RE: memetics-digest V1 #1023

From: Lawrence DeBivort (debivort@umd5.umd.edu)
Date: Fri Apr 19 2002 - 14:57:57 BST

  • Next message: Grant Callaghan: "Re: Media and Violence" 

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id PAA26027 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Fri, 19 Apr 2002 15:03:05 +0100
From: "Lawrence DeBivort" <debivort@umd5.umd.edu>
To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
Subject: RE: memetics-digest V1 #1023
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 09:57:57 -0400
Message-ID: <NEBBKOADILIOKGDJLPMAAELFCOAA.debivort@umd5.umd.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700
In-Reply-To: <B8E4D8B4.104%srdrew_1@hotmail.com>
Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk

    > Steve Drew:
    > I think [advertisers] have learned the 'cruder' techniques such as the
    'sex sells'
    > example you mentioned. I don't think it is because they are that good, but
    > that they stick to ones that have been useful in the past. The
    > problem they
    > face is that everyone's responses are different, and IMO they have not
    > developed enough ideas on how to overcome this yet, but if they do then I
    > agree that things could get rough.

    And that is one of the reasons we should be wary of turning memetics into a
    technology and releasing it publicly. I consider this list a public forum.

    Lawrence

    ===============================================================
    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 : Fri Apr 19 2002 - 15:15:15 BST