Posts from — October 2010

For Comm299, we were asked to prepare a speech about an advertisement and state whether or not it is ethical or not. I found it appropriate and relevant to what we are talking about in Comm101 (more so the first few classes). So, here it is:

“On the weekend, I made a trip to Safeway to buy myself some cereal to eat for breakfast.

As I was walking through the cereal aisle, I came across Kellogg’s Rice Krispies.

The Rice Krispies box is typically blue with the title rice krispies and the three signature cartoon characters (Snap Crackle and Pop) who are all eating out of a big bowl of Rice Krispies.

Taking up about one fifth of the box, on a big yellow banner written in big bold letters “Now helps support your child’s immunity”.

But does Rice Krispies really help children’s immunity more than, for example fresh fruit?

On the right of the big yellow banner, it said 25% daily value of antioxidants and nutrients.

It is true to say that it provides 25% daily value of antioxidants and nutrients because it actually does contain Vitamin A B C & E however; there is no clinically proven evidence that links Rice Krispies to a better immune system.

Kellogg’s should really change their advertising strategies and not put false information on their cereal boxes because false advertising makes consumers like us question the ethics of the company which will raise many concerns.

I found this ad offensively false that it deserved to be Google-ed.

I found out that the Federal Trade Commission investigated Kellogg’s and managed to stop such claim, but without requiring Kellogg’s to admit that they were wrong.

If they don’t change and apologize, then the company is simply digging up its own grave.”

Sources

Google images.

True, however there are consequences.

I read an article on the Financial Post and it was about how Canadian companies are putting machines before jobs. Canadian companies are planning on laying off some workers so they can use the money saved for more advanced technology. Friday, Statistics Canada reported that the economy let a net 6,600 jobs go in September. But where will these unemployed workers go? By increasing the unemployment rate, the income of families is going to decrease which will make those families less likely to spend. If they don’t spend, then the circular flow of income and expenditure wouldn’t be the circular flow of income and expenditure because there is no wages paid =>wages received => consumer expenditure and so on…

Although I understand why companies would want to invest on more technology, for the sake of keeping the economy going, we should not encourage the decreasing employment rate.

Sources

http://www.financialpost.com/news/Canadian+companies+machines+before+jobs/3644117/story.html

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/Economics/Unemployment-Rate.aspx?Symbol=CAD

Starbucks has been coping with the prices of raw materials and transportation until now by closing 600 of their outlets — they are not going to be nice this time. Starbucks stores in several cities, including Vancouver, are increasing the price of some beverages up to thirty cents more (depending on the drink; for example, frappuccinos or caramel macchiatos are being increased). But it’s not all bad, the company will charge less for the basic drinks; for instance, a tall black coffee.

There are two types of reactions from this devastating news.

1. Don’t care – These are the people who can’t live without having a cup of coffee every morning

2. Turn away – These are the people who don’t think Starbucks is worth its price and would rather save money buying from the supermarket.

3. Other

If prices grow, the demand for Starbucks will decrease because there are other competitors, like McDonald’s, who offer similar products for a cheaper value. Starbucks is considered a high quality and high priced luxurious item. However, as the US dollar value decreases, people are prioritizing their purchases thus a decrease in sales for Starbucks.

Nevertheless….

To counterattack the possible threats from increasing prices, Starbucks plans to redesign its menu and/or introducing alcoholic beverages. This may be a successful approach and may bump up the sales as it attracts consumers from other interests as well.

Personally, I do not favour Starbucks. I find that their drinks are too sweet and over all too much. I do drop by Starbucks if it is convenient ( since they do have a branch at almost every block of the city) however I prefer Bean Brothers. I wouldn’t say that I would never go to Starbucks ever again because of these slight changes in prices but I would go there less frequent than I already do just because Bean Brothers, for example, in Kerrisdale suits my taste buds (and also their portions seem a little cheaper if you compare the Starbucks cups per mL to Bean Brothers cups)

Sources

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/21/business/21sbux.html