Blog dedicado a la formación en todos sus ámbitos: presencial, online, a distancia
Hola:
Una infografía sobre ¿Qué empresas han llamado a más coches a revisión?
Un saludo
You will find more statistics at Statista
Hola:
Una infografía sobre cómo influir y persuadir.
Un saludo
Cómo influir y persuadir
Hola:
Una infografía con las Organizaciones que más invierten en lobby (USA).
Un saludo
You will find more statistics at Statista
Earlier this summer, facing lawsuits and investigations from multiple state and federal agencies, Corinthian Colleges Inc. struck a deal with the U.S. Dept. of Education to either sell off or wind-down most its schools, like Everest University, WyoTech, and Heald College. Yet Corinthian continues to plague the airways with ads, trying to talk potential students into enrolling in schools that may not exist in a few months. And guess who is making money off the ads? The folks at Comcast.
Ads for CCI schools have been airing on syndicated daytime TV for quite some time, but we’d expected them to cool off, it not vanish completely following the deal with the DOE, which stipulates that the $35 million in federal aid released to the schools only be used for “approved education activities.”
Advertising for schools that will no longer exist doesn’t seem like it would fall under that heading, so we recorded some daytime TV programming to see if the ads were still running.
Every time this Everest shill shouts “Hey ladies!” between segments on Maury, Springer, or Steve Wilkos, the folks at Comcast make some money, regardless of the fact that most Everest campuses may be closed or sold off in the coming months.
A few things stood out to us:
• The Everest ads were often positioned in that prime spot at the beginning of the commercial break.
• Some Everest ads featured a voice-over lead-in from the talk show host stating, “Brought to you in part by…”
• While lie-detector chat show The Test, which is sandwiched between episodes of Maury during this block, ran many of the same ads for sketchy car-title loans, personal injury attorneys, and other for-profit colleges, it didn’t air any Everest spots.
These all seemed to indicate to us that the Everest ads weren’t being sold by the local station, but by the shows’ distributors; a fact confirmed to Consumerist by a rep for WPHL.
“These spots are not sold by WPHL locally,” explains the rep. “This advertiser is buying the show from the syndication barter sales staff. We are simply fulfilling our obligation to run the show that includes the national advertisers sold by the syndication company.”
So who is that syndication company?
Well, for Maury, Jerry Springer, and The Steve Wilkos Show, the distributor is Comcast-owned NBC Universal Domestic Television Distribution.
Meanwhile, The Test, which didn’t have the Everest ads — though we can’t say for sure it hasn’t run Everest ads during episodes we didn’t watch — is distributed by CBS.
Reps for NBC’s distribution division declined to comment on this story or why the company continues to run ads from a company that is under scrutiny from regulators and prosecutors around the country.
And while these may only represent about 1-in-20 ads on each of the shows that air them, it’s still ad revenue — money that likely came from taxpayer-funded federal aid — that is going into the pockets of Comcast so that a school facing allegations of grade-manipulation and bogus job-placement stats can continue to lure in new students.
Just from the handful of ads on these few NBC-syndicated shows, Everest could be seen by several million people every day. These shows air on hundreds of over-the-air stations, including in every major market in the U.S. No cable connection or satellite service is needed to find out who the father is on Maury or to watch Steve Wilkos kick some alleged abuser off his stage.
These shows enjoy a high viewership among a wide range of demographics.
According to the NBC Universal page about Maury , the show has 3.1 million daily viewers, ranks as the #1 rated syndicated talk show among women from 18 to 49, and all adults in several age groups. Maury also has, per NBC, the youngest audience among all the syndicated talk shows.
And yet, in spite of this diverse group of viewers, the ads on these shows target the low-income viewers, pushing predatory financial products, ambulance-chasing lawyers, local car dealers, bottom-of-the-barrel insurance companies, and expensive career-training programs at for-profit schools like Everest, ITT, Kaplan and ICDC.
Meanwhile, during the same hours over on Comcast-owned Bravo, you’ll find reruns of second-tier reality shows like Ladies of London but the ads are for high-profile retailers, cosmetics, upcoming theatrical releases.
So Comcast is apparently selective on how it agrees to sell ads to questionable companies — if the show features predominantly lower-income, minorities shouting at each other over paternity, then it’s okay to profit off these ads. But it the show is about wealthy white women shouting at each other for a reality show, that production merits only top-tier advertisers.
Interestingly, no one from the Dept. of Education nor any of the federal lawmakers who have called for Everest to cease enrolling students altogether have been willing to go on the record about whether or not these ads violate the operating agreement between CCI and the feds.
However, a government source tells Consumerist that while the DOE does not have the legal authority to cease advertising the operating agreement does require that CCI immediately halt enrollment at schools that entering teach-out programs.
While the feds may not be openly trying to stop CCI from enrolling campuses at schools that are up for sale, the Illinois Board of Higher Education recently ordered CCI to immediately stop all sales, advertising, marketing and enrollment activities in the state.
Sen. Dick Durbin, who has been an outspoken critic of for-profit schools, but whose office would not comment on this story did say that he hopes other states will follow Illinois’ lead.
“All Everest College students should immediately be made aware of the company’s intent to sell their campuses in Illinois and their financial options whether they choose to continue their education or not,” the Senator said in a recent statement.
“Everybody tracking this issue is incredibly concerned and upset that Corinthian is still advertising and enrolling students,” Maura Dundon, senior policy counsel for the Center for Responsible Lending tells Consumerist.
Since schools like Everest are really just student loan mills that accept as many students as possible in order to get as much student loan money as they can, it’s not shocking that CCI continues to advertise from its deathbed.
“Even if the federal loan spigot is turned off, students could still sign up for private loans that put money in the schools’ pockets while the students are left on the hook,” explains our colleague Suzanne Martindale from Consumers Union. “The ongoing advertising is deceptive to students, who are being promised something that the schools can’t deliver.”
Martindale also points to CCI’s ongoing ad campaign as a sign of how broken the for-profit college system is.
“If an institution is only thinking about short-term profit goals — enrolling as many new students as possible — the situation will deteriorate in the end and leave behind a trail of victims,” she tells Consumerist. “It’s a shame that so many students have been treated like dollar signs, and that American taxpayers have been unwittingly footing the bill. Lax oversight of the for-profit college industry has taken a major toll on Americans seeking job training, personal improvement, or simply a better life for their families.”
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which recently sued for-profit ITT Tech (also a big advertiser on the NBC-distributed shows) could not comment on the Everest ads, but did point to previous remarks by CFPB director Richard Cordray at the time of the ITT enforcement action.
“[W]e believe many for-profit colleges may be saying one thing to students as they load them up with debt but saying another thing to investors as they sell their business model,” said Cordray at the time. “In the end, the outcomes for many of these students do not live up to the promises the schools made to them.”
A few weeks ago, a passenger experienced some kind of problem with (MAJOR U.S. AIRLINE). She sent a complaint letter about this (SPECIFIC EVENT) and received a printed letter back. This letter made it clear that the person who sent the letter had forgotten to use (CUSTOMER RELATIONS MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE) to fill in the blanks, resulting in a Mad Libs apology of sorts. Naturally, the recipient posted it to (POPULAR SOCIAL MEDIA SITE).
The letter-writer got partway there with their form-lettering, managing to fill in the customer’s name. In the salutation. The sender of the letter (in name, anyway) also included his signature, which the Reddit submitter thoughtfully redacted.
In case you’re on a mobile device or using a screen reader, here’s the full text of the letter:
Dear Mrs. [Redacted],
Thank you for letting us know about your recent experience with United Airlines. I apologize if our service did not meet your expectations, and appreciate you taking time to share your concerns.
Our goal is to provide a consistently reliable product and an exemplary level of customer service. Based on the events you describe, we did not meet this goal. Your comments regarding (SPECIFIC EVENT) will be used for coaching and training our employees.
To encourage you to fly with us again and as a tangible means of acknowledging your disappointment, enclosed is (SPECIFIC ITEM).
(CUSTOMER NAME), I ask that you allow us another opportunity to serve you, as we consider it our privilege to have you aboard.
Yes, there’s nothing that makes a customer feel valued and respected as a person quite like being referred to as (CUSTOMER NAME). A United spokesperson contacted by the Daily Caller said that he couldn’t confirm whether the letter was authentic, but that the company would like to straighten things out if they knew who the customer was.
We can’t exactly fault a company for using form letters, though. Even we use canned responses when reading our voluminous tipline, and make occasional mistakes with copy and paste. For example, here’s what a reader gets when they copy us on their e-mail to a company:
No one pretends that customer service worker bees are sitting in an office somewhere, typing out fresh and heartfelt responses for every lost suitcase and oversold flight. It’s better when a company at least pretends to give a crap, though, isn’t it?
United Airlines writes the most sentimental apology letters. (Thanks, Kent!)
The 29-year-old woman added Skywalker — after Luke Skywalker, a character created by George Lucas for Star Wars, if you’re not down with the folks from Tatooine — to her name in 2008 “for a bit of a laugh,” she tells the BBC.
She says she has the signature on a bunch of other official documents, but when she tried to renew her passport and changed her signature to include the name, the Home Office said it “will not recognize a change to a name which is subject to copyright or trademark.”
“We have a duty to ensure the reputation of the UK passport is not called into question or disrepute,” a spokesman said.
But the woman is wondering why this case is so different from her other forms of identification.
“It’s on my driving license, my bank cards, everything. Everyone else is happy with that signature apart from passport office,” she said.
She’ll now perhaps be able to keep the name on her passport, but would have to submit a new form with her old signature. Unless perhaps George Lucas himself arrives on a landspeeder brandishing a lightsaber to grant her permission personally. And if that’s what happens, well, just call me Princess Leia Quirk.
‘Skywalker’ signature rejected by passport officials [BBC]
As anyone with bad eyesight could probably tell you, having options when it comes to the cost of contact lenses is extremely important. Just ask my fiance, because apparently I have “very expensive eyes.” I’ll take that as a compliment, but the idea that I won’t have the opportunity to find the best priced lenses next time I fill my prescription is a very real possibility, and one that’s already hurting some of the 35 million consumers who wear contacts.
On Wednesday, the Senate Judiciary Committee’s antitrust panel met to consider whether decisions by three of the four major U.S. contact lens makers to set price floors for their products constitutes anticompetitive behavior by limiting competition and possibly resulting in higher prices, Reuters reports.
The moves by Alcon, owned by Novartis AG; Bausch & Lomb, owned by Valeant Pharmaceuticals; and Johnson & Johnson – the maker of Acuvue brand lenses – prevent many low-cost retailers (think 1-800-CONTACTS) from discounting their lenses.
The new policies bring up several questions surrounding the motivation of these producers. Two antitrust experts tell Reuters there’s a chance the companies see the price floors as a way to give optometrists an incentive to prescribe their lenses instead of a competitors’ lenses, possibly creating a kickback of sorts.
Contact lens makers, discount retailers, industry trade groups and and our colleague, Consumers Union senior policy counsel George Slover, offered their opinions during the subcommittee’s testimony Wednesday.
Joe Zeidner, general counsel for from 1-800-CONTACTS, told the committee that the decision by the lens makers would undoubtedly run up prices for consumers.
“They (consumers) will see higher prices. They will lose their ability to shop around,” Zeidner said.
Slover testified [PDF] that there really is no reason for such a provision to be implemented to begin with.
“In any event, the new practice constitutes an antitrust violation from a legal standpoint, from a practical standpoint it is anti-competitive to refuse to allow discounting,” he said. “Consumers are denied more affordable alternatives. They pay more than they need to, and sellers who would like to make those affordable alternatives available are denied the opportunity to do so. That’s not good for consumers, however you look at it.”
Officials with Johnson & Johnson testified that while the company discontinued discounts, they lowered prices of their products.
“By instituting uniform pricing, lowering our prices and making the process by which we make those prices available, we believe we can better compete in contact lens market,” Millicent Knight, an official with Johnson and Johnson said.
It’s hard to fathom HOW J&J could “better compete,” given that it is already controls 47.1% of the contact lens market.
Alcon was the first company to jump on the idea of price floors last summer. The other two makers followed suit, with Johnson & Johnson discontinuing rebates when its policy went into effect this summer.
A spokesperson for Novartis, the company behind Alcon, tells Reuters that the company implemented its new price floor policy to combat the practice of so-called “showrooming” where optometrists educate patients on a product only to have them go to an online retailer to purchase at a lower price.
All three makers hold a significant portion of the contact lens market, while industry officials estimate that only about 10% of contacts are sold online.
Those online retailers are trying to brace themselves for the effect of the new pricing model by urging consumers to stock up.
One Consumerist reader sent over an email he received from 1-800-CONTACTS notifying him of the changes.
“A new policy, known as Unilateral Pricing Policy (UPP), is being implemented by many contact lens manufacturers. This policy regulates the lowest price we can sell their lenses for and will cause the overall price of contact lenses to increase with the elimination of sales, rebates and discounts.
“In the next day or so, we will be sending you additional information as well as an opportunity to stock up on your brand using discounts and rebates before they are no longer available.”
The letter goes on to list a number of Acuvue brand contact lenses that will be effected by the pricing change starting August 1.
“In a truly competitive market, if one manufacturer tries this kind of rigid pricing, another would step in and take advantage, appealing to cost-conscious consumers with a lower price,” explains Slover. “Yet that kind of competition could now be absent in the contact lens industry. We hope antitrust enforcers will take a close look at these anti-consumer industry practices.”
U.S. Senate panel to look into price setting for contact lenses [Reuters]
Well, that isn’t fair. I am not a particular fan of Papa John’s, but clearly a lot of people like or at least tolerate their pizza. Brand Eating reports that in addition to “Carolina-style” pulled pork, the pizza also features pepper jack (not pepper Jill) cheese and crushed red pepper.
The pulled pork pizza will be a limited-time offering, only in stores until August 24th.
News: Papa John’s – New Spicy Pulled Pork Pizza [Brand Eating]
I’m not here to burst your happy grilling bubble, but come on — can you really consider yourself a master of the art of grilling if you haven’t tried cooking with hot lava? What about lightning? Maybe. But bending the forces of nature to do your culinary bidding? There’s no topping that, at least not yet. Call me when you beat an egg with a tornado.
Don’t feel too ashamed, my fellow normal people who do not have access to hot lava or lightning on demand, it’s not like Pat and Terry next door are going to top you anytime soon, as these two methods aren’t things anyone should be trying at home.
Over at DesignBoom, however, a video made by a London-based creative team knowns as Bompas & Parr shows how it could be done if you’ve got the right tools: An artificial volcano, allowing grillers to get molten hot liquid to 2,100 degrees using an industrial furnace, an ice flue and dry ice.
The resulting stream of hot lava flows beneath a normal grilling surface to cook steak and corn on the cob, basically instantly roasting both foods.
The B&P team also cooked with lightning, using a high-voltage laboratory that again, isn’t going to be easy to replicate but is super cool.
I don’t even have to warn you not to try this at home, because unless you happen to have the abovementioned tools or live on top of an active volcano (in which case you’d have other things to worry about besides ribeyes), you’re not going to be able to top Pat and Terry next door anyway. But it’s still fun to watch.
B&P Cook Out from robert wysocki on Vimeo.
While marijuana has been legal in Washington state since the beginning of this year, it’s not like the streets are filled with people lighting up bongs and toking on pipes. Because if you do, you’re going to get a ticket for public marijuana use. That being said, the Seattle Police Department says one officer has been reassigned after apparently going a bit ticket-happy and issuing about 80% of the city’s pot citations so far this year.
Chief Kathleen O’Toole of the Seattle PD writes on the department’s web site that the first biannual report on marijuana enforcement shows that 66 of 83 marijuana tickets were issued by just one officer.
He added notes to the tickets requesting the attention of City Attorney Peter Holmes in some cases, addressed to “Petey Holmes,” writes O’Toole.
In other cases, the officer added notes that he flipped a coin to decide which smoking citizen to cite, or referenced the changes to marijuana laws as “silly.”
Because of the above incidents, O’Toole says he’s been reported to the Office of Professional Oversight and has been reassigned — meaning he won’t be on patrol duties while the matter is under investigation.
“Please know that officers who perform professional and constitutional police service and enforcement will always have my full support,” she writes, in a bit of a “HINT HINT don’t do this, got it?”
Officer Reassigned Following Investigation Into Marijuana Citations [Seattle Police Department]
