A marketing team within media giant Cox Media Group (CMG) claims it has the capability to listen to ambient conversations of consumers through embedded microphones in smartphones, smart TVs, and other devices to gather data and use it to target ads, according to a review of CMG marketing materials by 404 Media and details from a pitch given to an outside marketing professional. Called “Active Listening,” CMG claims the capability can identify potential customers “based on casual conversations in real time.”

  • penquin@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 months ago

    I’ve never met a person in my life that was convinced by an ad to buy something. I know I never have and never will, I actually stay away from things that are advertised to me. So these fucking brainless fucks are literally wasting their money and energy on ads. Every human being I know loaths ads and would love to erase them from existence. When will they ever get this?

    • shani66@lemmy.comfysnug.space
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      Ads only work when you are searching them out yourself. Like, if i go to steam looking to buy a new game I’d be susceptible to a video game ad. And ads for established brands are complete wastes of money, I’m not gonna buy a coke because i saw an ad for it.

    • speck@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      I mostly agree. But that ad with the unicorn shitting ice cream and kids eating it was a rare exception that worked

    • admiralteal@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      This argument presumes that the entire many-billion and maybe even multiple-trillion dollar global ad industry is ALL based on complete, ineffective nonsense. That everyone has just been bamboozled. That’s a naive view, I think.

      The best argument for why we must be vigilant against ads and data collection by advertisers is because the shit does work. It influences people to make purchases, sometimes against their better judgement or reason. Because subverting someone’s agency over their own body and mind is heinous at a very high level.

      I’m certain you are wrong. You’ve absolutely purchased products that were advertised to you. You just didn’t make the connection between your decision and the advertisements. You THINK seeing an ad makes you unlikely to buy a product, but you likely only really notice and have an emotional response to the ads for products you weren’t likely to buy in the first place.

      • FfaerieOxide@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

        This argument presumes that the entire many-billion and maybe even multiple-trillion dollar global ad industry is ALL based on complete, ineffective nonsense.

        Strangers things have happened than money being thrown at bullshit.

        NFTs were a thing, recall.

        • admiralteal@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          11 months ago

          All the industry analysis of the ROI on advertising would’ve had to come to the same spurious conclusions about that effectiveness, too. With the largest, richest, and most profitable firms being the ones MOST fooled.

          No, I don’t think anything that strange has ever happened. This is basically a conspiracy theory.

          • FfaerieOxide@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            11 months ago

            A bunch of people making money jerking one another off and you think any one of them’d be in a rush to rock the boat?

            You sound much more conspiratorial with your “capitalism always results in rational and correct decisions” fallacy.

            • admiralteal@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              11 months ago

              You’ve literally just described your own view as believing in a grand conspiracy where all players have sworn themselves to secrecy in a scheme any one of them could undermine in a moment, so I guess that’s that.

              • FfaerieOxide@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                11 months ago

                I don’t see where I did that. To say you sound more conspiratorial (which you do) is not an admission of any conspiratorial thinking on my part.

                • admiralteal@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  A bunch of people making money jerking one another off and you think any one of them’d be in a rush to rock the boat?

                  In case you edit it away later. Very good, bye now.

      • penquin@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

        I know for a fact that you’re wrong. You just are. I have never bought a single thing based on an ad, period.

        • Nix@merv.news
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          11 months ago

          What phone do you hve? What computer? What shoes? What milk do you buy? Ads dont work by showing up and making you go buy it like a drone. You see the ads a thousand times and then you start believing its better than other products

    • Jay@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      When I was a kid there were some things I’d see and wanted, only to get them and be seriously disappointed. I learned quickly that ads are fluff.

      Nowadays, I actively stay away from things I’ve seen advertised. The way I see it is if a company has to pay tons of money to get their product seen, it can’t be all that good to start with. Genuinely good products don’t need to try and convince you they’re worth it.

      • penquin@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

        Oh boy, all those toys ads on TV where the make the toy look so awesome with all those animations then you get it, and it’s a piece of plastic that does absolute none of they advertised.

    • PM_ME_VINTAGE_30S [he/him]@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      I’ve never met a person in my life that was convinced by an ad to buy something.

      I believe that you’re being truthful, but I respectfully challenge the idea that you don’t know some person who was convinced by an ad to buy something. Even if all your friends truthfully insist that their decisions are not swayed by ads, there is probably some product they chose at least partially because an advertisement reached them and left a positive impression about the product.

      Ads do clearly work on people who are suggestible enough to be susceptible to them. Some of your contacts are probably these people whether they admit to it or not. If ads didn’t work, they wouldn’t be made. Ads aren’t made inherently to be annoying or make our lives worse; they’re driven by profit. Kill the profit and the motive dies. IMO that’s all the more reason to get rid of them.

      Anecdotally, my parents and grandmother watch TV with commercials, and they give me a bug-eyed look when I explain to them that I don’t get advertisements and that I don’t want to see them. Most people I know just want to get content crammed down their content-holes and will deal with ads to avoid the momentary inconvenience of change. So I feel like we’re fighting an uphill battle.

    • LollerCorleone@kbin.socialOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      You are generalizing too much here. I know many who have tried out a product only after seeing its ad. Ads can give plenty of returns to brands. But targeted ads which even exploits our most intimate conversations are really bad news for our right to privacy.

      • RaincoatsGeorge@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

        Ive absolutely bought shit that ended up as an embedded ad after I visited the page previously. Youre just more likely to follow through if you see it over and over again.

        Its not really a complex concept.

      • penquin@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

        I said “I’ve never met a person”… then “every human being I know”. Does that count as generalizing? This is basically my circle of the people I know.

        • nevernevermore@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          11 months ago

          I said “I’ve never met a person”… then “every human being I know”. Does that count as generalizing?

          generalize | ˈdʒɛn(ə)rəlʌɪz | verb | 1 make a general or broad statement by inferring from specific cases

          Literally, yes.

          • penquin@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            11 months ago

            If you say generalize within my circle of people that I know then yes I agree with you, but generalizing in general means everyone, even those I don’t know and have never met, and I didn’t say that. So, literally not yes. lol

            • nevernevermore@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              11 months ago

              so then your argument is companies are wasting money because you and your circle aren’t affected by advertising? how big is your circle that companies should fear not appealling to it?

  • Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 months ago

    One can only hope that we will eventually amend trespass laws to include digital trespassing.

    • dutchkimble@lemy.lol
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      But then it’ll be fine for them to do it because - forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive them that trespass against us

  • vexikron@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 months ago

    Why wouldnt they be serious?

    If your phone has the capability to have a parental control / monitoring mode on it enabled, which can see everything you are doing on the phone, hear what youre saying and see what the cameras see and know your GPS location… and hide all of this to the user…

    Why wouldnt ad companies also pay for such a live feed, or at least parts of it, if the software and hardware capabilities already exist?

    People have been reporting getting advertisements based on conversations they were having 10 minutes ago with a person next to their phone for years.

    • Lemmchen@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      What are you talking about? Which phone has parental control abilities like that?

      • vexikron@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

        Well, all phones with Google’s Android do, and probably all iPhones too, though I am not an iPhone user so I cannot speak from personal experience on iPhones.

        My brother, last year, decided to engage parental control on my android phone and used it to stalk me on foot and in his car.

        He was the head of the TMobile family plan we were on. I talked to TMobile employees at different locations many times about this. They tried to helo me, but because I was not the head of the plan, the tech support people that the instore agents had to call to try to fix my situation wouldnt do anything.

        At one point a T Mobile employee told me to call the police… on T Mobile.

        But uh yeah everything on stock android is connected to a google account, and TMobile and Google apparently just presume that any one not the head of a family plan are children, and will allow parental control to be enabled /without informing the ‘child’/.

  • smeg@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 months ago

    This seems fishy. Beyond being illegal in a lot of places, if this was actually possible without people noticing (e.g. detecting massive data usage of audio being uploaded or native battery/CPU usage of it being processed locally) then we’d know about it!

    My first thought is that this is the classic tech sales bullshit of claiming your product can do something impossible in order to sell it. What’s most confusing is the statement from the bottom of the article:

    “CMG businesses do not listen to any conversations or have access to anything beyond a third-party aggregated, anonymized and fully encrypted data set that can be used for ad placement. We regret any confusion and we are committed to ensuring our marketing is clear and transparent,” the statement added.

    So are they admitting it was bullshit or what?