Did you know that in Spain, strict privacy laws prohibit you from taking the President's daughters' pictures and publishing them, in print or online? Did you also know that last Wednesday, the Obamas hosted a reception at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York, during which they stood for 130 photographs with visiting foreign dignitaries in town for the UN meeting, and it included a photo with the Spanish president's family, that had his daughters allegedly dressed as Goths (in baggy black dresses and chunky boots)?
If you didn't and want to know more about what happened, read the Telegraph's report on the incident and its aftermath here.
OK, so what's the point? Read on.
The typical consumer's reaction to claims (conveyed through an Ad) by a brand? 'Oh, so you're the best thing that could happen to me? Tell me something I don't know'.
That's where brands miserably fail. Because they can't articulate what the consumer doesn't know, and is dying to. I bet you read about what happened in the Obama photo session because you were curious to know what happened, how the girls looked, dressed as goths. You were curious, because you didn't know.
Most brands bandy about what's common knowledge. That they (brands) are consumer salvation material. The consumer's heard it so many times, the next repetition is seen as an interruption. For brands to get consumers to respond, they must tell them something they didn't know. Something that's out of the ordinary and different, that consumers are willing to want to know. If information's out there that consumers don't know, they may even seek after more, to satisfy their curiosity. Like, you may have even googled more info. on the Obama-Spanish PM family photo session. Beyond what the Telegraph article told you.
Brands must learn to tickle consumer curiosity and lead them on, in a search for information. Of course, this wouldn't be easy. But if brands can prompt searches, the knowledge consumers encounter may well go past their sensory store to the short term store. If brands then reinforce and bait further searches, tell you what, they will move from short term to long term memory of consumers. As a result, the brand will be recalled at the time of consideration of purchase.
How does that help? With a probable purchase that follows.
Wednesday 30 September 2009
Know what happened last Wednesday?
Tuesday 29 September 2009
Soon, Fake 's in, Real 's out
What's incredible about being with Jaden is the experience of everything that's real. Not a hint of the 'made up'. His laugh, the sparkle in his eyes, the way he beams in pleasure when complimented, is all too real. Even when he expresses anger, screams in frustration, or cries when hurt, is brilliantly real.
As he grows, I guess we and the world will get to him. He will know how to fake and when. Its almost a must for survival. What a pity. I hope, I'd have the guts to exhort him to live real.
The fake 's everywhere. When I walk up the gate of the airline to fly, I am greeted. I appreciate that. But most times, the fake enthusiasm shown at seeing me and the likes of me (read fliers) is apparent. At least to me. Oh, I've had genuine greets. Though rare, they warm you up.
Service brands that want to make it big with customers must get this 'warmth' right. And the only way they can do it, is by putting their people before their customers. It may sound risky, but it isn't. Its the smartest thing to do as a service business. You take care of your people, they take care of your customers. Genuinely.
Note Michael Gates Gill writing in his book, 'How Starbucks saved my Life';
'The ad you were working on was either great or a piece of shit. The game was win or lose. And it wasn't just the ad, that took the hit. You were either a great creative genius or a stupid piece of shit . If you won new clients, you were a hero; if you couldn't get any new clients, you were a bum. There was no in-between. And there certainly wasn't respect or dignity. Those words were literally never mentioned.
Here at Starbucks both Partners and the Guests seemed to agree tacitly that everyone should be treated with respect and dignity. I had never seen any work environment like it. The best fortune 500 companies I had encountered, despite spending months and lots of money writing and publishing high sounding mission statements, never practiced the corporate gobbledygook they preached'.
Monday 28 September 2009
Reasoning by Analogy, Obama-Tortoise story
NY Times Op-Ed columnist, Charles M. Blow thinks Obama's the tortoise who's gonna outsmart us all, with his socialist healthcare plan. Pray, why does he feel so?
Because it seems, 'According to Gallup poll results released on Wednesday, the president’s approval rating has stopped falling and has leveled out in the low-50 percents, about the same as Ronald Reagan’s and Bill Clinton’s at this point in their presidencies (both two-termers, lest we forget).'
What's really happening? Rasmussen reports today, 'Just 41% of voters nationwide now favor the health care reform proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats. That’s down two points from a week ago and the lowest level of support yet measured.'
About Charles' 'Obama's Tortoise Tactics' piece, its what's termed 'Reasoning by Analogy', a cognitive bias
Weak glues a must at discount sales
I was back at the Landmark book sale. Bought a lot of books, again. One thing that's a constant at these discount sales is the big square labels stuck on all book covers, screaming what the original price, new price and saving is. Making these labels big and bold 's a good idea. It screams the bargain the consumer's getting, big time.
But what's bothersome is the fact that these labels don't come off easily. In fact pull 'em off, and you take the book jacket along. I don't know how many customers like to have these labels on, when they sport the books on their home shelves.
Bet not many. How many times would one want to tell the world they got something on sale?
To the Landmark people, I recommend a weak glue. Good enough for the label to stay on the cover while at the shop table, and weak enough to peel off, when the buyer wants to ease it off the cover.
Nostalgia is marketable
After quite some time we had one of the fluorescent lights at home, fuse. Getting to a store and looking at shelves with bulbs, I was prompted to try an incandescent light bulb, priced at Rs. 13 over the fluorescent one priced at over a hundred and fifty bucks. I know fluorescent bulbs consume less energy, emit white light, are less warmer, and remain lit for a far longer time than incandescent ones. Yet, I buy the incandescent bulb.
Screwing it into the socket and turning it on brings back memories. Of a childhood spent under these lights. I can almost live that cozy feeling, of time past. Something warms up inside. I guess that's what's called nostalgia. A feeling that's more relevant to ones advanced in years. I notice brands can evoke the past. This morning listening to Crystal Gayle sing at a show (drastically different from the kind we have now) evoked similar memories. Note, I grew up listening to her. Even the hosts of the show at which she sang, were so polite and measured in their announcements. A far cry from the mutants who host shows today. Russell Brand at the MTV music awards is a case in point.
Brands that can evoke niceties of the past, I believe have a fair chance with consumers advanced in their years. It can be a Cafe, a movie, or maybe even a library. Note, such brands would have to give the present generation a go by, but hey, don't we all get older some time? Sure, incandescent lights may not herald nostalgias for the present Uns. But something will. Tapping into it then, will carry as much meaning as what an incandescent light has, for me.
Silence that idiot box!
'TV isn’t called the idiot box for nothing. Even at its best it replaces engaged and active thought with passive and sedentary spectating, while at its worst it destroys children’s innocence, inuring them to violence, mockery, and crude sexualization. Television is by definition a visual medium; it appeals not to the brain but to the eye. You don’t have to study hypnosis to understand how easily the eye can be exploited to undermine alertness, focus, and good judgment. Just look at the dazed and vacant expression on the face of a youngster watching TV. Most parents would be calling 911 if their child drank something that caused such a reaction. Why doesn’t the zoned-out oblivion induced by TV cause parents to panic? Is it because they’re hooked on it too?'
Saturday 26 September 2009
When did that happen?
'It is difficult to exaggerate how much has changed in terms of consumers' relationship with brands in the last few years. Everything is different now: from how brands are viewed, to the mechanisms through which we find out about them. When did the change really start? Let us ponder.
Was it the day in 1993 when Marlboro dropped its prices by 40 percent to compete with the cut-price cigarettes that were eating away at its market share, thus sending investors into a panic that lopped nearly $50 billion off the value of twenty-five top brand makers?
Was it when a nascent World Wide Web became a tool for instant swapping of info, enabling each of us to instantly see the truth about all available choices of product?
...When the TV market fragmented into hundreds of smaller channels, each wanting a piece of the viewer's time?
...When technologies like TiVo made it possible for viewers to avoid watching commercials altogether?
...When Enron and others collapsed in a stinking mass of deceit and consumers lost faith in corporations and what they sold?'
...When incomprehensible events on September 11 made us reassess values and beliefs?
Choose all of the above.
- Richard Laermer & Mark Simmons, 'Punk Marketing'.
Friday 25 September 2009
The Roach emotion
'One of our first visits was to a sixtyish woman named Lillie, who lived in a mobile home park near Tampa, Florida. She welcomed us in and we perched ourselves on folding chairs while Lillie dropped into a La-Z-Boy recliner. I asked Lillie to tell us a little bit about herself and she launched into the story of her childhood in Mississippi, her first marriage, the birth of her two kids, her hardworking life, her divorce and remarriage.
Just as Lillie was telling us about the sudden death of her second husband, an enormous cockroach emerged from the kitchenette and ambled into the living room. My client and I noticed it exactly at the same moment. We looked at each other, wondering whether we should mention it or pretend we hadn't noticed.
But Lillie spotted the cockroach too. "Damn!" she growled. She leapt out of her La-Z-Boy, tore open a kitchen cabinet, and pulled out a can of my client's very own brand of bug spray. She closed in for the attack, bent over, aimed the nozzle at the roach, and nailed it. I counted- one-one-thousand, two-one-thousand, three-one-thousand, four-one-thousand, five-one-thousand- as the roach jerked into a deathly paroxysm and the spray formed a toxic puddle around him.
"Take that, you bastard", Lillie said.
My client and I looked at her with raised eyebrows.
Roaches!" she said with disgust. "Reminds me of my first husband". She placed the rim of the can on the carcass and bisected it with a definite crunch.
What did we learn from our visits? First, that customers can use far more spray than necessary. More important, Lillie demonstrated that even a utilitarian product like bug spray can have deeply emotional, even primal, meaning. Our visit with Lillie became a reference point for the bug spray organisation as it created news and improvements for its products.
- Michael J Silverstein, 'Treasure Hunt - Inside the mind of the new consumer'.
Sphere: Related ContentThursday 24 September 2009
What's rotten in the Kirana?
The last two emergency grocery purchases we made, saw us at what is called the Kirana store, in India. These purchases were made at two different Kirana stores. What was common about our purchases was the fact that, on returning home and inspecting the wares, we found a few not so fresh, close to rotten, vegetables that had been slipped in with the rest. This happened because we didn't pick the vegetables ourselves. And that's because these stores don't have enough of space for you to get in and pick your own stuff.
Now the romanticised Kirana stores around India have been heralded as the last bastion that's standing tall against the might of organised retail formats. And the reason given for their survival is the personal relationship that the store owners have with their customers, their extending credit and the delivery of stuff home.
Tell you what, that's a whole lot of hogwash. Kirana stores survive for one reason, and one reason only. Their convenience in terms of proximity. The larger share of the Kirana store customer comes from the lower and lower middle class in India. This class finds the Kirana store most convenient because its just next door. Going to an organised format store would require transportation. Plus the the organised store facade is such that it drives perceptions of higher prices. Both of these are good enough reasons for the lower middle class to stay put with the Kirana store. The upper classes in India prefer organised formats and resort to services of a Kirana store only if its an unplanned, emergency purchase.
Many a times, the result of that is part rotten. Are Kirana stores on their way out? Not yet. But they'll down their shutters if organised retailers can solve the proximity problem. Can the organised players be able to do that? Sure, but only if they tweak their format and their mode of operation. They have to down store sizes and maybe even take the franchise route.
Wednesday 23 September 2009
Why I drive a Santro
'From what I have learnt in life, including the brief spell in college, true elite are not obnoxious and certainly don’t make a virtue of elitism. Good breeding also means not making others feel inferior.'
Saba's moralising misses out on a point that's fair extension to what she's stated. My point.
'Good breeding should also mean not feeling inferior, when it isn't intended, and even when it is. Because your self worth isn't dictated by tweets, but by your own unbiased assessment of you'.
Tell you what, Saba's petty moralising is fertile ground for marketers. Most people live with a depleted sense of self-worth. Its either because they push themselves into that state or some one else does it to them. Perceived social class differences provoke comparisons. Upward class comparisons result in an assessment of lower self worth. For the consumer, this is self assessment. Its also possible that your neighbour waves her latest brand of jewellery to your face, commenting on how your 'piece' looks outdated. Now that's an external assessment that's bound to diminish your self worth, if you're the Saba kind. Either way, your only ticket to enhanced self esteem is the marketer and his brand. That's what gives you, your shot at upward mobility. The chance to get even.
To prove my point I pulled out today's ET Brand Equity and scanned it for Ads. Sure enough the promise of a higher class was written all over, by brands. The front page had Omega tell me its 'Abhishek Bachchan's choice' (I could almost laugh out loud), the back featured Turtle proclaiming, 'Even a lifetime of profits can't measure up to the respect you earn' (I am clutching at my sides to stop me from doubling over with laughter, and, by the way who's the twit behind the copy?).
So you see, diminished self worth is good. But just so you know my opinion about Tharoor's tweet on economy class flying, I agree. Plus, it was funny too.
Does that say something about my assessment of my worth? And is that bad news for marketers? Guess why I am perfectly all right driving my ugly looking 2001 model Hyundai Santro?
Reason & Wisdom
'That animal which we call human, endowed with foresight and quick intelligence, complex, keen, possessing memory, full of reason and prudence, has been given a certain distinguished status by the supreme god who created him; for he is the only one among so many different kinds and varieties of living beings who has a share in reason and thought, while all the rest are deprived of it. But what is more divine, I will not say in the human being only, but in all heaven and earth, than reason? And reason, when it is full grown and perfected, is rightly called wisdom. Therefore, since there is nothing better than reason, and since it exists both in human beings and gods, the first common possession of humans and gods is reason. But those who have reason in common must also have right reason in common. And since right reason is Law, we must believe that humans have Law also in common with the gods. Further, those who share Law must also share Justice; and those who share these are to be regarded as members of the same commonwealth. If indeed they obey the same authorities and powers, this is true in a far greater degree; but as a matter of fact they do obey this celestial system, the divine mind, and the god of superior power (praepotenti). Hence we must now conceive of this whole universe as one commonwealth of which both gods and humans are members.'
- Cicero, (The Laws, 52 B.C.E.)
Tuesday 22 September 2009
Liberty, In God We Trust!
The United States of America is the gutsiest nation in the world. No other nation's done more for freedom around the world, at the cost of sacrificing its own citizens. Both Afghanistan and Iraq have proved costly. Yet America strives on. Contrast this with Italian troops in Afghanistan. Loss of its soldiers has seen Italian sentiment turn hostile. Now, in no way am I saying that any loss of life is to be condoned. But freedom calls for sacrifices and America has given much to the cause of freedom around the world.
Why I mention America and its commitment to freedom is because its that very same character that transgresses into their world of consumption. The United States of America is one of the only countries that believes in liberty even in the world of business. Most Americans (read Libertarians and Conservatives) don't like government interference in business. In fact Americans don't look to the government for their own personal prosperity. They believe in themselves and in God. Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness is, they believe a God-given right. This is again such a contrast to the rest of the world, where people look to the government to make their lives better. They believe it is the government that should be the harbinger to their personal prosperity. Not so for most Americans. They believe its up to them. Them only. And that is why they hate the government telling them what to make or what to buy.
Obama and his coterie of liberals in contrast are the kind that want Government back in people's lives. Now you know why they do everything possible to scuttle any military moves that enable freedom, around the world. You shouldn't be surprised when you know that despite giving lip service to freedom, they do everything to curtail it (remember Internet control and war against conservative talk radio). Also, don't raise an eyebrow to the fact that they've turned General Motors into Government Motors.
Liberals in America who don't think it important to battle for freedom around the world are the very ones that want to usher in the rest of world (read Soclialist europe), in America. Usher in an era of the government that dictates what citizens do. Even what they do as producers and consumers. Should the liberals succeed, we will never know America for what it truly is, as a nation.
A nations that proclaims, 'Liberty, In God We Trust!'.
And that would be such a pity.
Monday 21 September 2009
The ugly truth about 'The Ugly Truth'
To take the movie story to conclusion, I have to report that the one we saw reinforces what I stated. That most movies are a monumental waste of time.
The ugly truth about 'The Ugly Truth' is that its one of the crassest movies I've seen. Yet I hear, its been a top grosser around the world. The response of most of the audience in the theater tells me why. They even applauded towards the end. I lost my appetite. It was lunch time when the movie got over.
The 'Ugly Truth' is perfect for younger audiences. Filled with profanities and anatomy descriptions, the movie teaches us a lesson about what connects with college going youth. I know I am guilty of generalisation. Despite the fact that most college going airheads voted Obama, I guess conservatism isn't dead in colleges. Anyway, the lesson of the movie is, if the youth is the audience, dumbing down the subject is a good idea. Throw in a slew of profanities and slap stick humour of the worst kind, and you have a winner.
Hey, It even gets you the applause.
Sunday 20 September 2009
Books for me, Movies for the kid
I ain't a Movie buff. Most movies, I believe, are a monumental waste of time. Yet I line up to buy tickets for a show tomorrow. Alphy's the reason. Plus I don't mind.
Queuing up at the theatre to book for the show tomorrow has me stand behind a kid who buys four tickets for a show in the evening today. I hear the counter man ask him to pay nine hundred bucks for four tickets. I am aghast. That much for stuff that's worthless? I buy my tickets for tomorrow, They cost me a hundred and eighty bucks for two. I think that's all right. Right after my purchase I proceed to a bookstore that's having a sale and buy books for twice the amount the kids' paid for movies.
Tell you what, If I were to ask the kid about his judgement of my purchase, I guess, he'd be aghast. That much money for books? In fact, at home, there's so much books, Alphy's going crazy.
The lesson in all of this? Value perceptions vary depending on who's buying. Smart marketers build both movie halls and bookstores. The former lures the kid successfully, the latter, me.
Friday 18 September 2009
Brands that speak for us are brands we buy
Time Warner's got good reason to hate Glenn Beck. He's a Libertarian and his TV ratings are skyrocketing. The last I heard, CNN viewership was tumbling.
So how does Time Warner's Time magazine react to Beck's rising popularity. They 'carefully' trash him using their latest cover story. (Quote) 'Extreme talk, especially as practiced by a genuine talent like Beck, squeezes maximum profit from a relatively small, deeply invested audience, selling essentially the same product in multiple forms. The more the host is criticized, the more committed the original audience becomes. And the more committed the audience, the bigger target it presents to the rant industry on the other side of the spectrum. A liberal group called Color of Change has organized an advertiser boycott of Beck's TV show — great publicity for the group and a boon to Beck's ratings.'
Glenn Beck scores with conservative viewers because he articulates what they desperately want to say. At a time when Barack's walking the socialist road, its become all the more important for conservatives and libertarians to speak up and be heard. They are getting themselves heard in Townhalls and Tea parties. But on screen, who's going to speak up for them? Glenn Beck. And Glenn does it brilliantly. He doesn't just say it ( he characterised Obama as someone who's got a deep rooted hatred for whites). He does so with fervour and emotion (he shed tears). That's what makes him a darling to the conservative masses.
As people our desire for expression is inherent. We do so in many says; Speaking up, writing about it and sometimes even expressing through art. The other avenue that we've found in expressing ourselves is by connecting to those entities who speak what we otherwise would have wanted to articulate. Avenues like Glenn Beck. Avenues like Brands.
Brands speak for us. The brand that articulates what we want to say about ourselves is the one we buy. Note, I talking conspicuous consumption. For the kid on the high street, the Nike sneaker is an expression of his cool and sporty character. Its what speaks for him.
The challenge for the Marketer is to uncover the personality we seek. Then to craft an identity for a brand that resonates with our desire to express our personality. If the marketer efforts result in a brand that speaks for us, that's the brand we'll buy.
Sphere: Related ContentTop 10 Brands of 2009
1. Coca-Cola - 68,734 ($m)
2. IBM - 60,211 ($m)
3. Microsoft - 56,647 ($m)
4. GE - 47,777 ($m)
5. Nokia - 34,864 ($m)
6. McDonald's - 32,275 ($m)
7. Google - 31,980 ($m)
8. Toyota - 31,330 ($m)
9. Intel - 30,636 ($m)
10. Disney - 28,447 ($m)
Read the complete Interbrand Report here.
Thursday 17 September 2009
'Downscale Chic' works with younger customers
Pabst Blue Ribbon beer's success in a recession proves two important points. One, Consumers are willing to pay more. Two, they pay more because of enhanced value perceptions driven by factors that aren't functional.
PBR costs $1.50 more than MillerCoors' Keystone, $1 more than Anheuser-Busch's Busch and Natural brands, and 50 cents more than Miller High Life. Yet its had the highest growth recorded in its category. This despite lower media spends.
Pabst through its word of mouth campaign was able to position the brand as 'downscale chic'. That is, lower priced than premium, higher priced than budget, with a hip non-conformist image. Worked will the younger drinkers trying to wear the 'anti-establishment' badge. Never mind the higher prices.
Sphere: Related ContentWednesday 16 September 2009
Free costs too much
'Most consumers get it. There's already a free operating system for computers: Linux. Yet netbooks running Windows outsell their Linux counterparts by a margin of nine to one. In other words, free is getting trounced.
Why? Because free costs too much, weighed down with hassles that you'll happily pay a little to do without. That's why people buy bottled water and cable TV. That's also the model that The Wall Street Journal uses to goad people into paying for news online. Anyone can read its stories for free through Google or a news-aggregation site like Digg, but people who want the full newspaper experience pay $103 a year for the privilege. More than a million subscribers consider that a good deal. This isn't an anomaly, either. According to a recent study by the private-equity firm Veronis Suhler Stevenson, consumers now spend more time reading or watching media they've paid for than free media.'
- Farhad Manjoo, 'Why Charging Just a Little Can Be Smarter Than Charging Nothing at All'.
Video Consumption, Multitasking continue to rise
Other findings:
- There are more TVs than inhabitants in an average American home: 2.86 TVs vs. 2.5 people per household in 2009. Moreover, 54% of people have 3+ TV sets in their home.
Adults 18-24 watch five times more video online than adults 65+: 5+ hrs. vs. a little over 1 hr. per month. - The number of children (2-11) online has increased 18% year over year, compared with 10% growth for the number of those 2+.
- More than 15 million Americans said they watched online content on a mobile device in Q209, an increase of 70% compared with the previous year—the largest annual growth to date.
- Americans are more likely to watch short-form video on their computers and TV network content on their mobile phones.
Source: MarketingProfs; About the data: All cited data comes from Nielsen's latest A2/M2 Three Screen Report (vol. 5, 2Q09). Nielsen's A2/M2 Three Screens Reports provide the results from quarterly analyses from Nielsen's Anywhere Anytime Media Measurement Initiative (A2/M2).
Sphere: Related ContentWorld Peace, YES; Info. to the world, NO!
The funny thing about 'news' is, that something doesn't make the 'news' is 'news'. And if its what liberals try not to report on that becomes 'news', I call it 'good news'.
Like Mark Levin's book, 'Liberty and Tyranny'. I've read the book thanks to my brother getting it for me from the US, and I say its a must read. At least for those who think government's the solution. Just so you may change your mind. Though I doubt your newspaper's told you about the book. That's if you read the NY Times or Washington Post, both of which, by the way haven't run any reviews on the book.
But note the facts. 'Liberty and Tyranny' has been riding high on non-fiction bestseller lists ever since it was released in late March. It debuted at No. 1 on the New York Times best seller list and has remained in the Top Ten on that list for 24 straight weeks. It is currently No. 7. (Levin's previous two books, Men in Black: How the Supreme Court is Destroying America and Rescuing Sprite: A Dog Lover's Story of Joy and Anguish, were also New York Times best sellers.)
Despite their objective of World Peace and spreading the wealth around, liberals don't care too much about spreading 'information' to world citizenry. Especially information that's unsavoury to them. Like the ACORN scandal, like Obama's nosediving ratings, like Van Jones' 'truther' past, and so on. Liberal lawmakers too play their part. By pushing the environmental bill and others through in haste so others can't read it.
The list, people, is endless.
Marketing Queries
Soumya: How does a brand increase its price and yet manage to retain its customers in the market when it really would not be able to add more value for the price it charges? Like for example, what I am asking is since the prices of all commodities are on a rise, how does the company increase the product price and yet manage to maintain its consumer? Also I just wanted to also get it clarified, isn’t a price sensitive customers value perceptions driven primarily by price? Isn’t the definition of value also based on price? Like good quality at affordable prices?
Ray: If a brand is forced to raise prices due to increases in input (read, commodity) prices, surely the customer wouldn’t be too happy about the same. But remember, this price rise, one, may be seen as a justified act by the customer, and two, there would be an all round price rise amongst all brands that category.
But I have another recommendation based on the concept of ‘Just Noticeable Difference’. I would recommend brands alter those stimuli, whose changes aren't easily noticed by consumers. Because they fall within the JND. Like for example, weight. So I would say, if the biscuit company’s forced to raise prices as the price of flour has rocketed, I would recommend they keep the Retail price intact, but drop on the weight of the pack. Of course, again, remember no decision isolated. It has its fallouts. For example, a drop in weight may require package sizes to be altered. That costs money. So the relative benefits have to be kept in mind while taking the decision to drop weight. Plus, factor in consumer perceptions about the company’s move. If consumers were to notice the weight drop, would they take too kindly to that? Or would they even perceive it as unethical?
Oh Yes, price plays an important part in value perceptions. A low price may even get you the first buy. But post the first buy, remember, consumers have a hold on reality. And then the landscape alters. Value perceptions now will be driven by factors such as performance. For example, the low price may get me to buy the shirt. But if I see that its color runs, the next time around I wouldn’t touch it with a bargepole despite the low price.
Deepesh: In such a scenario, where Jet has no control over the happenings, what could Jet have done in these couple of days in order to ensure that their customers do not face any inconvenience? Could they have collaborated with other airlines and transfer their passengers to them at the same fare?
As mentioned earlier customers have short term memory, they would forget this incident and in an industry like aviation, customers are loyal only to the prices offered and not to any airline per say. What could have Jet done in such a situation?
Ray: Yes, Jet should have helped their flyers find suitable alternatives. If there would be a fare rise that their customers suffered, due to a competitor’s higher priced ticket, Jet should make up for it by discounting the affected passenger’s flight in the future.
Notice, now that the Jet strike is over, they have gone on a discounted offer on flights till Friday forcing others to follow suit. My recommendation would be to ensure all their affected passengers are compensated by discounts in the future.
Deeptaman: I have a question and that is a bit different from the context you wrote about; but it revolves around individualism and teamwork. This happens especially in the corporate world - Why is it that praises come for the entire team and failures are blamed on the individual?
Ray: Note the saying, ‘Success has many fathers but failure is an orphan’
([1942 G. Ciano Diary 9 Sept. (1946) II. 196] La vittoria trova cento padri, e nessuno vuole riconoscere l'insuccesso. Victory has a hundred fathers, and no one acknowledges a failure).
There are many claimants to success because inherently it’s part of a need hierarchy that’s deeply embedded within us. Winning brings with it acknowledgement and recognition from others. That’s fulfilling our need for esteem. Are most people starved for esteem from the outside world? You bet. Should it then be surprising to see many clamoring for ‘praises’? Or is it again surprising if management passes the praise around to a team knowing well that it’s a tool they can wield to motivate?
Failure is unacceptable to most, not because of failure per se, but for its fallouts. Failure brings it with judgments. Judgments of incompetence. Now, who’s a willing taker to such judgments? Almost none. In fact such judgments drop you like a stone on any social or organizational hierarchy. You’re seen as a loser. How nice is that?
For more on success and failure and its effects on us, watch what Alian De Botton has to say, here.
Fareed: I am very keen to research on any field of marketing but I am facing some difficulty in choosing a topic for the research. Can you please help me to choose a very confined and to the point research topic?
Ray: I can help you find one, though in the end it must be a topic YOU zero in on.
The world of Marketing is fascinating. The entities and acts that make up this world are all subjects of research. For example, are consumers an entity you can study? Yes. Can you study an act like Supply Chain which is a critical function within marketing? Again, you can.
So first and foremost, you must figure out your areas of interest. It could be Consumer Behaviour, it could Marketing Communication or CRM, and so on. It could even be Industry specific. One you know what you’re interested in, you should immerse yourself into that 'specific world' by reading about it from secondary sources and mulling over issues that pertain to it. For example take consumer Behaviour and Pricing. That latest Jet strike fiasco throws up ample opportunities for research. For example, you can research on whether consumer loyalty, in the first place, exists in price sensitive markets. If it does, you can research on what parameters drive this loyalty. What causes consumers to switch? You can map switching patterns among price sensitive consumers within specific time periods. You may even do this study within the Aviation Industry.
The scope for research in Marketing is enormous. All it requires is for you to zero in on your interest, immerse yourself into that world, and mull over what you come across. Voila, you will conjure up topics that are specific, that you can then research. And your research results would contribute to enhancing our understanding of the world of Marketing.
Maybe, I will even take it to my classrooms for further discussions. :)
Tuesday 15 September 2009
Is the successful way the right way?
The explosive growth of the church, 'Reborn in Christ' in Brazil begs a question, or maybe two. Is there one 'right' way to achieving a goal, or is the way that achieves the goal the 'right' way?
Proselytising is inherent to Christianity. Its what Jesus said, 'Go into all the world and preach the Gospel to all creation' (Mark 16:15). 'Reborn in Christ' preaches using tools the Roman Catholic church or even traditional Evangelical churches frown at. But the fact is, Reborn in Christ is among a growing number of evangelical churches in Brazil that are finding ways to connect with younger people to swell their ranks. From fight nights to reggae music to video games and on-site tattoo parlors, the churches have helped make evangelicalism the fastest-growing spiritual movement in Brazil.
So the goal seems to be in grasp, of moving the youth into accepting Christ as their saviour. Also contrast this with waning Catholicism and you know, at least from the results, who's getting to the goal. Coming back to the questions, does that make Reborn in Christ's way, the right way?
In marketing too, its the same scene. That is, what is the right way to the customer? And is the way that gets the customer to buy, the right way? My take 's simple. As long as a way that's used is legal and gets the customer, its the right one. Too long have we been preached to about what the right way is, by people who are never willing to let go of their perception about their way being the right way and the only way. Its time to shrug off such wisdom. Adapting to newer environmental variables and crafting innovative ways is a must in savouring success when it comes to consumers or even the faithful. But I repeat again, no laws are to be broken.
The 'accepted' of the past is the disaster to the future. The lesson to learn from Reborn in Christ is the lesson of Adaptation. The lesson of using newer innovative tools that work. You may agree or disagree with the methods, but tell you what, its the one that's working. And they break no laws.
That's good enough for me.
Monday 14 September 2009
Bill Maher proves Stimuli Interpretation, not Racism
The subject of subliminal persuasion in Advertising is a controversial one. Over years the Advertising Industry has to tried to tell everyone that the charges are unfounded.
The latest airhead who's conjured up the subject of subliminal messages is Bill Maher. According to him the Drudge Report headline, “POLL HELL: OBAMA NEGS RISE,” is somehow an example of the ways in which “some of the right-wingers always drop subliminally racist messages.”
Bill Maher's charge shouldn't be seen for its contribution to proving anything on subliminal messages and their power to influence consumers (read, readers). Instead it must be seen as proving another concept in Consumer Behaviour, namely, 'Interpretation of Stimuli'.
The factors contributing to how consumers interpret stimuli include 'expectations'. That is, prior expectations dictate the way we interpret stimuli. Take the case of spiritual gurus in India. A 'believer' who attends a session by his guru, is moved to the supernatural he may experience in the room where he sits cross legged, to listen to a discourse. On the other hand, a skeptic like me is bound to yawn.
Bill Maher sees a conspiracy where there's none. He sees it because that's what he expects to see. Its the like the movie 'Crash'. Paul Haggis has constructed an American world where there's racism lurking around every corner. Racism that hangs like a dark cloud everywhere. He did it because that's the way he's interpreted what he's experienced and so that's what he expects (read Evan Sayet's take on it here) it be. Even if there wouldn't be a whit of racism in an incident. The world that Oliver Stone's constructed has him seeing a South American near dictator as a do-gooder. A do-gooder who admires a mass murderer who's projected as a 'liberator'. So guess what kind of movie he would make about W? What do you expect NY Times man Thomas Friedman to say about the Chinese totalitarian murderous government?
Bill Maher proves a point about Stimulus Interpretation and not Subliminal persuasion. Considering liberals aren't too good at realism, I am not surprised.
Sphere: Related ContentWhy Loyalty matters
'To be considered loyal, it shouldn’t be enough for a customer to feel a bond to a company, or to simply stick with the relationship. It should also require certain actions, or shopping behaviors, on the part of the customer.
Most corporate measures of customer loyalty focus only on feelings. But our research shows that knowing how customers feel about a company is a poor predictor of how they will behave toward the company. If data about buying behaviors are added to the mix, it can help a company identify not just who its truly loyal customers are, but which ones are profitable.'
- Tim Keiningham et al., 'Why a Loyal Customer Isn’t Always a Profitable One'.
Note: Timothy Keiningham and Lerzan Aksoy have a book out on 'Why Loyalty Matters'. Know about it here and here.
Sunday 13 September 2009
The Myths on Consumer Loyalty
Due to the flurry of comments that my 'Jet Pilot strike' post received, I thought I should post on it just one more time.
Let me address the issue of Customer loyalty. There are too many myths out there on this (Timothy L. Keiningham, Terry G. Vavra & Lerzan Aksoy's book, 'Loyalty myths: Hyped strategies that will put you out of business' is a must read). For example, its isn't exactly true that loyal customers aren't price sensitive. Turns out they are. It isn't again true that loyal customers are necessarily always profitable to the business firm. They aren't. Not always. Note, the key term is 'always'.
Coming to whether price sensitive customers can turn loyals, the answer again is, yes. But note the caveats. Loyalty doesn't mean that the customer isn't price sensitive. He still is. Which means that a competitor airline's helping hand may provoke loyalty. But that doesn't ensure the competitor can get away with higher prices, believing loyal customers will buy them at those fares. Next, the assessment of a product or a service, even for price sensitive customers, is not based on a single parameter called Price, but on a more umbrella parameter termed Value. That is, consumers assess brands on value perceptions. Price does contribute to that perception, but it isn't the only one. If price were the only one, the erstwhile Deccan Airways should have been the most prosperous airline by now. Sure prices matter, but so does delivering on whats promised as the takeoff and arrival time. So does getting a seat with a confirmed booking (Note Abdul Qabiz's post on why Air Deccan sucks).
Note, the theory of Instrumental Conditioning states that our initial move as consumer would be to try out multiple stimuli (read, retail stores, aviation services). We then settle for that stimuli that drives the best value. The next time around as a repeat consumer, we go back to the stimuli that delivered on maximum value. We continue this over time,. We only switch when the stimuli fails to deliver on what's perceived as value by us. In short, we switch when it messes up. If doesn't, we return to it time and again.
My final point is on one of the greatest myths about consumers. That the mass consumer is a ruthless rational who throws his lot with whoever sells lowest. The truth is we are as irrational as we are rational. Dan Ariely proves this is his book, Predictably Irrational.
Any one out there who believes himself to be a thinking rational who's in control of his own decisions, I'd recommend you listen to Dan's demonstration (note the Economist subscription scenario) to the contrary. You can watch him here.
Saturday 12 September 2009
Surviving for now is dying to tomorrow
Let me address the valid points Krishnasagar's raised. He talks of 'survival' being important, of formation of cartels, of public memory being short, and about how airlines need to communicate.
Sure, survival's important, but I wonder how much money rival airlines may have raised because they overcharged customers. Sure, demand-supply scenarios justifiy price hikes. But what it doesn't take into consideration is future revenues that could accrue due to loyalties built. Loyalty as result of showing you care enough not to raise prices at a time when you can.
A generic question. When has someone cared? And if someone did, do you remember the act for life? My bet is you do. We live in a cynical, opportunism driven world. Acts of kindnes are rare and far in between. And so when it happens, it stands out starkly against the backdrop of an unkind world. Again, when have you felt genuine care on the part of a business concern? Rarely. So when it happens, are you pleasently surprised? Delighted? I bet, you are. Let me illustrate. I now have been shopping at Spar consistently for more than a year. This despite the fact that getting to the store at Bangalore on the Inner Ring Road requires me go up a road, wait at a signal, take a U turn to reach the store. Again, despite the fact that I pay parking charges (introduced later in its operations). Here's why. Also note, I did try out Star Bazaar at Bangalore. But I didn't return. That was almost a year and half ago. Here's why and why.
Bottomline? I remember.
About cartels, sure they may crop up, but tell you what, its a life lived on the edge, with the cartel arrangements susceptible to breaking down any time. And that's when the consumer turns ruthless playing one brand against the other, trying to get the best bargain deal. Note, switching costs are almost non existent.
About airlines communicating to consumers, here's the best scenario. Don't hike prices. Help flyers out of their limbos. Get the press to cover the act. Subtly. The resulting publicity would be something a million dollars on Advertising can't buy. The icing on the Cake? A probable outcome of Brand Loyalty. That's revenue inflows for a lifetime.
Any day, that should be a brand's first pick.
Friday 11 September 2009
Who's Lying?
'To tell us, with a straight face, that he can insure millions more people without adding to the already skyrocketing deficit, is world-class chutzpa and an insult to anyone's intelligence. To do so after an analysis by the Congressional Budget Office has already showed this to be impossible reveals the depths of moral bankruptcy behind the glittering words.
Did we really need CBO experts to tell us that there is no free lunch? Some people probably did and the true believers in the Obama cult may still believe the President, instead of believing either common sense or budget experts. Even those who can believe that Obama can conjure up the money through eliminating "waste, fraud and abuse" should ask themselves where he is going to conjure up the additional doctors, nurses, and hospitals needed to take care of millions more patients...
Obama can deny it in words but what matters are deeds-- and no one's words have been more repeatedly the direct opposite of his deeds...'
- Thomas Sowell, 'Obama's Rhetoric vs. Common Sense'.
Wednesday 9 September 2009
Sweet goodbyes are comeback goodbyes
'Goodbye from our Newsletter, sorry to see you go. You have been unsubscribed from our newsletters. This is the last email you will receive from us. We have added you to our "blacklist", which means that our newsletter system will refuse to send you any other email, without manual intervention by our administrator.'
I am not too sure if this is the nicest of goodbyes I've ever received. The one above is a response to my decision to unsubscribe from a newsletter. In fact I think this goodbye's a bit scary. I have been 'blacklisted'. The system 'will refuse to send me any other email without manual inetrvention'. Woah, its almost as if I am guilty of a crime!
Tell you what, I don't think the firm in question intended this goodbye message to sound the way it does. Its just that whoever came up with the copy may be challenged when it comes to the language, English. But then again, there's a lesson in there. When you let someone go, especially someone who's a customer, at their request, be at your sweetest best. Because they may at some point in time change their mind. And then, they will remember that you left the door ajar.
The better Goodbye should go something like this:
'Goodbye from our Newsletter. We are sorry to see you go. Please note that you have been unsubscribed from our newsletters. We have added you to our list of 'Do not Disturb' clients. We respect your need to unsubscribe, but we also want to let you know that should you want to subscribe any time in the future, a reply to this mail is all that's required. We would then be most happy to mail our newsletters to you. Thank you for the opportunity to serve you.'
(Improvements to what's stated above 's most welcome)
Myopics make hay while the sun shines
Its appalling how myopic business firms turn, when faced with an opportunity to 'make hay'. The Jet pilot strike that left passengers stranded should have been an opportunity for rival aviation brands to start a relationship with flyers by helping them in their time of need. The help they could extend was by assisting these stranded flyers get to their destinations by issuing tickets if they had vacant seats on their flights or even by guiding them to other airlines that may. Instead, passengers allege rival airlines doubled their fares arbitrarily knowing fully well that flyers would be forced to buy tickets at those exorbitant prices.
What the airline's done is make hay while the sun shone. But the larger fallout is a lifelong impression they may have created about themselves in the minds of flyers who bought their tickets at exorbitant rates. An impression of being sneaky opportunists. Remember, in all probability, this will be an impression for a lifetime. And that virtually makes a relationship building scenario go kaput.
What's even more appalling about what was witnessed is that such 'money making' acts are encouraged in business firms. Maybe the 'architect' is even rewarded. That's such a pity. Because though it surely makes more money for the present, it shuts out the possibility of lifetime value from consumers.
Now that's reason to mourn.
Monday 7 September 2009
Pray, what's Indian?
'Those who are getting worked up - due to nationalistic reasons – at Giancarlo’s “betrayal” would do well to find more about Force India. Apart from the money, there’s little that’s Indian in the team. Of the 28 key team personnel listed on their website, only one is from India – Mallya. Mercedes Benz supplies the engine, McLaren the gearbox. The drivers are European.Force India is the only team on the Formula One circuit that uses a country’s name.'
I guess Rohit Mahajan's helped us not make a mistake in turning 'patriotic' when it comes to 'Force India'. The politics of business part, I wonder what should have us patriotic? The knowledge that something's purely Indian? And pray, what's that? What's without influences from the outside?
I wish Rohit knew that nothing's for real. Its perceptions that rule. Perceptions that dictate judgements. Vijay Mallya's the smart businessman. But why single him out? Business at the end of the day is about top and bottomlines. And to get that in shape its smart to build the right perceptions about a brand. Never mind if it requires a certain name, a certain colour, a certain personality and so on.
Also note, when it comes to consumers, they are ruthless in their decison making. Yes, Consumer ethnocentrism exists, but is abandoned as and when it suits them. The iconic Indian Coffee House I guess, is Indian. Just that a few months ago it almost downed its shutters. Contrast that with the imported Cafe concept that allows for consumers to lounge on leather sofas sipping at piping hot Cappuccinos. By the way, did you know the Cappuccino is European/Italian in origin?
And the last I heard, the Indian version of Starbucks, Cafe' Coffee Day was growing in strength by the day, even going international.
Saturday 5 September 2009
Bailouts for unreliable brands?
Consumers assess Quality on two generic parameters. Reliability and Attributes. The higher the two of these are, the greater the quality. But what needs to be noted is that on the former parameter, brands don't have a choice. I mean reliability levels can only be high. If they were to fall, it wouldn't matter that the product's got a lot of features, it would still be perceived as poor quality. On the second parameter, namely attributes, brands depending on who their target segments are, can either keep it low or pack themselves with features. If the Mass consumer is the target, attributes have to be kept low, so costs can be kept low, so prices can be rock bottom. Its the mass low-cost model. Remember, on reliabilty, there ain't a choice, even if its the Mass consumer on your radar.
Imagine if a brand were low on attributes and low on reliabilty. Only a miracle can keep such a brand in business. Or socialism, the way Obama's keeping Government Motors in the running. Or the way Hindustan Motors is kept alive in India.
The latest brand that nosedives when you consider both reliability and attributes is Air India. The irony? Its still seeking government funds to keep itself alive. Alive so it can operate with low levels of reliability (its just been a day since the nightmare passengers had to go through on an Air India flight to Saudi Arabia), and low levels of attributes (people who have travelled on the airline know how lousy their service is).
Air India is in deep trouble. It operates with neither reliability nor attributes. You gotta always say a prayer before you fly it, and also keep the prayer going so you can have the baggage arrive with you, encounter a sweet airhostess on board...
Tell you what, this is one case where even prayers fail.
Thursday 3 September 2009
The Mass Act for the Masses
As India mourns the loss of YSR, its pertinent to remember him as one of a rare kind, among politicains. YSR was among the last of a rare breed of leaders. Leaders with Mass following.
YSR burst on to the political scene with an act that was an iconic mass act. The Padayatra. That was the scorching summer of 2003. What's remarkable about what he did was the fact that he used a tool that may not have found takers in a world of technology to his advantage, to reach out to people to whom technology means nothing. People sans technology. People who are called the masses. The only people in India who can pilot you to political victories.
In India the mases are where there's nothing else. To have them on your marketing radar means abandoning tools that are urban and irrelevant to such masses. It means rethinking almost everything that's otherwise a taken for urban consumers. It means rewriting the classic Four Ps. The product has to drive and demonstrate functional value. Aspirations built through communiques have to reek of regional flavours. Distribution would mean hitting the dusty non-existent roads. And prices have to fit into tight purse strings.
In short, it means embarking on a different journey. A journey called the Padayatra.
Wednesday 2 September 2009
Why I love Stupid Sarah
'Sarah Palin simply does not understand. No nuance. She did not go to Harvard, nor is she a board member of Princeton University's Center for Human Values, where Zeke provides support for philosopher Peter Singer. Singer is best known for the view that fetuses and many disabled have less of a right to live than, say, fully functioning humans and "adult gorillas and chimpanzees." No, Zeke believes that those who know better, who understand morality, should make decisions for those less able to do so...
So when Sarah Palin says she doesn't want her "baby with Down Syndrome" to stand in front of his medical panels... that shows just how unsophisticated her thinking really is. She has already made the anti-social choice of giving birth to a child with a severe disability, who will never be able to live the "complete life" outlined by Zeke on behalf of the government.
Therefore, it is the responsibility of a health care system that operates in the public good to deny Trig -- or grandma, for that matter -- health services that are better used elsewhere. Sarah Palin, not the government, is to blame. She chose to have Trig. She forced a situation that provides her with, as Zeke puts it, "bleak choices."
And so government, for the sake of the common good, may deny Trig medical care. And may do the same with the elderly, the severely disabled, and others who fall low on the "complete life" value scale. It is the best way, the moral way, the smart way. And Zeke knows smart -- he went to Harvard, you know.' (Sarah Palin vs. Dr. Death)
Thw unsophisticated Sarah Palin is the torch bearer to Mass consumer brands. Its her lack of sophistication, sans a Havard degree that gets her to connect with the masses. If there were a dgeree, her sophisticated babble would have been given a go by, by the masses. Guess why? 'Cos they are too stupid to understand.
The equivalent of Sarah Palin in the business world is Wal Mart. No lofty vision or mission statements, no Havardian philosophies. The message to the mass is almost stupidly simple. 'Every Day Low Prices'. Simple, direct and profoundly meaningful. Now how many Business School grads. can conjure up such a philosophy?
The most profoundest of wisdom is the simplest. Rejected by the elite. Adored by the masses. Consider the Christian philosophy. Believe in the redeeming power of the Cross of Calvary and thou shalt live. How stupidly simple. Believe. That's it? Shouldn't it be a bit more sophisticated?
Brands that want to make it in the Mass consumer world must shed their sophisticated intentions and embrace the stupidly simple. This may not be easy if you sport a Havard Degree. Sarah Palin sans her degree with her 'Death Panel' comment triggered events that brought the great Obama Adminstration to its knees. Note, as Obama's ratings plummet, his elite sophistication that mesmerised the urban audience in America is beginning to crack. The American masses are on their way back to understanding what's truly profound.
That our ways of life are decided by us. Not Obama. Not the Government.
Three cheers to that. Three Cheers to Sarah.
Tuesday 1 September 2009
You CAN'T go, when you gotta go!
'But what the French call urine sauvage, which translates to "wild urine," is the hardest to crack. While France's capital has campaigned with some success to have Parisians pick up after their pets, the city is still struggling with the presence of pipi. Urine is hard to escape in certain parts of the city, be it on the street, in the Metro or in parks.
Members of the Brigade say there is no high season for urinary offenses, but summertime heat heightens the stench.'
France is now cracking down on public Pipiers with a vengeance, handing out fines. In India, if that were done, guess, Government finances can be saved and enriched with collections they can make off Indian public Pipiers.
Its just pathetic to see Pipiers in India zip down without any consideration for where they are and where they do it. Of course, the defense is, when they gotta go, they gotta go. My take is, it isn't about 'going'. Its more Habitual behaviour that's reached those proportions because there's never been any damages to pay. The first time the Pipier tried, it felt good and he got away with it. The next time around was a repetition, the third time is habitual.
Habitual behaviour that leads consumers back to the same FMCG brand is categorised as a purchase out of inertia. That is, lazily going back to what was consumed in the past. The only way to break habitual inertia driven consumption behaviour is by interrupting the consumer in the act, by an 'in-the-face' irresistible promo displayed prominently on the shelf by a competing brand.
For the public Pipier, the way to break the disgusting habit is by getting him to pay for damages he's caused. What could be even more effective is to get him to clean up, Bucket, mop, water....Embarassment and all.
Beware, Women consumers ahoy!
Performics' 2009 Online Buyer Economic Trend Study reports that 53% of women said their situation is worse than a year ago. By contrast, only 38% of men said they are worse off than a year ago. In April, when Performics posed those same questions, 53% of both genders said they were worse off.
The pessimism that women sport may be due to their roles as Purchasers-in-Chief when it comes to household goods. The survey also found that 73% of women said the recession had fundamentally changed the way they think about saving and spending money vs. 57% of men.
Should the implications from the way women now think be worrisome to marketers? According to me, its a Yes and No. It should be worrisome to those who pitch their wares using messages that try and connect with emotions. These are trying times where women turn ruthless rationalists. No more 'Be More' kind of campaigns for them. They don't want to be any 'more' than what they already are. Instead what they are looking for is how they can spend less and get the same deal or even more. Marketers who can keep the grin on are ones that sell with a 'Value for money' pitch. Women will gravitate to such brands, as it means greater value for the same expenditure. It will make them feel the money was 'well spent'.
Its the likes of McDonalds, McCafes and Wal-Marts that can sit tight. If you are the Starbucks of the world, I'd say worry.
Big time.
The Great Escape
'Education is usually discussed in terms of the money spent on it, the teaching methods used, class sizes or the way the whole system is organized. Students are discussed largely as passive recipients of good or bad education.
But education is not something that can be given to anybody. It is something that students either acquire or fail to acquire. Personal responsibility may be ignored or downplayed in this "non-judgmental" age, but it remains a major factor nevertheless...
The great escape of our times is escape from personal responsibility for the consequences of one's own behavior. Differences in infant mortality rates provoke pious editorials on a need for more prenatal care to be provided by the government for those unable to afford it. In other words, the explanation is automatically assumed to be external to the mothers involved and the solution is assumed to be something that "we" can do for "them."...
It is not just the "non-judgmental" ideology of the intelligentsia but also the self-interest of politicians that leads to so much downplaying of personal responsibility in favor of external explanations and external programs to "solve" the "problem." On these and other issues, government programs are far less likely to solve the country's problems than to solve the politicians' problem of getting the votes of those whose think the answer to every problem is for the government to "do something."
- Thomas Sowell, 'The Great Escape'.
Posts
