Re: a memetic experiment- an eIe opener

From: Chuck Palson (cpalson@mediaone.net)
Date: Tue May 09 2000 - 14:49:21 BST

  • Next message: Chuck Palson: "Re: a memetic experiment- an eIe opener"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id TAA16536 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Tue, 9 May 2000 19:46:43 +0100
    Message-ID: <39181761.B7399F@mediaone.net>
    Date: Tue, 09 May 2000 14:49:21 +0100
    From: Chuck Palson <cpalson@mediaone.net>
    X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (WinNT; I)
    X-Accept-Language: en
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Subject: Re: a memetic experiment- an eIe opener
    References: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D31CEB15C@inchna.stir.ac.uk>
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    Vincent Campbell wrote:

    > With respect, this idea ignores 75 or more years of media studies that have
    > been trying to identify the pecularities of media effects.
    >
    > I believe memetics may offer a perspective on this, but there's no way in
    > which your proposal would work because the uptake of memes is
    > context-sensitive, both in the sense of the environment in which a meme
    > emerges, and second in terms of the people who are exposed to the meme.
    > This is exactly why most theories of advertising and marketing etc. are so
    > flawed because they assume that if you construct a message with
    > characteristic 'a' and disseminate it to audience member 'b' you will get
    > the desired effect 'c'. But it obviously doesn't work like that. There is
    > little evidence that there is something inherent in any media text which
    > makes it more or less likely to succeed in general terms, mainly because the
    > audience is not an amorphous mass of automatons, but people with both
    > overlapping and contradictory attitudes, knowledge, etc. etc.
    >
    > Vincent
    >

    I heartily agree. I want to add something that all of you might find very
    interesting in regards to the above. The media industry took several to complete
    a study that studied the effect of advertising by actually following people
    around after they had been exposed to real advertising in their real lives.
    Here's what they found: there is very little correlation between what people say
    they remember of products with what they actually do in regards to that
    product. In other words, while they may not be able to SAY that they remember
    product X, they will nevertheless be more prone to buy that product if they have
    seen the advertising.

    That, of course, is how all research on the effect of advertising should be
    done, but it's too expensive. So what do they do instead? They still quote
    figures on how many people remember!

    That's a real story that indicates just how hard it is to study the effects of
    media. The advertising industry may say they study such effects, but it's really
    flim flam.

    ===============================================================
    This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
    see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue May 09 2000 - 19:47:00 BST