You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
3

[–] goodluvin 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Idea of getting rid of the waste in the system.
Prescription drugs should be given based on necessity.

What is the purpose of advertising them?
IMHO To make people "believe" they need these drugs.

Believe the prescient has been set already.
Similar to yelling "fire" in a crowded theater when there is no fire. Create panic(demand) for the sake of it when no fire(necessity) exists.

But I am always up for a debating these issues.

0
1

[–] ArchmageMordenkainen 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

I think you're missing the greater point. Regardless of the ad's necessity, or how wasteful it is, whoever makes that ad has a constitutional right to free expression of any sort. Even if what they're doing is a "waste in the system," he and the company that requested it are free to waste their capital in this manner if they so choose. I think MTV is a huge drain of resources that contributes nothing. That doesn't mean it should be banned.

Yes, the ads are often misleading. But it's better to deal with this by educating the gullible rather than creating a duplicity-free echo chamber for them.

0
1

[–] goodluvin 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

Agree: Banning is never great solution. Public free expression is critical.
When the issue comes to business "free expression". I am very wary of their motives.

In the case of prescription drug advertisements, advertising to the public only serves to artificial increase the demand for the drugs. Only advertising/making information available to the doctors serves a purpose.

prior comment on prescient and other comment on existing restriction of cigarette advertisement.