Ads can't make people buy something that they don't need?

I saw this ad on a book which is written by Solomon, and it brainstorms me a bit.

The picture above the text is a woman who has got full of shaving cream on her face and carrying a shave.

The main idea of content under the photo of the ad is simply saying advertisements could not force people to buy something that they do not need, for example, they would not buy many TVs in a house nor buy lots of cars that you are needed.

When I first read the ad, I do not think there are any problems, but when I read it again, I recognize it seems to have something that is not quite right. Let us step back a bit, remind ourselves what is the usage of ads. Ads are usually provided by brands and make differentiations between them and the other substitutions or brands and persuade potential customers to believe they are the best to buy and to use.

Yes, indeed, ads are not forcing people to buy their products but they are using legal methods to make you to buy their products, however, it is not a point for the headline that ads cannot make people buy something that they do not need.

Actually, people do not understand themselves well, sometimes they do not know what do they need and which is the best to choose since there are a part of the characteristics which is unknown by the individual themselves, so, when an ads that drawn the attention form the individual, the individual may find the ad interesting and may take a trail on it – they do not know if the product is suitable for them, but just like to have a go with it, to see if it is match with them or not. If they found that the product Is great, they will probably repurchase it, if not, the product might be being neglect (e.g. being put in a corner of the house) or thrown away (it is likely to happen if the product is a cheap one).

People do not care about too much and bother about information search if that is a low involvement product, sometimes they will rely on ads, choose thosewhich they are familiar with (because seen it in ads before) to make their decisions.

To conclude, ads do not forces people to buy things, but it is possible to persuade people to buy something that they do not need.

Twitter VS Facebook

Twitter is the central of social media, the gust lecturer said.

I'm a experienced facebook user but a noob of twitter. I've had a twitter account for near 2 months already but I've still got no idea how to use this stuff. It's generally like something like facebook, I guess? The only different that I know between these tools is -- twitter can "follow" people without their permission, but you can't be a friend without someone's permission on facebook. Perhaps they have got some more differences, but what I discovered by now is just as simple as that.  I would say twitter threat user's privacy more according to this, that's why I can't understand why do they said twitter is the central of social media, they gave me the same feelings but just from different providers. And, facebook is more popular than twitter, nearly everyone got it, but that's not what's happen in twitter. I thought the more popular the social media, the greater it is? Because it could influence people more and influence more people. So what's the point?

Anyway, I'll try to get used to use the twitter as I could search many Hiu Yan Lau from google, but none of them is me!!! That's not a good phenomenon at all.

Do you have a twitter? Do you know how to use it? Please feel free to left any comments behind.

Sometimes things are more easier to read than to study

Perhaps not just "sometimes", but very often, things are more easier if just have to read it than to study it, for example, psychology. 

I have got a subject which is called Organisation Behavior (actually, I have got consumer behavior as well) in this semester. What I have to say is, even if they are not my compulsory subs, I would still like to do them as their name attract me as I'm really interested in psychology -- I think this is the closest sub to our life and I believe that this would be very helpful to be well known  psychology and feel free to apply some of the theories in it into our real life.

It seems that going too far way from the topic, let's step few steps backward.
There is a very little space which is about the Emotional Intelligence (EI) in my OB lecture slides, but it attract me -- because I saw it before. I have read the abstract of a journal which talks about it before. Oh my word. The journal that I read is from my housemate who is doing Psychology, and I just picked it up and read it for interest and to satisfy my curious. 
I guess it would be an amazing world if we could do something just for interest but nothing else. Nonetheless, read it and can remember it are two things, there're many terms and theories around, maybe you can understand them and recognize them, but it is quite hard to remember the whole definition of it with the exact words which are in the text, and this, is exactly what the examiners want because they would just like to find out the key words form your pages long essay but not spend abundant of time to read your essays. I know, it's cruel, it's sad, but unfortunately, it's real.


I don't like the way that we're studying, I don't like the purpose that we learn either, they all sounds too down-to-earth for me and I think people are distorting a lot of wonderful things in the world as most of them are just focus on the final result but not the process of it -- they're not enjoying at all.

Imagine, if you're gonna die tomorrow, would you regret for not doing something that you're interested in today?

The Gruen Transfer

we watched videos in the lecture, and i found that our lecturer loves to play those videos from this show--The Gruen Transfer, and i found that is funny and interesting, thus, i copy the name of the show down and google it.

i found the show from the official website, however, it seems that have to pay to download the previous programs, so i had just simply watched it using the youtube and tudou (perhaps it is a AUS's TV program, i couldnt find lots of data of this show through the tudou tool). But unfortunately, because the problems of the copyright, what are recorded on youtube are not the full version of the show, but, at least, i can watch some parts of the program, this makes me happy enough.

The Gruen Transfer is a TV program that usually invite some marketers to talk about ads -- how does it work, what makes it work, and the pros and cons about those ads. They do not just simply pull all the marketing theories out and push it into a very typical, academic, boring discussion section, but trying to give a very fresh, professional views to the audiences by a funny way. And this could not only just not bored me, but attract me and makes me want to know more about it, want to know how they evaluate each ad.

It is so funny, and helpful as well, I guess. So, therefore, I am gonna watch it on the TV tomorrow night at 9 on ABC channel.

Anyway, the post that i posted up there is a part of the show which talks about the ads of bottled water -- imagine, we can have water from the tape for free, and water is just water, all of them got the same taste, so how do the brands distinguish them form the others and attract people to choose their product rather than the others?