Xref: utzoo misc.consumers:26537 alt.activism:9300 comp.org.eff.talk:1338
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!hellgate.utah.edu!caen!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!uunet!sugar!taronga!arielle
From: arielle@taronga.hackercorp.com (Stephanie da Silva)
Newsgroups: misc.consumers,alt.activism,comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: "advertising is not evil"
Message-ID: <E011PYB@taronga.hackercorp.com>
Date: 1 Feb 91 10:01:19 GMT
References: <856@argosy.UUCP> <156215@felix.UUCP> <1991Jan27.164332.22205@csn.org> <23016@ttidca.TTI.COM>
Distribution: na
Organization: A corner of our bedroom
Lines: 20

In article <23016@ttidca.TTI.COM>, hollombe@ttidca.TTI.COM (The Polymath) writes:
> In article <1991Jan29.210008.6535@looking.on.ca> brad@looking.on.ca (Brad Templeton) writes:
> }If you want to conserve paper, junk mail is actually a plus.   When you
> }consider that the alternative to a 10,000 piece junk mailing is an ad in
> }a 500,000 circulation magazine...
> 
> }But for those concerned about wasting paper, the better the targeting of
> }the junk mail, the less paper used.

In the recent cover article on junk mail in TIME magazine, the advertisers
claimed that smaller packages of junk mail don't do well. People like big
bulky junk mail. 

Go figure.


-- 
Stephanie da Silva
arielle@taronga.hackercorp.com        Cute saying under construction.
(713) 568-0381                         All suggestions are welcome.