Target Marketing

Remember back thirty or so years ago when being chosen to participate in a TV survey was an honor?  You were a Nielsen family and your TV preferences counted. Your voice mattered.

With cable and satellite, the idea of being a survey family has fallen out of favor.  I am not even sure my kids know what a Nielsen family is, but if they did, they would probably think it was redundant.  Don’t the cable/satellite companies track everything we watch as it is?

In the past, my husband was a huge fan of radio surveys, at least until he started using an IPod.  I am unclear whether ITunes collects data, especially as we seldom log in, but I am sure Pandora is collecting information from my husband.

It seems the novelty of being part of a survey has worn off as technology now makes so much more available to companies seeking information about consumers.  I remember, in years past, getting phone calls asking me what kind of laundry detergent I preferred, or what kind of shampoo I used.  Sometimes those calls were a nice respite from motherhood; sometimes they were simply odd since I wasn’t much of a brand name shopper.  Either way, I never felt my privacy was being infringed in any way.  I still don’t feel my preference of soap is intrusive information.

Just recently, while planning for a trip, I searched online for “support” socks.  It is amazing how quickly and abundantly ads for support socks showed up on Facebook and Amazon since my search and purchase.  These adds do not bother me, it is needing the support socks when traveling which bothers me.

Media discussion about target marketing seems plentiful, and while I agree there are some negatives, from a personal standpoint I don’t find this type of marketing to be much of a problem.  It is actually less irritating than the huge piles of junk mail of the past.

Another advantage with target marketing is that unlike TV commercials, I don’t get hounded by ads which I find objectionable.  Out of curiosity the other day, I tried to delete an ad from my Facebook page. I was delighted when I could.  I am not sure it is always possible, but in this case I could not only delete the ad, but also give feedback as to why I wanted it removed.

Target marketing is nothing new; the method of information gathering is all that has changed.  As with any other change, learning how to maneuver in a less than private world takes some adjustment before a comfort level can be reached.  Some days I feel frustrated with all the disruption to my comfortable rut, but on other days, I reflect on how this constant change is keeping my brain active.  It is up to me to look at the negative or at the positive of the changing world.

Now I ponder – would it have been funny or mortifying if on the day I searched for “support” socks, I had also searched for a sexy negligee?  Since it was a family trip I was planning, the thought and the search never occurred.  Give me another decade…

Accountability

I have already written about the problem of entitlement and how society tends misplace the blame for this societal ill.  This is not the only area in which society is misplacing blame and avoiding individual accountability.

While reading an article today on the recession, and perusing the comments made in response, I once again was amazed at how accountability is sorely lacking in our society.  For the record, I believe that the role of the government is to safeguard the people, and understand that while regulations sometimes restrict economic progress, they can also aid in safeguarding the people.  With that being said, when I hear assertions that the recession is the fault of our most recent presidents, or Wall Street, I get a bit miffed.  Yes, Wall Street should be held accountable for their greedy actions and our government should have been more diligent in its oversight, but when are we the individuals going to accept the unpopular accountability for our own choices and actions?

When I read about how more young people need to live at home because they can’t afford their own place, or of the difficulties associated with buying or keeping a home, I wonder why we blame the government.  How is it that we can argue over government enforced healthcare, claim the government is interfering in our lives, yet at the same time cry foul that the government hasn’t helped us find a job or buy a home?

Don’t get me wrong, I feel for the people of our nation. This recession has hit us all in ways we did not foresee, but foreseen or not, we should have been better prepared.  Like any good Boy Scout will tell you, there is wisdom in the motto “Be Prepared”.  This can mean creating a plan if you live in a hurricane or flood zone, because the 100 year disaster may coincide with your lifespan.  It can mean having food storage or a generator if you live in an area that gets heavy snow.  It should definitely mean  becoming informed before you buy a home.   Owning a house is expensive and there are costs besides the mortgage you will pay.  Get informed before you buy, and if it will sap your budget, buy smaller or buy later.  A house can be a great blessing and investment, but don’t purchase the dream, invest in the reality.

Understandably it is hard to prepare for unemployment.  Often we live month-to-month barely getting by, and building a nest egg feels difficult to achieve.  However, young or old it is the responsibility of the able-bodied to be prepared and to be informed.  If this means having a back-up plan to sell your house and move in with relatives, or take on roommates, then be prepared to do so.

One report on housing states that we must go back to the 50’s to find so many multigenerational households.  I find this claim to be interesting.  Isn’t that the era in which our entitlement nature really sprouted?  New houses, new cars and new gadgets for the home; college educations a middleclass norm; and dreams of retirement at age 65 were the dreams of that generation.  Now the youth of the 50’s have grandkids and those grandkids are struggling to live up to, and pay for the dream.

Dreaming big is not a bad thing, but the recession was a reality check for everyone.  For dreams to become reality, hard work is required. This hard work does not follow an employer’s time-clock.  It does not retire.  It does not grow up and move out.  It does not get paid off.  The American Dream is bigger than a house, or a two car garage, or a retirement account.  It has more value than a vacation home, or a boat.  It is not measured by the size of your income or your bank account.

The American Dream for a secure tomorrow is not the responsibility of the President; it is the responsibility of the individual.  Our elected officials work for us, and if we are asking for all the wrong things, then that is what they will provide us.  The Preamble of the Constitution states:

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

It doesn’t promise a house, or a college education, or a car.  It promises justice, civil order and defense.  It promotes general welfare but does not promise it. Finally, it secures liberty.

The government of the United States does play a huge role in the nation’s prosperity, but the individual plays a greater role.  Citizenship is not like high school, where you get credit for showing up, doing the work and then going home.  Citizenship requires accountability for one’s own choices and actions.  Blaming others, especially the government, may seem easier, but in the long run, individual accountability will provide prosperity.

A Dilemma to Ponder

A recent media blitz has centered on whether men or women have been more adversely affected by the current U.S. recession. It is just the latest in a long line of discussions about unemployment and the slow economy. Democrats have pointed to the fact that the bad economy began during the Bush years.  Republicans have pointed to the fact that Obama hasn’t “fixed” the economy during his three years. It seems everyone has an opinion about rich people’s taxes, rising gas prices, and the ineffectiveness of government.  

With all of these opinions, is it strange that there is confusion on what the candidates believe? 

So when a candidate actually speaks about what they plan to do if they are elected, I like to take notice.

 “I’m going to take a lot of departments in Washington, and agencies, and combine them. Some eliminate, but I’m probably not going to lay out just exactly which ones are going to go,” Romney said. “Things like Housing and Urban Development, which my dad was head of, that might not be around later. But I’m not going to actually go through these one by one. What I can tell you is, we’ve got far too many bureaucrats. I will send a lot of what happens in Washington back to the states.” Mitt Romney 15Apr2012

It is important to remember that for every “bureaucrat” who works in D.C., there are dozens of regular support staff who are simply trying to earn a wage. It won’t be easy for them to find replacement jobs, even if jobs get sent “back to the states”.

While I agree that the federal government is too big and could use some serious pruning, I wonder if a recession is the right time to be talking about large scale downsizing.  

It does make for a dilemma…

Women Attacking Women: The Covert War on Women

A call to war, a battle cry, a rally of the forces!  Unless you have avoided the news media entirely over the past few weeks, you must have heard the phrase, “War on Women.”  Is there a war?  Most definitely, but as with most wars, those who call for war instead of diplomacy are as much to blame for the eventual collateral damage as those who drop the first proverbial bomb and ignite the fire.

As with every war, there are quieter, more dangerous forces working just under the radar.  These covert warriors often go undetected and therefore unstopped.  Even when their warfare is known to the public, they are often discounted as being of little consequence or threat.

As someone who grew up in a very paternalistic society, I recall being repeatedly instructed, “While men may look like they control the world, it is the women who you need to look out for; they have the real power.”

I left my conservative, male dominated society and studied at an all-female college.  At school, the lessons of my youth were reconfirmed.  Women had voices, they had strength, and they had power.  They could be viciously truthful, unbending in their beliefs and forceful in their causes.  Women, who would shelter you from a storm or come to your aid, could also tear you to shreds if they felt you were unjust, or worse, lacking a cause.  Vocal women are not rare at an all-female college, but direct attack will most often be parried with more direct attack.  When verbally attacked by men or women, women will defend themselves, not always to their credit, but often with results.  “She was like an angry mother bear,” is a metaphor which applies not just to women with their biological children, but also with their ideological children.

As with any war, covert operations exist in the War on Women.  It would not be covert, however, if the secret warrior didn’t blend in with the crowd.  Choosing a man to covertly attack women would be foolish. Just as foolish, would be to utilize the same attack tactics.  Direct, open attack would only strengthen a woman’s determination, not weaken it.  Women, regardless of what some might infer, are not stupid or weak.  By “some”, I do not mean “men”.  Sadly women have a terrible tendency of treating other women, who hold differing beliefs and lifestyles from their own, as being stupid or weak.

The news this week has provided two examples of this type of war on women.   The first tactic has left the covert battlefield behind and like the covert military actions of the Cold War, is now under public scrutiny.  Oddly, the revelation of a longstanding covert war between two groups of women in New York has come to light because President Obama chose to speak at Barnard College’s commencement rather than at Columbia University’s.  Barnard is the all-female sister school of the co-ed Columbia University.  While Columbia men have made some appalling statements in regards to the women of Barnard, the women of Columbia have been just as applauding in their commentary.  Hostilities between these neighbors are not new, the rhetoric and attacks did not begin recently. The only recent development is that these attacks have come to the attention of a larger public.

The second attack on women is much more subtle. It is acting on the perceived idea that women are shallow and easily manipulated.  It is the idea that a woman who stays at home with her children is somehow less intelligent, less informed and less interested in social causes than a career woman.  Now, I have been a career woman, a super-mom, and a mom whose children are her career. Never, during any of my stages of life, has my interest in social and political welfare been as keen as it has been since I became a stay-at-home mom.  Every day, the time invested in my children reminds me of how important it is for me to work for their future.  I do not believe I am a rare woman today, and contrary to myth, I think women of the past were not so different either.

I acknowledge that women come in all kinds of packages, with different education levels and with different beliefs. With such diversity, it is easy for women to get frustrated with other women. While women can be harsh when frustrated, on some level they recognize that they are on the same team; a team where the players acknowledge their dislike for each other or for each other’s ideas, but where they often come to each other’s defense when under attack.

When politicians act upon the perception that women only care about how much it costs to fill up their SUVs gas tank, they are being repugnant.  When women defend this action, promote this perception and infer that somehow homemakers are just not concerned with social issues, it is more than repugnant. Today, it was two Republican women on ABC’s This Week’s – Roundtable, who made this type of subtle attack on women.  You will have to watch the video link, rather than read the article to hear it. I commend ABC for editing out the reference to women voting rather than general public voting on this topic.  While today it was Republican women attacking, it reminded me of an interview* that I watched also on ABC, many years ago, when a prominent woman shocked the host with an attack on moms who left the workforce when they had children, and accused the women of being in some way a detriment to their children’s growth.  Sadly the Covert War on Women is bi-partisan.

The phrase, “Look out, woman on a quest,” does not only refer to women looking for the perfect guy, sexy shoes or a great pre-school.  Women of all walks of life organize quests, lead quests and journey on quests.  The main difference between women on quests and men is that they declare less often to the world what their social quests are.  This makes them excellent operatives in a covert war.  When these operatives are respectful, women feel enlightened and informed, but when these operatives attack with subtle demeaning stereotypes, self-esteem dwindles.  Regardless if one believes they are justified in their quest or cause; women should not be waging war on each other.

Oh, and men shouldn’t attack us either, because it isn’t nice, and if we actually do hold the real power, it benefits them to be nice to us…..

* I included a “Mommy War” debate, but am still looking for the episode where the prominent woman made the appalling accusation that educated women choosing to stay home with their children, were in fact harming them, especially harming the female children.  I had only been a stay-at-home mom for about a year and was infuriated by the statement.  Sadly, while I remember the interview clearly, I cannot as of yet find a link.  I will update this article if I eventually find it.

War for Gas

Spring 1990 Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein claims economic warfare over Kuwaiti oil production.

By August, his military forces had invaded Kuwait.  By January 1991 the US had committed to freeing Kuwait and its oil.  There were many reasons the US government, the US media and the US people gave for the decision to wage war on Iraq.  The most reasonable justification was that a sovereign nation had been invaded.  Other reasons were:  support an ally and major US oil supplier, Saudi Arabia; help the Kurdish people of Iraq from their ongoing persecution; and prevent known biological and chemical warfare from being used by Saddam against the peoples of the Gulf region.

By February, President George H. W. Bush had challenged the Iraqi people, specifically the oppressed Kurds, “to take matters into their own hands and force Saddam Hussein, the dictator, to step aside.”

To the great relief of the US, the First Gulf War ended quickly.  The promises made to the people of Iraq were left unfulfilled, as the citizens of the US pressured the President to pull out of the region.

November 2000, George W. Bush was elected as the US president bringing with him feelings of unfinished business in regards to Iraq and a desire to finish the task his father had started.  The only thing holding back the new president was a lack of justification for reentering Iraq; a justification the US citizenship would support.  However Iraq was not the same country as it had been a decade earlier.  A harsh crack down on the opposition by Saddam had left the country with greater fear of their dictator and with the potential for greater instability should the dictator be removed.  Added to this was also a greater distrust of the US and its promises.

By 2003 terrorist actions and threats had propelled the US population into a state of fear making it easier to convince them of a just cause to invade Iraq, and embroil the US into a further Middle Eastern war.  It would take the majority of a decade to pull the US troops out of this war.  However, Iraq would remain destabilized, and by that time the entire region would become destabilized.   Technology and a changing world would propel the Middle East into internal turmoil and revolt.  While the pleas of rebels would seek US help, the distrust and dislike for the US would continue to grow.  Allied nations and adversarial nations alike would distrust the US and its policies knowing that US election politics and fickle citizens could again force a US president to go back on his promises or worse encourage a president to act aggressively towards perceived threats.

So why do I bring up this history?  Well it is simple, gas prices or war to protect gas prices?  If one moves away from listening to political yelling matches, they might just hear that a) even with additional US drilling for oil, current gas prices would not drop anytime soon, b) opening up the US reserves would only adjust the price minimally, c) the prices of gas will go up not down if speculators fear more Gulf conflict and d) it is through trade agreements not threats that the US has been able to maintain the low gas prices compared to what Europe pays.

Ah, remembering back when gas was only a buck a gallon.  I was newly married, had children on the way and was dirt poor.  President Clinton was developing solid friendships with trading partners as well as putting the US on a path of making millionaires a common place. Oh yea, he was also developing a reputation for avoiding war even when our people were under attack.

It was good times, strong economy, low gas prices and big houses. All was perfect – right?  However, all an enemy had to do was wait; wait for a new president to be elected; a president less opposed to retaliation when attacked.

Low gas prices are gone, big houses are foreclosed on, and businesses closed up shop or moved away. Millionaires have lost millions, the middle class have lost jobs, and the poor have become so much poorer.  Religious wars, cultural wars, and international wars are threating our homeland and allies.

Okay so times are tough, but all this blame and hate and fear is not helping us.  Go back to 1990, it was Saddam that invaded a sovereign nation and he is now dead.  It was Osama Bin Laden that brought down the towers and the Pentagon in 2001. He too is now dead. Katrina was a natural disaster so we can’t send troops or drones after her.  BP was responsible for the big oil spill, but eliminating them won’t undo the environmental damage or lower our gas prices.

Our presidents, regardless of their political party affiliation have tried to do what they thought was best in every crisis they have faced.  They have all in their own way tried to correct the ills they have inherited.  President George H.W. Bush protected an ally.  President Bill Clinton pulled the US out of a deep recession.  President George W. Bush tried to fulfill a promise made by his father, tried to punish international terrorists for their crimes and tried to keep us from going into a recession after years of conflict and natural disasters.  President Barak Obama is trying to aid our poor, rebuild our international relationships, pull us out of a recession, bring jobs back to the US and keep us out of new wars despite entangling alliances.

In an election year it is my duty to vote as my conscience dictates, but I will support the people’s choice as I have after every election.  I will and do support my president regardless of who he is, because he is my president.  I will let the history books decide if his policies helped the people more greatly than they hindered.  I will not add my ire to my president’s burden, because I know he acts on his conscience.

I understand policies of containment and I understand the need to stand up to genocidal dictators. I recognize the turbulence of our time and the often unavoidable reality of war.

I understand there is great suffering in the world, but I do not expect my president to fix it all in four years or even eight.  With so many worries and ills in the world that the president must contend with, I will not take him to task over gas prices!

For a timeline of information on the 1st and 2nd Gulf Wars, Click Here for an informative page.