Advertising
Survey of Broadcasting: Assignment 2: Question 6. Describe and define one theory about media impact.
Three theories concerning the effects or impact of mass media have evolved over time:
- Hypodermic Needle Theory: an early theory that posits that mass communications messages would have a strong and predictable effect on an audience member. The theory held that all people would more or less have the same reaction to a mass communication message.
- Limited-Effects Theory: a latter theory that posits that media have few direct and meaningful effects on the audience because of a variety of intervening variables. A mass communication message would have little impact.
- Specific-Effects Theory: a recent theory that posits that there are certain circumstances under which some types of media will have a significant effect on some audience members.
The hypodermic needle theory was given much credence due to the apparent success of propaganda before and after World War I and the fact that many people believed the radio show War of the Worlds was in fact reality and the success of Dr. Brinkley’s radio show selling patent medicines and cures for various aliments.
However, by the mid-1940s the hypodermic needle theory’s assumptions were called into question by experimental and survey research.
The limited effects theory focused on persuasion and political campaigns. Mass communication messages first influenced people known as opinion leaders and then flowed on to the rest of the audience. Research posited that media’s influenced people known as opinion leaders and then flowed on to the rest of the audience.
Research posited that media’s influence or impact was first filtered through a strainer of intervening variables, such as a person’s knowledge and beliefs and the influence of family, friends and peer groups. According to the limited effects theory, mass communications are simply one of many determinants of how an individual behaves.
Joseph Klapper’s book The Effects of Mass Communication summarizes the existing research with the generalization that mass communications does not ordinarily cause audience effects but instead functions primarily to reinforce existing conditions.
Klapper also noted that there are occasions when mass communications could exert a direct effect and where mediating factors reinforce change or when mediating factors are absent.
The mediating factors include the following:
- The exercise of opinion leadership
- The norms of groups to which the audience members belong
- The nature of mass media in a free enterprise economy
- Interpersonal dissemination of the content of communication
- Predispositions and the related processes of selective exposure and selective perception and retention.
Klapper considered that the two main intervening or mediating factors were selective exposure or people’s tendency to expose themselves to those mass communications which are in agreement with their attitudes and interests and
selective perception and retention or people’s inclination to organize the meaning of mass communication messages in accordance with their already existing views.
Most recent research on the impact or effects of mass communications tends to support the specific effects theory. Mass-media communications must compete with many other sources of influence such as family, friends, teachers, ministers and many others.
However, there are circumstances where specific types of media content may have a significant effect on a portion of the audience.
Harold Lasswell described the formula as follows:
- “Who (says) What (to) Whom (in) What Channel (with) What Effect.?”
Bernard Berelson succinctly summarizes the specific-effects theory of communication:
“Some kinds of communication, on some kinds of issues, brought to the attention of some kinds of people, under some kinds of conditions, have some kinds of effects.”
Background Articles and Videos
Mass Communication : The Hypodermic Theory of Mass Communication
Mass Communication : Why Is Persuasion Important in Mass Communication?
Mass Communication : Effects of Technology on Mass Communication
Media Effects
Selective exposure theory
“…Selective exposure theory is a theory of communication, positing that individuals prefer exposure to arguments supporting their position over those supporting other positions. As media consumers have more choices to expose themselves to selected medium and media contents with which they agree, then tend to select content that confirms their own ideas and avoid information that argues against their opinion. People don’t want to be told that they are wrong and they do not want their ideas to be challenged either. Therefore, they select different media outlets that agree with their opinions so they do not come in contact with this form of dissonance. Furthermore, these people will select the media sources that agree with their opinions and attitudes on different subjects and then only follow those programs.
Foundation of theory
Propaganda study
The Evasion of Propaganda
When prejudiced people confront anti-prejudice propaganda involuntarily, even though they might avoid the message from the first time, the process of evasion would occur in their mind. Cooper and Jahoda (1947) studied how the anti-prejudice propaganda can be misunderstood by prejudiced people. When the prejudiced reader confronted the Mr. Biggott cartoon, which contained anti-minority propaganda, their effort to evade their feelings and understand Mr. Biggott’s identification with their own identity would bring about misunderstanding. This kind of evasion occurs because of what individuals often face to accomplish uniformity in everyday life. There is a fear to be isolated from what they belong and also threat for shivering their ego. Therefore, the concept of selective exposure was in the same thread with small effect studies in mass communication in 1940s.
Cognitive dissonance theory
Before the selective exposure theory was put forward, Festinger(1957) published a book, Theory of Cognitive Dissonance, and explained the cognitive dissonance theory, which assumes that all human beings pursue consistency in their mind.
- Basic Hypotheses
- It is a state of mental unease and discomfort which helps explain selective perception. It is produced when new information contradicts existing beliefs, attitudes, social norms, or behaviors.
- Many times people favor consonance because their ideas flow freely into one another and do not create an unbalance. [2]
- The existence of dissonance, being psychologically uncomfortable, will motivate the person to try to reduce the dissonance and achieve consonance.
- When dissonance is present, in addition to trying to reduce it, the person will actively avoid situations and information that would likely increase the dissonance. [3]
Festinger’s cognitive dissonance theory, which was one of the roots of selective exposure, explained people’s effort to reduce their dissonance of something against their existing beliefs. Nonetheless, his theory was broad enough to be elucidated in general social behavior, not just for selecting medium and media contents. Festinger suggested situations that increase dissonance. Firstly, logical inconsistency brings about dissonance. If a person who believes it is not possible to build a device to leave Earth’s atmosphere observes man reach the moon, their belief and experience are dissonant with each other. Secondly, cultural morals entail dissonance. A person picks up a chicken bone with their hands, and it is dissonant with what they believe is formal etiquette. At this point, culture defines what is consonant and what is dissonant. Thirdly, if specific opinion is included in a more general opinion, dissonance should be followed. A person, who has been Democrat, prefers Republican candidates for certain election. This situation creates dissonance, because “Being a Democrat” needs to be attributed to favoring Democratic candidates. Lastly, past experience causes dissonance. If a person is standing in the rain, but is not wet, these two cognitions would be dissonant, because they might know standing in the rain leads to getting wet through past experience. Festinger (1957) also suggests the ways of reducing dissonance. For reducing dissonance, one may change a behavioral cognitive element or change an environmental cognitive element. However, sometimes, behavior change and environmental change do not help reducing dissonance. Festinger, then, suggested adding new cognitive elements. If people cannot reduce dissonance, they might seek new information, which is consonant with their beliefs or attitude; therefore, people might actively seek new information that would decrease dissonance and avoid new information that would increase dissonance. This third explanation of reducing dissonance is similar with selective exposure, which mass communication reinforces the existing opinion.
-
- Another example of the Cognitive Dissonance Theory can be found in the article entitled, “Theories of Persuasion,” by Daniel J. O’Keefe. It describes the different theories of persuasion and how media outlets use them to their advantage to influence their audience. The author’s example is that people donate to the Red Cross because they believe in what it stands for which represents consonance. However, on the other hand, the author suggests that a person who smokes and also believes it causes cancer, would be an example of dissonance and hypocrisy. Many times people try to sway against dissonance because it puts them in an uncomfortable position. Therefore, these feelings of consonance and dissonance lead to the “Selective Exposure Theory” because some believe that people will select the media sources that agree with their opinions and attitudes on different subjects and then only follow those programs. [4]
Klapper’s selective exposure
Joseph Klapper (1960) considered mass communication do not directly influence people, but just reinforce people’s predisposition. Mass communications play a role as a mediator in persuasive communication.
- Klapper’s five mediating factors and conditions to affect people
- Predispositions and the related processes of selective exposure, selective perception, and selective retention.
- The groups, and the norms of groups, to which the audience members belong.
- Interpersonal dissemination of the content of communication
- The exercise of opinion leadership
- The nature of mass media in a free enterprise society. [5]
- Three basic concepts
- Selective exposure – people keep away from communication of opposite hue.
- Selective Perception – If people are confronting unsympathetic material, they do not perceive it, or make it fit for their existing opinion.
- Selective retention – Furthermore, they just simply forget the unsympathetic material.
Groups and group norms work as a mediator. For example, one can be strongly disinclined to change to the Democratic Party if their family has voted for Republican for a long time. In this case, the person’s predisposition to the political party is already set, so they don’t perceive information about Democratic Party or change voting behavior because of mass communication. Klapper’s third assumption is inter-personal dissemination of mass communication. If someone is already exposed by close friends, which creates predisposition toward something, it will lead increase of exposure to mass communication and eventually reinforce the existing opinion. Opinion leader is also a crucial factor to form predisposition of someone, lead someone to be exposed by mass communication, and after all, existing opinion would be reinforced. Nature of commercial mass media also leads people to select certain type of media contents. Klapper (1960) claimed that people are selecting entertainment, such as family comedy, variety shows, quizzes, and Westerns, because of nature of mass media in a free enterprise society.
Selective exposure in entertainment theory perspective
Selective exposure is an instinctive activity of human beings. Early human beings needed to be sensitive to the sounds of animals. This kind of exposure was closely related with their survival from an external threat. Survival is still a very crucial matter for human beings; however, selective exposure is also important for human beings for other purposes, such as entertainment.
“Selective exposure designates behavior that is deliberately performed to attain and sustain perceptual control of particular stimulus events.”
Affective-dependent theory of stimulus arrangement
Zillmann and Bryant (1985) developed affective-dependent theory of stimulus arrangement in the chapter of their edited book, Selective exposure to communication.
- Basic Assumptions
- people tend to minimize exposure to negative, aversive stimuli
- people tend to maximize exposure to pleasurable stimuli.
After all, people try to arrange the external stimuli to maintain their pleasure, which ultimately let people select certain affect-inducing program, such as music, movie, or other entertainment program. In other words, people manage their mood by selecting certain kind of entertainment to exposure themselves; mood management theory was also rooted by this affective-dependent theory.
Furthermore, people will select media based on their moods. An example of this is if a person is happy they would probably select a comedic movie. If they are bored they might choose action and if they are sad they might select tragedy or a depressing romance. These attitudes and moods also convince people to watch different news outlets based on how they feel. People with conservative beliefs tend to watch Fox news and Democrats usually watch MSNBC.
- Examples:
1**A person with liberal beliefs, who comes home from a hard day at work will probably turn on MSNBC. They would not be in the mood to fight with a news station that has conservative beliefs constantly being portrayed. 2**A woman who just broke up with her boyfriend would probably not be in the mood to watch a romantic movie and would therefore tend to pick a movie that falls into the genre of tragedy.
Selective exposure processes in mood management
-
- Excitatory Homeostasis – Tendency of individuals to choose entertainment to achieve an optimal level of arousal.
- Intervention Potential – Ability of a message to engage or absorb an aroused individual’s attention or cognitive-processing resources.
- Message-Behavioral Affinity – Communication that has a high degree of similarity with affective state.
- Hedonic Valence – Positive or negative nature of a message. [7]
Critiques
- Possible influence by factors other than a person’s emotional state.
- Difficulty to measure long-term effect.
- Overlook the importance of cognitive processes.
- Not suit for information and education media.
- Possibility that negative stimuli provide enjoyment by overcoming it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selective_exposure_theory
Harold Lasswell
He is well known for his comment on communications:
- Who (says) What (to) Whom (in) What Channel (with) What Effect
and on politics:
- Politics is who gets what, when, and how.
and on aberrant psychological attributes of leaders in politics and business:
- Psychopathology and Politics
Lasswell studied at the University of Chicago in the 1920s, and was highly influenced by the pragmatism taught there, especially as propounded by John Dewey and George Herbert Mead. More influential, however, was Freudian philosophy, which informed much of his analysis of propaganda and communication in general. During World War II, Lasswell held the position of Chief of the Experimental Division for the Study of War Time Communications at the Library of Congress. He analyzed Nazi propaganda films to identify mechanisms of persuasion used to secure the acquiescence and support of the German populace for Hitler and his wartime atrocities. Always forward-looking, late in his life, Lasswell experimented with questions concerning astropolitics, the political consequences of colonization of other planets, and the “machinehood of humanity.”
Lasswell’s work was important in the post-World War II development of behavioralism.
Major works
- Propaganda Technique in the World War (1927; Reprinted with a new introduction, 1971)
- Psychopathology and Politics, (1930; reprinted, 1986)
- World Politics and Personal Insecurity (1935; Reprinted with a new introduction, 1965)
- Politics: Who Gets What, When, How (1935)
- “The Garrison State” (1941)
- Power and Personality (1948) …”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_Lasswell
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )News Journal: Number 23, October 4, 2010: The Progressive Radical Socialists Method of Cutting Carbon Emissions–Kill Those Who Disagree With You–No Pressure–Your Choice–The Big Lie–Video
10:10 mini-movie – No Pressure
No Pressure–Your Choice–The Big Lie
The global warming alarmists are fanatics that really think these public service announcements or propaganda are acceptable and humorous.
While I have a sense of humor, I found the 10:10 video ad campaign tasteless, intentionally designed to scared children and adults, and a poor attempt to shut people up that disagree with the global warming alarmists.
Corporate sponsors including SONY, are quickly distancing themselves from the videos and 10:10 campaign as complaints poured in.
Rising global carbon dioxide emissions have indeed increased from 280 parts per million to over 390 parts per million over the last three hundred years.
So what?
Carbon dioxide is a trace gas, required for life on the earth, and is not a pollutant or a primary driver of climate change.
Unstoppable Solar Cycles
CO2 is a trace gas
Global Warming – Carbon Dioxide
Did the rise in CO2 cause the modern increase in temperature?
Is a warm climate good?
Bureaucratic Beginnings
The Transfer of Wealth from Developed to Developing Countries
Charles Krauthammer on the EPA regulating carbon dioxide
CO2 Regulation: The Essence of Immorality
Background Articles and Videos
Richard Lindzen, Ph.D. Lecture Deconstructs Global Warming Hysteria (High Quality Version)
Prof. Fred Singer on Climate Change – CFACT (1 of 5)
Prof. Fred Singer on Climate Change – CFACT (2 of 5)
Prof. Fred Singer on Climate Change – CFACT (3 of 5)
Prof. Fred Singer on Climate Change – CFACT (4 of 5)
Prof. Fred Singer on Climate Change – CFACT (5 of 5)
The Reset Button
U.S. Gift to Russia Lost in Translation
CO2 Rising (series), Professor Tyler Volk: 1. Where in the world is the CO2 increasing?
CO2 Rising (series), Professor Tyler Volk: 2. Does my exhaled CO2 go into a leaf I can hold?
10:10
“…10:10 is a global warming mitigation campaign calling for a 10% reduction in carbon emissions in 2010. The project aims to demonstrate public support, apply pressure to policymakers to commit to national cuts, and inspire success at the United Nations climate change negotiations.[citation needed]
As of June 2010, 75,000 individuals, businesses, schools and organisations have joined the campaign and pledged to reduce their emissions by 10% in a year.[citation needed]
The campaign was founded as a British campaign in September 2009 by Franny Armstrong, director of The Age of Stupid, with the aim of capturing the public imagination using individual action in a way similar to the Make Poverty History campaign.[1] In mid-2010 the campaign went global, with campaigns launching in around 12 countries.
In October 2010, the group made headlines when a mini-movie produced for their campaign, entitled No Pressure, caused widespread outrage due to its gruesome content.[2][3] Subsequently, several of 10:10’s major corporate sponsors disassociated themselves from the group and withdrew support.[4] …”
“…No Pressure
On Friday 1 October 2010, 10:10 released a short film in which schoolchildren and office workers are summarily and gruesomely executed for not pledging a 10% reduction in their carbon emissions to participating employers and educators.[43] Although originally planned to be shown in cinema and television advertisements, 10:10 removed the film from their website and YouTube later on the same day following negative publicity[44] and apologised for “miss[ing] the mark”.[43]
10:10:10
10:10 and 350.org were jointly coordinating “a day of positive action on climate change”, on Sunday 10 October, 2010 (10.10.10). The day had been planned to include a wide range of events in a reported 180 countries, including sumo wrestlers in Japan, over 10,000 schoolchildren planting trees in Croatia and Russia, a telethon on national TV in the Netherlands and the president of the Maldives installing solar panels on his roof.[43][45] However in the wake of the No Pressure controversy, 350.org disassociated themselves from 10:10, strongly condemning the film. 10:10 are no longer involved in the 10:10:10 day of action.[46][47] …”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10:10
Sony pulls support for 10:10 initiative over contentious promo
“…In an official release on its corporate website, Sony said that it strongly “condemned the release by 10:10, the climate change campaign group, of a video entitled ’No Pressure’ that Sony considers to be ill-conceived and tasteless”.
The move is a blow to the initiative, just five days before its centrepiece day of action on 10 October, dubbed ’10:10:10′. The campaign aim is to cut global carbon emissions by 10% each year from 2010.
The electronics firm said it believed the video risked “undermining the work of the many thousands of members of the public, schools and universities, local authorities and many businesses, of which Sony is one, who support the long-term aims of the 10:10 movement and are actively working towards the reduction of carbon emissions.”
The company insisted that the promo was released entirely without its knowledge or involvement, and violated the “thoughtful and collaborative philosophy” that it had consistently supported.
Although Sony said that it recognised that 10:10 had acted quickly to remove the video from its website and had issued a public apology, the company said it had “no other option” other than to condemn the video in “the strongest possible terms” and was “disassociating itself from 10:10 at this time.”
The film appeared on the 10:10 website, but was pulled down “within hours” of its appearance, according to the organisation. …”
http://www.campaignlive.co.uk/news/1033027/Sony-pulls-support-1010-initiative-contentious-promo/
Age of stupid – greens blow up school kids in ad to sell climate change
Chris Arnold
“…The recent 10:10 climate change campaign (founded by Age of Stupid director Franny Armstrong) has scored an own goal with a disastrous video ‘No Pressure’ created by Richard Curtis (of Blackadder fame) that features exploding school kids.
The humour is puerile and may well appeal to a drunken 19 year old student but as a piece of communications it has got it very wrong. So wrong they have had to withdraw the video following thousands of complaints.
The video (they call it an ad) features a series of patronising people – a teacher and a boss – asking everyone to sign up to 10:10 (you sign up to reduce your carbon emission by 10%). The script quotes “we cut our carbon emissions by 10%, thus keeping the planet safe for everyone,” which is factually rubbish, it’ll take a lot more than 10%. The teacher then asks the kids to volunteer to do something. All but two, Phillip and Tracy, raise their hands. The two who don’t get killed in a sick and disgusting way. She blows them up leaving the other kids covered in burnt flesh and blood.
There are two other scenes featuring X-Files’ Gillian Anderson (she too gets blown up), together with Spurs players – including Peter Crouch, Ledley King and David Ginola.
The message is, “No Pressure celebrates everybody who is actively tackling climate change… by blowing up those who aren’t.”
It will go down as the ultimate in poor and stupid judgment (a lesson to those who try and make their own ads). The green blog, An Englishman’s Castle, called it “an eco-terrorism film”.
This is not only embarrassing for 10:10 but for their supporters, O2, Sony, Eada, National Magazines (Esquire, Cosmoplitan, Bazaar, Company), The Guardian and many other brands and organisations, not to mention many celebs. One critic has published the email address of Sony’s CEO, encouraging people to write direct.
Can’t say I’d want to be part of an organisation that advocates blowing up kids. It comes across as ‘eco-fascism’, a tag that has been put against extremist green groups. …”
“…The 10:10 campaign was founded by Franny Armstrong, director of the climate change film The Age of Stupid. In the film an archivist in the devastated world of 2055, asks the question: “Why didn’t we stop climate change when we still had the chance?” He looks back on footage of real people around the world in the years leading up to 2015 before runaway climate change took place. London is now flooded, Sydney is burning, Las Vegas has been swallowed up by desert, the Amazon rain forest has burnt up, snow has vanished from the Alps and nuclear war has laid waste to India (not sure that’s anything to do with climate change but the politics of war). It’s doom and gloom with no positive message.
The idea for 10:10 came to Franny while walking through Regent’s Park on her way to a debate with UK Climate & Energy Secretary Ed Miliband (now Labour leader and probably keeping as far away from this as possible). With her connections she managed to amass lots of celebrities and get lots of PR.
Now’s she is getting all the wrong PR.
…”
350.org
“…350.org is an international environmental organization,[1][2][3] headed by author Bill McKibben,[4] with the goal of building a global grassroots movement to raise awareness of man-made climate change, to confront climate change denial, and to cut emissions of one of the greenhouse gases, carbon dioxide,[5] [6] in order to slow the rate of global warming, the cause of current climate change. 350.org takes its name from the research of NASA scientist James E. Hansen, who posited in a 2007 paper that 350 parts-per-million (ppm) of CO2 in the atmosphere is a safe [7] upper limit to avoid a climate tipping point.[8][9][10][11][12] The current record level is 392.04 ppm of CO2, an almost 40-percent increase from the pre-industrial revolution level of 278 ppm.[13][14][15] In 1988 the Earth’s atmosphere surpassed the 350 ppm mark,[16] while global CO2 emissions per capita rose.[17][18]
The group reports that they organised the world’s “most widespread day of political action” on Saturday October 24, 2009, reporting 5,245 actions in 181 countries.[19][20][21]
“…The organization was founded by author Bill McKibben,[22] an American environmentalist and writer who frequently writes about global warming, alternative energy, and the need for more localised economies. McKibben promotes the organisation, for instance by writing articles about it for many major newspapers and media, such the Los Angeles Times[23] and The Guardian.[24]
The organising effort drew its name from climate scientist James Hansen’s contention in winter 2008 that any atmospheric concentration of CO2 above 350 parts per million was unsafe. James Hansen opined that “if humanity wishes to preserve a planet similar to that on which civilization developed and to which life on Earth is adapted, paleoclimate evidence and ongoing climate change suggest that CO2 will need to be reduced from its current 385 ppm to at most 350 ppm, but likely less than that.”[25]
McKibben’s first started to organize against global warming with a walk across Vermont, his home state. His “Step It Up” campaign in 2007 involved 1,400 demonstrations at famous sites across the United States. McKibben credits these activities with making Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama change their energy policies during the presidential campaign. Later, the meltdown of the polar caps pushed him into starting 350.org, based on Hansen’s 2007 book Climate Code Red.[26]
Rajendra Pachauri, the U.N.’s “top climate scientist” and leader of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has come out in favor of reducing atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide to 350ppm.[27][28][29] McKibben called news of Pachauri’s embrace of the 350ppm target “amazing”.[30] Some media have indicated that Pachauri’s endorsement of the 350ppm target was a victory for 350.org’s activism.[31][32][33]
The organisation had a lift in prominence after founder McKibben appeared on The Colbert Report television show on Monday August 17, 2009.[34][35][36]
The organisation disseminates its message through social networking sites such as Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube.[37][38] …”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/350.org
Franny Armstrong
“…Franny Armstrong (born 3 February 1972)[1][2] is a British documentary film director working for her own company, Spanner Films, and a former drummer with indie pop group The Band of Holy Joy. She is primarily known for three films: The Age of Stupid, about climate change, McLibel, about the infamous McDonald’s court case and Drowned Out, following the fight against the Narmada Dam Project. Her most recent project is the UK-wide campaign 10:10, which aims to cut 10% of the UK’s emissions during 2010, has received an unwelcome reception from the audience because of propaganda of violence against global warming skeptics. In November 2009, Armstrong was rescued by London mayor Boris Johnson from an assault by a gang of girls in north London.[3]
“…Armstrong’s first documentary, McLibel (1997, 2005), told the story of the McDonald’s libel trial, the longest-running court action in English history. Filmed over ten years with no commission, no budget and a voluntary crew – including Ken Loach, who directed the courtroom reconstructions – it shot to notoriety when lawyers prevented its broadcast, first at BBC1 and then at Channel 4 in 1997. Eight years later – after the ‘McLibel Two’ had defeated the British government at the European Court of Human Rights – it was finally broadcast on BBC2 at 10.30pm on a Sunday, to an estimated 1 million viewers. It was well received by critics, with Time Out crediting Armstrong with “gusto and wit” in telling a story that “will satisfy both head and heart”.[5] It was then broadcast on TV in 15 countries – including Australia, Canada and the USA – and released on DVD worldwide. McLibel was released in cinemas and DVD stores in the USA in summer 2005 and this was followed in the UK in 2006. McLibel was nominated for numerous awards, including the Grierson Documentary Award and the British Independent Film Awards. It was recently picked for the British Film Institute’s prestigious series, “Ten Documentaries which Changed the World”.
Armstrong’s second feature documentary, Drowned Out (2002), follows an Indian family who chose to stay at home and drown rather than make way for the Narmada Dam. It also sold around the world, was nominated for Best Documentary at the British Independent Film Awards 2004 and was released theatrically in America and DVD worldwide in 2006.
Without backing from the UK TV industry, Armstrong’s films have been seen by more than 56 million people[citation needed]. She has been working full-time on The Age of Stupid (formerly known as Crude) since December 2004. It’s a film that warns of the catastrophic effects of climate change using a mix of factual documentary and post-apocalyptic fictional styles. It was released in the UK on March 13 2009 and had its green-carpet global premiere on September 21 2009. During the Copenhagen climate change conference in December 2009 it was broadcast on BBC4 in the UK and on TV in seven other countries.
In October 2010, a short film, written by Richard Curtis and Armstrong, entitled No Pressure was released by the 10:10 campaign in Britain to spread awareness of climate change. The video was subsequently taken down from the organization’s website due to very negative reception and offence taken.[6] However, it is still available in several places, including YouTube. It depicted a series of scenes in which people were asked if they were going to participate in 10:10. Those who indicated they weren’t planning on participating were told “no pressure” and then blown up in a gory explosion at the press of a red button. [7] In response to questions about the message of the film, she replied, “We ‘killed’ five people to make No Pressure – a mere blip compared to the 300,000 real people who now die each year from climate change,”[8] …”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franny_Armstrong
Spanner Films
Franny Armstrong
“…In September 2009 Franny founded the 10:10 climate campaign which aims to cut the UK’s carbon emissions by 10% during 2010 and which has amassed huge cross-societal support including Adidas, Microsoft, Spurs FC, the Royal Mail, 75,000 people, 1,500 schools, a third of local councils, the entire UK Government and the Prime Minister. 10:10 launched internationally in March 2010 and, as of July 2010, has autonomous campaigns up and running in 41 countries, where some of the key sign-ups include the French Tennis Open, the city of Oslo and L’oreal. 10:10 estimates that organisations doing 10:10 have so far cut 500,000 tonnes of C02. Franny is a Londoner born and bred. …”
http://www.spannerfilms.net/people/franny_armstrong
Related Posts On Pronk Palisades
William A. Sprigg, PhD., an IPCC climate scientist, On “Climategate”–Videos
Professor Fred Singer–On Climate Change–Videos
Richard Lindzen, Roy Spencer, and Fred Singer On The Climate and Global Warming Alarmists and Junk Science Computer Models –Videos
Al Gore Global Warming Hot Head Says The Artic Ice Cap Will Disappear In 5-10-15 Years–Volcanoe Gate–Eruptions Melt Ice and Increase Carbon Dioxide!–Videos
Climategate–The Political Scam, Investment Fraud, and Science Scandal of The Century Exposed–The Progressive Radical Socialist’s Big Lie And Con That Man Is The Cause Of Global Warming Was In Fact Nothing More Than Politicians, Investment Bankers, and Government Scientists Creating Climate Crisis!–
Glenn Beck, John Bolton, and Lord Christopher Monckton On Copenhagen 2009 Treaty, Climate Change and World Government–Videos
Lord Christopher Monckton–Climate Change–Treaty–Videos
“We Can Reverse Climate Change”–President Barack Obama–Liar or Fool–Or Both–You Be The Judge!
John Holdren–Science Czar–Videos
John Holdren: Global Warming: What Do We Know and Should Do–Videos
The Obama Depression Has Arrived: 15,000,000 to 25,000,000 Unemployed Americans–Stimulus Package and Bailouts A Failure–400,000 Leave Labor Force In July!
Facing Fundamental Facts
Gore Grilled & Gingrich Gouged–American People Oppose Massive Carbon Cap and Trade Tax Increase–Videos
National Center for Policy Analysis–A Global Warming Primer
Global Warming is The Greatest Hoax, Scam and Disinformation Campaign in History
Global Warming Videos
Global Warming Books
Global Warming Sites
The Heidelberg Appeal: Beware of False Gods and Prophets
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )News Journal: Number 19, September 23, 2010:Republicans’ “A Pledge To America”–A Good Start Or A Missed Opportunity–Videos
“History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid.”
~ President Dwight D. Eisenhower
Republicans Outline ‘Pledge to America’
A Pledge To America
Paul Ryan on House Republicans’ Pledge To America
Paul Ryan: Stop all tax hikes
Fox News interview: A Pledge to America
GOP’s “Pledge to America”
Mike Pence discusses “A Pledge to America” on FOX
Roskam Talks Pledge For America on CNBC
GOP Pledge to America
GOP’s new ‘Pledge to America’
Laura Ingraham Interviews Paul Ryan On A Pledge To America
Sell Me on the Pledge to America
GOP ‘Pledge To America – William Owens Thoughts
Full Text of Republican
A Pledge to America
a new governing agenda build on
The Priorities of Our Nation
The Principles We Stand For
&
America’s Founding Values
Preamble
America is more than a country.
America is an idea – an idea that free people can govern themselves, that government’s powers
are derived from the consent of the governed, that each of us is endowed by their Creator with
the unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. America is the belief that any
man or woman can – given economic, political, and religious liberty – advance themselves, their
families, and the common good.
America is an inspiration to those who yearn to be free and have the ability and the dignity to
determine their own destiny.
Whenever the agenda of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the
people to institute a new governing agenda and set a different course.
These first principles were proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence, enshrined in the
Constitution, and have endured through hard sacrifice and commitment by generations of
Americans.
In a self-governing society, the only bulwark against the power of the state is the consent of the
governed, and regarding the policies of the current government, the governed do not consent.
An unchecked executive, a compliant legislature, and an overreaching judiciary have combined
to thwart the will of the people and overturn their votes and their values, striking down longstanding
laws and institutions and scorning the deepest beliefs of the American people.
An arrogant and out-of-touch government of self-appointed elites makes decisions, issues
mandates, and enacts laws without accepting or requesting the input of the many.
2
Rising joblessness, crushing debt, and a polarizing political environment are fraying the bonds
among our people and blurring our sense of national purpose.
Like free peoples of the past, our citizens refuse to accommodate a government that believes it
can replace the will of the people with its own. The American people are speaking out,
demanding that we realign our country’s compass with its founding principles and apply those
principles to solve our common problems for the common good.
The need for urgent action to repair our economy and reclaim our government for the people
cannot be overstated.
With this document, we pledge to dedicate ourselves to the task of reconnecting our highest
aspirations to the permanent truths of our founding by keeping faith with the values our nation
was founded on, the principles we stand for, and the priorities of our people. This is our Pledge
to America.
We pledge to honor the Constitution as constructed by its framers and honor the original intent
of those precepts that have been consistently ignored – particularly the Tenth Amendment,
which grants that all powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor
prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
We pledge to advance policies that promote greater liberty, wider opportunity, a robust defense,
and national economic prosperity.
We pledge to honor families, traditional marriage, life, and the private and faith-based
organizations that form the core of our American values.We pledge to honor families, traditional marriage, life, and the private and faith-based organizations that form the core of our American values.
We pledge to make government more transparent in its actions, careful in its stewardship, and
honest in its dealings.
We pledge to uphold the purpose and promise of a better America, knowing that to whom
much is given, much is expected and that the blessings of our liberty buoy the hopes of
mankind.
We make this pledge bearing true faith and allegiance to the people we represent, and we invite
fellow citizens and patriots to join us in forming a new governing agenda for America. …”
http://www.gop.gov/resources/library/documents/solutions/a-pledge-to-america.pdf
The biggest problem with “A Pledge To American” is its failure to address in a bold and creative way the economic problems facing the United States and its people.
Does the Republican Pledge permanently close one or more Federal Departments?
No.
Milton Friedman on Libertarianism (Part 4 of 4)
Ronald Reagan – “We the People”
Does the Republican Pledge offer comprehensive tax reform such as the national sales consumption tax to replace the Federal Income Tax, payroll, estate and gift taxes?
No.
The FairTax: It’s Time
Does the Republican Pledge produce annual surplus budgets by limiting Federal Government spending to 80% of FairTax revenue?
No.
Deficits, Debts and Unfunded Liabilities: The Consequences of Excessive Government Spending
Does the Republican Pledge transform Social Security and Medicare to an individually controlled and owned investment retirement account and health insurance plan.
No.
Social Security Ponzi Scheme
Does the Republican Pledge address illegal immigration by demanding immigration law enforcement and the removal and deportation of illegal aliens?
No.
Lou Dobbs – E-Verify & Border Fence may be canceled – Feb 16, 2009
Bilbray on the Cost of Illegal Immigration and Amnesty
Why not?
The plan was vetted by political consultants and lobbyists on K street who oppose all of the above as do the Republican establishment.
The pledge is simply timid or more precisely the anti-Obama agenda.
The pledge is neither bold nor inspiring with the exception of the opening preamble.
Going back to 2008 in Federal spending levels and freezing Federal Government employee hiring is too little too late.
Why would we want to go back to where we were just two years ago?
Now if you want to go back to 1928 Federal spending levels under President Calvin Coolidge that would be ambitious.
A return to the Republican establishment status quo in 2008 is playing defense.
Both the economic policies and government intervention of Bush and Obama are responsible for the Great Recession.
This reminds me of the economic policies and government intervention of Hoover and Roosevelt in the 1930s that led to the Great Depression.
Time to go on the offense.
Independents and tea party patriots will not be impressed.
Yes, the Pledge is better than the agenda of progressive radical socialists Democratic Party led by Barack Obama.
This is a a very low bar or standard to exceed.
Time for a new third political party with the tea party patriots as its core base with independents and the young as its growth opportunity.
Glenn Beck nailed it, the Pledge tells you what you want to hear, but does not tell you the truth and what you need to hear.
Glenn Beck-09/23/10-A
Glenn Beck-09/23/10-B
Glenn Beck-09/23/10-C
Ron Paul is also right, a GOP victory in 2010 would bring no change.
It would take several election cycles before the mess in Washington is cleaned up.
American Morning: Ron Paul on the state of the GOP
Ron Paul: GOP 2010 Victory Would Bring No Change
GOP ‘Pledge To America – William Owens Thoughts
our pledge
As government expands, liberty contracts.
~President Ronald Reagan
Background Articles and Videos
Ronald Reagan TV Ad: “Its morning in America again”
Milton Friedman – The Great Depression Myth
Unpacking the “Pledge to America”
By Daniel Foster
“…The Pledge places job creation front and center, promising to stop all tax hikes scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2011 — not just those singled out by the Obama administration. The plan would also give small businesses the ability to deduct 20 percent of income from tax returns and, in an effort to tame productivity-stifling overregulation, would require congressional approval for any new administration rules that would impact the economy by $100 million or more.
Turning its attention to spending and the size of government, the Pledge proposes to immediately end TARP, cancel unspent stimulus dollars, and “roll back government spending to pre-stimulus, pre-bailout levels,” a move estimated to save $116 billion in the first year alone. It promises to end the government’s involvement in the revenue-sapping GSEs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac while shrinking their portfolios and establishing new capital standards.
To rein in the size of government, the document proposes a hiring freeze on non-security personnel, and calls for any new federal program to come with a “sunset” clause that would place the onus on legislators to routinely reassess its merits and justify new funding.
But the plan does not set specific spending targets, promising only to “significantly” reduce Congress’s next budget and place a “hard cap” on the growth of future discretionary spending.
And it is decidedly vague on entitlement reform, laying out in broad terms a commitment to “regularly review” and “fully account” for Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid growth, but stopping well short of embracing specific entitlement reforms like those proposed in Wisconsin GOP congressman Paul Ryan’s “Roadmap.” …”
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/247471/unpacking-pledge-america-daniel-foster
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )
News Journal: Number 09, August 9, 2010: President Obama’s Big Arrogant Despicable (BAD) Lie On Immigration and Enforcement Of Immigration Laws–Back Door Amnesty For Illegal Aliens!–Aiding, Abetting and Promoting Crime In America–Obama Visits Two Sanctuary Cities–Austin and Dallas Texas!
In 1986, President Ronald Reagan signed into law the Immigration Reform and Control Act.
The bill granted amnesty to about 3 million illegal aliens, mostly from Mexico.
“It’s high time we regained control of our borders and his bill will do this.”
~President Ronald Reagan
“If you grant amnesty, the message that you’re sending is that if you come in this country and stay here long enough, we will let you stay. And no one will ever come through the legal process if you do that.”
~Marc Rubio, Florida Republican Senate candidate
“Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it was once like in the United States where men were free .”
~Ronald Reagan
Immigration Excerpt from President Obama’s Interview on the CBS Early Show
Obama’s Backdoor Amnesty Plan?
Here comes Backdoor Amnesty ,To Bypass Congress , Gibbs Lied !!!
Obama’s Scheme to Provide Backdoor Amnesty in the Works
Gov’t Memo Proposes Amnesty for Illegal Immigrants
Amnesty Plan in the Works?
All Presidents of the United States take the following oath of office in accordance with Article II, Section I of the U.S. Constitution:
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html
One of the primary responsibilities of the United States government is to protect each of the states against invasion:
U.S. Constitution, Article 4, Section 4
Section 4 – Republican government
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.
http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#A4Sec4
http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html
While nobody knows the exact number of illegal immigrants in the United States, past estimates have ranged from a low of 10 million to over 30 million illegal aliens living and working in the United States.
The United States population in 2010 is about 310 million including illegal immigrants.
Thus illegal immigrants represents between a minimum of 3.3% to over 10% of the United States population.
However, illegal immigrants tend to live and work in and around so-called sanctuary cities.
Sanctuary cities do not permit their police departments and other municipal employees to enforce Federal immigration laws by asking illegal immigrants any questions regarding their immigration status.
Below is a map of just some of the United States largest sanctuary cities:
For a more detailed and inclusive state by state map go to this web page:
SANCTUARY CITIES AND STATES ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT INFORMATION RESOURCE
http://www.sanctuarycities.info/
The two major sources of illegal aliens in the United States are those who entered the United States legally with a visa and then over stayed their visas and those crossing into the United States from Mexico, primarily Mexicans and those from other Latin American countries.
For the last twenty years the United States has been invaded by millions of illegal aliens crossing from Mexico into the United States illegally.
Thousands are entering the United States each day by crossing from Mexico.
The Mexican government is actually encouraging their citizens to go to United States and work.
If this is not an invasion, then what is?
The Federal Government under both Republican and Democratic administrations have simply refused to vigorously enforce existing Federal immigration laws for political reasons.
Both Presidents Bush and Obama have failed to honor their oath of office and enforce existing immigration laws.
Why?
The Republican Party wants the financial campaign contributions from businesses that benefit from hiring illegal immigrants.
The Democratic Party also wants the financial campaign contributions from these businesses as well as unions but also the votes of illegal immigrants once a “pathway to citizenship” or amnesty for illegal aliens is passed into law.
Both political parties and the ruling political elites are ignoring the will and sovereignty of the American people who want Federal immigration law enforcement.
The American people want the removal from the workplace of all illegal aliens and their deportation to their country origin.
There are currently over 30 million American citizens looking for full-time employment in the United States.
This is more than twice the 13 million Americans who were looking for work during the worse months of the Great Depression.
There are currently between 10 million and 15 million illegal aliens working in the United States.
Again, nobody knows the exact number.
If the current immigration laws were vigorously enforced and the illegal aliens deported, many of these 10 million to 15 million jobs would require the hiring of currently unemployed American citizens by employers.
President Obama, knowing he is acting like a demigod,would rather accuse those who are insisting that the Federal government enforce immigration laws–as being demigods themselves.
This is a classic example of psychological projection.
Projection, Part 1
Americans are not anti-immigration.
Americans favor controlled limited legal immigration.
Americans oppose uncontrolled unlimited illegal immigration.
The distinction between legal and illegal immigration is one that President Obama never mentions.
The reason is quite clear, President Obama wants all immigrants, legal and illegal to become United States citizens.
Americans are for the rule of law and the enforcement of the law.
The President knows this and so do the American people.
The President completely misrepresents what is actually occurring by not making the critical and important distinction between legal and illegal immigration.
The American people oppose illegal immigration by margins of 3 and 4 to 1.
A big arrogant despicable lie by a President of the United States is broadcast to millions of Americans.
This is done while his own Administration plots to undermine consensual representative government in the United States by seriously considering an executive order to grant amnesty to million of illegal aliens.
The President knows that local, city, county or state government and their police forces cannot deport any one that is arrested or detained.
Instead the detainees must be turned over to the Federal government for deportation.
This leaves a record of how many were turned over to the Federal government and how many were eventually deported.
This is a record that the Federal government apparently does not want to create and report to the American people.
Instead, Obama’s Department of Justice challenges any and every state that seriously enforces Federal immigration laws.
Hence the challenge to Arizona’s new law pertaining to immigration law enforcement which mirrors the Federal government’s immigration laws.
Arizona Ruling an Abomination
The American people only want the enforcement of immigration laws by the Federal government.
The Federal government under both Presidents Bush and Obama simply would not vigorously enforce these laws for essentially political reasons.
Instead both Presidents wanted comprehensive immigration reform which at its core is simply amnesty for illegal immigrants.
Both Presidents are substituting the rule of the few for the rule of law.
The American people will not let this tyranny of the ruling elites in Washington D.C. stand.
First the Republicans were turned out in 2006 and 2008 and this November and in 2012 the Democrats will be turned out of office.
President Obama uses strawman arguments and projection to accuse others of what President Obama is actually doing, refusing to vigorously enforce immigration laws and refusing to deport millions of illegal aliens.
The American people want results not a summary of how many resources the President has sent to the American/Mexican borders.
The American people are not so easily fooled or intimidated.
Arizona Should Sue the Department of Justice…
Sheriff Joe Arpaio Bounty…
When Mexican drug dealers put a bounty on an Arizona sheriff for enforcing immigration laws, one begins to wonder why are these drug dealers are on the same side of the argument as President Obama and not the American people.
Whose side is Barack Obama on anyway?
The American people or the criminals?
Americans are beginning to wonder out loud.
Illegal immigrants are not undocumented immigrants–they are illegal aliens or more precisely criminal aliens.
They are criminal aliens who have broken several U.S. laws.
First, illegal aliens enter the United States illegally–crime number 1.
Second, they purchase fraudulent identification documents that they use to obtain employment–crime number 2.
Third, they work for businesses or organizations in the United States–crime number 3.
Fourth, the businesses and organizations who employ them are aiding and abetting criminal activity–crime number 4.
Criminal aliens should be arrested, tried and if found guilty, deported to their country of origin.
The majority of the American people simply want the illegal aliens to go home on their own accord–self-deport.
The roads in America run in both directions.
If you are here illegally, please just leave.
The majority of the American people want enforcement of existing immigration laws.
The majority of the American people oppose amnesty for illegal aliens and a “pathway to citizenship”–you do not reward criminals, you punish them.
The majority of the American people oppose sanctuary cities.
Sanctuary cities are those who refuse to allow their own police to enforce Federal immigration laws which the cities are required to do by Federal law.
Sanctuary cities include Washington, D.C., Chicago, Boston, New York City, Philadelphia, Miami, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Denver, Houston and Dallas to name just a few.
These are cities who refuse to enforce Federal immigration laws and are therefore aiding and abetting criminal activity!
Every day millions of American citizens are unemployed, while millions of criminal aliens are working for employers who benefit from the hiring of illegal aliens.
For example I am writing this post in the sanctuary city of Dallas.
I attended a local community college who in the last ten years constructed two new buildings on its campus.
These buildings were constructed largely by illegal aliens or criminal aliens from Mexico who worked for considerably less money than American construction workers.
Today, these two new buildings and the remaining buildings on campus are cleaned by a janitorial staff consisting mainly of illegal aliens–Mexicans.
The campus police were and are well aware that these workers were and are illegal aliens but did absolutely nothing about it.
Dallas is a sanctuary city or more accurately a criminal city that actively discourages its police officers from enforcing Federal immigration laws by asking any questions about immigration status.
This same situation is repeated in hundreds of towns and cities across the United States daily.
Both Presidents George Bush and Barack Obama broke their oaths of office by refusing to vigorously enforce current immigration laws.
Both were corrupted by power and arrogantly thought that they knew best what was good for the American people.
Instead both Presidents sought comprehensive immigration reform, a code word for amnesty for illegal immigration, despite the opposition of the majority of the American people to illegal immigration and amnesty for illegal immigrants.
Who got hurt?
Take the preceding example of the community college.
American citizens should have been hired to construct the two buildings and to clean them once they were built.
These are jobs Americans have done in the past and today still do despite the repeated lies of the American ruling class that these are jobs that Americans will not do–give me a break.
Yes the ruling political elites may not do a job that an illegal alien does, but believe it or not there are millions of hard-working Americans who have in the past and will today do them to earn a living instead of becoming dependent upon the Government for handouts and welfare.
Multiple this by the millions of jobs across the United States over many years and you begin to see the problem.
The ruling political elites of both political parties simply do not give a damn that the American people are demanding–enforcement of existing immigration laws.
Particularly hurt are young hispanic and black Americans where the unemployment rates are extremely high:
Standing up for Jobless Hispanic Americans
HISPANIC AMERICANS STAND AGAINST ILLEGAL ALIENS !!!
The ruling political elites only care about power and staying in office.
Vote these professional politicians of both parties out of power.
Start by voting out of office those in your city, county, school, college, and state government that are aiding and abetting criminal aliens by employing them.
If they are for comprehensive immigration reform or amnesty and open borders, just vote them out of office.
The job you save just might be your own.
Sanctuary Cities Getting Free Pass?
54% Favor Justice Department Action Against Sanctuary Cities
“…Fifty-four percent (54%) of U.S. voters say the Justice Department should take legal action against cities that provide sanctuary for illegal immigrants. Even more think the federal government should cut off funds to these “sanctuary cities.”
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 30% say the federal government should not take legal action against cities that offer illegal immigrants various forms of sanctuary. Fifteen percent (15%) more are not sure.
The findings are in sharp contrast to voter attitudes about the Justice Department’s decision to challenge a new law in Arizona that attempts to help enforce federal immigration law. Fifty-six percent (56%) oppose the Justice Department’s decision to challenge the legality of Arizona’s new immigration law in federal court. Sixty-one percent (61%), in fact, favor passage of a law like Arizona’s in their own state. …”
Today, President Obama is in Dallas and Austin Texas, two of the many sanctuary cities that refuse to enforce Federal immigration laws.
Has the Department of Justice ever sued any of the so-called sanctuary cities for their failure to enforce the law–no they have not!
Texas Sanctuary Cities
TEXAS HAS ONE OR MORE CITIES OFFERING
ILLEGAL SANCTUARY
Austin, Texas
Baytown, Texas
Brownsville, Texas
Channelview, Texas
Denton, Texas
Dallas, Texas
El Cenizo, Texas
Forth Worth, Texas
Houston, Texas
Katy, Texas
Laredo, Texas
League City, Texas
McAllen, Texas
Port Arthur, Texas
San Antonio, Texas
http://www.sanctuarycities.info/sanctuary_state_texas.htm
Sanctuary Cities – Has the government ever sued them?
Questioning of Arizona Attorney General and ICE Official at Homeland Security Hearing
Mark Levin – Obama To Back Door Amnesty For Illegal Immigrants
Alex Jones: Obama Threatening To Pass “Immigration Reform” By Executive Order
Obama Takes Sides With Illegal Alien Invaders AGAINST Americans!
A Video Fisking of President Obama’s Immigration Speech
Virginia targets illegal immigrants
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NS6OsWfXJvM
“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”
~Samuel Adams
Background Articles and Videos
Desert Invasion – U.S.
Illegal immigration invasion numbers analysis by Fred Elbel
“…The idea for the following analysis is based upon the article titled Could There Be Twenty Million Illegals In The U.S.?”, by D.A. King, THE AMERICAN RESISTANCE FOUNDATION, published on VDARE, August 7, 2004.20 The purpose of this analysis is to present illegal immigration numbers that are more realistic than numbers being presented by the federal government – the very entity responsible for the tidal wave of illegal aliens entering our nation.
This analysis demonstrates that the December, 2003 Department of Homeland Security estimates of 8 million to 12 million illegal aliens in the United States and 700,000 new illegals entering and staying per year represent significant undercounts. This analysis shows that it is reasonable to state that at least 20 million illegal aliens reside in the United States and that up to 12,000 illegal aliens enter the United States every day, or, as Arizona Senator John McCain reports – more than 4 million per year.
This analysis also demonstrates that the proposed White House “guest worker” amnesty proposal of January, 2004 resulted in at least a 25 percent increase in the number of illegal aliens entering into the United States.
The precise number of illegals entering the United States and the exact rate at which they cross our borders is unknown. Official government numbers are often hard to come by and are routinely sanitized. The estimate of the number of illegals who enter depends on Border Patrol apprehension rates and estimates of the number that “got away”. The following sections presents a methodology to estimating the number of illegals and the impact of amnesty proposals on illegal immigration numbers. …”
“…Conclusion
Intentionally low, static, and misleading official government estimates claim that 8 million to 12 million illegal aliens reside in the United States and that 700,000 new illegals enter and stay every year. Based upon the analysis presented here, it is likely that in mid-2005 more than 20 million illegal aliens presently resided in the United States, with roughly 12,000 additional illegal aliens entering every day.
No one can say with certainty how many illegal aliens enter and reside in the United States because the precise data simply are not available. The methodology used in this analysis is presented as an alternative approach to estimating illegal alien numbers. Because it depends on factors that are not known with great accuracy, it produces a wider range of estimates than traditional estimates, but can be used to present another perspective on illegal immigration numbers.
Further analysis is certainly warranted. However it is important to recognize the magnitude of the numbers in order to recognize the seriousness of the crisis and urgency for a return to the rule of law and secured borders that the United States Constitution demands.
http://www.desertinvasion.us/data/invasion_numbers.html#conclusion
NO PAROLE OR DEFERRED ACTION FOR ILLEGAL ALIENS, HATCH, 7 OTHERS TELL OBAMA
“…In their letter to the president, Hatch and the other senators wrote that the Obama administration’s immigration policy should not be misused to usurp Congress’ authority.
“While deferred action and parole are Executive Branch authorities, they should not be used to circumvent Congress’ constitutional authority to legislate immigration policy, particularly as it relates to the illegal population in the United States,” the senators wrote.
Sens. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa; Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga.; David Vitter, R-La.; Jim Bunning, R-Ky.; James Inhofe, R-Okla.; Thad Cochran, R-Miss.; and Johnny Isakson, R-Ga., also signed the letter to the president.
A copy of the letter to the president is attached and follows:
June 21, 2010
President Barack H. Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, D.C. 20500
Dear President Obama:
We understand that there’s a push for your Administration to develop a plan to unilaterally extend either deferred action or parole to millions of illegal aliens in the United States. We understand that the Administration may include aliens who have willfully overstayed their visas or filed for benefits knowing that they will not be eligible for a status for years to come. We understand that deferred action and parole are discretionary actions reserved for individual cases that present unusual, emergent or humanitarian circumstances. Deferred action and parole were not intended to be used to confer a status or offer protection to large groups of illegal aliens, even if the agency claims that they look at each case on a “case-by-case” basis.
While we agree our immigration laws need to be fixed, we are deeply concerned about the potential expansion of deferred action or parole for a large illegal alien population. While deferred action and parole are Executive Branch authorities, they should not be used to circumvent Congress’ constitutional authority to legislate immigration policy, particularly as it relates to the illegal population in the United States.
The Administration would be wise to abandon any plans for deferred action or parole for the illegal population. Such a move would further erode the American public’s confidence in the federal government and its commitment to securing the borders and enforcing the laws already on the books.
We would appreciate receiving a commitment that the Administration has no plans to use either authority to change the current position of a large group of illegal aliens already in the United States, and ask that you respond to us about this matter as soon as possible. …”
Examiner Editorial: White House provides back-door amnesty
Examiner Editorial
August 2, 2010
Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/White-House-provides-a-back-door-to-amnesty-1006426-99725574.html#ixzz0w9JfGWRZ
“…The memo sheds light on why the Justice Department finds Arizona’s immigration law so odious. The law, popularly passed by the state Legislature and signed into law by the governor, is an effort to address the flow of illegal immigrants into the state by allowing Arizona police officers to detain illegal immigrants. But the police are not empowered to deport the illegals — instead, the detainees are referred to the federal government. This would create a record of the illegal immigrants the administration refuses to deport, making transparent the White House’s efforts to undermine current immigration law.
The memo is clear on this point: The federal government can use “deferred action” at its discretion in halting a deportation indefinitely (usually for a humanitarian reason). “This would permit individuals for whom relief may become available in the future to live and work in the U.S. without fear of removal.” But to do so would require justification and a paper trail, two things the administration has worked hard to avoid. The memo reveals as much: “While it is theoretically possible to grant deferred action to an unrestricted number of unlawfully present individuals, doing so would likely be controversial, not to mention expensive.” It’s controversial because it would attract attention, unlike other stealth measures proposed in the memo that could be implemented without alerting the public — such as expanding the definition of “extreme hardship,” which would enable virtually any illegal immigrant to qualify for an exemption from deportation.
There is one bright side to this scandal. If politicians continue to ignore the democratic process and the voters, the voters will use the democratic process to have their say in November.
Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/White-House-provides-a-back-door-to-amnesty-1006426-99725574.html#ixzz0w9JHgpZY
Nationally, 60% Favor Letting Local Police Stop and Verify Immigration Status
“…Arizona Governor Jan Brewer last week signed a new law into effect that authorizes local police to stop and verify the immigration status of anyone they suspect of being an illegal immigrant. A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey finds that 60% of voters nationwide favor such a law, while 31% are opposed.
Seventy-seven percent (77%) of Republicans support the law along with 62% of voters not affiliated with either major party. Democratic voters are evenly divided on the measure.
At the same time, however, 58% of all voters are at least somewhat concerned that “efforts to identify and deport illegal immigrants will also end up violating the civil rights of some U.S. citizens.” That figure includes 29% who are Very Concerned about possible civil rights violations.
Voter support for empowering local police comes at a time when most voters (56%) believe it is unlikely Congress will take action to gain control of the border. Only 31% say Congress is even somewhat likely to take such an action. That figure includes just 10% who believe Congress is Very Likely to act. …”
Michael Savage- Obama’s Immigration Speech
Immigration to play a factor for November elections
Discussion #3: Brand Loyalty–Brand and Price–Some examples
Hello Everyone!
For shaving cream I buy Barbasol.
For diet soda I buy Big K at Kroger because it is cheaper than Coke.
For peanut butter and bread I buy Kroger’s cheapest.
Kroger has a value brand category that is the cheapest.
For breakfast cereal I buy the Kroger brand for corn flakes and fruity rice crisps.
For batteries I buy Ravovac because they are the cheapest.
I usually do not buy a national brand because they are usually the most expensive and you can invariably find a product of equal or greater quality and much lower price.
Compare Kroger prices with those of the national brands and you will see what I mean.
You can get a box of saltine crackers for less than $1 or pay nearly $2 for a national brand name. I buy the Kroger discount value brand for this as well.
I just noticed this new discussion topic after I posted the one due at 5.
Raymond
Discussion #1: Raymond T. Pronk
Please state your name and why you are taking this course! Also, some information about yourself, such as interesting hobbies, year in school, etc…
Hello. I am Raymond Pronk and have lived in Fort Worth from 1978 to 1983 and in Dallas from 1983 to the present.
My interests include reading, writing, making videos and blogging.
I took this course to learn more about advertising since it is the primary revenue source for both commercial radio and television broadcasting and a major source of revenue for internet web sites.
My goal is to have my own talk radio show on current events, business, economics and politics.
I have already completed two associate degrees from Richland College in business application programming and web design.
I have earned several other degrees including a Bachelor of Science in Economics from New York University, a Master of Arts in Economics from the University of California, Berkeley, a Master of Business Administration from Wright State University and a Master of Professional Accounting from the University of Texas at Arlington.
I am currently searching for a new career position with a leading radio/television talk show or with a leading ad agency as a researcher/writer.
‘The purpose of learning is growth, and our minds, unlike our bodies, can continue growing as we continue to live.’
~Mortimer Adler
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )Discussion #4: Jumping To Conclusions About Shirley Sherrod
Ag Secretary Offers to Hire Back Ousted Worker
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nAsJS_E8EKE&hl=en_US&fs=1
Robert Gibbs on Shirley Sherrod: Mistakes Were Made
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bA18AEXQkNQ&hl=en_US&fs=1
Shirley Sherrod explains racial remarks
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KosReihC8Ts
USDA Reconsiders Employee’s Job Over Race Remark
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iV0u2RwwoIM&hl=en_US&fs=1
Shirley Sherrod Defended by White farmers Wife; Eloise & Rodger Spooner
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEGp2ni6B1I&hl=en_US&fs=1
White farmers at the center of Shirley Sherrod controversy: ‘No way in the world’ she is a racist.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUcH0ABKDII&hl=en_US&fs=1
shirley sherrod reveals her past racism
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrNWw7TGkjo&hl=en_US&fs=1
Andrew Breitbart Defends Shirley Sherrod Story
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2kMfCAoVPx0&hl=en_US&fs=1
Krauthammer on Shirley Sherrod
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZeTVQE45ko&hl=en_US&fs=1
John King-Andrew Breitbart Shirley Sherrod Interview, Part I
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rU2igzWD5Ms&hl=en_US&fs=1
John King-Andrew Breitbart Shirley Sherrod Interview, Part II
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVs_dyguHBY&hl=en_US&fs=1
Politics of Race: NAACP vs. Tea Party
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkOc8ZKYUeQ&hl=en_US&fs=1
NAACP Says Tea Party is Racist…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eY4dyCiP9b4&hl=en_US&fs=1
Black USDA Official Caught Making Racist Remarks About White Farmers !!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ahot8jCeaGU&hl=en_US&fs=1
Glenn Beck-07/20/10-A
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bTAm4tBN1mU&hl=en_US&fs=1
Glenn Beck-07/20/10-B
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9W9UokKAzAM&hl=en_US&fs=1
Glenn Beck-07/20/10-C
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obUd4BWpMeQ&hl=en_US&fs=1
Glenn Beck-07/20/10-D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5yJEPTWG_M&hl=en_US&fs=1
When an employee is accused of racisim, it is always good policy to first check that the complete context and all of the facts of the situation are detailed in a written report and the written report be fully coordinated with all appropriate departments including human resources and legal.
The person accused of racism should always be given an opportunity to explain their side of the situation.
Had this be done, none of the bad publicity from this case would have taken place for clearly Sherrod should not have been asked to resign.
Once the mistake had been made of asking for her resignation, the Secretary of Agriculture, finally did the right thing and made a public apology and an offer to rehire her.
The Secretary of Agriculture and The President Of The United States were poorly served by the staff members who initiated this firing or forced resignation.
Panicing and jumping to conclusions only leads to more problems.
One should not respond to blog posts, videos on YouTube or television commentary without first being sure of the facts in the case.
Panicing and jumping to conclusions only leads to more problems.
Glenn Beck was right, context is very important.
Andrew Breitbart should have waited until he got the complete tape from his source.
I suspect he was being set up when his source only gave him part of the video.
Brietbart should have suspected this and held the video until his source provided him with the complete video.
Apparently the NAACP had the complete video.
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )Unit 6–Part 2-Careers in Advertising
How To Get A Job In Advertising
Matryoshka Dolls with Olga & Dema
“When you are appointed to head an office in the Ogilvy & Mather chain, I send you one of these Russian dolls. Inside the smallest you will find this message: ‘If each of us hires people who are smaller than we are, we shall become a company of dwarfs, but if each of us hires people who are bigger than we are, Ogilvy & Mather will become a company of giants.’:
~David Ogilvy, Ogilvy On Advertising, page 46.
A conversation about advertising, with David Ogilvy
David Ogilvy interviewed by John Crichton in 1977. Realized by the American Association of Advertising Agencies AAAA. David is seen as the “pope of advertising”. This is the complete interview version.
While in the past I have never considered a career in advertising, I recently read the late David Ogilvy’s books, Confessions of An Advertising Man and Ogilvy On Advertising to learn more about career opportunities in advertising and advertising agencies.
I highly recommend reading both books for any one interested in a career in advertising or mass communications and for business owners and executives interested in growing their businesses.
David Ogilvy started his own advertising agency in 1948.
Today Ogilvy & Mather is one of the top ten marketing communication firms worldwide and employs over 15,000 people in 450 offices around the world with a tradition for training and developing their talent. Ogilvy & Mather is part of the WPP family of companies.
Ogilvy & Mather
http://www.ogilvy.com/Careers.aspx
According to Ogilvy advertising offers four different career paths:
-
You can join a television network, a radio station, a magazine or a newspaper and sell time or space to advertisers and their agencies.
-
You can join a retailer like Sears Roebeck, and work as a copywriter, art director or advertising manager.
-
You can join a manufacturing company like Procter & Gamble, and work as a brand manager.
-
You can join an advertising agency.
Source: Ogilvy On Advertising, page 31.
I would most likely pursue the career path of working for a leading advertising agency such as the following:
All of the above advertising agencies are owned by British marketing giant WPP http://www.wpp.com/wpp/companies/
Since I live in Dallas, Texas I would also be interested in working for a local Dallas advertising agency such as the Richards Group http://www.richards.com/index.html# or the local Dallas office of ReachLocal http://reachlocal33-px.rtrk.com/ .
There are several jobs in advertising agencies including the following:
-
Account executive
-
Art director
-
Copywriter
-
Creative director
-
Media director
-
Researcher/Analyst
-
Program Director
Actual job or position descriptions from the Ogilvy & Mather web site are provided at the end of this essay.
With over twenty years of experience in the financial services industry, sales, and running my own firm, the positions that most interested me are account executive, copywriter, researcher/analyst and program director.
An account executive or in earlier times the contact man is responsible for representing the agency to the client and getting the best possible work from the various agency departments for the client.
A copywriter is responsible for writing interesting prose for print media and dialogue for broadcast media ( television and radio).
Media director is responsible for all aspects of client’s media services.
A researcher/analyst conducts surveys, writes reports and provides answer to questions.
Market research is information on the market, competition, prospects, distribution and pricing.
Advertising research is information directly related to an advertising campaign including the development, pretesting, and evaluation of the actual advertising campaign or materials.
A program director is responsible for assembling and managing teams to deliver work.
Since I do not know anybody that works in an advertising agency to interview, I decided to first interview Marshall Siegel, the Advertising Advisor for Richland College, School of Human & Academic Development, who has over thirty-seven experience in advertising with a trade magazine publisher where he had numerous positions in all departments except media.
Marshall Siegel is a graduate of the University of Missouri, School of Journalism. After college, his first job was with the Chicago Tribune, formerly self-styled as the “World’s Greatest Newspaper” (for which WGN radio and television is named). When the Korean War broke out, he was called up by the U.S. Army and served in Korea as a private first class. Siegel subsequently joined the Army Reserves and retired years latter as a Major.
After completing his active duty military service, he returned to the Chicago Tribune. At the time he was paid only $35 per week and decided for financial reasons to take a higher paying position selling advertising space for a firm that publishes trade magazines.
After thirty-seven years with the trade magazine publishing company, the company was sold to a British firm for forty million dollars in cash.
Siegal retired soon thereafter when the British firm wanted one of their executives to manage the company.
Siegel now assists students at Richland College as an advertising and writing coach and as Advertising Advisor to Richland College. When advertisers want to post their ads on the Richland College campus, he is the person you go to get your ad approved and stamped. Place you ads only on cement walls and be sure to take them down after two weeks!
He loves owning and driving Porsches and carries photos of his “babies” in his wallet.
Siegel recommended that with my financial services and sales background I approach an advertising agency about selling advertising of financial publications to prospects and clients of the advertising agency.
He suggested I go to the main library in Plano or Dallas and look up the names of the agencies that I was interested in working for in the Advertising Red Books to determine who the advertising agency’s clients were.
“…The Advertising Redbooks Standard Directory of Advertising Agencies January Edition (S11) 2010
Each Volume 1 Advertisers $ 1495.00 AS LISTED TO BE ORDERED FROM THIS SECTION
Each Volume II AGENCIES $1495.00
CD-ROM; CONTAINS Both These Volumes is $1995.00
PLEASE CALL AT 905 946 9588 OR EMAIL US at sales@ippbooks.com
The Advertising Redbooks’ defines useful agency-to-advertiser relationships for prospecting and competitive intelligence research. …”
http://www.ippbooks.com/store/advertising-red-book-advertising-agencies-of-the-usa.html
Siegel also recommended that I obtain for selected financial publications their advertising rates from the SDRS directory at the library:
“…”For 90 years, SRDS has built and maintained the largest and most comprehensive database of media rates and data in the world, including:
-Magazines
-Newspapers
-Television & Radio Stations
-Online Sites
-Out-of-Home Venues
-Direct Marketing Lists …”
http://www.wpp.com/wpp/companies/companydetail.htm?id=532
WPP acquired SDRS in 2009.
SRDS Portal
http://www.srds.com/portal/servlet/LoginServlet
Siegel also recommended that I send a letter or e-mail to the founder or head of the advertising agency expressing by interest in working for his agency.
I indicated that I was more interested in a creative position in advertising such as copywriter for I write every day on a blog and have published over sixty videos on YouTube http://www.youtube.com/user/raymondpronk and designed and developed a number of web sites on famous artists
The one agency in Dallas that most impresses me is the Richards Group founded by Stan Richards.
2010 JA Dallas Business Hall of Fame Laureate – Stan Richards
I still remember participating in a focus group one evening for The Richards Group.
A group of individuals in the financial services were there to review the advertising and marketing materials for a financial services client of The Richards Group.
I will be reading his book next:
Another firm that interests me is ReachLocal that is relatively new and has just opened an office in Dallas.
ReachLocal has a unique system that gets prospects for advertisers.
ReachLocal Vision
ReachLocal Promo – What We Do
ReachLocal Promo – How It Works
How It Works: The ReachLocal Platform
Job Descriptions
From Actual Job Open Positions At Ogilvy & Mather
Account Executive
“…Responsibilities:
- Responsible for the smooth week-by week running of the account and the effective management of all Client projects
- Develops positive, proactive relationships with Client and Agency team creating a stimulating environment within which the best work can develop
- Begins to develop people management skills by coaching and developing their reports and by demonstrating an ability to effectively delegate both up and down.
- As the Account Executive moves towards promotion to Account Supervisor he/she will begin to show leadership and drive in thinking of innovative solutions to business/strategic problems and in merchandising the Agency’s services
- Understands challenges facing Client’s business in the short-term
- Makes it their business to know all aspects of competitive activity
- Develops an understanding of the motivations/behaviour patterns of consumers in the marketplace by attending focus groups/ quantitative debriefs, store visits etc.
- Goes to lengths to gain a thorough understanding of all aspects of the brand – from reading reports, visiting factories/stores and talking to sales force to using/experiencing the product/service
- Supports planners in developing ideas and stimulus for research
- Actively contributes to discussions on strategy and advertising development
- Works with Account Director and Planner to develop inspirational briefings for Creatives
- Keeps in regular contact with Creatives during development of ideas, keeping them supplied with any useful stimulus and helping to ensure they remain motivated and enthusiastic
- Keeps Client involved in the development process to build their confidence and enable them to buy braver ideas.
- Has mastered a range of presentation techniques and works with the Account Director to identify the most appropriate and inspiring way to present and sell each piece of creative work
- Be a sound judge of creative work, able to coherently argue the case for or against creative work based on the brief and factual accuracy, both internally and with the Client …”
Art Director
“…Responsibilities:
- Generate original concepts in partnership with copywriter
- Manage multiple deadlines/projects
- Present creative to senior management, account teams and clients
- Be a brand expert and steward for clients and Ogilvy
- Cast (or assist with casting) talent for TV/radio/photo shoots and attend production/editing
- Liaise with production companies, photographers, typographers, designers and printers
Copywriter
“…Responsibilities:
- Generate original concepts in partnership with art director
- Write strategically sound headlines and body copy for digital, print and broadcast deliverables
- Manage multiple deadlines/projects
- Present creative to clients
- Keep breast of cultural and industry trends
- Become a brand expert and steward for both clients and Ogilvy
- Cast (or assist with casting) actors for TV/radio/photo shoots and attend production/editing
- Liaise with production companies, photographers, typographers, designers and printers
http://careers.ogilvy.com/private/myjobs/openjob_outside.jsp?a=3jdo4jjibi1r49wrf9pgq9n9b2pvqyz45f4wjbysqnrh3rk24g6avteuh5ueleox0&from=COMP&id=2325396&SearchString=Copywriter&StatesString=
Media Director
“…Responsibilities:
- Oversight on all aspects of client’s media services
- Responsible for overall media objectives and strategies that fulfill client business objectives
- Lead creation of all important plans and presentations
- Demonstrate thought leadership and innovation for enhanced media plans and results
- Foster cross-agency relationships with account, production, and outside partners
- Train, motivate & develop Media Supervisors, Media Planners, Assistant Media Planners
http://careers.ogilvy.com/private/myjobs/openjob_outside.jsp?a=3jdo4jjibi1r49wrf9pgq9n9b2pvqyz45f4wjbysqnrh3rk24g6avteuh5ueleox0&from=COMP&id=2280700&SearchString=Media+Director&StatesString=
Researcher/Analyst
“…Responsibilities
•Assist senior analytic staff with various analytic projects for experiential , shopper, and promotional campaigns
•Retrieve raw data gathered from field or market activities and synthesize it into usable forms for account team usage
•Join multiple sources of data into one, normalized dataset
•Provide analysis beyond reporting basic facts, such as regression, cluster and factor analysis, and simple tests for statistical significance
•Maintain library of analytics case studies used to develop industry benchmarks
•Produce analytics reports from both custom and template designs
•Manage time spent against multiple projects, ensuring deadlines are maintained and met
•Assist in writing of reports
•Some client-facing responsibilities …:
Program Director
“…Responsibilities:
- Will work primarily on the digital side of the business, including such projects as:
- Tutorials
- New product launches
- Various TWC.com site initiatives
- TWC online Applications
- Scoping new projects and recognizing changes to current scope
- Should be familiar with key disciplines and their processes for delivering work (IA, Creative, Content Strategy, Project Management, Strategy, Engineering, Usability, etc.)
- Working with other disciplines (especially digital project management) to assemble and manage teams to deliver work
- Project plan development and risk planning
- Reviewing actuals to track profitability of projects and course correct if necessary
- Day-to-day client contact and advisement
- Presentation writing and presenting skills, meeting facilitation skills …”
“The biggest problem which besets almost every agency is the problem of producing good campaigns. Copywriters, art directors, and television producers are easily come by, but the number of men who can preside over an agency’s entire creative output – perhaps a hundred new campaigns every year – can be numbered on the fingers of one hand. These rare trumpeter swans must be capable of inspiring a motley crew of writers and artists; they must be sure-footed judges of campaigns for a wide range of different products; they must be good presenters; and they must have a colossal appetite for midnight oil.”
- ~David Ogilvy, Confessions of an Advertising Man, 1971, New York:
David Ogilvy made it very clear what he wanted when he advertised for a Creative Director for Ogilvy & Mather International:
Trumpeter Swans
In my experience, there are five kinds of Creative Director:
1. Sound on strategy, dull on execution.
2.Good managers who don’t make waves…and don’t produce brilliant campaigns either.
3. Duds.
4. The genius who is a lousy leader.
5. TRUMPETER SWANS
who combine personal genius with inspiring leadership.
We have an opening for one of these rare birds in one of our offices overseas.
Write in inviolable secrecy to me,
David Ogilvy, Touffou, 86300 Bonnes, France.
Signed David Ogilvy
~Source: Ogilvy On Advertising, page 48
Ultimate Animal Dads: Trumpeter Swans
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OnqkfglZI2Q&feature=related
The Trumpeter Swan
A Trumpeter Swan looking for a new career opportunity with an advertising agency.
Background Information
The Pope of Modern Advertising – David Ogilvy
http://www.hulu.com/watch/46488/the-david-susskind-show-the-pope-of-modern-advertising—david-ogilvy
David Ogilvy: We Sell or Else
David MacKenzie Ogilvy
“…David MacKenzie Ogilvy, CBE, (June 23, 1911–July 21, 1999), was a notable advertising executive. He has often been called “The Father of Advertising.” In 1962, Time called him “the most sought-after wizard in today’s advertising industry.” [1] He was known for a career of expanding the bounds of both creativity and morality in advertising. …”
“…The Ogilvy & Mather years (1949–1973)
After working as a chef, researcher, and farmer, Ogilvy started his agency with the backing of Mather and Crowther, the London agency being run by his elder brother, Francis, which later acquired another London agency, S. H. Benson. The new agency in New York was called Ogilvy, Benson, and Mather. David Ogilvy had just $6,000 in his account when he started the agency. He writes in Confessions of an Advertising Man that initially, he struggled to get clients. Ogilvy also admitted (referring to the pioneer of British advertising Bobby Bevan, the chairman of Benson) “I was in awe of him but Bevan never took notice of me!” They would meet later, however.[3]
Ogilvy & Mather was built on David Ogilvy’s principles, in particular, that the function of advertising is to sell and that successful advertising for any product is based on information about its consumer.
His entry into the company of giants started with several iconic advertising campaigns:
“The man in the Hathaway shirt” with his aristocratic eye patch which used Baron George Wrangell as model; “The man from Schweppes is here” introduced Commander Edward Whitehead, the elegant bearded Brit, bringing Schweppes (and “Schweppervesence”) to the U.S.; a famous headline in the automobile business, “At 60 miles an hour the loudest noise in this new Rolls-Royce comes from the electric clock”; “Pablo Casals is coming home – to Puerto Rico”, a campaign which Ogilvy said helped change the image of a country, and was his proudest achievement.
One of his greatest successes was “Only Dove is one-quarter moisturizing cream”. This campaign helped Dove become the top selling soap in the U.S.
Ogilvy believed that the best way to get new clients was to do notable work for his existing clients. Success in his early campaigns helped Ogilvy get big clients such as Rolls-Royce and Shell. New clients followed and Ogilvy’s company grew quickly.
In 1973 Ogilvy retired as Chairman of Ogilvy & Mather and moved to Touffou, his estate in France. While no longer involved in the agency’s day-to-day operations, he stayed in touch with the company. His correspondence so dramatically increased the volume of mail handled in the nearby town of Bonnes that the post office was reclassified at a higher status and the postmaster’s salary raised.
Ogilvy & Mather linked with H.H.D Europe in 1972. …”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Ogilvy_(businessman)
Russia-Matryoshka doll class
SRDS sale gives WPP an unfair advantage
“…This affects the direct marketing industry because SRDS provides a research system that is used for making mailing list purchasing decisions and formulating media plans. List managers use SRDS to promote their lists. List brokers and mailers use SRDS to make list selections.
WPP Group is a huge advertising agency holding company with an estimated 100,000 employees and £6.18 billion revenue in 2007. A big part of WPP’s revenue is commissions from media purchases done by their stable of advertising agencies. It’s a good strategy for WPP to buy SRDS because it will give them better insight into media purchases that happen outside of WPP. They can use SRDS’ database to better calculate their market share and to develop laser-focused strategies to acquire the share they don’t already own.
If I were a list broker, I’d be really nervous about this.
After all, list brokers compete with WPP agencies for their commissions (i.e. their livelihood). If WPP owns their list research system, it would provide WPP with powerful insights that enable them to steal the business away from list brokers and move those commissions to WPP agencies.
Imagine if your competitor could see all your research and proposals before you publish them. They would eat your lunch! …”
http://blog.nextmark.com/2008/11/srds-sale-gives-wpp-an-unfair-advantage.html
The Richards Group
“…The Richards Group is an American advertising agency. It is the largest independently owned agency in the country.[citation needed]
Based in Dallas, Texas, The Richards Group reports annual billings approaching $1.25 billion. Memorable work includes the iconic Chick-fil-A Cows (“Eat Mor Chikin”)[1], the Motel 6 campaign featuring Tom Bodett, and the dialogue-free Corona Beer TV commercials set on tropical beaches.
Major clients include Baby Magic[2], Fruit of the Loom, Home Depot, Sub-Zero/Wolf, and Zales. The agency handles advertising, public relations, and promotions for dozens of clients nationwide, in addition to sports/entertainment marketing for colleges and universities.
In the 3rd quarter of 2009, PODS signed The Richards Group as their creative agency.[3]
The Richards Group is associated by common ownership with Houston advertising agency Richards/Carlberg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Richards_Group
Trumpet of the swan – Ogilvy & Mather Chairman and CEO Rochelle Lazarus
“…In 1994, IBM stunned the marketing world by consolidating its $500 million advertising account, parceled among 40 agencies, into just one. It was the largest account switch ever and at its center was Shelley Lazarus, then the president and COO of WPP Group’s Ogilvy & Mather Worldwide.
Named chief executive last fall, on April 30 Lazarus inherited the chairman’s baton from Charlotte Beers, the 61-year-old dynamic Texan who became the first female chief executive in O&M’s history in 1992. Heading the $7.6 billion agency that legendary adman David Ogilvy founded in 1948, whose clients include Duracell, Ford, Kimberly Clark, Shell Oil, Jaguar, Sears Roebuck, Eastman Kodak, and American Express, makes Lazarus the most powerful woman in advertising – not bad for someone who couldn’t find work 25 years ago.
“Other agencies wouldn’t hire me, claiming they didn’t want to alienate the wives of account executives with whom I’d have to work late,” Lazarus recalls. But O&M took her on in 1971 as an assistant and a few years later – when she was six months pregnant – named her its first female account executive. With the exception of a hiatus in 1974 to follow her husband on a two-year posting at a Dayton, OH, Air Force base and care for their newborn, she has spent virtually her entire career at O&M. On returning to New York, she rejoined the firm and was soon running O&M Direct, the unit responsible for “junk mail.” Considered “off-the-path” at the time, Lazarus found direct marketing “a specialty with enormous profit potential,” and parlayed the job into a launch pad for posts as president of the New York office and president of Ogilvy North America. …”
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m4070/is_n124/ai_19694503/
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )« Previous Entries
Pronk Papers 