This weekend my roommates and I decided to get Netflix. Netflix is a service that allows you to stream movies instantly from home with out having to buy or rent it. I'm sure most people are aware of this however most people aren't aware of what it can do to your life. Since my roommates and I got Netflix we've done nothing but sit and abuse it all day long. Most of us had homework but found it impossible to get anything done with Netflix now in out lives. After a few days of this we decided that it wasn't the movies we were addicted to it was the fact that we could watch whatever whenever. The more I thought about it the more it made sense, how often do you pick one thing over another because of how fast or convientent it is? The faster cell phone, faster car, faster internet service which would you choose the faster and more convenient or the slower more time consuming one? Don't get me wrong not all things are supposed to be fast but in some industries its important, and this trend of being able to deliver instantly is taking over. Netflix almost put Blockbuster out of business because people preferred to have the movie now and not have to go and pick it up. More and more banks are offering online bankins which gives users more options and abilities then they did before. This new trend is becoming a must for some businesses we as american consumers are no longer happy with services that can't keep up with our busy lifestyles. The internet has changed the world allowing us to pack more into less time and making it easier to do so. As technology changes and becomes more advanced we want or businesses to advance too. Are you happy with this change in business or do you prefer to go out and do your shopping, banking, or socializing?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree that the convenience of the internet has begun to make its way into areas of our lives that we never thought would be affected. With Netflix, not only is the service fast and convenient, but the selection and price is hard to beat. If you pay $8 a month you have access to thousands of movies that are ready to stream instantly. With a $2 upgrade, you then can have DVD’s delivered straight to your house. This convenience has consumers happy but has put the entertainment industry in a state of panic. How do production companies make money off of a subscription service that many people could steal off of their friends? Also, what does the future market look like? The film going experience has become less glamourous and more of a technical achievement with IMAX and 3D. How are film studios going to keep selling tickets when all I have to do is sit at my computer and watch a movie instantly? Unfortunately this instant gratification is only going to get worse, and we won’t go backwards technologically. Does this mean that instead of movie theaters, studios will just stream their movies online? Does this take away from the experience and “magic” of movies? We will have to see.
Thursday, March 3, 2011
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
Week 7: Guilty until Proven Innocent
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/02/fashion/02dior.html?_r=1&ref=global
The topic of this blog relates to the above article but it also relates to many situations involving businesses and public perception. I want to talk less about the specifics of the fashion industry and focus more on the focus that companies put on their public appearance and how they navigate difficult situation when they arise.
According to this article, one of the head designers for the high-end fashion label, Dior, has been fired. His termination came after a video surfaced of the designer at a bar saying, “I love Hitler.”
I think this situation has become more prevalent in today’s society because of the ability for news and gossip to spread so fast over the internet. Obviously the head designer made a mistake. He should have understood that as a public figure every thing he does is being monitored. This is even more important now that every cell phone has a video camera and so many people are learning how to spread “news” on the internet. The internet is both powerful for marketing purposes as well as dangerous when the information is harmful to a company or person. How do you think companies should handle public relation situations like this?
Another question is, should Dior have reacted as they did? They suspended the designer immediately, and eventually terminated him after more evidence began to surface. Is firing the designer the right thing to do? What do they think this will do to their image? Does removing the designer hurt or help their image more?
I think that in today’s big business public perception has become very important. When a situation like this arises in today’s marketplace I feel like the first step is to suspend the person that is being investigated and then the second step, is usually termination. In the US the defendant is innocent until proven guilty, but many times when the situation is in the public eye, even if the defendant is innocent, he is treated as if he is guilty.
The topic of this blog relates to the above article but it also relates to many situations involving businesses and public perception. I want to talk less about the specifics of the fashion industry and focus more on the focus that companies put on their public appearance and how they navigate difficult situation when they arise.
According to this article, one of the head designers for the high-end fashion label, Dior, has been fired. His termination came after a video surfaced of the designer at a bar saying, “I love Hitler.”
I think this situation has become more prevalent in today’s society because of the ability for news and gossip to spread so fast over the internet. Obviously the head designer made a mistake. He should have understood that as a public figure every thing he does is being monitored. This is even more important now that every cell phone has a video camera and so many people are learning how to spread “news” on the internet. The internet is both powerful for marketing purposes as well as dangerous when the information is harmful to a company or person. How do you think companies should handle public relation situations like this?
Another question is, should Dior have reacted as they did? They suspended the designer immediately, and eventually terminated him after more evidence began to surface. Is firing the designer the right thing to do? What do they think this will do to their image? Does removing the designer hurt or help their image more?
I think that in today’s big business public perception has become very important. When a situation like this arises in today’s marketplace I feel like the first step is to suspend the person that is being investigated and then the second step, is usually termination. In the US the defendant is innocent until proven guilty, but many times when the situation is in the public eye, even if the defendant is innocent, he is treated as if he is guilty.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)