In Response to Brittany Maheris: Fight For your Right to Get the Best Price?

Overcharged: Would you fight for your rights?

I would definitely fight for my right. For example, I was in WalMart and Vitamin water was on sale for a dollar so I decided to buy some, but when I got to the cashier it registered for about $1.50. So I told the cashier that the sign said that it was on sale for a dollar, they called the floor supervisor to double check and was told that the drink was a dollar. I was buying five at the time which meant that I would have paid for 2.5 extra Vitamin waters. That is quite a bit over in my opinion.

I think that the video exposes a bigger problem than people not willing to fight for their rights. Quite a few customers thought that they got a really good deal and did not even realize that they paid way more than the $10, because they were not paying attention. One person said that they were embarrassed to argue about the price. No one should be embarrassed to fight for their right because if you don’t have your best interest at heart then who will. Rather you should be proud to stand up for yourself. You have to love and respect yourself before anyone else can.

I always pay attention because we are all humans and we make mistakes and see no reason why anyone should pay more than the price. I think that this is what is wrong with society and the reason for the economic crisis right now. We tend to act like mindless sheep, just following and paying no attention to what’s going on around us or what’s ahead. This attitude permeates society, not only do people not pay attention to how much they should pay, like some of the customers in the video, they also don’t pay attention to when their credit card payment is due or if they can really afford the monthly payments of the mortgage they just got. I think that this should be a warning to us, with so many graduating next week and entering the “real world.”

 Can you think of a reason why people don’t pay attention, like those in the video and do you think that someone should be embarrassed about fighting for their right?

Apple Keeping Tabs On You?

I was listening to “Wait, Wait Don’t Tell Me,” this morning and was surprised when I heard that iPads and iPhones were recording their location and the data was stored in an unprotected file.  Alasdair Allan and Pete Warden wrote the story “Got an iPhone or 3G iPad? Apple is recording your moves.” The article said that the recordings were not only the devices geographic location but also the time. According to Apple, the reason the data was collected to was provide and improve the company’s service, which is understandable. The company was also forthright about collecting the data a year ago in a detailed letter according to an article on Wired.com.

 But what is troubling is that the company has a year’s worth of data and the question is to what end. Once the necessary information is sent to Apple and that information is used to improve the company’s service there seems to be no reason why the data is stored on the device. Having that information stored creates unnecessary risks for Apple’s customers. For example, if the device is stolen or is hacked into, or someone has access to the device, then the data stored on the iPad or iPhone provides information about the owner’s movements.

Do you think that the Apple should store such data and do you think that it creates unnecessary security risks or invades one’s privacy?

In reponse to Ashley Guidi: Bottled Water! For Better or For Worse?

I must admit that I am one of those people who buy a lot of bottle water. We buy big one that sits on the counter and we always have a case for me to grab one as I leave in the morning. I am very particular about the taste of my water and have to agree that some bottled water taste a tad funny and it may just be the case that all the minerals that replenish what we have lost have been filtered out.

I remembered watching a show on T.V about bottled water; where people in a restaurant were given “bottle water” from exotic places and asked what they thought of it. Practically everyone said how refreshing, crisp and clean it tasted, not knowing that the water came from a hose at the back of the restaurant. I thought that it was very funny when they were told exactly where the water came from how surprised they looked.

There are some very valid points made in Ashley’s post about the cost of the water; from manufacturing the bottle to transporting it. We also have to contend with the fact that plastic is man-made and therefore not biodegradable. One of the ways that companies have tried to lessen the burden on the environment is through recycling and practically all water bottles now ask consumers to recycle.

Another thing that people don’t think about is the leaching of chemicals from the plastic bottle into the water, which have been proven to have a negative impact especially on women. People are cautioned not to leave their plastic bottles in areas that get hot because the heat increases the amount of chemicals leached into the water.

Marketing has played a big role in the bottle water fad and have even made drinking water – something that sustains life, a sign of prestige. People can now indicate by the brand on their bottle water their status. Very pretentious yes it’s water for goodness sake but I have to admit that some of the cheaper brands don’t taste as good.

Do you think that the more expensive the bottle water is the better it tastes and is the environmental price worth it?

Food Inc

I watched this documentary sometime early last year and again on Wednesday but was still shocked by what I saw.  Only a handful of companies controls the US food supply and animals are designed to grow fatter faster. Cattle are fed food (corn) that their bodies were not designed to digest, which resulted in the new strains of E.coli. The animals live in such horrendous conditions, for example, cattle are kept in pens where they have very little room to move and spend the entire time knee deep in their own waste. This is another reason why our food is contaminated. When the animals are transported to the slaughter house with their hides caked with feces and it becomes very difficult to keep everything sanitized.  One company’s solution to the problem was to rinse their ground meat with ammonium. I could not believe that this was their answer. How about giving those poor animals more space and cleaning those pens?

The slaughter house workers are exploited by the companies they work for. For example, the workers in plants such as Smithfield’s meat processing plant are treated as machines. They work in such horrible conditions that some get infections, lose fingernails, and suffer other bodily harm. Moreover, the company’s factory is in a poverty stricken area in the south and knowingly hires illegal immigrants from Mexico and then reveals their immigration status to US immigration. The only people how suffer are the immigrants while Smithfield escapes scotch free. Companies like Smithfield pay and treat their workers badly because they no longer look at them as human beings. They know that the workers are easily replaced because of the poverty in the area.  

Something that had me wondering what on earth was going on was the chicken industry. The giant companies are forcing the farmers into so much debt that the farmers have no other recourse but to do as the companies dictate. For example, chicken farmer spend $500,000 following the companies rule but only make $18,000 a year. How on earth are those farmers ever going to pay back all they have borrowed?  It now takes a chicken half the time it took to grow and they now have bigger breast than ever before. They grow so rapidly that their bones are under developed and they cannot carry the weight of the newly designed bodies.

Another thing that was shocking was the fact that the government allowed a private company to patent a food source. The Monsanto Company, developed soya bean that is resistant to pesticides and soya bean farmers how had been saving the seeds for generations were told they could no longer do so. If a farmer beans had the patent gene regardless of nature playing its part thru wind pollination they would sue that farmer. Even after farmers bought the Monsanto’s seeds they could not save them from their crops to replant; they had to buy new ones every year. This law was passed by a Judge who was Monsanto’s attorney before he became a judge. (Conflict of interest anybody)

I was amazed by the amount of people in charge governing bodies like the FDA among other who worked for the giants of food industry. These are the same people are reluctant to enforce the necessary rule to protect the American people; rather they protect the food industry. So many preach about exploitation in foreign countries, but turn a blind eye to what’s happening right here in the US. Working against labeling that would inform people about the products they are buying, whether it is – where the product comes from or that the meat they are buying is the product of a cloned animal.

The company Tyson was praised for they charitable donations, how about extending that charity to their chicken farmers so they can provide an environment that produces healthy food. I guess those companies have never heard of the phrase “charity begins at home.”

I strongly recommend that you watch Food Inc because at the end of the day what we eat affects our health. They are pumping some many antibiotics into those animals due to the conditions that they live and we are the ones paying the price when viruses and diseases become resistant.

We as consumers have power to make the necessary changes for our children’s future. Every time buy or refuse to buy we are utilizing and making of preference known.

My question to you: Do you think that working for those companies created a bias and affected the decisions the Judge or members of the FDA made? What’s your take on the conflict of interest aspect?

In Response to Abby Hajec’s: Pandora Radio: Safe or Unsafe

What is your opinion? Is this sharing of personal information going too far? Or, is it okay for companies to do without our consent?

I guess the company thinks that it is ok because of all those social networks.  It seems to be the norm today to tell the world everything, regardless of how personal it is. So I guess that the company thought that it’s ok for them to do the same, since people don’t seem to care. Don’t get me wrong I am not condoning what they’re done; personally I think that it’s going too far and I believe that people deserve the right to privacy. If there is a possibility that a customer’s information will be shared then the customer has the right to know and the authority to decide whether or not they are in agreement.

So many employers are checking potential employees’ Facebook as a way to gain insight as to who the person really is. I think that we all have heard stories about people who lost their jobs because of what they said on Facebook. I remember listening to the news (maybe it was Stupid news on KNE FM) and the host was talking about this woman that was robbed because of her status on Facebook. She posted that she was going to a concert, where and what time and one of her ‘friends’ decided to make use of that information. The burglar was eventually caught.

Do think the use of social networks and the amount of personal information has affects people’s privacy

Disaster averted: The Government open for business.

I was amazed that republicans seemed willing to shut the government down with so much at stake and jeopardizing the recovery process while commenting that it’s not for drama. Listening to the news on Friday (CNN) a democratic representative said that they did what the republicans requested but it was not enough. The republicans then wanted more concessions and they were not willing to compromise (a word that came up a lot). It seems to be more about a power struggle than anything else and some people care more about their own agenda than the American people. According to Congress.org “Under Article I, Section 6 of the Constitution, members of Congress "shall receive a compensation for their services, to be ascertained by law, and paid out of the treasury of the United States." Maybe what needs to be done is to renegotiate congress's salary and benefits; if everyone’s salary and benefits are getting cut then so should congress.

One of the recurring arguments is about Planned Parenthood and the fact that they used money funded by the government to conduct abortion. At a time like this the 3% of the funding Planned Parenthood spends on abortion is the least of the country’s problems. They should be happy that people are recognizing that they are cannot afford those children rather than having them and becoming a further burden on the state.  Maybe if more people acted responsibly there would not be such a strain on Social Security.

I understand the cuts were needed to be made and that something had to give, but no one wants to be the one to give. People don’t what to pay more taxes and I understand things are already hard. I don’t want to pay more taxes. Yet they expect so much from the government. Where on earth is the government going to get the money, unless there is some kind of money tree at the back of the White House that I don’t know about. The President inherited a country in crisis, he inherited two wars, he is trying to get the country back on its feet and like they say you have to spend money to make money.

Thankfully congress came to an agreement and the shutdown was averted. The consequences of the shutdown would have been devastating to an already decimated economy.

Do you think that the Tea Party extremists are right in allowing the shutdown and if yes would the resulting damage have been worth it?

Can the public’s perception of a company be affected by the behavior of the companies’ employees’ even outside of work?

Something happened today that really had me thinking about how a person’s perception of a company may be affected by the behavior of the companies’ employees even outside of work.

This is a summarized version of what happened. I was buying beer at a supermarket today and the young cashier needed assistance because of my ID. I am not a US citizen and therefore I have a Green Card issued by the United States government. This means that I am a permanent resident and I pay taxes like everybody else. The floor supervisor who came upon request was someone I had no respect for due to a pervious incident with my Green Card. Based on the principle of what happened I always avoided her and did not want to deal with her then. When she came over I made it clear that I did not want to deal with her and asked her to get her manager. After making it clear several times that I did not want to deal with her, she finally went to get her manager.

The assistant manager of the store came over asked what the problem was and I explained that I did not want to deal with her floor supervisor and why. She then took my card and said that she to go look it up in the handbook. Now this is not unusual I have even helped people find my type of ID in the same book before and have been buying alcohol at the store for the past three years. The assistant manager came back about 10 seconds later and said that she was sorry but my ID was unacceptable because it was not in the book. Imagine my outrage that an assistant manager would lie to a paying customer, someone who should be setting an example. I then told her that that was impossible since I know it’s in the book because I have seen it with my own eyes. Realizing that I know the truth and that I caught her in the lie she proceeded to tell me that they have the right not to sell to me. I also told her that I have spoken to her manager about something similar to this and he apologized and said that it should not have happened. I demanded to speak to the manager she said that he was in another state and that she was not calling him.   

Now don’t get me wrong I know that they have a right not to sell alcohol to anyone but within reason. But they had no reason not to sell to me – I am of age, I have a valid ID, I was not drunk nor was I belligerent and the ironic thing is I don’t drink. While I’m demanding a reason, a customer entering the line next to us pipes up that they have been in the business for a long time and that she is right not to sell to me. That really pissed me off, so I turned to the person and asked even for racist reasons and to my amazement, the person answered for any reasons yes. Realizing that this person was not someone that I could reason with, I ignored them but I was furious because they exacerbated an already tense situation. Still demanding a reason someone else said that she should call the cops, which I replied with please call the cops. The assistant manager knows what she did was wrong and that there is a law against discrimination she then proceeded to ask me to leave. I took her name, said I would be speaking to her manager and left.  

After I left, I found out that the person who had the audacity to tell me that they could refuse to sell me beer for any reason including racism since that was the question I asked, was an employee at Keene State College to my surprise. After my initial disgust, I had to laugh when a friend commented on how everything came back to KSC. On Saturday I presented at the Academic Excellence Conference and among the people I presented to were, the Vice President of the college Jay Kahn, and the Provost Emile Netzhammer. On Sunday morning I was inducted into the Management Honor Society and on Sunday afternoon a KSC employee was supporting someone’s decision to discriminate against me.

So here I was thinking that everything the college was working towards diversity, acceptance, and tolerance was been undermined by its own employee and not just any employee but someone who had a measure of power. The person had no idea who I was or many of the other people who were present. This is a small community and the college’s image may suffer because of the actions of one employee.

Personally if I was another customer and I knew or found out that the person who made such an atrocious comment was a KSC employee and they held the position that they did I would be appalled and would not attend, send my child or family nor would I recommend anyone to attend the KSC. Are we back to the days of Rosa Parks? If they have the right not to serve me based on my race where does it end? They might as well kill me while they’re at it so I wouldn’t ever bother them again. On that note, did Hitler have the right to kills the Jews?

Do you think that employees’ actions affect the public’s perception of a company and can you refuse to serve someone based on their race?

In Response to Ashley Guidi: Green Marketing: What's Green and What's Not

How many companies do you think are actually "going green"?

It is a fact of life that there will always be some people who take advantage of an idea or anything for that matter, to further their own agenda. We have companies that blatantly steal people’s money, companies like Enron for example. The 2008 economic crisis is another example of people doing unscrupulous things to get richer, so it would not be shocking if some companies who say that they are ‘going green’ just to get customers, are lying.

On the other hand there are a lot of companies that are making the effort to be green. Johnson & Johnson although embroiled in turmoil right now, has set environmental goals for the future that are stated in their Healthy Planet. The company also issues a separate sustainability report although unaudited is commendable. The company goals are measurable and in some cases they have reached their goals. Jonathan Fahey's April 26, 2010 article “America’s Greenest Companies” for Forbes, ranked Johnson and Johnson number five out of the top 10 greenest American companies (Intel was named number one).

It now has become economical to be green and companies are realizing that an alternative source of energy is necessary; especially at the rate we are using those nonrenewable resources. They realize that if they don’t change their ways their companies may not survive in the future nor are they immune to the results of the destruction of the planet. We need not only to become green but to encourage more sustainable actions. We are destroying forest, habitats, animals and fish stock, not giving them a chance to revive. Our ecosystem strives on diversity and if something does not change we will be responsible for our own extinction.

Do you think it’s possible to implement more sustainable practices in a capitalist society?

The Inside Job

Over spring break I looked at the documentary “Inside Job” which gave a detailed look at what led to the 2008 economical crisis. It proved that in theory, capitalism works and that regardless how good a system is, once the human variable is added there needs to be regulation. (Every school in this country should watch this and someone should send a copy to president Obama) Many economists and businesses argue for less regulations and more freedom, but they have proved that they are unworthy of such freedom. In fact Wall Street is fighting tooth and nail to prevent some of the necessary measures required to protect the economy from another crisis like the one we are still struggling with. The frailty of human nature, its corruptibility, and the darkness that lies within us all, makes regulations on businesses imperative.  I personally think that those people should be hanged, they committed crimes that affected lives worldwide and escaped unscathed. Ok so maybe we cannot hang them but at least the money that they made scamming people should be used to clean up their mess.

What do you think?

In Response to Douglas Sack

Do you think marketers are to blame? Are American consumers to blame? Or is it the affluent?

I believe that many people shoulder the blame, but not the affluent. So what if they have money and flaunt it, they aren’t holding a gun to anyone’s head forcing them to mimic their lifestyle. In my opinion, if you are stupid enough to go into debt trying to emulate people that make way more money than you deserve what you get.

On the other hand, the American consumer shoulders most of the blame. As an adult you are responsible for your actions, too many times people are not willing to take responsibility for their action. This also is becoming the American way, where people are always looking for someone else to blame. I was brought up to never be envious of what other people have (#1. You don’t know what they did to get what they have #2. You may not want to do the same) and to live within my means. Americans have become so materialist and fake that they have forgotten that money and things cannot buy love or happiness. People need to start getting to know themselves and to start loving themselves. They also need to stop defining themselves by what they have; material things are what you have and should not be who you are. We are social creatures but any friends gained through what you have aren’t true friends and will disappear as soon as there is any sign of financial trouble. Word to the wise, if your friends are like that you are better off without them.

Some marketers carry some of the blame because some of their messages are deceiving. They pretend that this is the way that the average American lives which is not the truth. But then again you are the one paying the ultimate price so you need to be on top of your game. Don’t get me wrong I understand the lure of nice things and the joy of a new purchase, but that happiness is flitting. I also understand the need to fit in but my question is at what cost and is it really worth it? What’s the use of fake friends, grueling hours and you’re not even happy. Do you think it’s worth it?

In response to Douglas Sack

Do you think a paid vacation trip is an effective motivational tool? What incentives would you like to see as an employee?

I have to disagree with Douglas because I think that a paid vacation is an effective motivational tool. (Just to clarify the paid vacation or incentive trip is an all-expenses-paid excursion). I am also positive that a company would at least find out what incentives would motivate their employees before deciding to use paid vacations. I doubt very much that if someone that was being rewarded preferred something other than the paid vacation that some alternate compensation could not be agreed upon. Remember, this is a reward not punishment. By law employees have to be given vacation time and if they worked hard enough to be rewarded with a paid vacation, what more can they ask for. Personally, I would love to have one of those.

On the other hand, the criticism of A.I.G was called for and I see no reason why the executives were on a lavish paid vacation a week after government had to bail them out. Regardless of how the vacation was paid for, their actions led to the company’s failure and yet still they are been rewarded, ridiculous. Yet still people wonder why the economy is in such a mess.

Do you think that top paid executives should have company paid vacations after mismanagement led to companywide failure resulting in the government spending billions of hard earn tax payers money to bail them out? Please do not forget that those are the same millionaire executives who receive tax cuts/breaks.

Japan and results of the largest earthquake in the country's recorded history



The earthquake and resulting tsunami has devastated Japan and is the largest in the country’s recorded history. There are billions of dollars worth of damage caused and will take years to recover but there is even more danger looming in the horizon. There are tens of thousands of people homeless without food and water and the situation in Japan is quickly becoming worse. The resulting destruction may also be the catalyst for an even greater catastrophe, if the country’s nuclear plants are unable to cool their reactors. According to the World Nuclear Association, Japan’s 54 reactors provide approximately 30% of the country's electricity. Nuclear scientist all over the world are coming together to try to solve this problem as well as different governments.  There has been one explosion so far and people have been reassured that the amount of radioactive particles released in the air is small. The plants were built to keep any radioactive material trapped within even if the reactors melted (let’s hope that it works) but the explosion happened at the oldest nuclear plant. We all know the dangers involved if the reactors are not cooled and the country will not be the only ones to suffer if the unthinkable happens.

According to NPR (after listening to Car Talk-love it), the country’s debt is approximately twice the size of its GDP but unlike countries like the US for example, Japan’s debt is held by Japanese. The country is also one of the richest in Asia with savings rate much higher than that of the US and a culture steeped in honor, sacrifice and seeing things to the end. This means that although their recovery will be difficult, the people are resilient and the country has a fighting chance.
Give strength to the survivors and may the souls of the dead rest in peace.

Do you think the benefits of Nuclear power is worth the risk?

Obama Tells N.F.L. Owners and Players to Settle Dispute Without Him

I was so happy to read Sheryl Stolberg’s article in the Wall Street Journal and applauded the President Obama’s actions. I thought that it was utterly disgusting for the NFL to request the president’s intervention to help mediate their dispute.  Can you believe it; on one side there are million Americans out of jobs, people without health care, people losing their homes left, right and center and on the other, we have millionaires and billionaires disturbing the president over trivial bullshit (everyone would know what I’m saying if I had this bullsh*t so why pretend)  in my opinion. The president was right when he said, according to the article, that “you’ve got owners, most of whom are worth close to a billion dollars; you’ve got players who are making millions of dollars,” the president went on to say, “my working assumption, at a time when people are having to cut back, compromise and worry about making the mortgage and, you know, paying for their kid’s college education, is, is that the two parties should be able to work it out without the president of the United States intervening.’’

Do you think that with all the pressure that the president is under and trying to revive the economy that he should be disturbed by such inconsiderate idiots?

In Response to Stephan Rolfe

Do you feel that other generations role models acted this way or are we the beginning of a new look on our figure heads? 

I think that every generation has role models who acted in ways that disgusted some – particularly parents while they fascinated others. I was listening to NPR because they have some very interesting programs and Alice Cooper was being interviewed. Vincent Damon Furnier and his friends formed a Rock ban in the late 1960’s called Alice Cooper and were the ones to introduce theatrics in Rock N’ Roll. The ban members dressed in women lingerie; wore makeup and did crazy things on stage. The ban KISS followed in their footsteps except for the lingerie. Parents hated them and the younger generation loved them. The Rock and Roll bands back then were known as hard partiers indulging in a lot of alcohol, drugs and women; they were very promiscuous just like the bands today. Even before Alice Cooper and KISS came Elvis Presley who in the 1950’s scandalized parents with his gyrating hips.

I don’t believe that we are seeing anything new we may have become a bit more open but it’s all been done before. In my opinion, I think that shows like “Jersey Shore” are showing people how not to behave and the hardships resulting from irresponsible behavior like”16 and Pregnant.” They are warnings and if you take them for anything else and want to emulate them, then you are a fool and deserve anything that befalls you.

If everyone is jumping into shark infested waters and getting torn to pieces would you do the same?

In response to Britney Perkins

Do you think paying a little bit extra to consume products and services from socially responsible companies is worth it?  Why do you think Wal*Mart has been so successful when they have been criticized about so many socially irresponsible aspects of their company (paying women lower wages, sweatshops over seas, child labor over seas, poor animal conditions, etc)?

I personally think that it is worth paying a bit more for products and services from socially responsible companies. There are a lot of companies that are socially responsible and are profitable so it can be done. If a company allows greed to guide their decisions then they are capable of anything. For example, the peanut butter incident should not have occurred because the company knew that it was contaminated, but still shipped it out, costing lives. A socially responsible company indicates that they don’t regard their customer as dollar signs but rather as human beings; it shows that they care.

On the other hand, because of the economy some people do not have the luxury of paying the few extra dollars when they are struggling to get by. Wal-Mart caters to those people and to them the company is god sent. At the end of the day as much as people care about those issues they are going to take care of their families first.    

Johnson & Johnson

Daniel McGinn’s September 21, 2009 article “The Greenest Big Companies in American” for Newsweek, ranked Johnson and Johnson number four in the U.S out of 500 companies and number three in the world out of 100.  Newsweek worked with the environmental researchers KLD Research & Analytics, Trucost, and CorporateRegister.com to rank the companies. The companies were ranked based on their actual environmental performance, policies, and reputation. Ranking the companies was very challenging because of the different industries involved. Another obstacle was the incompatibility of different companies’ data due to the lack of a uniform standard for reporting green data; as well as the limited corporate emissions data.

Jacquelyn Smith’s October 28 2010 article “America’s Most Generous Companies” for Forbes stated that the 5% increase in cash donations in 2008 fell by 7.5% in 2009.  Although profits are improving companies have reduced their cash donations to charity. It is still commendable that companies are willing to donate regardless of the economic climate. Johnson & Johnson took fourth place in the top ten givers, donating a total of $637,426,00 in cash and products in 2009; an increase of 12.7% from 2008.

According to Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) press release in the article “public views U.S. companies as more socially responsible than a year ago,” Johnson & Johnson was rated the number one out of 230 companies measured. Researchers at the Carroll School of Management's Center for Corporate Citizenship at Boston College collaborated with Reputation Institute to develop the Corporate Social Responsibility Index. According to the article, CSR was developed to better understand how the public’s perception on the way companies should behave in areas of citizenship, governance, and workplace practice affects companies’ reputations. The results of the 2010 CSR index indicate that companies are becoming more aware that the public’s perception of them is very important especially in economic times such as these. Based on Johnson & Johnson’s ranking the company is very successful in communicating its CSR efforts to the public.

Budget Cuts – Reduction in the education.

We’ve all heard of the fight ongoing on in Washington. President Obama’s budget request included an increase in spending in education. His argument is that the country needs to educate their young in order to compete in the global market. On the other hand, House Education and Labor Committee chairman John Kline is not in agreement with the president’s proposal. According to an article in the Huffington Post, Kline stated that "throwing more money at our nation's broken education system ignores reality and does a disservice to students and taxpayers.”He goes on to say that "It is time we asked why increasing the federal government's role in education has failed to improve student achievement."

Both arguments are sound; the country needs to educate their young in order to compete in the future, especially since America’s youth are being left behind compared to other countries. According to an article in the Saratoga Falcon, “American children perform so poorly on international education tests; coming behind China, Japan, and India.” The article also supports Kline’s argument stating that “These countries work harder on their children than America, do, even though they spend less on education.” The article went on to say that “this embarrassing statistic shows the United States just how ineffective our education system really is, and should make the boards of education realize that our country is in dire need of an educational reform if it want to compete and match the caliber of children from other countries, notably East Asian ones.”

It is clear that both sides need to compromise, educating the youth is the key to the future, but it is also clear that the system is broken and needs to be fixed. Without reform, increasing educational spending will be negligent since it seems that the problem stems not from the lack of money invested.

Is the American education system to lax on their students?

Response to Erica Murray

Do you think the taller and skinnier can is contributing to a negative portrayal of body image?

Old Pepsi Can

New Pespsi Can



Need I say more?

I do not think that a taller and skinner can is contributing to a negative portrayal of one’s body image. Because it is not the size of the can, but the way Pepsi has gone on to promote it. For example, Heineken has had a slim can for years. I must say that I am appalled that they would market their product in such a way. It is offensive to all the amazing women who are beautiful and confident who are deemed “bigger.” The media and Hollywood are perpetrating that the skinner you are the more beautiful you become. Some of the women they portray as beautiful because they are skinny are unhealthy with some suffering from anorexia or bulimia. This negatively affected impressionable teenagers as well as adults causing them to have low self esteem and has caused more harm than good. Seeing someone’s bones sticking out in my opinion is not beautiful nor is someone who is obese. Everything should be done in moderation. 

How has the media affected your opinion on the ideal body type and what do you considered sexy?  



The Affluenza infection

John De Graaf, David Wann, Thomas H. Naylor’s book Affluenza  describes Affluenza as “a painful, contagious, socially transmitted condition of overload, debt, anxiety, and waste resulting from the dogged pursuit of more.” I thought that it was a perfect topic for discussion especially since this course is about convincing people to buy.  This book talks about the American values that are disappearing as people become engrossed in gaining ever more material goods. Families are getting torn apart, buried under financial ruin while their debts keep piling up because they cannot seem to stop buying stuff even if they cannot afford it. The long hours needed to provide the things they deem necessary are also weakening the bonds of families. Parents are forgetting the most important thing that children need is love, acceptance and their parents to be there for them. Relationships are falling apart because people are not spending enough time together. The wasteful consumption is destroying the world as we eat our way through non-renewable resources with no thought of the future. We have forgotten that less is more. This is one book that I would recommend reading.

Are you suffering from Affluenza?

The Egyptian Uprising and the effect on their tourism

We’ve all hear about what’s going on in Egypt for the past weeks and how a people’s need for a better life led to the revolution that has captivated the world’s attention, while giving hope to people in similar situation.  On the other hand, the country’s economy has taken a beating because of the turmoil as well as the hundreds of people who have not been working. Egypt’s tourism industry in particular has suffered the most, which the country is very reliant on. Millions of people flock to Egypt to visit the pyramids of Gaza as well as the country’s famous Sphinx. 

 Any country going through what Egypt is going through is not conducive with tourism. Tourists would not feel safe especially when other countries were scrambling to get their people out of Egypt when everything started and the outburst of violence and the pictures of the battered that also dominated the news. 

  

This is also the height of the tourist season because a lot of people are leaving the cold climates for somewhere warm. According to the NPR website, “The uprising here sparked a massive exodus of tourists, and the loss of revenue could run into billions of dollars.”  Although Hosni Mubarak, Egypt’s president for 30 years has agreed to the people’s demand to step down, the country is far from stable. The Egyptian government and businesses have a rough road ahead with convincing tourist and businesses to come back to the country; it’s a marketing nightmare.

Would you want to visit Egypt any time soon?           

The iPad will it oust the laptop?

A Wall Street Journal article ‘Laptop Killer? Pretty Close’ by Walt Mossberg was a very interesting comparison between the laptop and the iPad as well as what the future might hold for each.  He argued that if the iPad became just another gadget to carry around then its future was looking dim and would not make it. However, if customers saw the iPad as something that could replace laptops, then its future was bright.  The iPad is very versatile, small and light weight, making it ideal for a wide range of people. Mossberg goes on to list the pros and cons of Apple’s latest invention. Some the impressive features of such a small product, Mossberg lauded, was battery life, overall speed, and doing things like watching videos, listening to music, and reading books to name a few. Even with all the apps available approximately 150,000, the iPad is still not ready to take the place of the laptop.

In the words of Mossberg,‘All in all, however, the iPad is an advance in making more-sophisticated computing possible via a simple touch interface on a slender, light device. Only time will tell if it's a real challenger to the laptop and netbook.’

Do you think that the iPad will replace laptops?

Ads and the Super Bowl

It’s amazing how much companies are willing to spend for a few seconds of airtime (approximately 30 seconds) during the Super bowl. Companies are willing to spend millions for one of those 30 second spots.  It is estimated that there are over 100 million viewers and from a marketing point of view this is the perfect opportunity for companies to advertise their products. According to Superbowl -commercials website, Reuters reported that super bowl commercials will cost approximately 2.80 to 3 million dollars for one of those coveted spots depending how long the ad is. Although it's risky due to the price tag, the rewards outweighs the the cost for companies that participate - the bigger the risk the bigger the reward.
 According to Reuters website, Nielsen – television audience researchers, found that 51 percent of 2010 Super Bowl viewers watch the game more for the commercials than for the game itself.

 I must admit that I am part of the 51 percent but take it a step further and watch only the commercials. I am not remotely interested in the game.  



Here are some of the companies who has ads that will be airing at this year’s game:  Vollkswagen, Doritos, Coca Cola, Bud Light, and Snickers to name a few.
I mean who can forget the snickers ad with Betty White - talk about funny.

 How much would you pay for that opportunity?   

Job hunting and the Marketing Mix

In a few years most of us will be entering the job market and need to come up with a marketing strategy to help us land the ideal job or considering the economic climate practically any job will do. A very helpful tool that can be used in developing one’s marketing strategy is the marketing mix. The marketing mix is the combination of the 4 p’s: product, place, promotion, and price.

Product: You are the product and the things about the product (you) that needs to be considered are: quality, brand name, and packaging. The quality of the product is the skills, education, experience or abilities that you have and it is what makes you marketable. In today’s society, companies are becoming more aware that the public’s perception of them is very important especially in economic times such as these. More and more companies are very interested not only in the skills and level of education but whether their employees are ethnical. Depending on the job the higher the level of expertise that one has increases the probability of landing their dream job. One also has to consider their strengths and weakness in order to discern the environment that is most suitable for them. Brand name could be the school that one attended. Attending Ivy League schools carry some clout and inform potential employers’ that you, the product is of high quality. Packaging: Like they say ‘first impression are lasting ones.’ Therefore it is very important when going to an interview that one dresses appropriately. To different companies this means different things and so one should do their research and be aware beforehand.

Place: Some very important things include location, transport and cost. One has to be able to get to and from work with relative ease. If an employer is uncertain of your ability to get to work, then that may prevent them from offering you the job. It would also be beneficial that future employers know that if needed you can get to work in the case of unforeseen occurrences, especially depending on your type of job. It is imperative that you budget the cost of getting to work and that you can afford it.

Promotion: In any market in order to sell a product one has to promote it. As stated earlier, you are the product and therefore promoting yourself is very important as a way of informing potential employers of an amazing product – you. Sending your application letter and CV is advertising; presenting yourself in a very attractive light and trying to persuade the person reading it that you are the best person for the job. During the interview you will be doing some personal selling – expounding on your strengths, possible connection and how your uniqueness would be an asset to the company. It is unbecoming to seem too full of yourself and advisable to talk about your weaknesses and how the company will help you to improve.

Price: The price of any commodity plays a major role in any buying decisions.  With today's economic climate you are but one of many competing for the same job.  A competitive advantage would be your willingness to accept a lower price. Yet one must be very careful since the price of a product is also used to indicate whether the product is an inferior or superior good. You want to indicate that you are a superior good of excellent quality.

Is a degree from an Ivy League school really worth it?

What is the difference between marketing, advertising and propaganda?

The first step in understanding the differences between each phrase is to knowing what they mean – their definition. Here are some of the definitions according to our marketing text book:

Marketing is defined as the process of creating, distributing, promoting, and pricing goods, services, and ideas to facilitate satisfying exchange relationships with customers and to develop and maintain favorable relationships with stakeholders in a dynamic way.

Advertising is a paid non-personal communication about an organization and its products transmitted to a target audience through mass media

Propaganda: According to the Merriam Webster Dictionary, it is the spreading of ideas or information to further or damage a cause.

Marketing:

It becomes obvious that advertising is a part of marketing. Advertising and propaganda are both used to inform the public (target market) about a product or idea or service and used to attract and convince people that they want your product or agree with your ideas.

The difference is that marketing is about educating about a product; stimulating a demand that already exists. Marketing main objective is not convincing consumers to buy a product. Advertising on the other hand, is presenting a product in a very attractive light, convincing consumers that they want to buy it. Advertising is very focused on sales and capturing a large market share. Propaganda on the other hand, although can be considered as a type of advertising, main goal is not only to influence a person but do so by giving partial information while omitting anything that will not further the cause or that is detrimental to it. It involves the deliberate use of misinformation and usually to further a political idea.

Examples of each:
Marketing: First time home buyer credit when the government was trying to stimulate the housing marketing and inturn the economy.

Advertising: Ads seen in magazines, newspapers, billboards, and on television to name a few.
Cool Ads 

Propaganda: Rwanda 1994 - when the Hutu extremist convince Rwandans that the Tutsi were going to kill them and in order to prevent that they had to take action. They used the history of Rwanda (after colonization), twisting it to suit their agenda which lead to the Rwandan Genocide.
RADIO PROPAGANDA AND GENOCIDE

Isn't there a bit of advertising and propaganda in every marketing venture?