Index for Insanity, Inc.
I have seen several commercials for Crystal Geiser Water which says that they bottle the water at the source. This is quite interesting since I have seen the bottling plant in Cartago, CA, which certainly is not what is pictured in the commercials. If you look at a web map site, you can see clearly that this is NOT the source that they claim in the commercials.
There are a couple of Nissan commercials which seem to indicate that Nissan prefers fiction (aka false, fraudulent) to reality in order to try to sell their vehicles, specifically their pickup truck. If you look at the fine print it states that it is fiction.
The first shows a plane with landing problems and the front nose gear lands in the bed of the truck. Speed is an issue since I doubt that the landing speed of a large jet is slow enough for a pickup to get under it. That is really a minor issue with respect to the weight of the front of the plane. I suspect it would crush the pickup like a bug under a foot.
The second is a sand rail vehicle going up a sand dune and not making it, so then a pickup drives up, stops behind it, then proceeds to push the sand tail up the rest of the way. I have not looked at the disclaimer on that commercial, but clearly it is fiction.
So, is Nissan trying to sell their vehicles to stupid people? What if some of these people really think that the vehicle can actually do that?
First off I really like milk, but the commercial which starts "Board of Unnecessary" which has a group around a table looking for some way to waste money is stupid and offensive. One person comes up with making milk from beans or nuts, so the main person deciding says to make plans to do it.
Does the marketing group not know or just not care that some people can't drink milk? Never heard of lactose intolerance? Or is it that it is just more important to push their product?
I think the commercial about the two sharks comparing the taste of two people they ate and saying that one tasted better because it tasted like snickers is VERY, VERY TASTELESS!!! (no pun intended). How insensitive can you be???. Sharks are NOT our friends and this is sending a poor message to our kids. Think about all the people who have REALLY been bitten or even eaten by sharks. And what about their families. Though I (use) to like snickers, I haven't eaten one since I saw that commercial..and I don't think I ever will. Come on guys, have you really run out of new ideas? You can do better than that!
There are several commercials with Dr. Phil for the Superbowl, but instead it shows that Dr. Phil is making a joke of the profession (yes, I know he is basically an entertainer now). I did not care much for him before these ads, but personally I think that these ads make him look bad personally. Perhaps he thinks that the ads are funny or maybe he just needs/wants the money, but it is sad that he has lowered himself to this type of ad.
There is recent commercial for Southwest Airlines showing what they call is a "fee court". They attack other airlines for charging fees to change a ticket and claim that Southwest never does that.
Perhaps Southwest Airlines has changed, but a few years ago I was taking a flight on Southwest Airlines (the last time I flew with that company) and there was a delay on the flight I was supposed to take. It turned out that the next flight was going to leave before the flight I had a ticket for. I asked if I could change flights, as I had already been delayed around an hour. Southwest Airlines told me that it was too much bother to change my flight and that I would have to wait longer.
Now, this was a bit annoying as it seemed that they were lazy. I did not have any checked luggage, so that was not an issue (not that they even bothered to ask), but it seems that it was just easier for them to do nothing and waste more of my time. When I was returning home, I got to the airport early and asked if I could get on an earlier flight. They told me that I would have to pay a change fee (which they now claim they would never charge) which exceeded the amount of the original price of my ticket.
Due to this and the cattlecar nature of Southwest Airlines, I won't fly on their Airline. It just seems rather stupid for Southwest Airlines to claim that they would never charge a change fee when they actually have done so in the past.
There is a Time Warner cable ad which shows two young women with a washing machine that has suds coming out of it and they can't figure out what to do, even with looking it up on the computer, so the one woman uses the computer to contact her father, who tells them to pull the plug. He then says that he will call a plumber.
First, it is pretty sad that Time Warner Cable is representing these women as being so stupid that they don't know to open the top, which would stop the washing machine. But even if you get past that, then you have to wonder about the father who says he is going to call a plumber. Since there is suds coming out of the washing machine, this implies either operator error (putting in too much detergent or the wrong type) or a problem with the washing machine itself, neither of which is a problem that a plumber solves. Perhaps it is a case that the daughter is as dumb as the father, both of which are as dumb as all the PR people at Time Warner Cable who approved this ad.
There is an ad which is basically attacking Kashi GoLean cereal. It states that if you eat the Kashi cereal for breakfast, then you need to add a whole bunch of vitamins. To me, this sounds like a completely false statement. It ignores that people eat other food during the day, so unless you just eat just one brand of cereal all day, it is just stupid advertising hype to try to scare people. I suspect that it would not be healthy to just eat Total cereal and nothing else, it is all about balance.
Also, there is the issue that if you eat too much of one vitamin, it can adversely affect your ability to absorb other vitamins.
This is on the LA Times web page:
It is confirmed by an Absolut web page:
In an ABSOLUT World according to Mexico
Posted Friday, April 04, 2008, 5:26:34 PM
The In An Absolut World advertising campaign invites consumers to visualize a world that appeals to them -- one they feel may be more idealized or one that may be a bit "fantastic." As such, the campaign will elicit varying opinions and points of view. We have a variety of executions running in countries worldwide, and each is germane to that country and that population.
This particular ad, which ran in Mexico, was based upon historical perspectives and was created with a Mexican sensibility. In no way was this meant to offend or disparage, nor does it advocate an altering of borders, nor does it lend support to any anti-American sentiment, nor does it reflect immigration issues. Instead, it hearkens to a time which the population of Mexico may feel was more ideal.
As a global company, we recognize that people in different parts of the world may lend different perspectives or interpret our ads in a different way than was intended in that market. Obviously, this ad was run in Mexico, and not the US -- that ad might have been very different.
By Paula Eriksson, VP Corporate Communications, V&S Absolut Spirits
Well, what about the people that the Mexicans took the land from? The Mayans and the Indians? Perhaps they should get their land back if the Mexicans really felt that way. Oh, but of course it does not go that far. It is only take what you can get for yourself.
I think that the ad is stupid and is sure to cause harm to the company. Perhaps their sales in Mexico will make up for the lost sales in the US. One thing that I have not seen explained is why the ad is in English. That tends to say that it is targeted a bit differently than they claim.
Also check out:
There are email addresses so that you can let the companies know how you feel.
There is a recent VW commercial in which a driver gets on the freeway and the salesperson suggests that the person gets off the freeway, most likely to go back to the dealership. The funny thing is that based on the freeway offramp signs they are driving west on the 118 in CA and that the closest dealership is quite a few miles ahead and getting off would take longer to get back, a lot longer. I guess they don't expect people to notice the offramps and know where the dealerships are :-). The funny thing about that too is that it seems like most of the VW dealerships have closed in the LA area and there are few left.
The second stupid VW commercial is regarding the change of the Jetta model. They said that in the past old VW models have really gone up in value, so this is your last chance to get the old Jetta model. While this might be true for some old models, after many years, what normally happens is the old models really drop in value since most people want the newer version. So, VW is trying to fool people into getting the old model before they can't give them away. I guess they think that people are stupid, but it is nice for the warning so that if you want a Jetta with the current design, just wait until the new model comes out and you should be able to get it for a good price.
The commercials for Kaiser Permanente are quite interesting, especially after having their "medical care" for many years, until I got smart and went with real medical care. One of the best is the entourage commercial. I guess you have to be a special person to have all those Kaiser doctors helping you, but it does explain why when I had Kaiser I could not get an appointment for typically over a month. Add to that if you wanted to see a specialist, you first had to see your primary care doctor, which meant that it would be a couple of months before you got care for your problem. Maybe many people are getting wise to Kaiser, which I often think of as medical care by Walmart. Yes, that is a joke since the two companies are not related, although I heard recently that Walmart lost the ability to sell firearms because they could not follow the rules, something like over 500 violations.
I can only guess that Tums' sales is being hurt by products like Prilosec due to the recent Tums commercial. It also seems that they are implying that their customers are stupid and are not able to read instructions or know the difference between prevention and short term relief. Perhaps they want to fool people into thinking that Tums works better, when the reality is that they are comparing two very different products.
What is Honda (or the advertising agency) trying to say when they show a Honda owner stopping their vehicle and putting a jacket down over a pothole in the road? Are they saying that people who own a Honda are stupid and stop in the middle of the road since they don't realize how dangerous it is? Are they saying that the person is so foolish as to throw away a jacket (it is left behind, which is littering) instead of have some common sense and driving around the pothole? Are they saying that foolish people like this are the type that buy Hondas? It does not seem to present a good image of Honda owners, but perhaps they do not realize this.
There is a nice Mercury Insurance commercial in which they claim how great they are and how fast they resolve things, but this is just an ad and does not always represent reality. A family member was involved in an accident in which a 16 year driver failed to see on oncoming vehicle and turned and hit the vehicle, sending that vehicle out of control and into my family member's vehicle and another on-coming vehicle was also involved. The 16 year old admitted that it was his fault to the police. The second person hit was also with Mercury and they determined that it was his fault. Several people were hurt and several vehicles were totaled. The problem is that the adjustor for this kid liked to annoy and harass people and refused to admit fault and refused to settle the matter. It is quite funny in a way because due to this suing was the only option, although it never went to court. Instead of making a reasonable settlement (and I do mean reasonable, not a get rich quick type of settlement in the least), this Mercury employee caused all sorts of problems and since two parties were suing (including the other person who was insured by Mercury), this guy requested and demanded all sorts of depositions, including all the medical staff of the emergency room. The end result was that Mercury had to pay a lot to their own attorney due to all these demands and most likely paid out double the amount over the settlement. It also showed me that Mercury is not a company you want to deal with since they allow their employees to act in such an irresponsible mannor and end up costing the company far more than it should have.
Another recent commercial really shows a Mercury Insurance customer is a bad light, not to mention not very bright. It shows a vehicle following a truck and a lot of stuff in it, which is not properly contained. A reasonable person would not want to be around such a vehicle, but not this Mercury Insurance customer. Instead, the Mercury Insurance customer follows the truck when it overtakes another vehicle, illegally passing since it is a double yellow line, and the Mercury Insurance customer just follows, not being able to see ahead due to the truck and also illegally passing. Then a lot of stuff falls off the truck and a television ends up in the Mercury Insurance customer's windshield. Perhaps next time the Mercury Insurance customer would learn to say away from such vehicles, not pass illegally and learn to drive. I am sure that Mercury Insurance does not want you to notice the double yellow line and the illegal passing. Perhaps they should pay more attention to how they are presenting themselves and their customers.
Yet another stupid Mercury Insurance commercial shows a family coming back from a hike and find a large boulder on top of their vehicle, smashing the roof down. The commercial says that the Mercury agent gave them information on finding a good repair facility, but the problem is that with the extent of damage done to the vehicle by boulder, most likely the vehicle should be totaled due to safety issues. The structure of the roof is gone and the impact of the boulder on the rest of the vehicle, including the suspension, would mean a lot of damage through out the vehicle.
In a recent series of commercials Mercury Insurance is trying to convince people that they have low rates, but their commercials show that they are liars instead. They claim that low is a way of life, or something like that, and that they have low ceilings, low temperatures, etc. Obviously, this is not true and is just advertising hype, but do you really want to deal with a company which is obviously lying? It would be even worse if it was true since the cost from lawsuits due to employee injuries and the cost of cooling a room down to 28 degrees F would raise their rates really high. I don't even believe that the President of the company drives the vehicle that they claim. In other words, it does hit with Mercury, but it just confirms to me that you can't trust a word that they say.
I just saw a commercial from a company called ReFlex Mortage. In the commercial the person says that they were drowning in debt, but then they called Reflex Mortage and took money out of their house. They then bought two new motorcycles and said THEY WERE NO LONGER IN DEBT. This is a FALSE statement since they are now more in debt than before. A mortage is DEBT and since they took out additional money to buy "toys", as suggested in the ad, they now owe more money and since most mortages are for 30 years, they will pay a lot of money for those toys.
As a side note in many states they don't use a mortage, but instead use a trust deed. While the concept is basically the same, there is a difference in how it works and how the lender can collect their money. I say this just to be accurate :-).
It seems that Reflex Mortage likes to encourage people to take money out in order to get further in debt. In another commercial a woman is talking saying that money was tight after they bought a house, but with Reflex they were able to take money out to go on a family vacation and now they have memories to last a lifetime. Unfortunately they also now have a debt that will also last a lifetime and if they don't pay, then they could have the memory of having their house foreclosed.
There are a couple of stupid Toyota commercials (excluding the bad Darrell Waltrip commercial, discussed in another article, which shows Waltrip committing an illegal act) which are pretty stupid.
The first shows a Toyota employee crash testing minivans because children want to see them crash. Normally you would do a crash test to test the vehicle and not because a child wants you to. Perhaps Toyota could lower the prices of their vehicles if they did not do foolish things like that :-).
The second shows a person, perhaps a Toyota salesperson, test driving a vehicle for a child, going around and picking up friends of the child, and a dog, as well as showing them a DVD. They get back to the dealership and then the child wants to test drive a different color.
I am not sure of what Toyota is really trying to show. Are they trying to show that Toyota employees are willing to do whatever a child wants them to do.
There are several stupid ReMax commercials, but one which seems to indicate that their clients are idiots is one is which it shows a husband out in the desert calling his wife who is in a swamp, asking her if she found anything yet. They then go to a ReMax agent to find a house since it is more difficult than they thought. Is ReMax just looking for stupid people to sell houses to? Who would go searching for a house in the desert unless you wanted to live there? There were no houses in the picture, BTW. The woman was in water and there certainly were no houses there.
One commercial shows a couple mountain climbing stacks of paperwork. They decide to go to ReMax, complaining about paper cuts. Is ReMax really trying to claim that they have less paperwork when buying a house then other places? I would really like to know how they justify that, especially with truth in advertising.
Another commercial, this time on the radio, in which a couple is looking for a house and the one they are looking at is too small, then it turns out that it is their current house. Again, this seems to indicate that ReMax either thinks people are stupid or that is the type of person they want to sell a house to.
What are they thinking when they approve such commercials? Perhaps they are not thinking at all.
It seems that there is a recent surge in commercials trying to get people to take money out of their houses. Perhaps it is because the companies expect the people to not be able to pay off the additional debt and then they can forclose on the house and make money.
This commercial is just another such commercial, but in this case they are suggesting that you take the "profit" out of your house. Perhaps they choose to use those words since profit means money that was received and people like to make a profit. Unfortunately the word profit does not apply in this case since the house was not sold and no money was received. This means that this company is just using words, inappropriate words, to convince people to get in further financial problems. If the housing market goes down, then just where is the "profit"?
There is a recent commercial for this company which acts like they are just doing a nice thing and referring friends and family to a dentist. While this is a nice idea, it does not seem to be accurate. They are fast to say that they refer pre-screened dentists, but they are not so fast to say that the dentists have to pay to be listed. I checked their website, using my dentist's address, and he was not listed, yet I would highly recommend him (well, maybe not because it is hard enough to get an appointment). I guess my dentist does not have to pay to be listed because he has enough patients. That is something that they don't care to mention. I would suspect that most of the dentists listed do so because they need more patients, not because they are the best out there.
In looking at the website, specifically the FAQ section, I have to say that I don't believe that they are being honest. They say that they don't share any of the person's information with other companies. Question number 3, "Why do I have to tell you anything about me?" is more telling. The answer is "Our service is free and confidential. We ask for your name, address, phone number and e-mail so we can introduce you to the dentist office that best suits your needs". How do they determine that the dentist office which best suits your needs with your name and email address? Perhaps they do that to collect your information so that they can send you solicitations, by phone, mail and e-mail. Having the your name makes it easier to make you think that they know you and that it is not junk mail. Question 4 is a bit lacking, "How does a dentist qualify to be on your service?", which the answer does not mention that the dentist has to pay money. They do mention in question 6 that the dentist has to pay, just as other advertising (not worded that way). Question 8 says that they need your name in order for the dentist to start your patient file, but the truth is that in order to start a file a dentist needs a bit more than just your name. Question 9 is regarding your phone number, which is claimed to be needed to complete your patient file. This not true, since other important medical information is needed to complete a patient's file. They do go on to admit that they want your phone number in order to call you in order to "help" you connect with the office.
You can get some information about the dentist before you have to give your name and phone number, but I am not sure if it is complete. It seemed to be a be lacking to me, in the one case I looked at. Perhaps that is all there is. In the process I did not get to the "Dentist Info" section. I personally would want to know more about the dentist before I would want to create a patient file.
While I think they provide a better service than just looking at a phone book ad, I think some of what they are doing is deceptive and people should be aware of it. As with any company, you need to look closely at the company. Remember, they make money by referring people to dentists. While the dentist is the one who is paying, all involved have a financial involvement.
Addition: In recent commercials 1-800-Dentist claims that they "choose" their dentists, which seems to me to be a be of a deception since the dentist has to request and pay to be on their referal list.
Also, 1-800-Dentist is now saying that because they want to get to know the dentist, less than 5% of dentists are listed with them. This is also obviously false and the reality is that the dentist has to apply and agree to pay them money, which a dentist who has a lot of clients does not need to do. This means that some of the best dentists would never be listed with them and instead I think that many of the listed dentists need more clients for a variety of reasons.
I find the Flex Your Power commercials to be a bit funny, although in keeping with the wrong concept that the power companies and the government likes to push. In the commercial you are told that when you hear a "Flex your power alert" you should turn off unneeded lights and appliances. Well, that is good to know that I should not turn off unneeded lights and appliances unless I am told to do so. It seems to me that people should be told to turn off unneeded lights and appliances all the time, not just when the power is limited. Of course this would cause a problem since companies like SCE have offered power saving discounts, such as reducing your power usage by 20%, you get a 20% discount. This means that the people who don't waste power end up having to pay more and not able to get the discount.
It seems that CLR has decided that it is a good idea to have a spokesperson who is known, rather than a person who would have a clue about using their product. On the Rush Limbaugh radio program, Rush is pushing their products, but I seriously doubt that he has any idea of how to use the product (other than telling a servant to use it). While Rush tries to claim that he knows something about the average person, it is clear that he has forgotten what it is like since his examples include going to a McDonalds to buy a burger years ago and not wanting the change from a $20 and going out to eat and leaving a $50 tip for a meal which was around $150 or so, as I recall him saying. A friend said that he heard Rush respond to a caller that Sears does not carry anything other than Kenmore, which is not true and has not been true for many years and instead of asking about it, Rush assumed that he knew the truth, but was wrong. All of his examples show that he is clueless with what average people are like.
CLR should consider that using Rush to push their products is just insane, especially when he personally pushes the product. Who is going to believe that Rush would actually use the product? Perhaps there is a chance that he did, but if so I would suspect it was just so that he could claim that he used it for the commericial and does not use it on a regular basis, at least not personally.
There was a recent commercial for Consumer Reports in which they claimed that they did not take advertising and therefore were unbiased. That is insane. Reading the magazine will show their bias. No one is unbiased and someone who claims that they are is a liar.
Often Consumer Reports seems to be interested in safety issues, but I was suprised to read a critical review of the handbrake release for the 1986 Toyota Pickup, obviously this was many years ago. The release required that you pull the handle before turning it, which would reduce the risk of children and other accidental releasing of the brake, which is very important in a manual transmission vehicle. For reasons that I can not figure out, Consumer Reports disliked the brake release and said how bad it was. I owned the vehicle for 10 years and never had a problem with it and it was never an issue, but it sure changed my opinion of Consumer Reports.
There is a commerical which Harley Davidson is running in which they are not really advertising the motorcycle, but what they claim the difference will be if you have one. It shows a couple returning from a date, back to the woman's house and the man gets a handshake or a kiss on the forehead. In one case the woman says that it is getting late, although it is still light out (perhaps they are near the north pole in summer :-). Then they show a motorcycle with a red bra on the handlebars and you hear people in the house. Harley Davidson is trying to claim that if you get one of their motorcycles then you will get sex at the end of a date. There are many things wrong with this, including issues with STDs and moral issues, but the most important thing is that it is false. Perhaps Harley Davidson wants people to associate their motorcycle with sex, but I think it speaks poorly of them.
There is a recent series of milk commercials which try to be humorous, but instead are just stupid in my opinion. They are trying to use the recent athlete drug issues to sell milk, but the message they are sending is just plain wrong. I heard on the news that they claim that they are just trying to get kids to drink milk, but the method that they are using is to try to get kids to do what athletes are doing, which is using illegal drugs. Is this really something that they think is positive? I like milk, but this puts milk in a bad light. They should not try to imply that milk is an illegal drug and will get you in trouble, which is exactly what they are doing.
If they wanted to keep it funny and be reasonable, they would have changed the commercial so that the accused person would say that he does not understand the charges since it is milk, legal and tastes good.
Got Milk? Got any Brains? I guess not.
There is a California Lottery commercial which shows a family in front of a TV watching the lottery results. The children look bored with the whole thing. All of their numbers match and they yell with excitement. The daughter takes a tape out of the VCR marked "the day we won" or something like that and the camera pulls back to reveal a living room set in a mansion.
Another commercial shows two young girls waking up there parents and then running out to play in the snow. The camera pulls back to show a snow machine making the snow. The wife asks the husband if he is going to do this every day and he says maybe.
While the State of California is pushing people to buy a lottery ticket, they fail to mention what happens to the winners. I recently heard that in the case of 50% of the winners, all of the money is gone within 5 years. I have also heard that many winners of lotteries end up worse off then before because they over spend and end up in debt.
This is what makes these commercials stupid since most do not win enough money to have such a mansion with servants (shown in the picture) or constantly hire a snow making machine. It also encourages people to be stupid should they win. People don't realize how little the money really goes, nor the expenses which come with buying expensive items, such as insurance, property tax, etc. On a news show it was mentioned that if you give more than $11k, then the giver of the gift owes a gift tax which is 50% of the gift. While this is double taxation and wrong, it still exists and can hit the person at the end of the year taking more money from them.
There have been some recent commercials by El Pollo Loco which seems to indicate that they have something against the police. In the first commercial, the spokesperson is being grilled by two agents and is shown a video. More discussion occurs, then another video is shown with one of the agents in a dress. I have to wonder why El Pollo Loco would want to imply that agents are perverts.
The next commercials shows the spokesperson being stopped by two officers and the officers take his food away. The camera zooms out and shows that the officers are doing a checkpoint on the exit of the drive through. The officers say that they love their jobs. This is claiming that police officer love to abuse their positions by illegally taking items from people and harassing citizens illegally. I would love for El Pollo Loco to show one officer who would illegally setup such a checkpoint and/or who would illegally take food from citizens.
While these commercials are supposed to be funny, I think that trying to portray the police in such a manner is not acceptable, as well as reflecting poorly on El Pollo Loco.
There have been some recent commercials for Hummer. Perhaps their sales are down due to fuel prices or maybe people have figured out that it is not worth it to pay more for a GM vehicle with a boxy body, just to try to enhance their status. Well, actually, I doubt that people have gotten it since Hummer is trying to claim that if you are a wimp or not agressive, you should buy their vehicle. Just what we need, more idiots driving agressively. The first commericial is a guy standing in line at the store with tofu. He sees the next person, a male, with a lot of meat and charcoal. So this guy decides that in order to enhance his ego he has to run out and buy a Hummer. Too bad he did not buy the real thing, instead he bought into the ugly body GM version. The next commercial is a woman with her kid at a park. A another woman is there, who is a jerk, and cuts in line at the slide. So, the first woman rushes out to buy a Hummer and trade in her minivan. The tag line is "get your girl on", or something like that. It is quite sad when companies try to push their products by claiming that it will somehow make the person better, or in this case a worse person.
One funny aspect to this is that I saw a video on the Internet with a H2 Hummer going down a rocky road and a front steering part failed which caused the front wheels to turn in different directions. It did not even look like a really difficult road. I will say that they marketing is pretty good since they are convincing people to buy a fake Hummer (H2, H3) instead of the real thing.
When companies advertise they try to define their target market and often they try to use humor, but sometimes it seems that they are trying to sell their products to stupid people. There is a recent series of Black & Decker ads which fall into the category.
One shows a person trying to cut a metal rack with a wood saw, which obviously would not work well, especially since the wood saw is long and it bends. The correct tool would be something like a hack saw, but since that works too well, Black & Decker could not show that as they are pushing their electric saw.
Another ad shows a person trying to work on a shower head, using an adjustable wrench (Cresent wrench, which is a brand name). The wrench somehow slips and ends up in the toilet. I guess the person can not hold onto things, which would make them dangerous to be around. This commericial is pushing an electric adjustable wrench.
There is another ad and perhaps more to come, but the bottom line is that Black & Decker is showing that stupid people need their products or perhaps it is that those people are stupid enough to want such products. Personally, I would think that it would be better, although harder, to show how products can make a job easier (until the battery runs out). Such stupid examples just makes me want to avoid such a company.
There is a recent Volvo commercial which starts with a female passenger asking if they are going to make it, with a shot of the clock which is just before 2am. Then it shows the male driver driving stupid and putting others at risk, including having the vehicle collision warning going off. So what was the reason for this mad rush? What was so important that they had to get to and put others at risk? It was to get to a famous hot dog stand in Los Angeles, Pinks. While they have good food, it certainly not so go ask to risk people's lives.
I have to wonder if Volvo is marketing to selfish, self centered people who care more about getting a hot dog than the lives and property of others. Yes, it is just a commercial and they are trying to make a point that the car is safe, which obviously these people need, but what about the others on the road? It shows a bad example of driving and of the type of people who own a Volvo.
In another Volvo commercial for the S80, they show the features of the Volvo, which in this case two out the three features is due to the driver not paying attention. I am not sure if they are trying to promote their vehicles to bad drivers or what, but if that is the type of driver who buys a Volvo, it would be best to stay clear of the vehicle since the drivers can be dangerous.
Some of the recent "Flex Your Power" commercials are really stupid. They are playing on feel good feelings, but are short on reasonable, rational arguments.
One example is they say that if everyone replaced light bulbs with CFL, it would be like removing some number of vehicles off the road. The simple fact is that replacing a standard light bulb makes no sense if it is not used much and in fact it would waste energy if it was replaced since making CFLs take resources and energy, plus this often contain mercury and create issues regarding recycling. If they wanted to offer a better solution, they should consider pushing LED lights instead. These last longer and don't have the same recycling issues.
Another example is where "Flex Your Power" claims that global warming is a choice. I am glad that they think that the output of the Sun, which varies, can be controlled and that the output of the Earth from volcanos and other emissions can be controlled. I heard that Mars is suffering warming too. I guess that it from the pollution from Earth.
I also like the commercials where they say that when you hear the "Flex Your Power Alert" you should turn off unneeded lights and appliances. Personally, I think it is a far better idea to ALWAYS turn off unneeded lights and appliances, but that won't get you a discount (see below).
Their web site is: http://fypower.org/
Some of the programs on their website are quite annoying and stupid. You can get a discount if you reduce your energy consumption by 20% for the summer:
The problem with this is that those people who don't waste energy can't manage such a reduction. This rewards those that waste energy and then reduce the power that they use. If you were to use the minimum energy and do everything that they suggest, how could you reduce your power consumption by 20%?
I personally think that people should reduce the trash and pollution. One area which could greatly reduce the pollution is to get rid of drive through lines at places. Often it is quicker to just go inside, but it seems that some people are just too lazy to get out of their cars. The exercise would also do them some good. Instead of recycling items, try to reuse items and select items which are reusable. It takes far less energy to reuse something than to even recycle it. Do what you can to reduce the trash or recyclable items.
One thing that people often ignore is the energy that it takes to create an item. Does it make any sense to buy a new car which gets better fuel economy if you don't drive enough to make up the different in energy and pollution it took to make the new car? This goes along with the people who think that electric cars are pollution free.
Index for Insanity, Inc.
If you want to submit your own article, please read the first article and send email