{"id":52719,"date":"2026-07-24T14:09:36","date_gmt":"2026-07-24T18:09:36","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/mjtsai.com\/blog\/?p=52719"},"modified":"2026-07-24T14:11:49","modified_gmt":"2026-07-24T18:11:49","slug":"advertising-cognitive-dissonance","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mjtsai.com\/blog\/2026\/07\/24\/advertising-cognitive-dissonance\/","title":{"rendered":"Advertising Cognitive Dissonance"},"content":{"rendered":"

John Gruber<\/a> (Mastodon<\/a>):<\/p>\n

\n

This to me is proof that Apple leadership is suffering from cognitive dissonance over their slide into advertising. They’re conflating cause and effect. The Apple brand stands for high-quality superior user experiences because the devices and software Apple makes traditionally deliver high-quality superior user experiences. The work Apple ships is what makes the brand what it is. But now they’re stricken with the mindset that it’s the Apple brand that makes something a high-quality superior experience.<\/p>\n

[…]<\/p>\n

If you refuse to admit that the ads make these services worse, you also can’t admit that there’s a reason to offer an ad-free experience. So the thinking is something like “Apple always focuses on the user experience, and never deliberately makes the user experience worse. Therefore, if an Apple service shows ads, those ads are high quality and don’t detract from the quality of the product or the experience of using it. Therefore, there’s no reason to offer users a paid ad-free tier, because there’s no reason to want to avoid Apple’s ads.<\/em>”<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n

What a brand stands for can change over time. It’s eventually determined by the products, not the mantras.<\/p>\n\n