TaN: It has dawned on me that many people, today, say things that either only pay lip service or do not comprehend the exact extend of the meaning of what they are saying or the words they use. Take the case of saying: So-and-so is my idol or my hero or my whatever. Until and unless you try to live and do the things your idol or hero lives and does, you have no right to claim such.
It is easy to say that (as in the words of a local popular celebrity) Mother-now-Saint Teresa is her idol. But when you look at the life(style) she lives; it is nowhere near how her idol lives. Now how hypocritical is it for that certain personality unless said personality qualifies his/her idolatry by specifying which aspect of his/her idol’s character s/he is idolizing. But then this would or may reveal, at least in part, what kind of a personal said personality is — i.e., if s/he chooses something trivial (like the idol’s fashion taste or food preferences) or noteworthy (like the work or advocacy or lifestyle).
Every now and then, people blurt out that so-and-so is their idol — or hero, these terms are commonly interchangeable. I wonder what aspect of the idol’s life or character are they referring to. In addition, there are often instances where their so-called idol or hero is due to his/her popularity — i.e., many people commonly instinctively chose personalities that are popular or has high media exposure. How shallow — and insulting to the idol/hero, if s/he is still living.
TaN: One of the fundamental tenets in marketing is repetition promotes memory retention and recall. This is essential if the business is to continue operating — but will be off the market for a considerable period but will be making a come back.
However, there are two opposing resulting effects: positive and negative. In the past, repetitive advertising ensures that the consuming public remembers the product (service). This is essential especially during times when the product/service will be out of the public’s attention for a while. This ensures that when the product/service makes a come back — usually because there will be a new formulation, a price hike, a repackaging (to spur or boost flagging sales, or some other reasons) — consumers will readily purchase the product/service as if it has never been off the market.
On the down side, repetitive advertising (or “too aggressive” marketing) can be irritating or annoying, especially when people know the product/service is not in the market or when it is too aggressively pushed/marketed or if the recipient or target of the advertisement is not weak-minded and knows exactly what products or services s/he wants — like when it appears in broadcast media’s (i.e., television and radio) advertising slots at every few seconds apart. It is really, really, really, reeeeeeeally annoying and makes me vow not to patronize or to boycott the product/service — after all, I doubt if the product/service is that essential that I cannot do without it.
Another thing is that the general public appears to have become too “desensitized” by the constant bombardment of commercial advertisements and marketing campaigns that they have turned into mindless zombies — blindly repeatedly patronizing products and services that have absolutely no redeeming value whatsoever. The reiterative exposure to constant advertising has robbed and “programmed” the weak-minded among consumers to perceive worthless products and services as essentials. This, plus the psychological fact that it is human behavior to crave for belonging and to feel part of a group and this is precisely what businesses prey on, but I digress.
Finally, it is probably a good thing — at least not from my point of view — that most of the global population are not like me in terms of spending hard-earned money. I do not just mindlessly spend my money but make purchases only because it (truly and substantially) improves my quality of life and not just make somebody else (who is not after my but ONLY his/her own interest) richer. If just a few consumers are like me (when it comes to spending money), global commerce would go belly up in an instant because I am not easily swayed by any form of advertising or marketing scheme. I actually have very few wants and my needs take precedence before I indulge in my wants. And I will not hesitate to let go of my wants if it comes to a toss up between needs and wants.
TaN: To save the elderly and especially the disabled or those confined (to hospitals, rehabilitation centers, old age homes, and other similar institutions) the trouble of having to make an annual appearance or even to obtain a barangay certification of their living status, it would be better if it will be government policy or a law requiring all agencies that deal or are involved with producing (like a morgue) or receiving (like memorial parks and cemeteries) a death certificate to furnish agencies such as banks and the SSS copies of the death certificate.
Or, better still, such agencies be mandated to maintain a web accessible database of all who were officially pronounced dead so agencies like the SSS do not have to bother requiring personal appearances, especially for persons severely troubled or disabled physically to make the appearance. [This way, it saves the trouble of finding the appropriate recipient of the death certificate, such as banks.]
Or even better still, there could be someone — equipped with a database of the elderly pensioners within their area of responsibility for instant verification — who can be assigned to go around on the birthdays of the pensioners to determine whether they are still “eligible”. This may be an additional financial burden for the government but it is all for providing better and humane services to the nation’s elderly.
TaN: Today’s (Oct 4) news title on the front page of The Philippine STAR, “Brussels may cancel royal visit“, made me realize that, because Mr Duterte cannot seem to be able to control his mouth, he is alienating many world leaders and foreign investors. Without reading the article and from the title alone, it would imply to me that the possibility of canceling the royal visit may be to avoid the royalty from being insulted by Mr Duterte. And if we extend this further, many other world leaders — unless they “really need” to visit, usually because they can get something from the Philippines like exploiting the natural resources or something — may take the cue and follow suit. They may start avoiding the Philippines altogether, waiting for when the motor-mouth will be gone.
For one thing, it may be both a boom and a bane. A bane because the Philippines, through the “efforts” of Mr Duterte, is shrinking its world market as (possibly) more and more human rights-conscious nations may tend to shy away from trading with it — and only those whose economic concerns are more important than humanitarian ones will be more than willing with open and expand their markets to or in the Philippines.
But it could be (in a way) a boom because the Philippines will now what are the “true” intentions of those who may want to invest and deal with the Philippines. Most of them will just be in for the money — the hell with human rights. There are too many people in the world already so why not participate in the depopulation efforts — like the eugenics (supposedly) pursued by William Gates II and now continued by the son — by globalists to trim down world population, especially those who are non- or under-productive…those they cannot enrich themselves further with.