In Response to Diana Schaller (Week 3)

I guess my big question is what would you do if you were being pressured to remove your commercial from the air during a show? Is it worthwhile to submit to the pressure of parental groups? Why is it so necessary to respond to them and do they really have enough power to hurt your business?

-----------------

It is interesting that you mention Skins. Originally it was a teen drama in the U.K. The content in the British version has more sex, drugs, etc. However, the British advertisers and audiences did not have the reaction to the show that American advertisers and audiences have had. The British version of Skins was on TV for at least 4 seasons, if not more.

As an advertiser, submitting to pressures from parental groups is only in the best interest of the company. although the Tiger Woods example is different in many ways, it is similar to how the companies endorsing Tiger Woods reacted. As soon as Tiger made a mistake his sponsors immediately tried to "save face."

Businesses, especially ones who market to children and teens (like Skins sponsors,) want their product or service to be associated with a positive image. So when parents are angered, it is the parents that have the money. I guess I can understand the quick reaction by sponsors, however I have always been partial to the idea that, "Any Press is Good Press." Skins has recieved more notice from being provocative than it would have as a sub-par MTV drama.

Week 3: Publishing Books as Self-Promotion

I think, historically, that having a piece of writing (whether a book or a journal) published immediately adds credit to the author. The idea is that the publishing companies take great care in reviewing each book before it is published. This makes books seem credible by nature. 

Whether this is true is up to interpretation, however I think that being published is a smart way to promote yourself as an expert on a particular subject. The WSJ article mentions a dentist who says, "If you write a book, you are an expert...Who would you rather go to? Someone who has written a book, or someone who hasn't?" I think this question is an important one. The credibility gained after being published is definitely a defining characteristics when looking for an expert. If it was a choice between two identical candidates, where one person was a published author and the other was not, I believe the author would be the most popular choice.

I think the use of digital publishing is also a great way to add a second form of income from the expertise that a person has gained. The article calls this “invisible income.” I really like the idea of an entrepreneur utilizing as many options as possible to create the most profit. By releasing a book, with little overhead cost like digital books, the author is able earn the most profits. I support this earning strategy. Does anyone think that writing books to gain credibility is wrong?