147
Can I get UberEats to stop recommending to "bundle" alcohol from a liquor store to your order? (lemmy.world)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml
35 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

It just annoys me because I'm not going to order it and I'm abstaining from alcohol. But there's always some "special deals" being advertised by UberEats on alcohol, as well as meat, dairy and eggs. It's like they're really sleazy and desperate to hawk these products.

all 41 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 92 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Just wait until they get caught targeting people in recovery for these liquor ads at the optimal time for them to cave and make an order. You know that shit's going to be a scandal sometime in the next few years.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago

    My buddy's dad is an alcoholic with a ton of health issues. He had a stroke a while back and had to quit drinking as a result. He can't drive anymore or even really leave the house. Well, his wife recently passed away, and someone showed him door dash and Uber eats was a thing to help him get food delivered. He saw they had alcohol on it, and now he regularly gets beer delivered. Like, the guy's old AF n lost his wife, so who am I to judge him wanting to get liquored up, but he probably wouldn't be drinking right now if this all happened 10 years ago.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [–] 54 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Often, when bringing up privacy, people say they are ok with some tracking because they'll get more relevant ads

    But it's so common to not be able to block products you don't want, be it alcohol, meat products, dairy, gambling/casino games, podcasts from people you don't want to hear from

    It's not about getting more relevant ads, it's about figuring out what they can best sell you. Sometimes that lines up with what you want, but you can get that benefit without targeted ads too

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
    • [–] 30 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

    Good starting place for an ADA class action lawsuit.

    Addiction is covered.

    US regulatory institutions lack teeth these last 40 years. They're the agency that should castrate such an issue, IMO.

    You're disabled with addiction tendencies? Okay, not lawful to feed you adverts for your addictions.

    Why is this not the case? Is our government disinterested in our welfare?

    The moment that's true, we should be lighting our tax funded institutions on fire. Straight up. We paid for that shit. And the folks handling that money are doing fuck all to support our generosity.

    Edit: people in here mistaking "good starting place for" with "A fucking slam dunk grand slam for," But that's cool, y'all do you.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago* (2 children)

    The ADA doesn’t have anything to do with marketing/advertising. Yes, people struggling with addiction are a protected class. How does that apply here?

    Can we sue people who make Souls games because they’re too hard for people with one hand? of course not. Should trivia games be banned because some people have intellectual disabilities? Can you ban my advertisement for my trivia night because of that? No. The ADA isn’t that wide

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    Yes that's true. That specifically why I said what I said.

    It's a good starting place. For a class action lawsuit.

    It's not a slam dunk, but it's a good starting place. And the ADA is an agency that could facilitate such an endeavor.

    How do you think sidewalks become mandated to have handicap accessible ramps at all crosswalks?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    The ADA is a law, not an agency. And the law mandated those ramps. It’s all in the law, which hasn’t been updated since it was written 30 years ago

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    No, but it's been interpreted in relevant cases already, the courts told Domino's that their website needed to be screen reader accessible because of the ADA. That was in 2019 though.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    You're still wrong. The law mandates how websites should operate too so everyone can access them (which isn't unique to the US either), and the article you linked even says that the case was covered by the ADA and no special interpretation was necessary (you may be confused by Domino's horseshit response). The act does not mandate how advertising should and shouldn't be conducted. The ADA covers quite a bit of ground. Might be worth looking it up before you spout off next time...

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 child)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Advertising isn't covered by the ADA. That's the beginning and end of it. Yes, they should. No, they don't have to. Just like liquor stores don't have to hide their advertising. You've also assumed way too much about how broad the website accessibility statues are. They are very narrow, and the case you've presented is not covered by them. Websites aren't required to censor their content for fear it may trigger a response in a disabled person. They are only required to ensure that the website is accessible to the disabled person. If what you proposed were the case, then no alcohol manufacturer or store would be able to have a website.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] -10 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Good starting place for an ADA class action lawsuit.

    Oi vey πŸ™„. The first step is not a lawsuit. Uber probably don't even know they're doing this as they will create marketing campaigns at a high level to target a mass audience rather than specifically trying to offend you. That's just not how these campaigns work.

    A good starting point would be to reach out to their customer team and highlight the issue and see if they can figure out a solution.

    What's with the straight to the courts ambulance chasing mentality people have rather than trying to reach out and find a solution?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Large corporate entities like Uber don't listen until it significantly affects their bottom line. A program to allow customers to tailor advertisements would involve many thousands of dollars to implement and maintain, and the net result would be less customer engagement with their marketing programs.

    The math just doesn't add up until Uber faces a significant cost for not implementing it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -5 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    This sounds like you've never worked in the industry or have any insight into this topic. Large companies like Uber absolutely do listen to customer feedback. And if you want it to hit their bottom line you can protest the use of their app until they change, make it a hash tag on social media and drive change by voting with your feet. You don't need to whip out the lawyers. Lord above, not everything needs to be solved with litigation.

    A program to allow customers to tailor advertisements

    We're not talking about tailoring advertising. OP stated these are recommendations based on the what he is buying at the time. These are offers. Have you never seen a two for one aisle at your local supermarket? Or special offers on alcohol? It's not a random advert popping up asking them to buy stuff whilst booking a cab. At the simplest level we're talking about a setting that says, don't upsell or market me alcohol (because I may be recovering) or meat (because I may be vegan). That would actually be a selling point for their app and something they could put a positive spin on.

    I genuinely think you don't understand the problem space here by what your saying or the solutions you're offering.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    We're not talking about tailoring advertising. OP stated these are recommendations based on the what he is buying at the time. These are offers.

    That's advertising.

    That's targeted advertisement.

    Businesses only listen to customers when it positively affects their bottom line, or when they are forced to do so by regulators.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -5 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    That's advertising.

    That's targeted advertisement.

    It's really not, mate. Do you think buy one get one free is advertising? Or we have an offer on alcohol today? Or 50% off all cheese?

    You don't have a clue.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Yes.

    Yes, all of those are advertising.

    Communicated offers to exchange goods are advertisements.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Well feel free to waste money on a lawsuit as OP suggested because you'll fail so hard it'll be funny. Then the courts can tell you it isn't covered by advertising laws and you'll finally learn.

    I look forward to reading your court submission.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    The cost for them to defend themselves will exceed the cost for them to implement an ADA compliant solution.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    So feel free to start the challenge and let's see the change. If you're so confident then lawyer up, as they say. Force them to implement an ADA compliant solution if you think they're in breach.

    Then post the judgement where the court throws it out πŸ˜‚.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    The person you are replying to said nothing about the ADA. That was OP. I dunno why you're bothering to argue with this person, you're clearly out of your depth since it's painfully obvious you don't even know what advertising is.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    The person you are replying to said nothing about the ADA

    They literally said this:

    The cost for them to defend themselves will exceed the cost for them to implement an ADA compliant solution.

    I mean at some point I just have to give up. Twenty years in the industry is clearly not enough for internet warriors. 🀷

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [+] 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 child)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I've worked for gigantic corporations as well as small shops, from cashier to systems administrator, on three continents, and not once have I seen a manager review customer feedback about anything but the call centre staff.

    Well to be blunt you've worked for shit companies. Sorry.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child)

    Lol, you've spent 20yrs in this industry and don't know what advertising is? Do you work as a receptionist for your company? And if you are an advertiser, you're terrible at it if you think that was them proposing they use the ADA to enforce any sort of judgement. All they said that is that it would cost more to defend than to follow the ADA. They were referring to them rather than invoking them like you have done. You are terrible at parsing nuance from a comment - I apologise for trying to speak to you as someone with an equal intelligence to mine, my mistake...

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago

    Uber doesn't even care and straight up steals from you if there's missing food in your order. I doubt minimum wage support employee #7608 is going to care or even have the ability to pass on that information.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [–] 15 points 2 years ago* (1 child)
    • meat
    • dairy
    • eggs
    • alcohol

    these are large industries with a lot of muscle. I'm sure the deal they struck with Uber eats doesn't include an option to "turn off" these offers

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
    • [–] 15 points 2 years ago

    I'm just bouncing ideas off and not sure if it works like that, but maybe you can try creating a teen account and link it to your main one.

    Recently I noticed there's an option to let me link teen accounts(and other adults) under a family that lets them order but pay with the primary account.

    Assuming teens won't be able to buy alcohol, perhaps those recommendations would go away too?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 3 points 2 years ago*

    Stop using gig economy apps, you're fucking up the economy and eroding worker rights.

    You love enshitification on the internet? Well those apps are going to bring that to the real world.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [+] 1 point 2 years ago
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [+] -18 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Yes, you just have to remove it from my order. Unfortunately, I can't give you access to my orders. So I guess you can't remove those recommendations from my orders.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •