We're in danger of going way off topic. But look, this removal of borders and restrictions is new. That hasn't been going on since the Vikings.
Printable View
We're in danger of going way off topic. But look, this removal of borders and restrictions is new. That hasn't been going on since the Vikings.
Nargh, the Romans trampled right on through it and put a new one up at Hadrian's wall. I agree, someone needs to get this onto a track.
Clearly the demand is stimulated, but that is not a bad thing. The important thing is that there is a flow of money and goods, without out this an economy flounders. If there is no market, companies are completely within their rights, and abilities to create one. You can influence people all you want, in the end it is their choice whether or not to utilise your services.
Clearly there is a moral bankruptcy among MNCs these days, but they do not need morals, morals do not make money. They are fulfilling their goals using the tools at their disposal, evil? Some call it survival ( in the competetive world of buisiness.) Companies cannot consider how their intrusions will afffect a society or culture, because they need to intrude, in order to pump the market and make money, before others do.
Yes, it may be a tad more complicated than I project, but not by much. I'm a little simplistic for two reasons: (a) this is a short post, I'm not about to elaborate and (b) I don't have a degree in Business. You know, there are people with Masters and PhD degrees and who write text books and teach courses and work in the business world with real businesses and write business plans and start real businesses. I don't have any of that expertise. I take it that everyone here talking about the complexities of business world has some of it. Or are they just talking out of their blank.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Unnamable
The life of businesses is knowing what the customer wants. There are market surveys, interviews, trial experiments with customers. A company needs to know what the customer wants, because the customer decides what he will buy. Businesses will prioritize customers desires. Let me just speculate for MacD. The customer wants to be filled (heavy foods), eat tasty (fat enriched) foods, quick, and cheap. MacD is going to strive to find the right balance in all that. The company that finds the best balance is going to be the most succesful. Yes, it is slightly more complicated than that, but that is the core and the complications are tangentials. If you don't get the core right, you can forget about everythng else. Look these fast food places have tried certain things around here the last few years. I remember Burger kKng (I think it was) tried serving customers at their table as if it were a restaurant. It didn't work. People didn't care, and despite the advertising it went no where. Recently they all have tried to get on the health food band wagon, and I think almost all of them put out a line of healthy foods. It went no where. Hardly anyone goes to these places for healthy foods. That's not what the customer wants. Advertisement doesn't change that. People have free wills.
Where I work, we don't make products for the general public, but we do know very distinctly who our customers are. We all distinctly know who our number one customer is and who our number two customer is. We try to bend over backwards for them. And it also works in reverse. We have vendors who supply us materials. Here's a real example. We have a need for a specialized nylon that is not commercially available. We've had this nylon company supply us this particular nylon for years. The had to make a special batch. A couple of years ago they decided to modernize their equipment, which wound up altering the properties of the nylon we needed. They couldn't get the properties we wanted no matter how they tweaked and tried. Well, we went to another company who still used the old type of equipment and taught them how make the product we need. Now we don't go to that first company anymore, and they've lost a good deal of business.
The point of all this is that the customer chooses what he wants. If people go to MacD it's because they want to go.
How is that a contradiction? I'm questioning why advertising doesn't control your mind but yet it seems to control all the sheep that frequent MacD. The contradiction is on your part, not mine.Quote:
there seems to be a contradiction in your argument here – are you Superman and everyone else sheep
There are something like 6 billion people in the world. That's like 33 cents per person per year. That doesn't sound so outrageous to me.Quote:
McDonald’s alone spends over two billion dollars a year on advertising
Could you please explain why morals do not enter into economics?Quote:
Originally Posted by Union Jack
Could you please explain why morals should not enter into economics?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Union Jack
Quote:
but they do not need morals, morals do not make money.
Quote:
They are fulfilling their goals using the tools at their disposal, evil
Quote:
Some call it survival ( in the competetive world of business.)
These statements are not only one-sided, they are also extremely unsupported, inaccurate, and wrong. If you stand firm on the no-research-no-evidence position, can you at least provide some kind of explanation or argument to support these things you said? Thanks.Quote:
Companies cannot consider how their intrusions will affect a society or culture, because they need to intrude, in order to pump the market and make money, before others do.
Congratulations, Virgil; I think you have managed to find the weakest argument in history.Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
As I said in a previous post, these statements do not reflect my views, it' simply the way many MNCs tend to look at their affairs. I am not presenting my view, simply trying to represent their aurgument in hopes of a counterpoint to it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Regit
Can you counter the point?
I wanted to repost this to straighten the theme. I feel there is an error in the question, 'Do you think this cultural homogenization is likely?'. As far as I see it, its always been going on, is as deterministic as life itself. If people are presenting it as a new notion, then okay, and I want to create a new verb (not so new really); "yogurting", "to yogurt". We are doing it right here, so its natural.Quote:
Originally Posted by Union Jack
I agree that complaints are on the whole nationalistic, even individual (selfish (in the natural sense)) and that its a 'boon', though the word 'boon' does not impress on me the cost that detractors actually have to pay, including there, the oft times insensitive, selfish side to marketing. But then, humanity paid a price every step of the way anyway, didn't it. We isolate MacD, which is simply a trader, doing what any business does, however on a much larger scale. The essentials are exactly the same at your corner store, or the street person selling his fake Rolex watches in every country on this globe. We would not have quality of television if 'economies of scale' left the invention of television in the backyard of that inventor, or the invention of the lightbulb, or medicines, and so on. Economics is 'underneath' the homogenization of the Arts; something fundamental. An artist cannot paint without paint.
Back to my Vikings (apologies in advance for all the quick examples, there are sooooo many), Brits complained when they snook off all the beautiful women to Iceland (I think), French farmers complain when its their chicken coop being reduced or their language being relegated, Americans did complain when the Beatles first landed their strange music, and the Russians did not complain when MacD created jobs in Moscow, and Nigeria did not complain when it received medicines.
Of course, ideologies will try to put walls around theirs, but they cannot support those walls unless they can also support themselves within those confines. Bottom line is, people on this planet need each other, so homogenization is not only 'likely', has always been present, and is inevitable.
I can only offer what I see is common blank. I put forward that resistance is futile, could go on about creating an homogenized World Yogurt, but I am really not sure I want to join the Borg, just yet. :banana:
This is not your view, but it's their view? How do you know their arguments? How do you know that what you said is the way many multinational corporations look at their affairs? Do you work for them? Do you own one? What?Quote:
Originally Posted by Union Jack
I can't counter something that does not make any economic sense or any common sense to me.
If I understand this correctly (or even at all), then you seem to value the authority of academic credentials. How about this from media analyst Dr. Jean Kilbourne:Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
"The average American is exposed to at least 3,000 ads every day and will spend three years of his or her life watching television commercials… Advertising makes up about 70 per cent of our newspapers and 40 per cent of our mail."
"Almost everyone holds the misguided belief that advertisements don't affect them, don't shape their attitudes, don't help define their dreams. What I hear more than anything else as I lecture throughout the country is 'I don't pay attention to ads...l just tune them out...they have no effect on me.' Of course, I hear this most often from young men wearing Budweiser caps. In truth, we are all influenced by advertising. There is no way to tune out this much information, especially when it is carefully designed to break through the 'tuning out' process.”
"The fact is that much of advertising's power come from this belief that advertising does not affect us. The most effective kind of propaganda is that which is not recognised as propaganda. Because we think that advertising is silly and trivial, we are less on guard, less critical than we might otherwise be. It's all in fun, it's ridiculous. While we are laughing, sometimes sneering, the commercial does its work."
It's a wonderful thing, Economies of Scale. If you are willing to spend money on marketing on each and every person in the whole wide world, you must be entitled to a little discount :). Though that doesn't mean that it isn't an enormous amount of money and an ambitous investment.Quote:
There are something like 6 billion people in the world. That's like 33 cents per person per year. That doesn't sound so outrageous to me.
HaHa, actually I did intern at Dell ( the computer company) for several years, and as such was privy to much boardroom discussion on this very topic. My boss, Charles, have a favourite saying, when asked "But sir, can we do that, is it right?" he would respond with "Right, right my ***, nice doesn't make money!"Quote:
Originally Posted by Regit
And yes, lets try to get back on topic, Jackyyyy brought up a good point, that cultural homogenisation has been going on for a while, what could some of the potential outcomes be, when(if) we reach such a point that cultues become intermixed to a degree that separation requires historical analysis and tracing?
An example, most people are aware that St. Patrick's Day is traditionally an Irish celebration. However, other cultures ( notably America) also celebrate this day. Is it possible that in the future, everyone could celebrate other cultures/ countries occasions, and not relate the celebration to the original cultural signifigance, ie: it's no longer Irish, it's a world holiday?
Back on topic? I don't think I strayed off topic for a second; the large bodies of politics and commerce are most responsible for the speed of globalisation, and understanding how they operate is essential to answering your original question.Quote:
Originally Posted by Union Jack
You make me laugh; you really think that I would let your thoughtless statements go because you had an internship at Dell and, apparently, remember a quote from your boss. You surprised me (in a good way) and got my hopes up when you said that you worked for Dell; but then you disappointed me again because it seems that this hasn't really help your answers to make anymore sense. Tell me, apart from the extensive argument brought forth by your ex-boss, do you have any actual explanations, perhaps drawn from your experience at Dell, for why you stated that "morals do not enter into economics" and that morals "should not" enter into economics? And I would also love to hear any expansion on the "evil" of MNCs. Thank you.
:lol: If we mixed-in all the mandatory holidays from every country, we would never work again, eh, cool! Homogenization must include harmonization; melding of people, economies, ideas, and so on, so we are not replacing or taking anything away (unlike the Vikings), but putting them together somehow. However, something has to change because we cannot have **8000 bank holidays in one year, and this is actually choking governments for decisions, rules and guidelines, and causing certain politicians to seek advice from lady friends. As for historical tracing, not sure it will be relevant, rather nostalgic. Successive generations may look back fondly, and thats about it. Language, education, money and table manners aside, the disparities on this globe must be addressed, and if yogurting is to be a good mix for everyone.Quote:
Originally Posted by Union Jack
** This number was totally invented by myself, please do not book holidays because of it.