In all the many Index Topics, only one deals with the ,"Labor Market"...
Not much on work and working and workers supporting the family systems and Community systems, or How to make work work better for everyone?

A Foot Note...Democrats too often defer to the Republican Party as having more Business Savy--maybe on Wall Street but not on Mainstreet. Finding a community need and responding in an Effective and Efficient way is the heart of the Democratic Party and of Marketing. We are not selling an Ideology. We are leading the processes of identifying need and Organizing the resources to
meet them. While the Republicans are in a free-fall we need substantative
proposals.

On second thought, I would leave Veterans Health Services independent. This system could be used to test segments of the new National Wellness and Health Services Program to Emerge. The People need to give Congress direction for
designing and assigning direction (with over-sight) to the Wellness and Health Services to the Executive Branch of the goverment. If the Democrats don't take
posiession of this opportunity now, Gov. Huck. of AR. will do it under the Republican Party banner.

I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at, but let me take a stab at it. Are you saying that Republicans only examine and present society's problems as they relate to private individual profitability and market consumerism, whereas Democrats do (or should) examine and present society's problems as they relate to health, well-being and sustainability of both the environment and all of it's population?

Yes, and also that goverment operations must be competent and
also organized to change social and cultural practices to support individual self-actualization and socialization. The full application of all the arts and sciences
are required to support a humanitarian constitutional democracy.

I've always looked at Selling as a subset of Marketing. It sounds like you are treating Selling as apart from Marketing, not a part of Marketing. I guess if you look at Marketing as understanding the full need and meeting the need, and Selling as persuading people they want something that they don't need, they are apart from each other.

Selling as a subset of Marketing is knowing what people need and educating them on why they need it.

I can hardly think of a more useful distinction than between Marketing and selling.
One might say that selling is starting with a product or service one already has
and convincing or tricking someone into buying it. The only condition is that
it sells for more than it cost (or that you can get away with selling below cost
untill you run the competition out of business), and then make up the loss. Marketing means systematic observation of the social system to identify
critical needs and wants, create products and services to respond to these needs
and wants and prospect at personal, family, community, national and international
levels for consumers to serve. Doing one's job well is being supportive of Self, Family, Community, Nation and Universe.

Marketing goals can be just as shallow and selfish as selling goals. Selling goals can be just as noble and good-willed as marketing goals. It all hinges on the goals.

At the risk of over simplifying, Marketing is identifying the market, and wants and needs of that market. Selling is educating or persuading.

If the goal is just a selfish agenda (like making money), then Marketing and Selling work together to persuade the market that it wants what the marketer is selling. In this case, Marketing only does enough research to identify wants and needs of the market in order to arm the Seller with the lies and propaganda the market customer expects to hear before buying the product or service. Marketing does little or no changes to the product other than cosmetic. Selling bridges the gap between quality and customer expectations by changing customer expectations or deceitfully hiding the gap.

If the goal is an unselfish agenda (like serving community or humanity), then Marketing and Selling work together to educate the market that it needs what the marketer is selling. In this case, Marketing does the necessary research to identify the full wants and needs of the market in order to customize the product or service to meet the needs of the market customer, and then help the seller bridge the gap between wants and needs. The Seller is more of an educator than a persuader in this case depending on how wide the gap between wants and needs are.

Very well put, Bill. Marketing, in its most adaptative sense, probably would
not have evolved in the social system without at least a minimum level of
democracy in the system. And yes, purpose and goals make the difference.
Either Democracy or Marketing can be mis-used. And yes, there is a selling component in marketing.

In fact, "Marketing" may be a contendor for a place on theTen Words List

I am not qualified to comment but learned a lot from this stream.

In a goofy mood how would retail and wholesale fit into marketing as seen in Democracy?
Also when marketing takes from society with out a return?

If I have lost the thread please tell me and I will move on.

Welcome cutecat. I was thinking while opening my computer, That no one in this group, aside from Bil and I, have any interest in the concept of marketing.

I think "Marketing" derives primarily from the concept, "Community." Marketing
is the synthesis of democratic government and market economics with the major focus on the relations between the Individual Person (and family) and the Community, State, Nation, Universe and Human Culture. The basic unit of analysis is the individual person--their needs and wants, and ways to respond that
makes the Community better. In the process of doing this, Individuals and Groups
often times, even with the best of intentions, mis-read the needs and wants, or take too long in creating or finding and demonstrating helpful products and services so potential consumers don't easily recognize them as solutions to their problems. Pretty soon we may have a ware house full of stuff which we have
to sell in order to keep operating. I experienced this for 20 years in a government
funded Research and Training Center. It must be even more pronounced in
for profit organizations.

I am sorry I broke away last night but I usually shut down in Thunderstorms.
Afraid of lightning trashing my computer. Marketing issue is I can backup my files but could never afford to replace the harddrive.

Omaha is a test market area in US. We get a lot of marketing to familys and individuals here. It comes and then goes and then may return later.

Sometimes we loose the real good quality issues or items because they did not test well. The sadest thing is when the dumb or useless come back.

What I have noticed in a marketing aspect is they always are trying to push the envelope.

So perhaps that is where goverment and governing is at. Testing the effects of errors in the bush marketing. got to go Judge ruled Bush wire tapping illegal.

I imagine Bill would say that whether pushing the envelope is bad or not depends
on the purpose and goals of the enterprize, but we'll see. If one is truely working
within the customer's frame of reference, is convinced you have a product or service one can help the customer incorporate to improve his or her system,
responding in an Assertive manner is almost always appropriate. Responding in
a confrontive way is sometimes appropriate when you maintain an empathic relationship.

On line, on the phone in person How do you tell the difference between assertive and confrontational.

In my social and prior work settings I was always labeled with one of these.
Now I realize how we relate to people can go back to our childhood dinning table experiences(relating to family).

Marketing yourself is the greatest difficulty in politics and in serving goverment or just talking on CGCS.

Is their a marketing approach to evaluation of service. Is it truthful or false advertising.

Keys or clues are helpful. I find I stay within what my kids call my comfort zone.
This means that Media reporting, neighbor hood stores and shopping experiences are now where I find no lies, or until I find a lie.
I then base my news, shopping and entertainment on past experience. As I get older it is not a greater bias against things, I just put fewer options to myself to maintain my comfort zone.
My zone or cage rattles when I learn that the advertising I based my decision on may have been false.

Now is what I am saying making sense? This consumer side of me is not limited by lack of experience but by restriction of choices.

Are you asking how can one determine truth from lies?

Yes, as a consumer of services, whether from Politicians, Goverment or Private sector Clerks, Educational and Human Service Professionals, etc., you have the right and the responsability to assess whether they are doing the right things
and whether they are doing them effectively and efficiently. Assertive is
protecting your space. Aggresive is taking space from someone.

However, protecting one's space is only half of being Assertive. It also includes
reaching out to Others in positive ways--greetings, compliments and communicating understanding in affirmative ways. After adequate relationship
building, then giving constructive feedback which the recepient may perceive
and conceive as confrontational may be helpfull.

"Assertive is protecting your space. Aggressive is taking space from someone."

I know its been over a week since we started this marketing conversation in regard to politics but I like rla's answer to my questions of difference between assertive and aggressive.

Is the answer that protecting is considered passive to the agressive definition?
How do you market strongly within a Assertive approach with out being passive?

The passive is the silent label placed on Democrates.

Passive = Non-responsive
Assertive = Responsive, Non-provocative
Aggressive = Preemptive, Provocative
Hostile = Preemptive, Combative

One may be passive by not responding, but one may also be passive in conforming or compliant ways when such compliance is real and not a cover
for a hidden, aggressive response.

What would be an example of hostile marketing in governmental politics?

OK so basic marketing in Politics is best used as preemptive, provocative and I would like to add engaging?

Now I saw this item and thought about age 18 to 30 who need to be included in politics.

Politics in the fine meshes: young citizens, power and media
Kevin G. Barnhurst
"Young citizens form their political identities within personal networks, responding first to fiction television in the family and with peers. Their stories take place in small jurisdictions — home, school, church — where through media they confront the state as a force empowered to risk life."

Now I know with Clinton the marketing move that succeeded was MTV get out the vote and his Clinton's age didn't hurt.
So what is happening politically on TV, at the movies and in music to market voting, caring about elections and candidates.

Issues on ballots are very important. What issues are marketable to this age group?

This CGCS stream is showing as second on Google under marketing approach to politics so I am glad we are discussing this.

That's what I would call complacent.

I want to add that when this was the original Kerry site I had recommended Black Eyed Peas as a background for campaign. I did notice that they were on West Wing on their election day episode.
Since then I have found out that as a rap group they are seen as being to commercial and not unique. Well since I am over 40 (+)(+) I guess we know why I like them!

Starting a war and then using that war to maintain office?

WWF Smack-down, extreme sports, MMORPGs, street racing, reality tv, raves, and ecstasy, porn, and Christine Aguilera? You got me.

Now that I think about it, all these have one thing in common, entertainment. This is the beat me, stab me, shoot me, rob me, but just don't bore me generation. This would explain why faux news is entertainment first, facts last.

If we can find a way to make the political positions and campaigns entertaining, there would probably be more 18-30 participation in the process.

Christine Aguilara would definitly be good marketing for this generation but would they use the madonna kiss against her.

I thought that was Britney Spears.

Another approach may be the question;
Is Human behavior a product of culture, learning and socialization or is it a result of culture and genetics?

The motives of human behavior are the former. The habits of human behavior are the latter.

Four major factors have freuently been found in studies of interpersonal style. The model I'm most familiar with, name these factors:Aggressive, Assertive, Passive,
or Passive-Aggressive. Hostile could be either Aggressive or Passive-aggressive,
depending upon how overt the response is. Here's an example from a study of
career counselors in state employment offices. From 10 minute samples of tape
recordings of intake interviews, Counselor ratings on Empathy, Respect and non-
possive warmth predicted whether the clients showed up for their scheduled
follow-up interview with 95% accuracy. Counselors who were high in both Empathy
and Respect were described as Assertive more often than the other three categories and by Self-report measures. An incidental finding from the study
provides a good example of passive-aggressive style. The number of times the counselor used the word, go in the 10 minute dialog with clients also
predicted whether clients came back for their 2 nd interview and had a negative
correlation with scores on the counselor rating scales.

Is this addressing personality and psychology rather then marketing?

It was both actually.

More fun with marketing to a younger demographic...

american-citizenship on line

Look how comedy central has involved the 25 to 35 year old.


Voting at a fast food window

Voting mail boxes outside malls

Show like Americas most wanted but instead it could be Law Makers and Law Breakers

Gameing industry is wide open.

Game show

GLBT might argue this one

Perhaps. I was responding to Bill's question about hostile styles. A better example
would be in the context of talking politics.

All good ideas.

I threw up an idea or a Class War video game a few days ago.

Very impressive, Bill. When I finish getting my new computer set up, maybe we could work together to develope a cyperspace mutual self-help group where
any group member could lead the group through structured group exercises.

I must apologize for my momentary lapse last evening when I was looking for information on google and discovered this discussion was opening as a top site.
It appears although retired I still light up whenever I feel 1 second of notoriety.
This only shows like people in direct service industry google offers that in the moment gratification.
Talk about marketing; did I show my vulnerability.

Pretend to be developing an interpersonal marketing relationship and use the "inside" position to sabatage the prospective customer's operation. Actually,
this wouldn't be an application of marketing, or even a mis-application of marketing, but rather a misapplication of interpersonal relationships, which is only a part of marketing. The expression, "hostile marketing" may be a contradiction in terms.

I saw this and wondered is this why wireless spying would be important to the Goverment? Would that be a form of hotile marketing. Rather then actually hiring people or bying software they can just cull the internet.

The Independent Co.UK/Media
Power to the blogosphere
Geekiness has given way to consumer activism, so the major corporate players are having to learn the weblog game, says James Cherkoff
Published: 27 June 2005
Imagine a room with tens of thousands of your customers talking about your company and your products. That's one way to think about the blogging community (the blogosphere). The choice for companies is whether they want to be in that room or not. And increasingly, staying out is just too risky.
Imagine a room with tens of thousands of your customers talking about your company and your products. That's one way to think about the blogging community (the blogosphere). The choice for companies is whether they want to be in that room or not. And increasingly, staying out is just too risky.

A hostile marketer would believe that he/she is building a relationship by removing choice of competing relationships. Kind-of like a rapist who believes that the victim will like the sex enough to forgive the forceful manner in which sex was initiated.

This is also the effect of monopolization.

Hostile marketer is a more meaningful term than hostile marketing. Monopolization
is an authoritarian alternative to marketing. Seduction, blackmail, expert prescription and many other alternative approaches to marketing exist. A hostile
marketer is one who distorts the true marketing process.

What you are talking about is a form of marketing that is unselfish in nature. Most people know the selfish kind of Marketing. Marketing is amoral unless you consider total marketing meeting a market's total needs. Most people think of marketing as meeting the marketer's total needs, or meeting the markets total wants instead of needs.

If a customer's total needs are anything that supports the life and well-being of a customer, than there should be a lot less marketing going on in the world, seeing as how there are more unhealthy products being sold by marketers than healthy.

Much of the holistic unselfish approach to marketing is hinged on how one views population growth.

If the goal is to facilitate population regardless of size, than it all depends on the markets needs.

If the goal is to reduce population, then it all depends on the marketers needs, particularly living space.

If the goal is to tame population or regulate population size, than it all depends on the combined needs of the market, marketer, and the sustainability of the environment that supports both.

I'm trying to use the concept, "Marketing" as it is usually used in undergraduate and graduate courses in Marketing. The term is not widely used in ordinary language social discourse but where the goal is to use adult educations methods of politicing to raise awareness, then specific attention to the concept development
of Marketing could be helpful.

I think the outcomes from a marketing approach depend less on the personality structure(selfish vs unselfish) of the individual marketers and more on the preva-
lent world view of community at a particular time and place. The focus of political
intervention should be on changing the culture--not the personality structure of individuals.

Population density is certainly something that all enlightened nations need to be aware of along with best practices in resource utilization, but people who spend all their time counting their money aren't likely to be the ones to get rich.

My comments about selfish vs unselfish marketing were in reference to the goals of the marketing, not the goals of individual marketers. The overall goal has a personality of it's own, that's made up of the collective efforts of the individual marketers. Even if the individual marketers are selfish, the marketing goal could be unselfish, or the reverse.

An example of a selfish marketer working for an unselfish marketing goal would be a politician trying to make the most money from corporations while working under a constitutional government for the people. A an unselfish marketer working for a selfish goal would be the marketing director wanting to protect the environment while working under a company that's share holders only want to make more money at the environments expense.

Changing the marketing goal of America would change the culture. I consider culture the collective personality of a nation. If the marketing goal of the nation were to change (from say, not trying to dominate the world economically) then the overall (collective personality) culture would follow.

America once had a humble personality. When corporations took over, it developed a greedy cocky personality.

Hence the need for a strategy of concept development which allows all
stake holders an opportunity to collectivelly define what a Marketing Approach
is. This shift provides for a Part-whole Analysis to complement the linear
cause and effect analysis we are more accustomed to. The concept, "Marketing"
is no more morally and ethically neutral than the concept, "Democracy." The
goal of marketing is to meet the needs and wants of all individuals at each level of Person-Social System Interface. Democracy, at a given time and place, is
happening to a more or less degree. Marketing, at a given time and place is
happening to a more or less degree. Neither or something in the abstract which
may be used for good or evil purposes. The advent of mass media was required for nations to, "take on personalities" in the propoganda wars. This makes the need for functional models of Personing, of Community Building and of Nation
building more critical for promoting Democracy and Marketing.

We need to make a distinction between, "Marketers" and, "Huskersters."