Thursday, December 29, 2011
Saturday, December 24, 2011
Sunday, December 18, 2011
The Dutch airline KLM is rolling out its newest seat selection program. USA Today reports passengers will be able to link their Facebook and LinkedIn profiles to their check-in information and then “pick seatmates based on similar interests.”
Right. The Maven knows the number one interest involved in that contrivance. No thanks!
The USA Today report serves as a reminder that the current system isn’t perfect, (as will be discussed) but being a frequent traveler, The Mave’ll take randomization over sitting-targetization any day.
Like most frequent flyers The Maven has a predictable routine. Southwest is The Mave’s preference with their uniform fleet of 737’s, open seating and an easy change of flight policy. Customary for The Mave is the right side of the plane, aisle seat in row 7, 8 or 9 with carry-on baggage only.
On a recent flight departing Indiana The Maven was delighted to hear the pre-board announcement stating it wouldn’t be a full flight. Happily nestled in Her row 8 aisle seat, with the last group boarding, The Mave was confident of enjoying the empty row. Moments later that confidence dissolved when He emerged through the cabin door. With LOADS of open seating options still available The Mave saw him glance in Her direction. Averting eye contact, The Mave busied Herself with her reading material. A comparison to Peter Griffin from Family Guy would be a charitable one…Griffin has a full head of hair with shirt buttons that don’t strain beyond their load limit. Dotted with perspiration from schlepping all manner of carry-on accoutrements, He asks The Mave if anyone is sitting in the window seat. (Ugh) After much ado with stowing his vintage 1970’s American Tourister in the overhead bin, The Mave stands to allow his largess wide berth for passage. Clearly displeased with his present arrangement there’s considerable shimmying and shifting in his seat whilst futzing with and attempting to fasten his seatbelt. After liberal harumpfing, obvious grunts of dissatisfaction and several furtive glances in The Mave’s direction, Peter decides the open seat IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT to The Maven would be more suitable.
With the window seat now vacant, it certainly creates the impression that Peter and The Maven are on this flight TOGETHER. Mortified, perturbed and severely lacking in personal real estate, The Maven lists into the aisle for next hour and a half. The passage of time is punctuated by frequent badgering of the flight attendant for more ice to go with his complimentary beverage and a magnanimous offer to avail himself of more snacks when The Maven states She’ll forego the peanuts… (“Oh, If She doesn’t want them I’ll take them”)
Yes. Open seating has its hazards. But it seems to The Maven that it’s actually more random than allowing an unknown to select his or her seat BEFORE the plane boards based on a Facebook profile.
So KLM? The Maven says you can keep your “meet and seat” system.
Thursday, December 8, 2011
A University of Toronto newspaper (The Varsity) ran an article taking issue with a local dental office. The complaints, as The Maven sees it, are twofold: 1.The office is using the University Logo in their advertising without permission and 2: that their advertising display choices have nothing to do with dentistry.
Copyright infringement is a serious offence. The University issued a cease and desist, which, it seems the dental office promptly heeded. The advertisement pictures, however, are a completely different matter. The Varsity claims, the ads “display faces of young, attractive women, some showing generous amounts of cleavage and not all of them showing their teeth.”
Where is it written that advertising has to have anything to do with the product?? And what makes dental advertising different from other advertising? Seems to The Mave, this has more to do with a bunch of co-eds who are, for some absurd reason, offended by pictures of attractive women.
From The Varsity article: “I feel like they’re exposing females for the wrong reasons,” said U of T student Britnee Lam. “They’re using these images for their sex appeal to lure people in so they pay attention to them. These images are hardly appropriate for what they’re trying to advertise.”
Uh…okay Britnee, guess you’re the self appointed moral authority on advertising content. Can you give examples of when, in your opinion, females are “exposed” for the right “reasons?” And kudos for recognizing why those images might be used. When a business pays cash-money for advertising it’s expected the target audience will pay attention and hopefully take action as a result…in fact that’s called “ROI” or, Return on Investment. (Brit, The Mave sure hopes you’re not a communications major…) And The Maven can’t help but wonder: Would ol’ Britsky’s boy-shorts be in a bunch if the ad included buff boys with tanned six-pack abs?
Sex and erotic imagery has been used in advertising since, well, the beginning of advertising. It’s used because it works and The Maven applauds the Canadian Dentist for his atypical approach. Heaven knows the dental industry has struggled to get patients to make oral hygiene a priority…and the traditional plea to “see your dentist twice a year” has done ZERO to hammer that message home. If sex appeal works, then, why not?
Here’s a few examples and a reminder that advertising need not have anything to do with the product: