Re: Maine Times: Listeners want to put the 'public' back in radio

[Garrett Wollman <wollman>]

<<On Sat, 10 Mar 2001 10:13:38 -0500, "Roger Kirk" <rogerkirk@ttlc.net> said:

> Coca-Cola's rationale to change "Coke" to "New Coke" was based on
> research, too.  The Coke-drinking public retorted.  Coke recanted.

The whole ``New Coke Fiasco'' was intentional and well-reasoned.  KO
never expected that ``New Coke'' would be accepted by the public; its
only purpose was to clear the store shelves of ``old Coke'' so that
most consumers wouldn't notice the difference between ``old Coke''
(made with sugar) and ``Coke Classic'' (made with high-fructose corn
syrup)[1].  A classic use of marketing as a distraction to keep people
from noticing changes in the product.  (Much like the 6-oz can of tuna
that's ``on sale'' for the price of a 6.125-oz can, disguising the
increase in unit price.)

[Note Reply-To!]

-GAWollman

[1] HFCS is cheaper than sugar because of quotas which keep the price
of sugar unnaturally high.  The biggest supporter of the sugar-subsidy
system is none other than Archer Daniels Midland, the country's
principal manufacturer of HFCS.  Coincidence?  You be the judge.