 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / December 2006Brand loyalists = cultists?
On PBS tuesday night. A PhD in psychology (some French fellow) who has made millions advising the auto industry how to advertise says that psychologically and in their behaviour patterns, brand loyalists are identical to members of a cult. Does this mean that those rabidly attached to a brand like...Canon are mindless drones, only too willing to do their master's bidding and attack anyone who appears disloyal or who attacks the master? > On PBS tuesday night. > A PhD in psychology (some French fellow) who has made millions advising [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > drones, only too willing to do their master's bidding and attack anyone > who appears disloyal or who attacks the master? Stop watching PBS. Your life will be better for it. >On PBS tuesday night. >A PhD in psychology (some French fellow) who has made millions advising [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >drones, only too willing to do their master's bidding and attack anyone >who appears disloyal or who attacks the master? I wonder about people who spend all their time trying to find or make up things adverse to a particular brand. Are they more enlightened? >>On PBS tuesday night. >>A PhD in psychology (some French fellow) who has made millions advising [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > I wonder about people who spend all their time trying to find or make > up things adverse to a particular brand. Are they more enlightened? Nah, lonely...  SignatureSkip Middleton www.shadowcatcherimagery.com www.pbase.com/skipm > >On PBS tuesday night. > >A PhD in psychology (some French fellow) who has made millions advising [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > I wonder about people who spend all their time trying to find or make > up things adverse to a particular brand. Are they more enlightened? Made up? Yeah. Never say die, Charles. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/persuaders/themes/ Most likely it means said consumer already has a sizable investment in prime lenses and flash equipment that will only fit "their favorite brand of camera". Unlike cars or trucks, I build a camera system and integrate all the pieces. darkroommike >>> On PBS tuesday night. >>> A PhD in psychology (some French fellow) who has made millions advising [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Made up? Yeah. Never say die, Charles. > http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/persuaders/themes/ It might mean that people who bought a certain brand, then get to know the brand product's quality as good or acceptable. Or perhaps the consumer wants to avoid any compatibility with accessories and is not aware that brand parts are interchangeable. However, I'm shopping for a reasonably-priced quality tripod for my Canon Rebel XT and will probably select one of these brands: Bilora Bogen Benbo Gitzo Lenmar SLIK Smith Victor I passed up the Canon tripods I saw, although I did look at them. >Most likely it means said consumer already has a sizable >investment in prime lenses and flash equipment that will [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >> Made up? Yeah. Never say die, Charles. >> http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/persuaders/themes/ >> >On PBS tuesday night. >> >A PhD in psychology (some French fellow) who has made millions advising [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Made up? Yeah. Never say die, Charles. > http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/persuaders/themes/ Charles brings up the obvious point. What is the difference between these "brand loyalists" and someone fixated the other way? The anti-brand loyalists. If it's true that I go out of my way to defend my choice of Canons, how is that better or worse than someone who goes out of his way to consistently blast Canon? The fact that my first Canon was a success, that all subsequent Canons have been a success, may have something to do with my brand loyalty. As long as they work well to my expectations, I'll keep buying them. Like most, I suspect, I'll move on to something else if or when one of my Canons lets me down. I'm also a Ford loyalist, since Ford is the only company that makes Mustangs, and I've driven Mustangs all my life. (Okay, actually I'm a Mustang loyalist.) Of course, if Ford NEVER advertised the Mustangs, I'd continue to buy them, only because that car fits exactly what I'm looking for in a car. But cars or cameras are just things. You can "attack" them all you want, and I'll never take it personally. So, have at it, if that's what gives your life meaning. We all need something we can be proud of in this life. dwight "dwight" <tfrog93@gEEmail.com> wrote in message > If it's true that I go out of my way to defend my choice of Canons, how is > that better or worse than someone who goes out of his way to consistently > blast Canon? Unless you have experience with other brands, you really would have little objective evidence to support the assertion that your particular brand was better than others. We see that on these newsgroups all the time. Everyone promotes the brand that they have chosen for their personal use, and few even admit the possibility that there may be better solutions available. It isn't too long before these discussions deteriorate to where the participants are attacking one another. It reminds me of that old jingle, "My dog's better than your dog. My dog's better than yours. My dog's better, 'cause he eats Ken-L-Ration My dog's better than yours." > "dwight" <tfrog93@gEEmail.com> wrote in message >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > objective evidence to support the assertion that your particular brand was > better than others. My only other experience in digital cameras was my Olympus D360L - a 1.3MP camera with 2X digital optics. When I bought it, it was a fantastic little camera. Six months later, it was disappointing and in need of replacement. But I'm not foolish enough to judge all Olympus cameras by the one with which I have any experience. I understand that Nikon, Fuji, Kodak and others make some nice equipment, but I have no personal knowledge of this. I bought a Canon (S1IS) that served me well, and upgraded to another Canon (Rebel XT) that brings me joy. In that regard, I can ONLY speak to Canons and tend to seek out what I know. I've also given my family the SD200, SD300, and now SD630. My opinion on any other make of cameras is absoutely worthless. I know that and tend to NOT weigh in on discussions of other brands or comparisons. For film work, I've chosen to go with Pentax. I understand that there are many better options out there in this area, too, but I go with what worked for me in the past. That has never meant that I have any standing to blast Canon or Nikon film cameras, but I can certainly offer my opinion about the particular Pentax cameras I own. > We see that on these newsgroups all the time. Everyone promotes the brand > that they have chosen for their personal use, and few even admit the [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > My dog's better, 'cause he eats Ken-L-Ration > My dog's better than yours." Yes, this newsgroup has much in common with many others. I always take everything with big grains of salt. When someone asks for opinions on two or three different camera selections, the odds are a million to one that they'll get a solid response from someone who actually owns and/or has experience with those two or three. All they can expect is a) a response from someone who owns ONE of those cameras or b) a response from someone who has read something about one of those cameras or c) the expected response with a link to a camera review site. dwight >> "dwight" <tfrog93@gEEmail.com> wrote in message >>> [quoted text clipped - 51 lines] > > dwight What Pentax bodies and lenses do you have? >> Yes, this newsgroup has much in common with many others. I always take >> everything with big grains of salt. When someone asks for opinions on two [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > What Pentax bodies and lenses do you have? I still enjoy the old K1000 that my wife picked up for a black & white photography course in college. Trying to upgrade from that, I bought the ZX-M. I like shooting in manual, so I can screw up ALL the settings, not just one or two. That's why digital photography is a godsend for me. With the S1 and now the Rebel XT, I can play all I want in manual mode, and eventually get a shot worthing showing to anyone. dwight > On PBS tuesday night. > A PhD in psychology (some French fellow) who has made millions advising [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > drones, only too willing to do their master's bidding and attack anyone > who appears disloyal or who attacks the master? Or is it possible that this 'cult', professes love and freedom of choice to all others? Eddie >> On PBS tuesday night. >> A PhD in psychology (some French fellow) who has made millions advising [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Eddie Why respond to a post that is clearly meant to fan the flames of dispute? The OP was clearly trolling. There was no need to characterize people with phrases such as "RABIDLY ATTACHED TO A BRAND," "MINDLESS DRONES," "WILLING TO DO THEIR MASTER'S BIDDING," and "MEMBERS OF A CULT." That is pure troll bait, and the only appropriate response is to add the OP to one's killfile. > >> On PBS tuesday night. > >> A PhD in psychology (some French fellow) who has made millions advising [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > That is pure troll bait, and the only appropriate response is to add the OP > to one's killfile. Actually, Rich/RichA is not a troll, but the proper response is the same. See Issues: <http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/issues.htm> >From that page: Issues has an issue and she won't rest until it becomes your issue, too. Even when she's not talking about her issue it's clear she would rather be talking about her issue...Her obsession, however, provides the key to defeating her in battle; she can't tolerate indifference, so if her thrusts are simply ignored she will rage, accuse, condemn, plead and finally, go away. So killfile, ignore, refuse to comment, read with amusement, but whatever you do, do not reply. And may those who are ignored go on to bug others elsewhere. Austin Personally I feel sorry for RichA. He apparently has very little life of his own. He has no friends (if he did he has annoyed them to death by now) and he is apparently not getting laid enough. ljc >On PBS tuesday night. >A PhD in psychology (some French fellow) who has made millions advising >the auto industry how >to advertise says that psychologically and in their behaviour patterns, >brand loyalists are identical to members of a cult. This goes to motive: By "brand loyalist" do you mean someone who buys simply because of the brand name stamped on an object? If so then that is irrational behavior. On the other hand someone may rightly or wrongly, really believe for many reasons that a particular brand is, in the main, superior to other brands. Nothing psychologically wrong with that. > Does this mean >that those rabidly attached to a brand like...Canon are mindless >drones, only too willing to do their master's bidding and attack anyone >who appears disloyal or who attacks the master? Most folks "rabidly" attached to anything is sick. My guess is that there are only a few like this with most thinking that Canon stuff is in the main superior to other brands and could be convinced otherwise given substantial evidence to the contrary. You are making too big a thing out of it. > >On PBS tuesday night. > >A PhD in psychology (some French fellow) who has made millions advising [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > believe for many reasons that a particular brand is, in the main, > superior to other brands. Nothing psychologically wrong with that. No. This fellow maintained that brand loyalists literally "love" the brands they buy, in the human-human sense of love. Creepy. > > Does this mean > >that those rabidly attached to a brand like...Canon are mindless [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > in the main superior to other brands and could be convinced otherwise > given substantial evidence to the contrary. Switching people off brand loyalty isn't easy. > You are making too big a thing out of it. Oh? Have you ever seen how some of these people react? I'm glad they aren't allowed to carry guns. >Oh? Have you ever seen how some of these people react? I'm glad they >aren't allowed to carry guns. We do allow these kind of people to carry guns. We call them Patriots, Heros and soldiers and as a group they are called "armies". > On PBS tuesday night. > A PhD in psychology (some French fellow) who has made millions advising > the auto industry how > to advertise says that psychologically and in their behaviour patterns, > brand loyalists are identical to members of a cult. I have always suspected that practitioners of psychology were themselves cultists. :-) > > On PBS tuesday night. > > A PhD in psychology (some French fellow) who has made millions advising [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > I have always suspected that practitioners of psychology were themselves > cultists. :-) One of the biggest detractors of psychologists and their practices was a cultist, L. Ron Hubbard. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.