http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/story/2012/10/12/f-ewallets-mobile-payments.html

Almost everyone has a phone these days, in fact roughly 80% of the worlds population as access to one today. Smartphones make up about 1.08 billion of the 5 billion mobile phones floating around today, with 81% of these users claim to use their phones throughout the day. Smartphones represent more than a phone; they hold maps, emails, banking information and other applications outside of a phone. The thing that smartphones arent though is a wallet, but that may soon change. Fusing smartphone technology and payment technology is the next step in the mobile market. Recently, Starbucks released a mobile app that allows clients to pay for their orders through their phone and it exploded.

Now companies like Walmart, Bestbuy and Target are utilizing the same technology and reaping great rewards. By allowing clients to “swipe” with their mobile phones instead of their credit cards companies are able to save money from creditors who often charge swipe fees upwards of 2%. As of now the only thing holding back the mobile payment game is the amount of firms that would be involved in the deal, and who gets the cuts. Phone companies, cell carriers, banks, creditors all want a piece of the pie but cant decide how to cut it, so until then phones are going to have to wait for a bit before they can enter the world of wallets.

Yahoo, Facebook! A new search engine involving the two internet giants may be in the works. There has never been a better advertising method than search engines. When a user searches something through a search engine advertisers pay big bucks to show up in the search results, giving Google the 40 billion in annual revenues they enjoy today. Currently, Facebook boasts an incredible 1 billion active monthly users and Yahoo claims 80 million. The two giants possess a huge global distribution. Facebook has a massive range of unique consumer data due to its nature as a social network. It knows the ins and outs of customer tastes allowing for more effective targeting from ad agencies. By allowing Yahoo to tag along with Facebook’s famous brand, top programmers can be attracted and tune Facebook into a top tier search engine. As of now money is slipping through Facebook’s fingers as valuable advertising dollars are lost. Current Facebook users do not want to be looking at ads when they are browsing the site and communicating with their friends. Instead, if Facebook can develop a search engine with Yahoo that wont be flashing ads in consumers faces they can cash in on the huge population of users on the site. If Facebook added a search feature somehow billions could be added to the bottom line every year, no questions asked. Facebook stocks, although taking a bit of a dip lately, might be looking up in the near future. Yahoo!

http://www.businessinsider.com/yahoo-facebook-search-engine-2012-11

We are living in a period of unprecedented interconnectedness. Humans have never been so easily able to share information, revolutionizing the way we live. Upon reading Jaskaren Athwals blog post about the European debt crisis, I took a step back and analyzed the bridge that connects humans worldwide – Globalization.

Globalization is a blessing and a curse. On one hand it brings people the world over closer than ever, in a way that is easier than ever. A person can speak face to face with a family member across the world with a click of a button over the internet. Goods from China can be bought and sold in Canada at the snap of a finger. The interconnectedness brings the economies of the world together like they have never been before, opening up new dimensions for trade. This connectivity however means that if something is going on in one market, all the other markets will feel the ripples as well. When the US housing market crashed in 2007, it marked the worst recession since World War 2. The American market is the strongest in the world and when it dipped under, the other markets worldwide followed suit. The effects were felt around the globe. I was in Spain and Portugal over the summer and it was clear to see what kind of toll the recession had taken on Europe. Riots were taking place in the streets over unemployment rates infront of my hotel in downtown Barcelona, with general strikes breaking out nation wide. With international markets being so closely connected through globalization, the effects of failure are felt worldwide. The American market is making turnarounds today but the European crisis will likely last until beyond 2014, proving that while globalization may be a beneficial force its negative effects can be devastating on the global scale.

A major blow has been dealt in the world of snack foods. Hostess, the makers of twinkies and other various treats has declared they will be going out of business. A recent strike has economically crippled Hostess, so much so that even if the workers conducting the strikes had a change of heart it is still “too late” to recover. Hostess has been plagued with economic crisises since 2004 when it first filed for bankruptcy, but this latest development will prove to be its last. Roughly 18,500 workers will lose their jobs as a result, adding to current unemployment line facing the states today. Leading up to the closing Hostess was in bad shape. After attempting to pass a new contract that would slash workers salaries and retirements benefits resulted in a strike from the unions of bakers, confectionaries and tobacco and grain millers that make up 30% of the companies work force. Production for Hostess products ground to a halt, and sales accordingly plummeted as clients will not stock the products if supplies are not adequate. Hostess, who nets $2.5 billion in sales a year, is hoping to sell of its 30 signature lines in order to retain some sort of cash. Twinkies will forever live on in the hearts of people worldwide for their hilariously unhealthy reputation and their delicious taste.

Upon reading Hilary Rejto’s post regarding misleading advertising, I began to think about what effects advertising really has on consumer behaviour. Advertising is everywhere, constantly bombarding the senses. Radio, TV, internet, even cellphone games are packed with it. Although often overlooked, it is nearly impossible to leave the house without being struck by a heavy barrage of advertising. Consumer behaviour is shaped through the use of advertising. Ads target consumers in hopes to change how they think. Companies associate desirable features with their product, and the consumer begins to do the same. 

Ads attempt to position the brand in question into a desirable spot in the consumers mind, like the beer ad above. The beer is positioned with a beautiful girl on a beautiful beach in some beautiful tropical destination, and the consumer is lead to believe that all that can be theirs if they support the brand. According to research done by Mark Changizi of the Rensselaer Polytechnical Institute, exposure to advertising appeals to a subconscious section of the brain. When someone sees a movie with a “cool” guy riding around with a pair of fresh Nikes on, the consumer subconsciously makes note of it. They see that whoever the guy in the Nikes is, whatever he is doing is paying off and he is successful. Its the sense of something greater, like success, that ads feeds consumers in order to obtain their business. Ads will tell a consumer what is cool and what isnt cool, and the consumer changes their behaviour accordingly. They dont have a choice because a subconscious part of their mind has been attuned to the brands wishes. Consumers like to believe they make their own choices but those choices have a heavy weighting placed on them through advertising and its mental effects.

This years presidential campaign was filled to the brim with controversy. In the recent elections the rise of super PACs (Super Political Action Committees) have been driving the elections, pouring huge sums of money in, in favor of their supported politician. Generally the politician with the most amount of money backing their campaign cleans up, but this race was different. This year Karl Rove, through the use of his groups blew through over a billion dollars, and gained little to no returns on the money invested. Almost all of the politicians sponsored by Rove’s super PACs lost their races.

Huge sums of money were directed towards funding vicious attack ads on democratic runners, proving to be of little to no use. Super pacs mask the voices of the people who happen to be voting, and serve to some extent, indoctrinate citizens. They strip the power out the people voice, and replace it with a fabricated voice supplied by the highest bidder. For that reason, the 2012 election was an extremely important one in Americas history, proving that while money may buy all the advertising and brainwash campaigns a party needs, the peoples will is ultimately what counts.