In Response to Doug Kendall

Doug asked; Do you feel as if the two names are too close and there is a trademarking issue? These seems to be a lot that is unknown about trademarking, how can rules and regulations of trademarking be better cleared up to the public or start-up business owners?

I agree that the names are close, but technically they are written and represented differently, which makes this a difficult case. I would have to say that yes, there is a trade-marking issue. When speaking the names aloud, they are obviously identical and in my opinion, it is too close of a resemblance.

I would say that regulations could help if some sort of database was kept so that people could check beforehand to see if a name or slogan has already been taken, sort of like when you make a name on a message forum. I think that this is an easy step that could clear up a lot of confusion and headaches.

Cognitive Dissonance

I thought it would be fitting for me to write about this because I experienced this feeling earlier today. I was on a short break at work and was sitting in the break room. I noticed that I was thirsty and I saw the Pepsi machine across the room and thought to my self that it would be really awesome to have an iced tea right now. So expecting that I would feel instantly refreshed by an ice cold beverage I walked over and bought a can of iced tea for sixty cents. After one sip, my thirst had been quenched and I didn't really have any desire to finish the can. I felt like I could have gone without that can of tea and just saved myself the sixty cents and the change from the dollar I had to break. It's pretty sad that I thought about this purchase of an iced tea this much, but I guess if I had to feel cognitive dissonance about something, regretting a sixty-cent purchase is better than something more expensive.

Have you felt cognitive dissonance about anything lately? Why did you regret the decision?

In Response to Gretchen Harbourt

Is there any other case or instance that something you know is copywrited or trademarked that seems silly or stupid which people may use day to day or every day?

One instance of this that I can think of is people using the name Kleenex to describe all tissue products. I don't know if this is necessarily a bad thing, but I hear a lot of people ask for a Kleenex, even if it is a Scotties or Puffs brand, for example. I guess this is just one of those things where people are used to calling something a certain name and nobody really thinks twice about it.

Cars and Commercials

Have you ever noticed that some products appear more in commercials than others? I definitely have, and three stand out the most to me. The one that appears most often are car commercials. There is always the "Year's biggest Sale!" every weekend or nondescript holiday, which doesn't make sense because that sale can only occur once per year. Then comes cell/phone/TV/internet service providers with each of them seemingly using a different set of facts about each other's quality and price of services. Finally, I see a lot of car insurance commercials. Each of them claims that if you switch from a competitor's policy, you will save a few hundred dollars a year. I guess I will just keep switching from one company to the next until I get a plan for zero dollars a year.

What other types of commercials appear frequently? Do they all make sense or are they repetitive?

In Response to Robert Bellavance

Robert Asked: How much could you take before you switch brands? Are you loyal to one product only?

I am not very brand loyal at all. I usually try to use the products that work the best, and not just products from one specific brand all the time. That being said, I don't just buy products from different brands just for the sake of it. I don't have a lot of spending right now, so I buy what gives me the most bang for my buck, and the brand is not super important for me right now.

The Power of Labels

Do good labels on products make a difference influencing buying decisions? I think that they do. I find that when people are examining two similar products, they will more likely choose the product with a good-looking label, with everything else being equal.

I do not know why this is, perhaps people feel more confident buying a product that is displayed in a better light? I see this a lot in the grocery business when people compare products and usually take the one with a prettier picture. Sometimes its even when that product costs more.

Of course, there are many other factors to consider. Is it just because some brands are more popular or maybe its because I have only happened to witness those transactions where people chose products with an attractive label. I guess it makes sense in a way because the company that markets their products better will usually sell more.

What other characteristics of advertising can influence customers' buying decisions?

In Response to Doug Kendall

Doug asked: Do you think this profiling is helpful or hurtful to consumers? Do companies take advantage of unknowing consumers or is it the consumers responsibility to know what they are making known to the public?

I think that tracking people's tendencies online for marketing purposes is unethical. I think of it almost as spying. I don't want companies tracking my footsteps just so they can try to sell me something.

I believe that yes, companies do take advantage of unknowing consumers when they track them without permission. Now, I think it is ok for companies to use information about people if those people gave it to them with permission. I also think that people are responsible for what information they give out, but if they are being tracked without their knowledge then what are they supposed to do? Never go on the internet? I don't think its right for companies to secretly track people.

Color in Marketing

Its a fact that certain colors are more prone to grab people's attention than others. Bright greens, reds, yellows, and oranges are all very vivid. In fact, the human eye is most sensitive to light wavelengths of 555 nanometers which is a bright lime green.

Knowing this information, do marketers use this to their advantage? I would say they most definitely do. I will use a grocery store as an example. You will find that the labels of products are specifically designed to be noticeable. At the store I work at, they even apply this principle to the price signs. They are all in either a bright green (in the produce section) or in day-glow orange (for everything else).

Another thing I have noticed in grocery stores is that the location of the product matters. They usually put the products they are trying to sell quickly at eye-level, where they are easily seen and reached. Also, products that are very popular (like ketchup, mayo, or mustard), are placed on the bottom shelf so that you need to look past many more products before you see these popular ones, increasing the chance that you might see another product you may want to buy. I think that visuals in marketing are an important tool to the marketer and can make the difference when trying to sell a product.

Have you noticed any other marketing techniques that are used to make people more likely to buy things? What industries are these techniques found in?

In Response to Doug Kendall

Doug's post was about trash talking in marketing. He asked; Do you think think this is effective marketing? Do you think this type of advertisement actually has an adverse affect on these companies?

I think that in many industries, "trash talking" is actually the best type of marketing. Take the car insurance industry for example. It is impossible for them to effectively market their service without pointing out the disadvantages of other companies' service and what they do better than their competitors. They all say that if you switch from their competitor you will save such and such dollars a year.

I do not believe that this type of marketing has an adverse affect on these companies. If I owned a firm competing for customers and one of my competitors made a claim on their commercial that I thought I could prove to be false or that I could beat, I would do it. That is sometimes the only way for businesses to compete for the limited number of customers in their target markets.

Ethics Scenario homework

Should John Smith sell the names?

The answer, simply, is no. He should not be selling the names of his employees for any reason, even if it means it might save a few people their jobs. He should be protecting the private information of his employees. Whether or not they are the sole breadwinners in their families is immaterial in this case. Private information regarding employees should not be solicited for any reason.

Does the AMA statement of ethics address this issue?

The AMA statement of ethics directly addresses this issue under their "fairness" category of ethical values. They state directly; "Avoid knowing participation in conflicts of interest. Seek to protect the private information of customers, employees, and partners." John Smith should not sell his employees information because it violates both parts of this ethical standard. Selling the names would be a conflict of interest because he is supposed to keep his employees information confidential, and he can't do that if at the same time he is selling them to make money. The second part of this statement would also be directly breached if this sale took place. He should seek to protect his employees information. Obviously, he can't be committed to this statement if he sells the information.

In Response to Robert Bellavance

What could Toyota have done differently post recall? Would you buy a Toyota knowing the recent problems that they've had?

Well, unfortunately for Toyota, the question isn't what could they have done differently post recall, it's what are they going to have to do in order to make sure they are actually correcting the problem?

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, there have been over 60 claims of unresolved sudden acceleration problems since mid-February. This is possibly more bad news for Toyota.

What does this mean for Toyota? It seems to me that the acceleration problem is not exactly what they thought it was. I think it may have something to do with the software in those vehicles. And software problems are not easy to fix. Thousands of lines of programming code, and the problem could be hard to find. I say that it could be a software problem because if it were only a physical piece that needed to be fixed (which is what they said the problem was and is what they replaced) then there couldn't be any unresolved problems because the problem wouldn't physically exist anymore.

I don't claim to have any answer as to why there are problems or what those problems even are. All I am is saying is that I think the recall story for Toyota isn't quite finished yet.

Catchy Tunes

What makes a commercial memorable? For me it's always the tune they have playing in the background. Of course, there are some commercials that are memorable for other reasons, but for me it's the music that sticks in my head.

Using catchy tunes with commercials is a great way for companies to market their products. The easier you can make your product memorable to your customers, the more likely they will be interested in buying it over another one, so every little advantage helps. I'm not saying that just because you include a snappy song on your TV spot that you will outsell your competitors, but knowing what gets people's attention helps greatly.

This is a double-edged sword however. There are always those commercials with the music that you can't get out of your head. For example, I could not get that McDonald's fillet-o-fish sandwich commercial out of my head for a good week because of that singing plastic fish. It was annoying, but I won't forget it for a long time.

Do you think catchy tunes are effective in commercials? What else makes something stick in your head?

In response to Jason Rury.

Technology is keeping managers and marketers on their toes in this ever changing environment. They must be aware of trends and especially costs when trying to implement new value adding strategies. Will scanning bar codes and taking pictures out of magazines be a new fad/trend practiced by consumers?

Interesting question. I could definitely see scanning bar codes out of magazines being a fad, but I could not see it being a lasting trend. It is a good idea in theory, being able to instantly find out if you can get a better deal on an item from another place of business. But I see two problems with this.

First is that not everyone is willing to travel to another store to get the best deal on each individual products. In other words, some people like the one-stop shopping experience and find it more convenient to buy all of the products they are looking for in one rather than travel and save the few dollars. I know that they could be finding better prices online, but not everyone is willing to send their credit card info over the internet and then wait for delivery.

Second, you would either need a lot of bar code magazines, or a device with a large memory unit to be able to look up a variety of bar-codes and compare the prices to many competitors. This means buying another expensive piece of electronics, The i-compare maybe? And on top of that, prices change so fast you would need to update your system all the time.

Good idea, but it seems like a hassle.

Infomercials, outdated or effective?

Judging by the frequency by which I see infomercials appear on television, I could say that they are a great way to market products. On the other hand, I find them to be too long, too generic, and just plain predictable.

They all seem to take the same approach. The products that are marketed are usually ones that try to make some task in your life easier like cutting tomatoes, or draining the water out of your bowl of spaghetti. Then, it's five minutes of demonstrations and over-dramatizations of how bad your life was before their product was available for purchase. But wait, there's more! Then it's the additions of free products that have absolutely nothing to do with the main advertisement.

And of course if you call in the next seven and a half minutes, they will double your offer. Same old, same old for me. Seeing an infomercial pop on the screen is just simply a prompt for me to change the channel. I feel like they are not effective marketing tools because none of them do anything to differentiate themselves.

Are there any other types of advertising that you feel has run its course by now? Why aren't they effective?

In Response to Doug Kendall

Do you find yourself being influenced by e-marketing? What is the most effective way that this type of marketing gets your attention, pop-ups, banners etc...? Do you find yourself reading reviews before buying products?

I feel like I have been very heavily influenced by E-marketing. I almost don't buy anything anymore without researching it and reading some reviews. And the more expensive the product is, the more time I am spending reading reviews on it. This just seems like common sense to me.

What gets my attention most are advertisements or suggestions for products that are similar to the one I am currently looking at. This usually gets my attention and even helps me find what I am looking for. I think that this type of e-marketing is extremely useful and is a great aid when I am trying to find the right item to buy.

E-marketing is definitely beneficial to both the company and the customer. It streamlines purchases and makes businesses more profitable because it makes them easier to buy from.

Surveys

It seems like one out of every ten websites I visit on the internet now asks me if I am willing to fill out a survey once I am done browsing. When you think about it, it makes sense that this is becoming common. Business want to make sure that their websites are connecting with their customers the way that they want them too and they want to know if they are effective. This is all well and good but is it convenient?, no.

I use the internet primarily to get data and information about things. I don't really have the time to just go on the internet and cruise around on a bunch of different sites, nor do I have use for that. This means that I am not inclined to spend extra time filling out a survey. That sounds mean, but sometimes these surveys really are very lengthy.

It will be interesting to see if these surveys stick around. I do not know the response rate of these surveys or how eager other people are to fill them out. Personally, I think we will see more of these online surveys with time as businesses' websites become more and more important and critical to their connection with the customer.

What other trends are becoming more common as a result of E-marketing? Are they effective?

In Response to Robert Bellavance

I am sorry to hear that those two people at WalMart were not willing to pay the extra fifty cents for their ice cream. It really annoys me when people complain about having to expend a tiny amount of energy more to afford a luxury that they don't need and completely ignore how lucky they are just to have the quality of life that they do. A lot of people around the world aren't even going to eat today, but they complain about ice cream. Give me a break.

And to say that the government doesn't spend enough money on us is ridiculous. They spend too much, hence the enormous deficit that is being increased every year. I can tell those people were very ignorant. Anyways, onto the question.

My answer is that it is not really where the company puts its money to use that influences my decision to buy from them. If they are donating to help suffering people overseas, I think that's great. If they are giving back to the community, I that's great too. In short, I prefer to buy from companies who are putting their money to work, not just into their paychecks.

Shiny Suds Commercial

I wouldn't call this commercial an example of socially irresponsible advertising. I think the words distasteful and inappropriate are more accurate descriptors. I think the firm producing this commercial was walking a thin line when deciding to use sensitive content to get its point across.

Some people have complained that the commercial is insensitive to victims of sexual assault, which it is, but I did not feel that that was the intent of the commercial. I believe that they made a mistake when they chose to use distasteful content as it will upset some people. This commercial did not bother some people, but it did bother some and had some sort of negative impact on the company's image.

That brings up my main point. This was not a socially irresponsible form of advertising, it was a dumb one. Not only did it offend some people, but it made the company look insensitive. Why would they choose to spend money on a commercial of a polarizing nature that could possibly put them in any kind of negative light? In today's world, information spreads fast and you are marketing to a much larger amount of people than you would have been years ago. This means that there are many different types of people who are watching this which in turn then means it is more likely your commercial will be misinterpreted/taken offense to. Now, obviously you can't make everyone happy, but with sensitive content like the one in "Shiny Suds", it seems like they weren't even trying to minimize how many people's toes they stepped on.

And again, this commercial isn't the end of the world or super-intolerable, it was just distasteful and not a good move in terms of advertising. In my opinion, there are just better ways to sell your product.

Do you remember any other advertisements that were received negatively? Was it a big deal or blown out of proportion in your opinion?

In Response to Doug Kendall

I have one company in mind that has changed its product to be more environmentally friendly. That company is Scotties Tissues. I work at a grocery store and happened to look at the label of one of their boxes. Being a tissue company, they use a lot of trees as a part of their business. On every box of their tissues they say that they plant three trees for every one that they use.

They are using this statement of their increased environmental awareness to do two things. First they are trying to project a good image of their company. And second, they are trying to increase sales by staying competitive with other eco-friendly companies.

This is a movement that is around to stay. It has gained so much steam in people's interests when they are looking for a product that it is basically a requirement if you want to sell anything that uses a natural resource.

Is environmentalism more of an opportunity or threat for marketers?

This is a very timely question as more and more people are subscribing to the idea of environmental protection. I believe that this trend makes environmentalism an opportunity for marketers.

Marketers can use the idea of environmental responsibility to their advantage when selling their product or service. An obvious example of an industry that sees environmentalism as an opportunity is the automotive industry. Whole new types of cars have been developed to run on different kinds of fuel. Hybrids, electric cars, bio-diesel, etc... have all come out of this trend toward protecting the environment. Car manufacturers are able to introduce so many new products and now have a secure future in selling cars utilizing the new technologies.

Even though I just said that I believed environmentalism is a boon for automobile manufacturers, it can also be said that environmentalism was a threat at first for the automobile industry. When people were first demanding that more efficient automobiles be produced, it was a strain on the companies. Sales of larger vehicles with greater gas consumption, like SUV's, fell and hurt sales. Federel guidlines for emissions also placed a strain on the companies to produce more fuel efficient cars. But now that the auto-makers have adjusted into the new market, they are meeting customer demands and developing future technologies.

A question to think about would be; what industries will take the biggest hit from environmentalism? Can they adapt to the challenge?

Response to Jeremy Jordon's Blog

Your question of whether or not a corporate democracy can exist is an intriguing one. In my mind, the answer is a definite no. This question, and the content of your post, raises many interesting points.

Everything is run by money in this country. The banks, politics, the education system, the things the government wants you to be afraid, the list goes on. If something can be made profitable, it will be exploited. This is, of course, the nature of business in a capitalist society. Survival of the fittest and aggressive competition is the name of the game. But has it gone too far?

It has gotten to the point where I wonder who really elects our leaders, the people or the corporations? And on top of that, the government lies to us. The problem is two-fold. One is the government is too big and has been encroaching on individual rights for too long, and corruption is becoming more and more common. Second is that corporations have become too influential. In the end I keep my faith that those who should really be in charge of this country, the people, will sooner or later take a stand and demand transparency and integrity from the government and the corporate giants.

Marketing vs.Advertising vs.Propaganda

On the surface, these three terms have a lot in common. They are all a way of presenting information, or an idea, to people. These techniques of information transmission are, however, very different in their specific purposes and in the way they use the information that is being transmitted.

In my view, marketing is the term used to describe a method that many institutions use to tailor their product or service to a certain sector of the market. Marketing means first identifying what the customers as a whole desire for a product or service, and then developing the product or service that fulfills that desire. This way, you are presenting an item that is already in demand with the customer base and the product can, almost literally, sell itself. The information is presented in a way that is tailored exactly for the customers it was intended for.

This is different from advertising in that advertising is the active selling of a product or idea. In other words, you have already developed a product, now you just need to convince people it is worth their money to buy it. The same applies to selling an idea to someone, you need to advertise its merits as something worthy to believe in.

Propaganda is different still because propaganda is the use of information in a way that it only supports a single idea or cause. I believe propaganda is not the information itself, but the way in which it is applied to make people believe something that isn't entirely true. This happens a lot when it comes to politics and the way that politicians spin facts to support their causes.

Obviously, things can be confusing when trying to distinguish between what method is being used to deliver the information you are being presented with. In other words, how do you know if someone is trying to advertise and not spread propaganda? One thing I look for is if someone is trying to pass off their opinion as fact. Someone's statement of opinion is different from a statement of fact. Always question things that are told to you and do some investigation of the validity of the facts that people present to you.

When asked if the "War on Terror" is an example of marketing or propaganda, I would say it is an example of marketing. Why do I say this? After September 11th, 2001, the American people demanded that we hurt the people who killed so many American citizens on that tragic day. Recognizing this demand by the American people and understanding the necessity to take some sort of action against the radical terrorist groups in response to their attack, the American Government took military action. I call this marketing because it was a fulfillment of a demand by the American people. Obviously not every one of the three hundred million people in this country wanted to go to war, but the vast majority did and to do nothing after three thousand Americans were killed would have been nonsense in my opinion.

Some people would argue that the "War on Terror" is an example of propaganda because we were told there were weapons of mass destruction (WMD's) in Iraq when it turned out there were none, or that the war is really about oil. To this I say that every war is a resource war, that is the whole origin of armed conflict. This war is no different, if you are surprised by the fact that a natural resource is involved in this war, then you should look at other wars in human history and take note that all of them were fought over some sort of resource. This explains the value of Iraq as a strategic ally in the Middle East due to their vast oil reserves. Now, don't get me wrong, they (the government) still didn't tell the whole truth, nor do they ever. Keeping the American people afraid of the masked terrorist in the Middle East is propaganda, not the war. This is the trouble with big government, they can do things without being held fully accountable by the people.

I believe that we should be more worried about the growth of the size and power of the government in this country and their encroachment on the individual rights of citizens. The passage of such things like the Patriot Act (which allows government agents to tap telephone calls and monitor e-mails), any type of restrictive "gun control" (which makes it more difficult for good, law-abiding citizens to defend themselves because criminals will have weapons no matter what laws are in place), and the increased government involvement in the private sector are the things we should be worried about.

My question now is this; What are the most successful advertising, marketing, or propaganda campaigns that you have noticed? Whether by a business (of any type) or other wise?

Thanks for reading.