I know it's a... stretch, but imagine this: - you can't put billboards in the city - you can't place any images, text, etc. banners anywhere (except for tightly controlled, single-design descriptions of businesses in buildings, decided by each municipality like it's already done in some cities to maintain consistent look of historical town centers) - in general, no publicly visible ads of any kind are allowed - no ads in videos, TV, etc.
Where would ads be? - you can search for ads like you do today, in search engines (preferably opt in), i.e. ads become a catalogue, not a "here I am" attention grabber - gray line (recommendations/suggestions which really are ads would need to be limited/removed as well) to be decided
In general, clear up public space and attention holding spaces from explicit commercial interests as much as possible.
I'd love to live a few years in such a world and see whether value propositions of businesses would start shifting...
See:
https://99percentinvisible.org/article/clean-city-law-secret...
https://www.rapidtransition.org/stories/adblocking-the-globa...
https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/aug/11/can-cities-ki...
A gallary of Tokyo stripped of advertising: https://www.theguardian.com/cities/gallery/2015/aug/12/tokyo...
I can't start a "we are cheaper than wallmart" discount business without advertising this fact.
You need advertisements, or something like that, to encourage new products and price competition.
You do not need tracking for any reason since you can advertise against the content of the article, video or podcast. If I am reading up about apartment prices in AREA, serve me suggestions based on that.
Targted ads don't work.
The reason is it's all highest bidder, no quality control. If there was an ad network with a brand, with a reputation for only running ads for high quality products at competitive prices, then maybe I'd pay attention.
EDIT: Writing this comment made me consciously pay attention to ads to verify my thesis, but honestly the quality was better than I expected.
[edit] Onto your second point, that you need ads to promote price competition, I don't think so. There's almost no advertisement in many kinds of services like e.g. hair salons, but they still very much compete (price included). Also, huge majority of professional trainers do not advertise anywhere in my area, and yet we all compete on price and our customers know the range of prices that are reasonable. So information about price etc. flows quite well regardless of ads.
The thing is, advertising does not efficiently suggest products/services now, so the idea that removing it would hurt customers ability to find what they want is a little melodramatic
One would search for a massage chair on there and find that some are cheaper than others and read the reviews to make an educated guess about whether the extra price is worth it.
Now, one could say, "so what? Most folks know that, useful info still, and it's better than ads!". But is it? At least the ad is an overt block of color, but affiliate links are hidden behind redirects and tiny disclaimers (in the few regions that require disclosure).
It's fine (and easy) to complain about display ads or video ads, but there's a lot more. Product brand shown or mentioned in tv or movie:ad. Movie trailers: yep, ad. Public media mentioning a sponsor: ad. That tiktok or insta person who always has branded product in the frame? ad.
In fact, most product discovery comes from ads. Is there another way? Probably, but ads have worked better than any other approach for so long, we haven't beaten it yet. I hope we do, but til then, for every 100 ads I despise, I'm still happy I found that one thing I actually liked. Can't say that defends all ads, but it gives me hope that we can find a good middle spot.
Ad supported media has a similarly skewed structure. If I'm paying for media I better like it. If adverts pay for it, the key is lots of people spend lots of time looking at it.
I haven’t heard anyone suggest we ban distributors.
.adv would be the internet catalog (good or bad, awesome shopping resource or godawful bag of crap, as may be) and all other TLDs (even .com) will be free of ads. Period.
But then take the example of new technology: you wouldn't want to buy gore-tex shoes, which would be more expensive than the others, if you didn't know that they were both waterproof and breathable, something you would consider impossible before seeing the ad.
Apples M1 is a more recent example: until their marketing/pr blitz hit I couldn't buy a fanless laptop with anywhere decent performance and so because I didn't know it existed, I wouldn't have gone to search for it.
You can run a price comparison website for know old things, e.g I use them when I am after something specific.
Of course that leaves me the problem of which price comparison site I should use.
There are big cities, see the comments above yours, where billboards are banned or strictly limited.
There's no need to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
How do you decide what is an ad and what is not an ad? What if I tell my friend, that my new TV is really good? What if I tell it to 10 of my friends? What if I send an email to everyone I know, saying, that my new TV is great?
Would you investigate, if the TV manufacturer paid me or not? How exactly would you do it? Or did they gave me a discount on the TV?
I wish you could see, that you can not ban advertising, without banning free speech.
It would be also great to ban lying in media, right?
As opposed to the billboards, building side adverts, and web site ads that are just splatting out at anyone that happens by.
Over consumption is killing the planet, processed foods are destroying our health, user engagement hacking is eroding free will.
Powerful companies like HSBC manipulate the press through the pressure of their ad-spend. [1]
But obviously we can't just see the vast advertising industry and all it supports vanish overnight. However, we could nationalize them. We could pay last years ad-spend to market healthy food, low consumption & social connections. Then next year we could cut spending a little, say 90%. If companies can't survive without the economic dead weight of advertising then they shouldn't exist. It's not like they're required for product discovery in the information technology age.
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/feb/17/peter-oborne-t...
I can't really think of any billboards nearby, so I think this effectively restricts the billboards to maybe very busy interstates and nowhere else. Going across state lines into Missouri is very noticeable because there's billboards everywhere.
[0] http://online.encodeplus.com/regs/overlandpark-ks/export2doc...
There is too much lucre at stake for the government to be allowed to regulate. The government is vulnerable and needs to be supported by the advertising lobby. After all, it's what they do.