Jump to content

Ever choked on your prejudice?


KenjiOgiwara

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, KenjiOgiwara said:

I am willing to debate that, because I think advertising is very effective on some people, on others it's pointless. I don't think I've ever bought something based upon adverts. Possibly a cold glass coke in the 90's. Adverts just puzzle me. 

Sorry for going off topic, but I've discussed this with friends before and it's definately person dependant. 

That's very different from suggesting that someone would have to be a bit of a moron to allow advertising to influence them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

And when you read the same kind  of material day in, day out for years on end, you begin to lose sight of the other side

A good example would be the hysteria about "the deficit" which we had for several years.  It completely dominated political discussion in the media.  And yet it's a concept which has been invested with a degree of importance which it simply doesn't deserve.

It's partly the common line taken by the media, partly the constant, unremitting repetition, partly the lack of other perspectives (the much lauded "state both sides of the case" has never applied in BBC coverage of this old wives tale). 

If you ask people in the street if they think "the deficit" is a problem, probably most would say yes.  They mostly can't tell you what the deficit is, why it may be a problem, any countervailing views,  and so on.  It is a perception created and maintained by spin doctors and the media,  and a good example of how views and voting intentions are created based on nothing more substantial than candy floss.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, peterms said:

A good example would be the hysteria about "the deficit" which we had for several years.  It completely dominated political discussion in the media.  And yet it's a concept which has been invested with a degree of importance which it simply doesn't deserve.

It's partly the common line taken by the media, partly the constant, unremitting repetition, partly the lack of other perspectives (the much lauded "state both sides of the case" has never applied in BBC coverage of this old wives tale). 

If you ask people in the street if they think "the deficit" is a problem, probably most would say yes.  They mostly can't tell you what the deficit is, why it may be a problem, any countervailing views,  and so on.  It is a perception created and maintained by spin doctors and the media,  and a good example of how views and voting intentions are created based on nothing more substantial than candy floss.

One thing I've never quite got is when I get my tax breakdown thing through the post, who the interest on the national debt gets paid to.  It's something like the fourth biggest expense in it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, sharkyvilla said:

One thing I've never quite got is when I get my tax breakdown thing through the post, who the interest on the national debt gets paid to.  It's something like the fourth biggest expense in it.

Those who hold government bonds.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, sharkyvilla said:

One thing I've never quite got is when I get my tax breakdown thing through the post, who the interest on the national debt gets paid to.  It's something like the fourth biggest expense in it.

As Snowy says, it goes to people/organisations that hold bonds.  Often pension funds, which need a secure investment with a known return.

NB interest rates can be negative, ie sometimes people pay to hold bonds.  Which generates a notional "profit" for government.  But the profit is not real any more than the "loss" is real.  It doesn't empower us to do things we couldn't otherwise do.  It's bookkeeping entries.

If we don't want our government to pay interest on bonds,  we could buy them up, retire them, and strike out the interest payments from the national accounts.  Might meet with some resistance from pension funds and others, who quite like the government giving them a stable source of income on a rock solid asset.

Thing is, these interest payments are a choice by government, and don't stop us doing other things.  We could pay them, or not pay them, and still do what we want government to do.  It's a fairy story that these payments preclude other choices.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We are all influenced (to varying degrees) by everything in our environment, whether you consciously realise it or not (including newspapers, advertising etc). 

Anyway, to contribute to the original question. My musical tastes have changed, I used to only listen to hard rock/metal or indi music and looked on with distain at other genres. Now I favour house music and even some hip hop. My teenage self would be very disappointed with me :P

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

- women's sports being a thing

- slight misogyny when it came to jobs, but I've since had women managers and worked alongside women and think they make much better employees than men :lol:

- I guess slight racist beliefs.. I swear nothing bad, I went to a high school with lots of Asian people and never thought anything of it and had a few friends, but just those kind of opinions which say they exclusively worked in corner shops. I went to a primary school with 1 Asian girl who was cool, but her parents did work in a corner shop which probably didn't help.

- there are loads I guess but mine were mostly ignorance and lack of knowing and following what people around me said.  Learned behaviours, I'm slowly unpicking them as life trundles on.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rugeley Villa said:

I hI hate the fact that there are women pundits on the football now. 

 

I hate pretty much all pundits, tbh. Most of them are morons who have got a cushy job with their mates 'cause they used to play. How a complete imbecile like Paul Merson can be employed to give his thoughts and  observations about anything is beyond me. 

I just go and do something else at half time if I'm watching a game on TV. Ideally it'd be possible to mute the commentary but still listen to the crowd. 

I've got a lot more respect for commentators and journalists who've earned the  right to be on the show for being good at that task, rather than for being good at the sport, though, regardless of their gender. I'd much rather listen to those people than an idiot that used to have a decent right foot.

Edited by Davkaus
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, KenjiOgiwara said:

I am willing to debate that, because I think advertising is very effective on some people, on others it's pointless. I don't think I've ever bought something based upon adverts. Possibly a cold glass coke in the 90's. Adverts just puzzle me. 

Sorry for going off topic, but I've discussed this with friends before and it's definately person dependant. 

The best adverts are the ones you do not realise have had an influence on you. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps in the reverse to the theme of the thread, I used to be fairly liberal when it came to crime and punishment and thought rehabilitation was more important than just locking people up. This was until we were victims of crime, and now I think prisoners should be worked hard til they drop, then have their hands chopped off the morning they are released.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

The best adverts are the ones you do not realise have had an influence on you. 

No doubt. But I rarely buy anything at all. I also think you got to separate between buying products you needed and those you bought spesifically because of commercials. I've bought a gym short cause of a commercial cause I needed a new gym shirt and the commercial offered a product with the properties and price tag I was looking for. I think that's different than people buying crap they don't need due to commercials. 

I think you got two groups of people 1) those who care a lot about other people's opinion. 2) those who don't give a ****. 

I am probably in the latter group. And more often than not I suspect women in general and people weak for advertising are in group 1. 

Then again if 75% of the population are weak to adverts, then no wonder companies spend money on it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, KenjiOgiwara said:

No doubt. But I rarely buy anything at all. I also think you got to separate between buying products you needed and those you bought spesifically because of commercials. I've bought a gym short cause of a commercial cause I needed a new gym shirt and the commercial offered a product with the properties and price tag I was looking for. I think that's different than people buying crap they don't need due to commercials. 

I think you got two groups of people 1) those who care a lot about other people's opinion. 2) those who don't give a ****. 

I am probably in the latter group. And more often than not I suspect women in general and people weak for advertising are in group 1. 

Then again if 75% of the population are weak to adverts, then no wonder companies spend money on it. 

Going off topic but I read the manufacturers of Fabreeze spent millions on marketing it as a product to get rid of bad smells and it flopped horribly. They couldn’t understand why this was until they finally realised smelly people don’t know they smell so wont buy it! 

So they then marketed it as a product that made things smell fresh and the rest is history.

I found that fascinating and our chat reminded me of it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â