Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!ucsd!casbah.acns.nwu.edu!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request
From: gast@cs.ucla.edu (David Gast)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Stupid AT&T Ads
Message-ID: <15298@accuvax.nwu.edu>
Date: 5 Dec 90 15:16:26 GMT
Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu
Organization: TELECOM Digest
Lines: 15
Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 871, Message 7 of 11


Stupid ads is certainly one category that AT&T does not and never did
monopolize.  In fact, I can't think of any ad I don't think is
manipulative, but that is a topic of discussion for another newsgroup.

> * A current campaign targets small business ... their rates are competitive.
								  -----------
In adver-speak competitive always means ``more expensive, but not so
much more that YOU the consumer should mind.''  As another example,
consider ``a competive rate'' versus ``the lowest/highest rate''.  (It
depends whether you are paying or receiving interest).


David Gast   gast@cs.ucla.edu
{uunet,ucbvax,rutgers}!{ucla-cs,cs.ucla.edu}!gast