show a group of news articles as Trump being a jerk. If a person was maga you could show Jan 6th or Trumps cabinet saying he’s dangerous.

To me the Generals and advisors saying he shouldn’t be president will decide the election. Trump has many policies I agree with but the only reason he would lose if the anti Trump fuels voters.

I really don’t know what Harris stands for but she is running on: “Not Trump.”

But 5 states will determine the election anyway. I see the political ads and wonder how and who they are trying to influence.

I think the political cartoons are interesting. Political cartoons are the most credible political ads.

I did some graphic artwork for a few months. We called them products but they were ads. It was simple stuff like events or signs. Nothing as devious as trying to win an election.

But putting out messages like these can be with great power comes great responsibility. One group in the graphics shop made a slogan: “One Nation.” Which in the U.S. is patriot but means “one race” in a different country.

So with its unpredictability and no rules we see all these garage ads. But these problems weren’t discovered by me. The U.S. Government is battling social media and at the same time exploiting media for their own purposes.

[StringJunky]

41 minutes ago, Trurl said:

But putting out messages like these can be with great power comes great responsibility. One group in the graphics shop made a slogan: “One Nation.” Which in the U.S. is patriot but means “one race” in a different country.

The MAGA idea of a 'patriot' is "White wing" and "Far white". Those are two new labels I learned today, and how apt they are too. The author of those terms was Middle Eastern, iirc.

Edited October 27 by StringJunky

[Trurl]

@StringJunky

I will tell you what I told my friend:

 

“Next week is crunch time. The election. Three States will choose between two candidates that one state chose to get a result nobody wants.”

[swansont]

On 10/22/2024 at 8:52 AM, exchemist said:

Ah so that’s what this is about. I didn’t realise Bezos was also into entertainment. This handful of oligarchs really do insert themselves into every aspect of our lives. 
 

And now one of them is trying to buy the US election, ironically on the pretext of “saving democracy”. 🤪

Bezos also owns the Washington Post, and ensured the paper made no presidential endorsement 

[exchemist]

13 minutes ago, swansont said:

Bezos also owns the Washington Post, and ensured the paper made no presidential endorsement 

I read that in the FT, which wryly commented that Bezos had a meeting with Trump the day the non-endorsement was announced.
 

These oligarchs are falling into line behind Trump, one by one. When the chips are down, what counts for them is the prospects for their business and their personal fortunes. After all, democracy is for the little people. Peter Thiel has a survival bolthole in New Zealand if things get too hot in the States, having taken out NZ citizenship as a precaution. And Musk is trying to buy votes, on Trump’s behalf. These individuals are out of control.

[swansont]

1 hour ago, exchemist said:

And Musk is trying to buy votes, on Trump’s behalf

Musk’s secret talks with Putin that just came to light are a likely violation of his security clearance. I’m wondering if he gets his clearance yanked on Nov 6. (Before then might seem politically motivated)

[MigL]

2 hours ago, swansont said:

Bezos also owns the Washington Post, and ensured the paper made no presidential endorsement 

Rumor is the WP was all set to endorse Harris, but J Bezos quashed it because he's afraid of retribution should Trump win.
Last I heard quite a few editors/reporters have resigned, and they've lost 200K subscribers.

Maybe all these people who are afraid of Trump should help make sure he's not elected, instead of kissing his ass.

[iNow]

50 minutes ago, MigL said:

Rumor is the WP was all set to endorse Harris, but J Bezos quashed it because he's afraid of retribution should Trump win.

Especially since Trump could also hurt his Amazon and BlueOrigin properties 

51 minutes ago, MigL said:

Maybe all these people who are afraid of Trump should help make sure he's not elected, instead of kissing his ass.

It’s not like Trump voters give a shit about what WaPo says. Lamestream media cries go all the way back to Sarah Palin. 

[StringJunky]

4 hours ago, swansont said:

Bezos also owns the Washington Post, and ensured the paper made no presidential endorsement 

Apparently, he might be being cautious if Trump is elected, given his pronouncements of retribution.

Edit: Just noticed MigL already said it.

Edited October 30 by StringJunky