Archive | Article Spinner Q & A’s

Which of the following marketing messages are consumers most likely to trust?

A TV commercial
An article about the company in a city newspaper
An Internet advertisement
A phone conversation with an employee of the company

Which of the following can help you evaluate the performance of your ads and other marketing strategies?

Asking competitors what they think of your advertising strategy
Collecting secondary data about your target market
Asking customers how they found out about your company or product
Sending out a press release multiple times

Posted in Article Spinner Q & A's2 Comments

Do mailing list links provide clickbank commissions?

I am trying to do some article marketing in the self help niche. I chose self confidence creator by robert anthony as my product to promote. Anyway I tried joining the mailing list via my hoplink. I noticed in the emails that it has links back to the site to encourage sales. The emails don’t include my hoplink, will I still get commissions off the sales in the mailing list?

Posted in Article Spinner Q & A's3 Comments

Did United Nations 1441 actually imply the use of military action?

Me and my friend were debating so much yesterday whether UN 1441 actually imply the use of military action against Iraq. He insisted that UN 1441 did not imply the use of military action against Iraq.

He insist Bush and Blair(UK) administration tried to spin it that way but that lacked credibility. The coalition sought a new resolution and only abandoned the plan to go after one because any vote would demonstrate the explicit objections of the security council. When UN Resolution 1441 was voted no one interpreted or defended it as the pro war people (mainly the Bush and Blair administration) later would. The source has the legal details but again it’s crucial to note the only reason the US didn’t seek a new resolution is because they knew it would be defeated and that would be an explicit no to the way they were planning to spin 1441. That how my friend think.

http://www.fpif.org/articles/lawyers_statement_on_un_resolution_1441_on_iraq

But the I think Iraq war was justified on the basis that Saddam failed to comply with 18 UN resolutions(maybe i’m wrong but it’s my opinion).

Specifically this section of 1441: “Iraqi production and use of weapons of mass destruction (biological weapons, chemical weapons, and long-range missiles), all in violation of U.N. resolutions.”
I’m asking a simple question based on facts that have changed since 1441 came out. We all know that Saddam had WMDs against the Kurds, his own people and Israel.

However Hans Blix & team said that after returning in November of 2002, Iraq was complying with the 1991 terms of Ceasefire(not a lie, a fact, just ask him yourself) but US and it’s allies went in anyways and invaded. That’s why UN(i know US and it’s allies don’t care since they are sovereign nation) refused to support the war.

So my question is that did UN 1441 actually imply the use of military force? if so, quote where it says "military action" from 1441 please. or try to quote the closest thing it says that.

Please answer this because i’m trying to understand UN 1441.

Posted in Article Spinner Q & A's1 Comment

Need help with a blog title?

I can write pretty good but for some reason i always have trouble coming up with titles and sub titles. Anyway, i want to start a new blog, the blog will mostly be about how to make money online with subjects such as article writing, article marketing, general marketing, affiliate marketing, blogging, possibly CPA, will not include PTC, PTS, MLM, and those types of methods.

Thanks for your help

Posted in Article Spinner Q & A's1 Comment

How much do I charge for my services? "Internet Marketing"?

I am starting a business doing internet marketing for small businesses and entrepreneurs. SEO, Article Marketing, Virtual Assistance, PPC, Keyword Search all other suggestions appreciated.
My question is how much do I charge them and how should they pay? If you are already in this type of business please help. All other suggestions welcome.

Any ideas help:) Thank you in advance:)

Posted in Article Spinner Q & A's3 Comments

can you analyze the rhetoric strategies used in this article?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/06/AR2006120601349.html

U.S. Uneasy About Biotech Food
Americans Lack Knowledge, Faith in FDA’s Accuracy, Poll Finds

By Rick Weiss
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, December 7, 2006; A16

Ten years after genetically engineered crops were first planted commercially in the United States, Americans remain ill-informed about and uncomfortable with biotech food, according to the fifth annual survey on the topic, released yesterday.

People vastly underestimate how much gene-altered food they are already consuming, lean toward wanting greater regulation of such crops and have less faith than ever that the Food and Drug Administration will provide accurate information, the survey found.

The poll also confirmed that most Americans, particularly women, do not like the idea of consuming meat or milk from cloned animals — a view that stands in contrast to scientific evidence that cloned food is safe. The FDA recently said it is close to allowing such food on the market.

Michael Fernandez, executive director of the Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology, which sponsored the survey, said that overall, Americans are "still generally uncertain" about genetically modified and cloned foods. "How the next generation of biotech products is introduced — and consumers’ trust in the regulation of GM foods — will be critical in shaping U.S. attitudes in the long term."

In the five years since Pew began plumbing American views of genetically engineered food, U.S. acreage in such crops has grown substantially. Today, 89 percent of soybeans, 83 percent of cotton and 61 percent of corn is genetically engineered to resist weed-killing chemicals or to help the plants make their own insecticides.

Because most processed foods contain at least small amounts of soy lecithin, corn syrup or related ingredients, almost everyone in the United States has consumed some amount of gene-altered food.

That quiet revolution has been punctuated by occasional high-profile problems, including the 2000 finding of StarLink corn, unapproved for human consumption, in many food products, and the recent revelation that the U.S. long grain rice crop has been contaminated with an experimental variety of gene-altered rice.

In this year’s survey, conducted by the Mellman Group, one-quarter of the 1,000 adults polled thought they had ever eaten gene-altered food, an indication that Americans have "very little in-depth knowledge of the topic," according to a Pew summary.

Support for marketing of genetically modified food has remained flat since 2001 at 27 percent, with opposition dropping from 58 percent in 2001 to 46 percent this year.

The proportion of Americans who say they "don’t know" if gene-modified foods are safe has shrunk since 2001, while the "safe" and "unsafe" camps grew by about 5 percent each: 34 percent think they are safe, while 29 percent say they are not.

Of those who claim to have at least a rudimentary sense of how engineered foods are regulated, 41 percent say they would like to see more stringent rules, and 16 percent say there is already too much regulation.

Consuming cloned animals — addressed in the poll for the first time — popped up as a hot-button issue. Even among those who said they had no objection to eating genetically engineered foods, 34 percent were comfortable with animal cloning, while 51 percent were not.

Religion played a big role in those opinions. Among those who said they attend religious services only "a few times a year or less," 30 percent were comfortable with animal cloning, and 54 percent were not. Among those who attend weekly religious services, 17 percent were comfortable with cloning, and 70 percent were not.

Asked which sources they trust "a great deal" for information about gene-altered foods, "friends and family" ranked highest, at 37 percent. Only 29 percent named the FDA, continuing a steady drop from 41 percent in 2001.

The least trustworthy source, garnering 11 percent, was the news media. But remember, you read it here first.

Posted in Article Spinner Q & A's2 Comments

Makers of Depakote being sued for off-label marketing?

I know I read an article about the makers of the epilepsy drug Depakote being investigated for illegal marketing of the drug – does anyone have more information on this?

Posted in Article Spinner Q & A's1 Comment

Did United Nations 1441 actually imply the use of military action?

Me and my friend were debating so much yesterday whether UN 1441 actually imply the use of military action against Iraq. He insisted that UN 1441 did not imply the use of military action against Iraq.

He insist Bush and Blair(UK) administration tried to spin it that way but that lacked credibility. The coalition sought a new resolution and only abandoned the plan to go after one because any vote would demonstrate the explicit objections of the security council. When UN Resolution 1441 was voted no one interpreted or defended it as the pro war people (mainly the Bush and Blair administration) later would. The source has the legal details but again it’s crucial to note the only reason the US didn’t seek a new resolution is because they knew it would be defeated and that would be an explicit no to the way they were planning to spin 1441. That how my friend think. http://www.fpif.org/articles/lawyers_statement_on_un_resolution_1441_on_iraq
was that her opinion or more of a fact?

But the I think Iraq war was justified on the basis that Saddam failed to comply with 18 UN resolutions(maybe i’m wrong but it’s my opinion).

Specifically this section of 1441: “Iraqi production and use of weapons of mass destruction (biological weapons, chemical weapons, and long-range missiles), all in violation of U.N. resolutions.”
I’m asking a simple question based on facts that have changed since 1441 came out. We all know that Saddam had WMDs against the Kurds, his own people and Israel.

However Hans Blix & team said that after returning in November of 2002, Iraq was complying with the 1991 terms of Ceasefire(not a lie, a fact, just ask him yourself) but US and it’s allies went in anyways and invaded. That’s why UN(i know US and it’s allies don’t care since they are sovereign nation) refused to support the war.

So my question is that did UN 1441 actually imply the use of military force? if so, quote where it says "military action" from 1441 please. or try to quote the closest thing it says that.

Please answer this because i’m trying to understand UN 1441.
@reznist and you need to get a life if you don’t have anything to say. did UN 1441 imply the use of military action? if you just another troll looking for 2 points. Go somewhese else.

Posted in Article Spinner Q & A's1 Comment

Based on the Marketing Week (2007) article, explain the importance of usability when designing a Web site.?

Posted in Article Spinner Q & A's1 Comment

I need help understand this short article,can u please help?

(Can you please let me know what are the main point of this article, I’m kinda confused. Thanks)

My Overall Summary:
This article is discusses mainly about the security of a national ID card. Because, the fear of terrorism that is why they come up with this type of identification card. The author is against this idea because he think by doing this the people have to give up some of their personal privacy which will be vulnerable to these people.

—-> Can someone tell me how can this type of national ID card help America prevent from terrorism?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Threat of National ID

By: WILLIAM SAFIRE
Published: December 24, 2001

A device is now available to help pet owners find lost animals. It’s a little chip implanted under the skin in the back of the neck; any animal shelter can quickly scan lost dogs or cats and pick up the address of the worried owner.

That’s a good side of identification technology. There’s a bad side: fear of terrorism has placed Americans in danger of trading our ”right to be let alone” for the false sense of security of a national identification card.

All of us are willing to give up some of our personal privacy in return for greater safety. That’s why we gladly suffer the pat-downs and ”wanding” at airports, and show a local photo ID before boarding. Such precautions contribute to our peace of mind.

However, the fear of terror attack is being exploited by law enforcement sweeping for suspects as well as by commercial marketers seeking prospects. It has emboldened the zealots of intrusion to press for the holy grail of snoopery — a mandatory national ID.

Police unconcerned with the sanctity of an individual’s home have already developed heat sensors to let them look inside people’s houses. The federal ”Carnivore” surveillance system feeds on your meatiest e-mail. Think you can encrypt your way to privacy? The Justice Department is proud of its new ”Magic Lantern”: all attempts by computer owners to encode their messages can now be overwhelmed by an electronic bug the F.B.I. can plant on your keyboard to read every stroke.

But in the dreams of Big Brother and his cousin, Big Marketing, nothing can compare to forcing every person in the United States — under penalty of law — to carry what the totalitarians used to call ”papers.”

The plastic card would not merely show a photograph, signature and address, as driver’s licenses do. That’s only the beginning. In time, and with exquisite refinements, the card would contain not only a fingerprint, description of DNA and the details of your eye’s iris, but a host of other information about you.

Hospitals would say: How about a chip providing a complete medical history in case of emergencies? Merchants would add a chip for credit rating, bank accounts and product preferences, while divorced spouses would lobby for a rundown of net assets and yearly expenditures. Politicians would like to know voting records and political affiliation. Cops, of course, would insist on a record of arrests, speeding tickets, E-Z pass auto movements and links to suspicious Web sites and associates.

All this information and more is being collected already. With a national ID system, however, it can all be centered in a single dossier, even pressed on a single card — with a copy of that card in a national databank, supposedly confidential but available to any imaginative hacker.

What about us libertarian misfits who take the trouble to try to ”opt out”? We will not be able to travel, or buy on credit, or participate in tomorrow’s normal life. Soon enough, police as well as employers will consider those who resist full disclosure of their financial, academic, medical, religious, social and political affiliations to be suspect.

The universal use and likely abuse of the national ID — a discredit card — will trigger questions like: When did you begin subscribing to these publications and why were you visiting that spicy or seditious Web site? Why are you afraid to show us your papers on demand? Why are you paying cash? What do you have to hide?

Today’s diatribe will be scorned as alarmist by the same security-mongers who shrugged off our attorney general’s attempt to abolish habeas corpus (which libertarian protests and the Bush administration’s sober second thoughts seem to be aborting). But the lust to take advantage of the public’s fear of terrorist penetration by penetrating everyone’s private lives — this time including the lives of U.S. citizens protected by the Fourth Amendment — is gaining popularity.

Beware: It is not just an efficient little card to speed you though lines faster or to buy you sure-fire protection from suicide bombers. A national ID card would be a ticket to the loss of much of your personal freedom. Its size could then be reduced for implantation under the skin in the back of
(adding missing words from the last sentence in article:)

Its size could then be reduced for implantation under the skin in the back of your neck.

Posted in Article Spinner Q & A's1 Comment

Advert

Powered by WordPress Lab
Powered by Yahoo! Answers