There are unreasonable amounts of unethical advertisements, whether on TV, on the radio, or elsewhere. Some may have obvious attacks on other companies, and others may seem appropriate but include hidden meanings.

In this one car insurance commercial, it portrays a crazy woman driving a car, including banging her head on the horn, screaming, and other nonsense. The car insurance dealer would then say “If you don’t drive like her, you shouldn’t pay the same insurance rate as her.” This emphasis on the word “her” makes me feel like he is attacking women, as if all females drive like maniacs.

In another commercial by the same company, the driver is a crazy woman as well, therefore proving that the company is being sexist towards women. This type of advertising is unethical and should be revised.

“Funny Car Accident with Crazy Woman”

______________________

*Even though this video is not the commercial I wrote about in the article, it’s still amazing how ridiculous some commercial are to promote their car insurance.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ciHT8tS0p80

This is what I hate the most when buying things: “Sold Separately”.

I went to Futureshop today to get a netbook. Yes, the original price was pretty nice, 1 penny less than $230, but guess what, it’s just a useless shell. So, after listening to what the salesperson had to say, I had to pay $99 for the system then $159 for Microsoft. So… $258 for the netbook to work. I’m paying more for the things not included than for the thing itself. That’s pretty sad.

I looked at printers too. What a delight to see printers under $80! But of course, toner was not included. It was estimated that the toner itself would be another $300 or so. What was I there to buy? A working printer. Not an empty box.

I guess it’s a good way to earn money; make the customer want the cheap item, then force them to buy the insanely expensive things not included but necessary for usage. Great strategy. Unethical in my eyes. The real price always ends up being over double what you expect. Go buy something, and prepare to be robbed.

The automobile industries have always been very competitive. Always getting the best and newest technologies, the best models, and now, the most eco-friendly. Companies began producing microcars.

Let’s compare three of these microcars. The Tata Nano, Smart Car, and Toyota iQ.

What’s the difference?

I’d say that the Nano not only saves people a whole lot of money, but its build isn’t half bad either. Out of all the three, it has the best fuel efficiency (over 55 mpg-US) and battery range (up to 80 miles). The iQ is almost as good in fuel efficiency, but neither the iQ nor the Smart Car could compete with the battery range. For 2,500 in India? That’s amazing.

Not much to say about the Smart Car. Pricey for its size, although the tiny engine, ranging from 0.6L petrol, is really something.

Toyota iQ. Beautiful. Its engine isn’t noticeably small like the Smart Car, and it’s not cheap like the Nano, but what’s the use without safety? The Nano needed heavy upgrades to meet the European safety standards, and the Smart Car received ratings such as “acceptable.” iQ’s crash testing was a score of five stars.

Now, which would you pick?

_______________________

Nano: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tata_Nano

Smart Car: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_ED

iQ: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_iQ