1) What was the biggest surprise for
you in the reading? In other words, what did you read that stood out the
most as different from your expectations?
I was quite surprised that geography and other societal factors actually do not hold that well in terms of marketing. I have noticed that, unfortunately, people still seem to be relatively segregated. I have lived in the Northern, Southern and Mid-Western United States and it doesn't matter where you go. For some reason like live with like and have similar friends with similar interests (I would suppose because most people do not like change and the unknown - as it is only instinct to not venture to an unknown place because if you were a caveman, venturing to an unknown place by yourself would almost surely mean death). So, it would make sense to me that geography would have some weight as to a buyers habits. So, that was quite surprising that it is not. However, upon further analysis, it makes more sense that a buyers habits would depend on, well, his habits when he/she buys things (as correlation equals, well, correlation).
I was also surprised that the strategy for advertising (reflecting the general population, itself) has changed. You would think that advertising would remain the same, but - as the article indicates - spending habits and wars and many other factors have changed how and what people buy.
2) Identify at least one part of the reading that was confusing to you.
I wasn't quite sure what the author meant by "psychographics," first of all. I assume he was referring to segmentation for advertising, but he just all of a sudden used the term and it seemed to be referring to the segmentations, but I wasn't quite sure.
3) If you were able to ask two questions to the author, what would you ask? Why?
I would ask the author if he thinks that the marketing approach will change in the future (near or far) and would we be able to come up with a representational model for this to try and predict it (perhaps based on different aspects about the conditions of the economy, social situations, wars, etc).
4) Was there anything you think the author was wrong about? Where do you disagree with what she or he said? How?
I don't know if I really have the knowledge to argue with the author. Based on my experiences, I think that geography has more to do with advertising and predicting someone's purchases for this key reason: if you live in a town and you are, let's say, 7 or 8 years old and your friend gets a cool new toy, then you are going to want that toy as well. Regardless of your age, if your peers get a certain thing that is deemed by all of your peers to be very cool or useful, then you are more likely to buy that. Additionally, these items' "coolness" or appeal would almost certainly depend on age (except, perhaps, say phones or computers - which almost every age demographic seems very interested in having).
