Several times this Holiday season I received e-mail "Blasts" which leads me to wonder if the were thought through. Granted e-mail is supposed to be an inexpensive, quick and green way to contact people but when it is a business contacting its customer/clients at some point the way it is done shows how a business really considers you:
As an insignificant one of the masses it can quickly and inexpensively contact you by: "Dear valued member, thank you for your patronage throughout the year, happy holidays and happy new year." What's wrong: it shows the amount of effort that is put in. It is so mass produced and impersonal. They don't even bother customizing it by adding your name. I am of the opinion if you are going to do a "Blast" like that to customers, you'd better put in a gift like a discount coupon because a mass produced impersonal thank you letter isn't really showing any appreciation or return gesture/giving at all. These mails are simply trash and wasted use of bandwith on the internet. Why do individually written, personalized e-mails or handwritten thank you letters work even without a gift? It's because it shows that someone in the business took the personal time to cater to you and thus it shows that you are a live human being to the business.
The use of words like "Blast" or "Viral Marketing": Don't they all have bad connotations? We customers like the perception of being in control. Blast has the connotation of being indiscriminate and hitting everyone in its path. Of course in real life that's what happens, people get hit repeatedly by messages not really intended for them. As for Viral Marketing...that sounds like something out of control and malevolent like a virus. Why not use something more friendly and perhaps clearer.
Lastly I got a message from a non-profit organization which said this basic message (not the exact wording): Hi, Happy Holidays, don't forget to give matching donations to us during this holiday season (note this place hits you up earlier in the year with another funding drive). While I know that this place is a non-profit (it's a university), this is like saying, Hi Merry Christmas - where's my present? All at a time when people's bank accounts are stretched by the commercialism of buying gifts for friends and family.
Addendum: On a funny note the little musical phrase "Every kiss begins with Kay" (Kay Jewelers) has gotten stuck into my head because the commercial has been played so many times. The singer's voice has that vocal fry beginning (for those of you who are singers) and then goes into that late 90's hip-hop pop female vocalist type of voice ... blechhh - it's kind of like it's trying to reach to too many generations at once -traditional jewelry with hip hop! ha ha.
Sunday, December 23, 2007
Friday, December 21, 2007
Opening Comments - Politics
Hi everyone, it's my first entry ever so I'll open it with a common issue - politics (we'll eventually go to other topics):
FLIP FLOPPING: I've heard the idea of flip-flopper freely tossed around ever since the George W. Bush and John Kerry presidential campaigns. The thing I wonder is this. Isn't the politician supposed to represent what (s)he perceives to be the will of the people? Thus if the will of the people (e.g. the strong majority) change, then should the politician cling to his or her own ideals or should there be a shift? One might say that "flip-flopping" is a good thing because it better aligns the representative of the people with the constituents. While we are do elect politicians partially based on who the person is, I think we do expect them to try to be in line with what we want. This isn't to say a politician should ignore the minority - the politician should of course be trying to mitigate damages or find every one wins solutions as much as possible. There are also times when, the politician is aware of facts and evidence so compelling which the greater public does not know, that the politician should act contrary to the will of the people. I will admit, I do not quite know where the line is drawn there.
NEWS REPORTING: The interesting thing about news coverage is that no newspaper or TV has ever put a grid together to show exactly each politician currently stands on important issues. Instead the news puts more emphasis on where a politician is, how the politician is in the polls, what tactics are being used, who won a debate (according to whom? based on what?). Of far better use to the reader/viewer/listener is information that (s)he will use in the voting booth. When I vote, I won't vote based on if Candidate X won State Y, or Candidate B was campaigning on the West Coast on Tuesday, then spent the Holidays with relatives, or had too many wrinkles, or hosted a Hollywood star.
NEWS ORGANIZATION ENDORSEMENT: I'm sure this is old, but I have to say it anyways. How can a newspaper endorse a candidate? I thought news reporting is supposed to be as unbiased as possible. By endorsing a candidate the newspaper taints its own articles and reports as potentially being biased.
FLIP FLOPPING: I've heard the idea of flip-flopper freely tossed around ever since the George W. Bush and John Kerry presidential campaigns. The thing I wonder is this. Isn't the politician supposed to represent what (s)he perceives to be the will of the people? Thus if the will of the people (e.g. the strong majority) change, then should the politician cling to his or her own ideals or should there be a shift? One might say that "flip-flopping" is a good thing because it better aligns the representative of the people with the constituents. While we are do elect politicians partially based on who the person is, I think we do expect them to try to be in line with what we want. This isn't to say a politician should ignore the minority - the politician should of course be trying to mitigate damages or find every one wins solutions as much as possible. There are also times when, the politician is aware of facts and evidence so compelling which the greater public does not know, that the politician should act contrary to the will of the people. I will admit, I do not quite know where the line is drawn there.
NEWS REPORTING: The interesting thing about news coverage is that no newspaper or TV has ever put a grid together to show exactly each politician currently stands on important issues. Instead the news puts more emphasis on where a politician is, how the politician is in the polls, what tactics are being used, who won a debate (according to whom? based on what?). Of far better use to the reader/viewer/listener is information that (s)he will use in the voting booth. When I vote, I won't vote based on if Candidate X won State Y, or Candidate B was campaigning on the West Coast on Tuesday, then spent the Holidays with relatives, or had too many wrinkles, or hosted a Hollywood star.
NEWS ORGANIZATION ENDORSEMENT: I'm sure this is old, but I have to say it anyways. How can a newspaper endorse a candidate? I thought news reporting is supposed to be as unbiased as possible. By endorsing a candidate the newspaper taints its own articles and reports as potentially being biased.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)