Excellent addition! Thanks!
Interesting political take on all this during an election year. Next thing you know Peyton will be running for office as did another UT player in NC. Your point about wealth redistribution is a good one in that no elected officials are scrabbling to put an end to ridiculously high salaries of some sports figures. If Shoney's had spent the dollars it cost for the ads on feeding the hungry, we wouldn't be having this conversation, and the possibility of earned media would have been priceless. Wonder if politicians would ever challenge the status quo of pro sports? Thanks for commenting.
Exactly! Even if/though the ad were meant, at least in part, to be a joke, it's a missed opportunity. If the copy had said something like "If Peyton signs, pancakes are on us" followed by a specific strategy of implementation that included fans and the needy, their brand equity would be much more strengthened. BTW, in another news account of this morning, Shoney's owes six figures to its former ad agency. Thanks for commenting!
Seriously. I haven't been to Shoney's in years because of mediocre food and uncleanliness; then their recent ad campaign was enticing enough to get me to reconsider; then the pancake ad ran. If the ad had said something like "If Peyton signs, pancakes are on us" with a strategy for specific implementation behind it, I'd likely respond differently. In any case, thanks for sharing your views.
Wow. Thanks as I'm so honored!
Sent on the Sprint® Now Network from my BlackBerry®
I agree that the groups are reacting to current circumstances, but I still think they're lacking a clear, concise message point, along with a call to action. Because reporters can interview anyone and everyone, officially or unofficially representing the cause, drunk or sober, or until they find someone who agrees or disagrees with the story angle, the reaction is diluted by inconsistency. In a prior PR job, we referred to such group behavior as organized clusters! Thanks for your insights.
The saddest part about Weinergate isn't the behavior, the morality or the outcome. It's the divisiveness that continues to exist in this country as illustrated by comments on the topic. But then again, I support freedom of speech, so there you have it.
Once again, Lynn, you're officially the smartest person in the room, and with this particular comment, the voice of reason. It's just sad, sad, sad, and if I weren't so blessed, I'd really get depressed about it. As always, thanks for sharing your insights and wisdom.
Blaming your predecessor is commonplace in politics and the private sector, and it seems to be most prevalent among men, but of course, they're the ones most in power, but I digress. Again, this isn't a partisan issue; it's one of character and leadership. While playing "who's the biggest sinner?" seems entertaining, it's sad that we can play it at all, Thanks for commenting.
Thanks so much for sharing your viewpoints. A couple of thoughts: it's not about whether someone physically committed adultery or who from what political party did what and resigned - it's about the bigger picture of where do we, as a society, draw the moral line? You're right about technology and guns - if both are used responsibly, then there shouldn't be an issue. But the reality is that due to lack of personal moral responsibility, we can no longer depend on human beings to make appropriate decisions to rear healthy, balanced children, much less lead our country. As good as technology is in regard to things like medicine (then there's the Internet sale of class III narcotics), it also has enabled some people to display their behaviors (legal or not) in public ways that only contribute to the moral decay of this country. And you're right, hypocrisy is sickening. To quote somewhere in the Bible, let the first without sin cast the first stone........
![[Avatar]](/images/avatar26.png){kind=avatar}
Brainchild