Should clothing companies be responsible for censoring messages their item promote, or should buyers use their discretion? Anna Zhao’s post about using controversy as marketing (and essentially marketing controversy), points out the interesting fact that amidst the controversy and arguable negative messages being promoted, Urban Outfitters in a leading competitor in its market.

Urban outfitters isn’t known for it conservative styles or typical slogans, rather, its unique for its out-going styles and questionable messages, and uses these as a brand positioning technique. UO definitely uses its controversial nature to a) differ itself from the other competitors, and b) establish its own target market in which it can succeed. Its unique style and messages purposely target teens, known for going through the typical ‘rebellious’ stage. Focusing on a particular consumer group (though attracting other consumers as well) with such a specific genre of clothing answers Anna Zhou’s previous question of how UO can be doing so well amidst all the competition and resentment from certain groups.

Urban outfitters has always counted on a certain target group of people for its revenue, and it’s their strategic marketing techniques, no matter how unconventional (in this case, the more controversial the better, it seems), that let them still strive in the clothing market.

Through learning about the importance of positioning and branding your product in such a way that conveys the message you want your product to send, it can be concluded that social media is generally a good way to make that happen.

Though not useful in all cases, as the marketing strategies of each product will differ, social media proves to be an effective way to expose products and companies in our society today. Though caution is given in Ryan Caligiuri’s article “How to convince the boss social media does pay off” towards some hesitations in using social media, he also provides valuable insights on how to make it work to a companies’ advantage.

Bringing up the point that one needs to set a goal when marketing a product proves to be very true when applied to social media. Having this sector being so large and diverse, a goal must be set to guide the type of publicity the product gets. Furthermore, since social media is relatively geared toward a younger audience, this should be taken into consideration when deciding what type of product is being advertised.

The use of social media, though unapproved by some, is an effective way to introduce and advertise products, when used correctly.

A large dispute between Apple and Samsung has resulted in courtroom debates on the extent and legitimacy of patents. How far and detailed should these patents extend?

Apple sued Samsung for patent infringement for 1 billions dollars, for creating technology that had similar functions and, primarily, looks. However, these claims that Apple hold over specific little functions and formats of their phones seem to be stretching their limits a bit too far, and thus causing the debate on how strongly these patents should hold.  With such specific patents, how are companies supposed to come up with new technology and functions with such strict limitations?

Furthermore, they begin to affect the public as more of these patents issues will be encouraged, it will become increasingly difficult to build upon and create new apps and features, and more attention will be placed in the courts than in the marketplace.  These restricted patents are limiting the production of new products and will continue to slow the market unless a compromise is found to balance out the restrictions.

Recently, The Economist has highlighted the issue of Canada’s cautious spending in its article “Hey, small spender”. Commenting on the conservative nature of Canadian corporations and how their hesitancy to spend aided in weathering the recession, they emphasize how it is now harming their recovery.

The fact that Canada’s GDP is growing slower and slower is a cause for concern and is attributed to many factors, including low prices on resources exports and the housing boom. How can businesses be encouraged to take more risks and spend their money to compensate for these changes? The government is wavering between using tactics persuasion versus tactics of bullying as this issue continues to escalate. Tactics of persuasion include reducing tax rate, and increasing tax incentives. Investments need to be made, and money spent in order for the economy to grow and jobs to be provided. The attempts of the government continue to increase in desperation as they consider entering the schooling system, but still remain simply attempts.

The article printed by the Economist earlier this year, “When the jobs inspector calls” reveals the complicated relationship between large companies and their use of factories and workers overseas. The off-Broadway play “The Agony and Ecstasy of Steve Jobs”, though revealed to somewhat falsely portray the working conditions of the apple factories, sparked the purpose of this article to touch on the ethically troubling issue of poor and dangerous working conditions in return for lower production costs.

Large companies, such as Nike and now Apple, have been revealed to have dangerous and unfair working conditions for their factories and workers abroad.  Though they continue to say that their conditions are improving, it is difficult to measure the proper worth of these luxuries compared to the working conditions of those producing their parts. Ideally, there would be a safe and protected environment for which these workers work under, but since that is currently unattainable, how far can we justify the production of these items?

Additionally, since we as consumers continue to provide a market for these products, there is little incentive for these large corporations to reform their systems that prove to still function. What are we, as consumers, and these companies as producers going to do to properly improve the working condition abroad?