Small screens on shopping trolleys will exploit your psychological state at the supermarket, while collecting data about your shopping behaviour
New technology to be attached to supermarket trolleys will play on the human mind’s openness to suggestion when undertaking a low-involvement activity such as grocery shopping. And if marketers respond to new research published in the Journal of Consumer Behaviour, it won’t be long before small screen advertising is attached to your small shopping basket. But there is much more to this little activity than giving you helpful information about specials and offers.
Of course, I'd heard a lot about her. It was quite difficult not to know about her. She was beautiful, she was exotic, she was fun, and open and tolerant. I mean it was hard not to miss her. I could see that she was quite sporty, pretty successful, and someone that I would definitely like to get to know.
And, she was young. But not young in a silly, immature kind of way. She was young in a good way – fresh, fun, a little bit risky.
But starting to mature. And the thing about her was that I had heard that she was quite complex… and I guess that was something that was really appealing about her. Fun, edgy, exciting.
But on the other hand there was a complexity about her… brooding, mysterious, creative, even spiritual. She was more than a single idea, she was the perfect package.
News that Christian Churches in Australia are about to start an advertising blitz to persuade people to bring Jesus into their lives, once again shows how naïve and uninformed businesses, government, and people are generally when they believe that advertising has some magical power to persuade people to behave the way they want them to. It seems that thousands of churches across 15 Christian denominations in NSW are behind a project that aims to promote the message that the teachings of Jesus are still relevant. The campaign, based around the slogan, “Jesus. All About Life” begins in three weeks.
Today marks the first day the long-awaited criminal cartel laws enter force in Australia. The news laws create new civil and criminal offences for engaging in cartel conduct. Cartel participants now risk up to 10 years jail for making or giving effect to cartel provisions, defined (in s 44ZZRD(2)!) to include price-fixing (this replaces s 45A which has been repealed), bid-rigging, restricting outputs and market division between competitors. Despite the flaws in the drafting of the laws, it is appropriate to treat cartels as criminal and the law should be welcomed.
The Trade Practices Act (TPA) is too big and too complicated. The Government has introduced phase I of their two-phase plan to implement a new Australian Consumer Law which will bulk up the Act even further (the Bill alone runs to 84 pages). The adds to the additional 90 pages of statutory text generated by the recent passage of the criminal cartel act. It cannot go on ... the annotated acts are bursting at their seems.
Lots, but there are some very scary similarities.
Okay, I’m not really qualified to write about flu epidemics, but the increased incidence of swine flu reports, made me return to an article that I read a little while ago.
The Trade Practices (Australian Consumer Law) Bill 2009 was introduced into Parliament last month and contains the new unfair terms laws which, if passed, will enter into force on 1 January 2009. They are, however, considerably watered down from the original proposed unfair terms laws and the Government has provided insufficient explanation for this change.
Australia will soon join the US, the UK and a number of other countries in criminalising cartel behaviour. The criminalisation of cartels is desirable. The economic damage they cause is well documented and civil penalties, no matter the size, have failed to provide adequate deterrence. But the consequences of criminalisation are serious and it is important to ‘get it right’. While it took many years for Australia to introduce criminal cartel legislation, its passage through Parliament has been rushed with the consequence that the bill that has now passed is seriously flawed and likely to lead to considerable uncertainty. The sudden urgency (grounded more in politics than good policy) was highlighted by Senator Coonan's acknowledgement that, despite the potential for the bil
I'm chairing and presenting at this week's PR and New Media Summit in Brisbane, and it's got me thinking about the evolving nature of public relations.
When I started my BA (Public Relations) at Deakin in 1985, the role of the mass media was of paramount importance to PR practitioners. Mainframe computers were starting to be used for word processing, and telephone calls were made on rotary dial, fixed-line telephones (provided by Telecom).
On 6 May the government released a second discussion paper relating to the introduction of creeping acquisition laws in Australia. It is disappointing to say the least. A 'creeping acquistion' involves ‘the acquisition of a number of individual assets or businesses over time that may collectively raise competition concerns, but when considered in isolation, are unlikely to be captured by the existing mergers and acquisitions test under section 50 …’ (this is the definition adopted in Chris Bowen’s Press Release) and the ALP have, for many years