There have been times in my life when I have felt that rules/laws have exercised an excessive amount of power to try to manage my moral choices. There was a time in high school when I felt as if the government had unfairly judged my behavior by assuming that I was going to be an irresponsible sixteen year old driver and thus implemented the “6 month” law. Although this regulation may not have been a direct reflection of moral character but of statistics I still felt unfairly judged. I’m sure others could agree with me in that circumstance when they could not ride with friends for 6 months after the got their license. Have there ever been instances in your life when you were offended by any laws or rules implemented by a “higher power” that you felt people unfairly assumed your moral character?
In chapter 12 of Persuasion and Influence in American Life, Woodward and Denton state that “a free marketplace of ideas is also vital to the concept of democracy. Diversity of thought and respect for dissent are hallmarks of the values of freedom and justice. When multiple view points are heard and expressed, the common good prevails over private interests” (p. 352). I personally feel that the last line of this statement is very bold and could be strongly argued in today’s society when celebrities’ personal lives are front page news and the general public is eager to follow their lead for trends, I feel as if the common good can be easily over looked. Do you agree, or disagree? Why?
In my Mass Media and Society class, media literacy was a core concept that we discussed extensively. This concept was also introduced briefly in the “Advertising as Persuasion” chapter of Persuasion and Influence in American Life. Media literacy is a term used to describe the act of being critically conscious of the media one consumes. People have to realize that “’news is gathered, written, edited, produced, and disseminated by human beings who are part of organizations and who have beliefs and values… These beliefs, values, functions, and interests are bound to influence the messages these networks publish and broadcast’” (p. 370). I believe that media literacy is seriously overlooked and should be implemented into school curriculums. Do you feel the same? Should school introduce some type of education to make people more aware of what and how they consume media? Why or why not?
Sunday, November 29, 2009
Sunday, November 15, 2009
Questions for Ch. 8
In chapter 8 of Persuasion and Influence in American Life, Woodward and Denton state that “Some people are naturally resistant to any persuasive effort. Those who are highly ego involved in an issue or those who possess an extreme conviction or position on an issue will not be open to opposing views… Persuasion is also difficult when listeners have been rewarded for their positions in the past and are unfamiliar with the speaker’s background and opinions” (p. 200). I completely agree with this statement, especially with the author’s account of which types of people are the hardest to persuade. In my own personal experiences I have been both non-persuadable and unable to persuade and in each situation I have found myself frustrated. I feel that most people have found themselves in similar situations where they have not been convinced by an argument or have been unsuccessful in convincing others. Can you recall a time when you have been the most frustrated that you could not sway someone to see your side? Who were you trying to convince and why?
As William Wilmot and Joyce Hocker suggest “Dialogue involves actively listening to understand the other view point and having a deep respect for the other person” (p. 201) they then list 6 communication strategies that help create trust. These strategies are: speak your mind and your heart, listen well, summarize and ask questions, express strong feelings appropriately, avoid harmful statements, and finally, give and take. Each of these is incredibly valuable and I should probably use more of them all in my personal life. For me, this is especially true for the first strategy. I have a strong tendency to try to make everyone happy regardless of what my heart or mind may be telling me. Even though I may have only the best intentions in mind, I often find myself in precarious positions due to my need to pacify situations. I am sure, if I worked on these simple communication skills, I would 1) be able to better execute the other strategies and 2) be an overall, better communicator. Out of these 5 strategies, which do you feel you need to work on, if any at all? How do you think your communication skills would change as a result?
In chapter 8, Woodward and Denton offer a few different types of sales, interviewing being one of them. “In many ways the interviewing process is also a type of sale. When you interview for a job, you are both the product and the salesperson” (p. 221). After I read this section, I began to ponder if there were any other “sales” positions that a person could be in where they are both the product and the salesperson. After a significant amount of brainstorming, I could only come up with one situation where a person would be both and that is if they were running for office in some type of political campaign. When people enter into a political campaign, they are trying to sell their credentials and capabilities to their audiences. Therefore they are the product (what they will/can do for the people) that they are trying to sell. Can you think of any other instances where a person could be a product and a salesperson at the same time?
As William Wilmot and Joyce Hocker suggest “Dialogue involves actively listening to understand the other view point and having a deep respect for the other person” (p. 201) they then list 6 communication strategies that help create trust. These strategies are: speak your mind and your heart, listen well, summarize and ask questions, express strong feelings appropriately, avoid harmful statements, and finally, give and take. Each of these is incredibly valuable and I should probably use more of them all in my personal life. For me, this is especially true for the first strategy. I have a strong tendency to try to make everyone happy regardless of what my heart or mind may be telling me. Even though I may have only the best intentions in mind, I often find myself in precarious positions due to my need to pacify situations. I am sure, if I worked on these simple communication skills, I would 1) be able to better execute the other strategies and 2) be an overall, better communicator. Out of these 5 strategies, which do you feel you need to work on, if any at all? How do you think your communication skills would change as a result?
In chapter 8, Woodward and Denton offer a few different types of sales, interviewing being one of them. “In many ways the interviewing process is also a type of sale. When you interview for a job, you are both the product and the salesperson” (p. 221). After I read this section, I began to ponder if there were any other “sales” positions that a person could be in where they are both the product and the salesperson. After a significant amount of brainstorming, I could only come up with one situation where a person would be both and that is if they were running for office in some type of political campaign. When people enter into a political campaign, they are trying to sell their credentials and capabilities to their audiences. Therefore they are the product (what they will/can do for the people) that they are trying to sell. Can you think of any other instances where a person could be a product and a salesperson at the same time?
Sunday, November 8, 2009
Persuasion Observation: Starbucks
Persuasion Observation: Starbucks
After learning about the VALS in Chapter 10 of Persuasion and Influence in American Life, I wanted to see where I fit into the chart on p. 278. I found the website, took the survey and learned that I am an Experiencer/Innovator.
Armed with the knowledge that I am among the “avid consumers [who] spend a comparatively high proportion of their income on fashion, entertainment, and socializing…” and also “among the established and emerging leaders in business and government, yet they continue to seek challenges. Their lives are characterized by variety. Their possessions and recreation reflect a cultivated taste for the finer things in life…” It was no surprise to me that I chose Starbucks for my persuasion observation destination.
Keeping the dimensions of the VALS and theory of psychographics in mind, I observed that Starbucks’ attempt to persuade consumers is heavily influenced by those concepts. Starbucks has a brand identity that is worth millions, and that is not even the value of the company itself. This is due to the fact that Starbucks has infiltrated consumer life through branding and very strategic messaging.
In the store that I sat to observe this phenomenon, I counted over 200 logos just within my field of vision. As I applied the potential effects of this to myself (an Experiencer/Innovator) and others like me, I realized that I could not stand a chance to fight off the influence that these logos were going to have on me. Starbucks screams “trendy”, “hip”, “sophisticated”, “sustainable”, and “established”, just to name a few and for most consumers my age, those qualities are exactly what we are looking for. By creating trendy merchandise, such as sustainable cups, water bottles and gift cards that, when purchased, donates money to starving children in Africa, Starbucks is using it’s persuasion tools with surgical precision on a very specific target market. With such heavy precipitation of brand, logos, and marketing, persuasion, reinforcement and reminder (the distinct levels of persuasion) come easy to Starbucks. And it is this effective persuasion that has put the company at the very front of the pack in areas such as consumer loyalty hich is every company’s and advertiser’s dream.
After learning about the VALS in Chapter 10 of Persuasion and Influence in American Life, I wanted to see where I fit into the chart on p. 278. I found the website, took the survey and learned that I am an Experiencer/Innovator.
Armed with the knowledge that I am among the “avid consumers [who] spend a comparatively high proportion of their income on fashion, entertainment, and socializing…” and also “among the established and emerging leaders in business and government, yet they continue to seek challenges. Their lives are characterized by variety. Their possessions and recreation reflect a cultivated taste for the finer things in life…” It was no surprise to me that I chose Starbucks for my persuasion observation destination.
Keeping the dimensions of the VALS and theory of psychographics in mind, I observed that Starbucks’ attempt to persuade consumers is heavily influenced by those concepts. Starbucks has a brand identity that is worth millions, and that is not even the value of the company itself. This is due to the fact that Starbucks has infiltrated consumer life through branding and very strategic messaging.
In the store that I sat to observe this phenomenon, I counted over 200 logos just within my field of vision. As I applied the potential effects of this to myself (an Experiencer/Innovator) and others like me, I realized that I could not stand a chance to fight off the influence that these logos were going to have on me. Starbucks screams “trendy”, “hip”, “sophisticated”, “sustainable”, and “established”, just to name a few and for most consumers my age, those qualities are exactly what we are looking for. By creating trendy merchandise, such as sustainable cups, water bottles and gift cards that, when purchased, donates money to starving children in Africa, Starbucks is using it’s persuasion tools with surgical precision on a very specific target market. With such heavy precipitation of brand, logos, and marketing, persuasion, reinforcement and reminder (the distinct levels of persuasion) come easy to Starbucks. And it is this effective persuasion that has put the company at the very front of the pack in areas such as consumer loyalty hich is every company’s and advertiser’s dream.
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
CMJR 350: Persuasion Question Response #2
"Also in Chapter 6, Woodward and Denton explore the concept of beliefs. A belief is what we personally “know” to be true or false even if others disagree. There are many types of beliefs. Some are very crucial to our lives, while others provide connections to different objects. Do you believe that there are beliefs out there that could be concrete fact? Are there any beliefs that cannot be dismissed? An example of what I am talking about would be how everything in the study of science is still considered “theory”. I mean gravity, evolution, air and space, are all still theories, none of them has been said to be exact truth. So my question is, is everything a belief?"
There have been many times in my life when I have pondered Ryan’s third question, “Is everything a belief?” As a child I would always question why a tree was called “tree” when it could just as well be named “dog” and maintain its form. Don’t get me wrong, I knew what a tree was with its bark and leaves and need for sun but I always wondered if it could be possible that all of humanity was wrong purely because there is no solid proof about the correctness of its name. I would question colors in a similar way by asking, “How do I know that the way I see red is not the way you see blue?” There is no way to see an object through someone else’s eyes, therefore, there is no way to tell whether we are all seeing different colors but calling them by the name we have been conditioned to use.
Even though my childhood questions may not seem to directly relate all of Ryan’s, I do feel that my anecdote speaks to Woodward and Denton’s quote that “Beliefs are informational statements that link specific attributes to an object. Our perceptions of how two or more things are related determine the categories to which we assign information. One’s attitude toward an object is a function of one’s salient beliefs about the object” (pg 133). Although there is no “concrete” proof that a tree is not a dog, we believe that a tree is a tree because of our unwavering conviction in its name. Therefore I think Ryan asks a valid question; “Is everything a belief?”
To a certain extent, I believe that everything is belief but I do not feel that that changes the validity of the potential “fact” that surrounds it. As Ryan said, most science is considered “theory” but as it applies in our lives today, it is fact. Gravity is a perfect example of this. It is obvious that there is something that makes our atmosphere different than the one that is on the moon but what exactly that is, no one truly knows. The current concept of gravity works because everyone believes that it is true and there is a substantial amount of evidence that “proves” it; but yet again, can anyone, without a doubt, prove that the theory of gravity is flawless? Maybe in five hundred years a future Newton will discover that the gravity that we believe in today is completely wrong but what difference does that make to us; nothing because our beliefs today allow us to explain a phenomenon in a way that seems plausible and truthful.
There have been many times in my life when I have pondered Ryan’s third question, “Is everything a belief?” As a child I would always question why a tree was called “tree” when it could just as well be named “dog” and maintain its form. Don’t get me wrong, I knew what a tree was with its bark and leaves and need for sun but I always wondered if it could be possible that all of humanity was wrong purely because there is no solid proof about the correctness of its name. I would question colors in a similar way by asking, “How do I know that the way I see red is not the way you see blue?” There is no way to see an object through someone else’s eyes, therefore, there is no way to tell whether we are all seeing different colors but calling them by the name we have been conditioned to use.
Even though my childhood questions may not seem to directly relate all of Ryan’s, I do feel that my anecdote speaks to Woodward and Denton’s quote that “Beliefs are informational statements that link specific attributes to an object. Our perceptions of how two or more things are related determine the categories to which we assign information. One’s attitude toward an object is a function of one’s salient beliefs about the object” (pg 133). Although there is no “concrete” proof that a tree is not a dog, we believe that a tree is a tree because of our unwavering conviction in its name. Therefore I think Ryan asks a valid question; “Is everything a belief?”
To a certain extent, I believe that everything is belief but I do not feel that that changes the validity of the potential “fact” that surrounds it. As Ryan said, most science is considered “theory” but as it applies in our lives today, it is fact. Gravity is a perfect example of this. It is obvious that there is something that makes our atmosphere different than the one that is on the moon but what exactly that is, no one truly knows. The current concept of gravity works because everyone believes that it is true and there is a substantial amount of evidence that “proves” it; but yet again, can anyone, without a doubt, prove that the theory of gravity is flawless? Maybe in five hundred years a future Newton will discover that the gravity that we believe in today is completely wrong but what difference does that make to us; nothing because our beliefs today allow us to explain a phenomenon in a way that seems plausible and truthful.
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Question Response: Week 4
Shanae Holder
Question Response #1
As a part of this class, we are required to blog. Now that we are a part of the rising blogosphere and to an extent, understand the power of a blog (such as the recent raves of food blogs and fashion blogs, etc.), how can we determine a blogger's "ability" to blog truthfully? As many restaurants like to frame their credentials and positive reviews from newspapers and hang them on their walls, should there be some kind of system implemented to distinguish bloggers who blog truthfully with good intentions and notable credentials, as opposed to bloggers who have neither credibility or authority who may even be a secret blogger for a larger organization? Given that anyone can "Google" search any subject and be able to choose their sources, how can we be sure that what we are reading is written by an author of ability? By Gina Kim
As I read through chapter 4, I also found myself asking questions that were similar to Gina’s. How can people determine the ability/credibility of new social media? Websites such as Twitter, blogs, YouTube and Wikis are mediums that anyone can use to generate and exchange ideas, conversation, videos, pictures and various other types of content to users. From an innovative angle, these website are great because they allow for new material to be voiced freely but how can people tell an author’s truth ability through the internet?
One example that comes to mind is the new movement by journalists to use these social media as a news source. Recently, a reporter browsing Twitter discovered that Lance Armstrong wrote that he “Had dinner w/ Howard Schultz of Starbucks, his family, and some friends last night.. Great man who's committed to healthcare for all..,” and although this may seem very innocent and even complimentary, this comment sparked a controversy that could be potentially detrimental to the Starbucks reputation. After posting this statement, that reporter found that it was actually in Hawaii that Lance dined with Mr. Schultz and after digging even further she found that Schultz had used a company jet to fly his family there on a personal vacation. According to company policy, Starbucks’ employees must reimburse the corporation for the use of company planes. Apparently Schultz has still not done so and has found himself in hot water all because of a simple, polite twitter by famous friend. Now, this particular incident may be an anomaly as far as a reporter stirring up serious, truthful allegations against a very prominent CEO, I find it hard to believe that most information can be that reliable.
Although I do believe that certain websites should be held up to a “credibility” standard such as Wikipedia which claims to be an online encyclopedia, I think it would defeat the purpose of blogging and wikis if everyone needed to be an expert on what they are talking about. I cannot really find anything wrong with someone blogging about something that they may not have expert ability in. Where I believe the problem truly lies is in people’s media literacy. If people pay more attention to what type of information they are consuming and are conscious of a source’s “authority,” the amount of misinformed people would significantly decrease. I honestly feel that it is the responsibility of the person reading the blogs, twitters, and wikis to do their due diligence and research information that is not already common knowledge. Therefore each person can certify their own “author of ability.”
Question Response #1
As a part of this class, we are required to blog. Now that we are a part of the rising blogosphere and to an extent, understand the power of a blog (such as the recent raves of food blogs and fashion blogs, etc.), how can we determine a blogger's "ability" to blog truthfully? As many restaurants like to frame their credentials and positive reviews from newspapers and hang them on their walls, should there be some kind of system implemented to distinguish bloggers who blog truthfully with good intentions and notable credentials, as opposed to bloggers who have neither credibility or authority who may even be a secret blogger for a larger organization? Given that anyone can "Google" search any subject and be able to choose their sources, how can we be sure that what we are reading is written by an author of ability? By Gina Kim
As I read through chapter 4, I also found myself asking questions that were similar to Gina’s. How can people determine the ability/credibility of new social media? Websites such as Twitter, blogs, YouTube and Wikis are mediums that anyone can use to generate and exchange ideas, conversation, videos, pictures and various other types of content to users. From an innovative angle, these website are great because they allow for new material to be voiced freely but how can people tell an author’s truth ability through the internet?
One example that comes to mind is the new movement by journalists to use these social media as a news source. Recently, a reporter browsing Twitter discovered that Lance Armstrong wrote that he “Had dinner w/ Howard Schultz of Starbucks, his family, and some friends last night.. Great man who's committed to healthcare for all..,” and although this may seem very innocent and even complimentary, this comment sparked a controversy that could be potentially detrimental to the Starbucks reputation. After posting this statement, that reporter found that it was actually in Hawaii that Lance dined with Mr. Schultz and after digging even further she found that Schultz had used a company jet to fly his family there on a personal vacation. According to company policy, Starbucks’ employees must reimburse the corporation for the use of company planes. Apparently Schultz has still not done so and has found himself in hot water all because of a simple, polite twitter by famous friend. Now, this particular incident may be an anomaly as far as a reporter stirring up serious, truthful allegations against a very prominent CEO, I find it hard to believe that most information can be that reliable.
Although I do believe that certain websites should be held up to a “credibility” standard such as Wikipedia which claims to be an online encyclopedia, I think it would defeat the purpose of blogging and wikis if everyone needed to be an expert on what they are talking about. I cannot really find anything wrong with someone blogging about something that they may not have expert ability in. Where I believe the problem truly lies is in people’s media literacy. If people pay more attention to what type of information they are consuming and are conscious of a source’s “authority,” the amount of misinformed people would significantly decrease. I honestly feel that it is the responsibility of the person reading the blogs, twitters, and wikis to do their due diligence and research information that is not already common knowledge. Therefore each person can certify their own “author of ability.”
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)