It’s obvious isn’t it?

If you say or write something enough it will assume a significance and accuracy it probably doesn’t deserve. If the comment is already one of those that has achieved the status of ‘being a well known fact’ then repeating it yet again just adds a little more credibility that helps support its existence as an absolute truth.

I was scanning today’s press and encountered a couple of these types of comments that on face value seem obvious. I just wonder if they are really true?

Motorola's mobile-phone division has completed a three-year agreement with MTV, worth £45million. I think it involves a new show called MTV Mash.
The company’s marketing manger says the link-up with MTV will bring awareness of its brand to the youth market. She went onto say "We were technology-based and an older demographic brand. We want to become a more consumer-led brand, and we see that the youth market is easily adapted to new technology. Youths will more often change their phone as they do their sneakers."

Did you see the couple of ‘obvious’ statements. Firstly, Technology-based is not consumer-led. Secondly, the youth age group is easily (by inference more than the older demographic) adapted to new technology. It would be interesting to see the evidence that supports this statement.

Another example from the head of corporate marketing at Chase de Vere Employee Benefits, in the context of providing flexible remuneration packages. He says, “A younger recruit saving for a deposit on a flat would much rather have the additional money, whereas an older employee would place more value on a critical illness policy”

So obviously true it is not worth questioning?

How about this ‘well known fact’. Age stereotypes are bad for your business.