Tuesday, August 21, 2007

The world's worst name

 
What were their parents thinking?
I voted for Dick Rash in the world's most unfortunate name poll I voted for Dick Rash in the world's most unfortunate name poll.

Go to
IsThisYour.Name to cast your vote. Do it for the kids.
These are all real names of real people. All of these names are pretty bad and I am sure the people they belong to had it pretty rough growing up with all the teasing.
 
Some are oddly cute, some just amusing. Some the humor doesn't hit you till you say it out loud. Some will make you giggle, some will make you spit your coffee on your screen.
 
From a list of thirty, containing names like Mike Hunt, Hugh Jassman, Dwayne Pipe, and Mike Rotch, it would be a difficult task to pick just one.
 
But of all of these, no matter if you say it or read it, Dick Rash has to be by far the worst name on the list. Nobody would want to have a name like that and the poor boys given this name were probably teased more than anybody else on that list. Their parents should have been charged with child abuse for naming them that.
 
Please, think before you name your kids and remember what the traditional nicknames are for some first names and don't do something like this to your children.

Sunday, August 19, 2007

I am Lion Warning Cat

 

62% Affectionate
59% Excitable
35% Hungry
 
 
You are the good Samaritan of the lolcat world. Protecting others from danger by shouting observations and guidance in cases of imminent threat, you believe in the well-being of everyone.
 

The Which Lolcat Are You? Test

 

What I find most amusing about this, is that the image above looks just like my daughter's evil cat, who would like nothing more than to blow up the entire world... ending all life as we know it.

Monday, August 13, 2007

Ad vs. Product

Imagine if Coca-Cola charged you money to watch a commercial for their product, in addition to charging you for the product itself. It sounds kind of crazy, doesn't it? Would you willingly pay to watch the commercial? Probably not. But in a case like this it is obvious which is the product and which is the ad.

We are being bombarded with advertising every day. In most cases, it's not hard to recognize an ad when you see one, as being an ad. But there are areas where we have been fooled and can't tell the product from the ad. This is because the creator of the product hasn't properly and clearly defined exactly what his product is.

Take music, for example. It's not quite as obvious which is which, and you could be buying the ad as well as the product.

An artist releases and album and then goes on tour playing concerts, which are live performances of that album. One of them is an ad, and the other is the product. Only, unless the artists defines which is which, you really can't tell. What is worse is that unless you know which is which, you will be duped into paying to experience the advertising.

There are artists that have clearly defined which is the product and which is the ad. There are plenty of artists that will give concerts with free admission and sell CD's afterwards. The show is the ad, the CD is the product. (I am referring to the artists that are not hired to perform concerts and receive no compensation for their live performance.)

Then there are artists that will send you a free CD if you add your name & address to their mailing list...or they offer free downloads of their album on their website. But if you want to hear them play live, it will cost you the price of a ticket. In this case, the album is the ad, the show is the product.

But what about the artists that charge you for both? Is the artist releasing the album to promote the concerts, in the hope that by listening to their CD that you will buy a ticket to a show? Or is the artist playing concerts in the hopes that if you hear them play that you will buy their CD? They need to make up their minds and let us know which is the product and then stop charging us for the advertising.

This problem isn't limited to music. There are other types of creative content production where this exists, as well. There are authors that charge for books...and then charge for public appearances, too. Is the 'guru' advertising his seminars with his book or are his seminars an ad for the book he wrote? It's not always easy to tell.

For the majority of authors, the book is the product. They don't make their living from public appearances. They know this and they don't charge for you to hear them speak, nor are they hired to talk about their book. They have defined the book as the product.

But in the cases where the line is blurred, you are being tricked into paying for the ad. Motivational speakers/authors are the most guilty when it comes to charging the consumer for advertising.  You buy the book and then pay to hear them preach at you for an hour or two. Or you pay to hear them speak, and then buy the book. Somewhere in there you have bought an ad. Again, the real product hasn't been revealed to you, so you can't tell which is which.

This is just a little food for thought. Something for you to think about the next time you are in line waiting to buy a book, album, or ticket to a concert or seminar.