C
Chuck100
Guest
(This message was left blank)
|
|
|
C
Chuck100
Guest
I find that advertising only works for me if it's somethign physical that I can hold, such as a flyer. Otherwise I forget which ad campaign promotes which product within seconds of viewing it. The two commercials which come to mind right now are hands in my pocket, and SAVE THE TUNA. I can honestly say that I have no clue which product they are associated with, therefore they haven't influenced my spending in any way.
On the other hand, I'm far more likely to do something when there is a flyer in my hand - if it's at the top of the pile of junk mail I immediately toss in the blue box without reading. For example, when the pizza pizza deep dish pizza flyer came in the mail, it looked so tasty that I ordered one that night.
On the other hand, I'm far more likely to do something when there is a flyer in my hand - if it's at the top of the pile of junk mail I immediately toss in the blue box without reading. For example, when the pizza pizza deep dish pizza flyer came in the mail, it looked so tasty that I ordered one that night.
E
EnviroTO
Guest
How does what is cool become cool? Why do so many in a particular society come to believe that a certain product is cool while another one isn't? Why do material things make people feel good?
A
adma
Guest
D
dan e 1980
Guest
I used to be with it, but then they changed what "it" was. Now, what I'm with isn't it, and what's "it" seems weird and scary to me. - Abe Simpson
S
scarberiankhatru
Guest
Homer: So, I realized that being with my family is more important than being cool.
Bart: Dad, what you just said was powerfully uncool.
Homer: You know what the song says: "It's hip to be square".
Lisa: That song is so lame.
Homer: So lame that it's... cool?
Bart & Lisa: No.
Marge: Am I cool, kids?
Bart & Lisa: No.
Marge: Good. I'm glad. And that's what makes me cool, not caring, right?
Bart & Lisa: No.
Marge: Well, how the hell do you *be* cool? I feel like we've tried everything here.
Homer: Wait, Marge. Maybe if you're truly cool, you don't *need* to be told you're cool.
Bart: Well, sure you do.
Lisa: How else would you know?
Bart: Dad, what you just said was powerfully uncool.
Homer: You know what the song says: "It's hip to be square".
Lisa: That song is so lame.
Homer: So lame that it's... cool?
Bart & Lisa: No.
Marge: Am I cool, kids?
Bart & Lisa: No.
Marge: Good. I'm glad. And that's what makes me cool, not caring, right?
Bart & Lisa: No.
Marge: Well, how the hell do you *be* cool? I feel like we've tried everything here.
Homer: Wait, Marge. Maybe if you're truly cool, you don't *need* to be told you're cool.
Bart: Well, sure you do.
Lisa: How else would you know?
O
Ontarian1976
Guest
But we're lucky enough to have a large urban area that is very pedestrian-friendly, and doesn't fit this description at all. Pretty much the entire old city of Toronto, plus at least a few square kilometres of the "inner" areas of the old suburbs (Etobicoke, etc.) are fine to get around without a car. If they weren't, I wouldn't have sold my car when I moved downtown. Within this area there are plenty of living options.
A
Antiloop33rpm
Guest
What is pedestrian-friendly is a rather ambiguous term. In some respect Bay Street could be coined as pedestrian friendly because it has buildings along its entire length, is rather built up and meets a lot of the criteria of urbanity. But, how many people actually enjoy walking down this street? My own experience of this street has left me with the impression of a street ment for cars and not one that a pedestrian would enjoy walking down. Bloor often leaves me with this impression as well sometimes.
It doesnt have to be that the city is built in a modern suburb way where the car is the only option for a feeling of automobile dominance too occur. Parking lots, wide streets filled with traffic, expressways, and other factors all contribute to this sensation.
I agree Ontarian that Toronto is lucky to have areas where it is possible to be a pedestrian and not own a car. But by and large the city is still dominated by the automobile, as is the case with every city in North America. Even in the downtown core, you still have a strong emphasis on cars with an incredible number of new parking spaces being added to each condo that rises. Im sure that in the future, especially in the downtown area, a lot of this will change and as available space to build shrinks, the car will no longer be accomadated as it is now. Yet Toronto, and every other city still show the signs and still often very much feel the incredible effects that 50 years of auto dominace has had.
Edit: And this I just came across Ontarian. In your own words this is what you had to say about downtown Toronto.
From this thread. I can let the contradiction slide because it does illustrate that even for an abnormal amount of pedestrian-friendly spaces by North American standards, there can be little denying that the car has had an incredible impact on this, and all other cities and it this continual catering to the automobile that has largely resulted in pedestrian spaces and environments falling behind.
O
Ontarian1976
Guest
There is no contradiction. I said we have a large area that is pedestrian-friendly, not that downtown is part of that area.
A
Antiloop33rpm
Guest
What areas/neighborhoods/streets would define is pedestrain friendly or not Ontarian?
B
bizorky
Guest
Beats me. I let other people worry about these things if they want to.
E
EnviroTO
Guest
OK. Parhaps you feel you are not heavily influenced by advertising and don't feel your purchases are influenced by what is cool or not.
My point is that "cool" is partly influenced by external influences such as media and advertising. People might be buying what they "want" but that has been influenced by advertising and media. I don't think anyone has mastered the formula to making something cool yet but I am fairly certain that what is cool would change if advertising and media did not exist. Certain brands become linked to cool and desirable and while that may in part have to do with some quality products, to some degree it is marketing as well.
Advertising is used to show a company is a environmentally friendly, supports charities, customers are happy, etc, etc and the point is to increase sales. With all the information being thrown at people I'm not sure if people fully know when they are making a decision influenced by advertising or not. Sometimes people are thinking to themselves "this brand is pretty reliable" because they have heard that somewhere... but was it a person with experience with the brand or an advertisement that put that in their mind. A lot of people make purchases with pieces on information in their head and they don't really realize where that information came from. They think "this one is reliable", "I heard that feature doesn't add much value", "this feature is really useful", etc... but all these pieces of information could have been picked up over time from advertising rather than more unbiased sources. Brand shopping which happens fairly frequently has more to do with marketing building brand loyalty than product by product comparisons.
B
bizorky
Guest
The thing is that, as even you have pointed, many advertisements don't provide information, such as specifications. They are more about look and feel.
Ads will often use lingo, or scientific terms, or "feel good" phrases, not so much to induce a purchase, but to make a positive link to a brand or product. A purchase is almost a side benefit; advertisers want brand recognition first and foremost. I know plenty about Coke, I have even been to the Coke Museum (or whatever it is called) in Atlanta, but I don't drink it. I even kinda like the cute Coke polar bear ads, but it still won't convince me to drink the stuff. I recognize the brand, and for the advertiser that is half the battle; but not the winning of the war. The point is that when someone talks about drinking a Coke, I share a recognition of a sugary drink, and a will not confuse it with that tar-like industrial biproduct that goes by the same name. If you will, their advertising has expanded my "brand-literacy."
Neither you or I can convince all people to actually sit back and analyze everything that they are buying. It would be a good idea if more people actually did question themselves about what they thought they needed. Nevertheless, people can and will make a purchase for a number of different reasons, sometimes even contradictory reasons. And sometimes those contradictory reasons have nothing to do with advertising.
Ads will often use lingo, or scientific terms, or "feel good" phrases, not so much to induce a purchase, but to make a positive link to a brand or product. A purchase is almost a side benefit; advertisers want brand recognition first and foremost. I know plenty about Coke, I have even been to the Coke Museum (or whatever it is called) in Atlanta, but I don't drink it. I even kinda like the cute Coke polar bear ads, but it still won't convince me to drink the stuff. I recognize the brand, and for the advertiser that is half the battle; but not the winning of the war. The point is that when someone talks about drinking a Coke, I share a recognition of a sugary drink, and a will not confuse it with that tar-like industrial biproduct that goes by the same name. If you will, their advertising has expanded my "brand-literacy."
Neither you or I can convince all people to actually sit back and analyze everything that they are buying. It would be a good idea if more people actually did question themselves about what they thought they needed. Nevertheless, people can and will make a purchase for a number of different reasons, sometimes even contradictory reasons. And sometimes those contradictory reasons have nothing to do with advertising.
A
adma
Guest
It may cause cancer in rats, but still, it tastes real good
B
bizorky
Guest
^But should you have rats in your gut...