Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community  

Go Back   Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community > The Academy > Tilted Politics


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 01-11-2011, 02:27 PM   #81 (permalink)
Junkie
 
filtherton's Avatar
 
Location: In the land of ice and snow.
Like I said, I'm not going to play that game with you. My questions don't require you to understand how I define personal responsibility. They just require a straight answer.

And you're right, you don't have any responsibility to me to explain yourself. It just seems odd to me that someone so confident in his ideological superiority would be so intent on making up a completely bullshit reason to avoid enlightening a blind, cowardly statist such as myself.
filtherton is offline  
Old 01-12-2011, 06:38 AM   #82 (permalink)
Junkie
 
aceventura3's Avatar
 
Location: Ventura County
Quote:
Originally Posted by roachboy View Post
uh....so therefore regulation is unnecessary?
Pretty big leap you make. The amount of regulation is subject to what most people find reasonable. There are trade-offs. With every increase in regulation something is lost, usually some freedom. Individual tolerances differ in general and differ based on the subject in question. If I got into things you value and started "regulating" reducing freedoms you hold near and dear to your heart, you can bet your tone on regulation would be completely opposit of what you project here.

Quote:
there's a deep problem with the american industrial food system as a whole and its subordination of human nutritional needs to profit imperatives,
The "profit" motives...do you give away your services in the market place for free or are you motivated by "profit" for your services?

Quote:
because they're marketed at kids.
You are wrong. They don't market to kids they market to decision makers, the parents. Marketing 101. The basic strategy is to sell the image of "this place is gonna be fun for your kids, save you some time and effort." It is scary when public policy gets formed based on misinformation like what you present above.

Quote:
i have no problem with regulating them out of existence.
I assume you like this forum, would you find it acceptable if people used faulty reasoning and made up crap to regulate TFP out of existence? Feel free not to respond, because there is no reasoned response to the corner you have painted yourself into, continuation of this would only prove to be further embarrassing.

Quote:
there's more a problem with the lack of regulation, really. it's the lack of regulation that enables your circular non-argument to function. what's bizarre is that you seem to imagine it an argument against regulation.
So is your logical argument that more and more regulation will solve all problems? Sorry, don't respond to that either. I just can't help it with these silly questions, suggesting that you don't think things through thoroughly given your chronically condescending tone.
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

aceventura3 is offline  
Old 01-12-2011, 07:48 AM   #83 (permalink)
warrior bodhisattva
 
Baraka_Guru's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: East-central Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by aceventura3 View Post
You are wrong. They don't market to kids they market to decision makers, the parents. Marketing 101. The basic strategy is to sell the image of "this place is gonna be fun for your kids, save you some time and effort." It is scary when public policy gets formed based on misinformation like what you present above.
If we move past Marketing 101, and onto the more advanced marketing strategies and theories, we will know more about the leverage that influencers place on decision makers. Marketers know the power of the "nag factor" all too well, which is why they do indeed target children and aggressively. Large corporations that have products and services geared towards children have the marketing to children down to a science. This isn't a figure of speech: they literally have it down to a science, and they often employ psychologists to help them figure out the best ways to influence children.

You'd think parents would be a bit creeped out by a red-haired clown in big red shoes who seems only able to communicate with children. I know I am. Ronald McDonald wasn't created for the parents.

McDonald's has distinct marketing strategies for each segment of their customer base. The convenience/anywhere commercials are for adults; the "this place is really fun!" commercials are for kids.
__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

Last edited by Baraka_Guru; 01-12-2011 at 07:53 AM..
Baraka_Guru is offline  
Old 01-12-2011, 10:07 AM   #84 (permalink)
Junkie
 
aceventura3's Avatar
 
Location: Ventura County
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baraka_Guru View Post
If we move past Marketing 101, and onto the more advanced marketing strategies and theories, we will know more about the leverage that influencers place on decision makers. Marketers know the power of the "nag factor" all too well, which is why they do indeed target children and aggressively.
The "nag factor" is nothing until the decision maker is "sold" on the product or service. Child like themes does not mean the target is the child. Marketers would not spend million if not billions on creating a brand image if the target audience has no disposable income, no means to get to and purchase the product. The "nag factor" as you call it only has value after the decision maker is comfortable with the brand.

Quote:
Large corporations that have products and services geared towards children have the marketing to children down to a science. This isn't a figure of speech: they literally have it down to a science, and they often employ psychologists to help them figure out the best ways to influence children.
Why don't they share this knowledge? If there was such knowledge wouldn't it be employed in our schools? Are you suggesting that a company like McDonald's has this knowledge but a company wanting to sell "healthy" food can not employ it?

McDonald's is successful (I have worked there, invested in its stock, and studied the growth of the company) because they deliver on what they promise. Marketing is nothing without execution - they excel at both.

Quote:
You'd think parents would be a bit creeped out by a red-haired clown in big red shoes who seems only able to communicate with children. I know I am. Ronald McDonald wasn't created for the parents.
An affinity for clowns is a learned behavior. It is cultural. It is learned from adults.

Quote:
McDonald's has distinct marketing strategies for each segment of their customer base. The convenience/anywhere commercials are for adults; the "this place is really fun!" commercials are for kids.
Now you are on to something. Perhaps, we do need to be specific. There are "kids" that are decision makers - perhaps we could segment this demographic between about 10-18. This group is not into the clown or Happy Meals, but they do have some independence, disposable income and often the means to go out and get the product. If this is the group you are talking about, I agree. I can assure you that McDonald's is not marketing to toddlers, 3, 4, 5, or 6 year-old kids. i would guess the marketing they do regarding 7, 8, 9 is more for long-term repetitive brand recognition, while still focusing on the decision maker for short-term sales.
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

aceventura3 is offline  
 

Tags
area, brain, conservatives, fear, larger, study


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:28 AM.

Tilted Forum Project

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360