I get the populist sentiment, but 'advertising' is just another word for 'speech.' aka, should be maximally protected under the 1st amendment. If it's not: obscene, fraud, defamatory, there is little mandate for the state to be involved.
It's silly to create laws that are unenforceable on an internet without borders. Furthermore, the wackjob types aren't restricted to spread woowoo, so you're just setting up asymmetric info warfare against any industry that is already hamstrung with regulatory hurdles to climb.

I’m for banning pharma industry TV ads no matter who does it.  👍

Andrew Yang🧢⬆️🇺🇸

I get the populist sentiment, but 'advertising' is just another word for 'speech.' aka, should be maximally protected under the 1st amendment. If it's not: obscene, fraud, defamatory, there is little mandate for the state to be involved.
It's silly to create laws that are unenforceable on an internet without borders. Furthermore, the wackjob types aren't restricted to spread woowoo, so you're just setting up asymmetric info warfare against any industry that is already hamstrung with regulatory hurdles to climb.
https://x.com/AndrewYang/status/1857212114097836526

Software Engineer @ Cadence Design Systems. B4: Stanford EE / Illinois ECE

I agree in principle, especially in regards to internet advertising. However, in a world already hamstrung by regulation and one that bans advertising all kinds of things that should be free speech (like smoking ads) I don’t see any issue with it.

This is a fair point, though I feel jacobgrier.bsky.social is pushing back on some of the tobacco policy stuff and I find it quite interesting, I've added his book to my to-read list:

AI Agents and Podcast apps 
www.hypercatcher.com
@clanker-fomo

This is a fair point, though I feel jacobgrier.bsky.social is pushing back on some of the tobacco policy stuff and I find it quite interesting, I've added his book to my to-read list: https://jacobgrier.substack.com/p/my-new-book-the-new-prohibition

Interesting, will check that out too, thanks!