Archive for April, 2007
Here’s Lou Dobbs’ question for tonight, before the voting has been tallied.
I predict the results will come in at about 95% No, 5% Yes.
|
Do you think it’s appropriate for a corporate lobbyist to be appointed to a post overseeing our national safety standards?
|
 |
|
Yes
|
|
0%
|
 |
|
No
|
|
0%
|
Imagine if the question was re-framed as follows:
“Do you think its appropriate to ban corporate lobbyists from being appointed to a post overseeing our national safety standards?”
From previous studies of framing, you can get a preference reversal just by switching the question from one centered on “allowing” a actions to a question centered on “disallowing” the same action.
More to follow in a later blog on this point as well as Lou’s poll results. This effect of framing has important ramifications in many areas of business and our personal lives.
Share This
April 27th, 2007
Anyone familiar with CNN in the United States knows of Lou Dobbs and his program aired in the early evening. Mr. Dobbs brings his energy to the issues of immigration, off-shoring and many items which might have a detrimental effect on the working person in this country.
During each show he asks his viewers a poll question to be answered on line. The problem is that each of his questions is framed in such a way to drive viewers to answer in one predominant way, and that way is in support of Dobbs’ viewpoint. For example here is last night’s question and the results.
|
Do you believe the President and Democratic party are representing American citizens on the issue of illegal immigration?
|
|
|
Yes
|
|
3%
|
362 votes
|
|
|
No
|
|
97%
|
10083 votes
|
|
Total: 10445 vote
|
Since Lou wants a large number of “No” answers (this would support his agenda) he has framed his question with the “AND” between two diametrically opposed parties, the President AND the Democrats. So he’s asking a compound question which, in order to have a “YES” answer, requires the voter to believe that both the President and the Democratic party are representing citizens on the issue of illegal immigration.
Imagine for a moment if he’d change the word “AND” to “OR” and offered the voter the chance to choose which was doing a better job on illegal immigration. Would this not give more interesting information? Yes. But maybe not in support of Lou’s hyperbolic agenda.
Share This
April 26th, 2007
Remember, Decision Velocity is comprised of Speed (of deciding and taking action) and Direction (intended effect or endpoint).
Many people concerned about Global Warming have the Direction side of the equation in hand. They want to mitigate their’s and others carbon footprint to help reduce any potential to warm up our planet. However, their high Speed of deciding tactics to have an impact leads them to make somewhat strange choices.
Here’s one from Sheryl Crow. Her Direction is good but she needs to slow down a bit on promoting tactics like this one when there’s so many other improvements that could use her airtime.
| I have spent the better part of this tour trying to come up with easy ways for us all to become a part of the solution to global warming. Although my ideas are in the earliest stages of development, they are, in my mind, worth investigating. One of my favorites is in the area of conserving trees which we heavily rely on for oxygen. I propose a limitation be put on how many sqares of toilet paper can be used in any one sitting.� Now, I don’t want to rob any law-abiding American of his or her God-given rights, but I think we are an industrious enough people that we can make it work with only one square per restroom visit,� except, of course, on those pesky occasions where 2 to 3 could be required. |
|
|
Share This
April 23rd, 2007
Would you rather get your magazines on-line or through the mail? I’d like to hear your comments.
Here’s why I ask. Conde Nast is launching a new magazine called Portfolio. It will be their most expensive magazine launch ever coming in at a staggering $125 million before it becomes profitable. Of course they’ll have an on-line version as well.
Now here’s what to think about.
Let’s say each magazine weighs in at about 1 pound (printed on nice glossy paper to show off the car adverts). And then let’s say they produce a run of 500,000 magazines for each monthly issue. Now that equals 500,000 lbs of paper and ink or 250 tons or roughly 6 semi truckloads each month for delivery across the country. Forget about any savings in trees but think about fuel. Fuel to get raw materials to the paper mill. Fuel to get the unprinted paper to the printing plant, fuel to run the printing presses and fuel to distribute the final printed magazine. Now consider that of the copies that end up on news stands, many will not be sold and will need to be “fueled” to a recycler who will use fuel to energize the recycling process and fuel to transport the recycled pulp to a paper mill where the whole process can start over again.
Now consider the on-line version. Fuel to energize the servers and computers.
So what do you think? Paper or plastic (computers)? You decide.
Share This
April 22nd, 2007
Next Posts
Previous Posts
