Marketing research apparently shows that people are multi-tasking more and more while they use various media. We already knew that, really, I mean, when the television or newspaper doesn’t give you all the information you want, of course you’ll check it out online. Our main other activity while using media isn’t blogging or googling, though, it’s eating…

I was surprised at the finding (opinion? I’m not sure) that

media that can target, be timely, and deliver value to consumers – such as coupons/direct mail, radio, yellow pages, newspapers and newspaper inserts – increased in purchase influence

Really? I always simply throw out that junk mail, and the horrible inserts that come with newspapers, yuck, they go straight in the recycling. I imagined that was everyone else’s response too.

Are “Bigresearch.com” simply trying to sell direct mail and waste paper, or am I a total anomaly?

OK, time to go read the newspaper while I have some cereal… (hey, it’s still morning in Chicago!)


Discover more from Jill Walker Rettberg

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

1 Comment

  1. writershall

    As an overly-avid computer user, this doesn’t surprise me. More often than not, I get too engrossed in what I’m doing to remember to eat, but when I do I’ll usually try to manage eating and doing something on the computer at the same time. Though, not having much space on my desk here at college, it’s kind of difficult to manage typing around a bowl of cereal.
    But as far as junk mail goes, I agree with you that I just throw it all out. If it looks interesting, I’ll scan through it briefly before tossing it. I’ve never gotten any junkmail worth saving.

Leave A Comment

Recommended Posts

AI STORIES

AI-generated stories have longer endings than human stories

My colleague Jessica Witte has just shared a preprint where she compared the emotional arcs of the stories we generated using gpt-4o-mini to those of human-authored (pre-2022) stories from the subreddit r/WritingPrompts, conveniently gathered in this dataset. She found a distinct difference in the endings of the LLM-generated stories: both […]

How to peer review a paper in 2026

Dorothy Bishop, a psychologist, wrote a useful list of what reviewers need to look out now that so many papers are bad science that looks good thanks to LLMs. Read her whole blog post, she explains it well, but here’s a brief version because I’m pretty sure we’ll be needing […]

“So what if it was ChatGPT? It *could* have been true!”

I recently read a good article on the different kinds of truth a language model operates with by Luke Mann, Liam Magee and Vanicka Arora, Truth Machines: Synthesizing Veracity in AI Language Models, but despite its lovely typology of truths (consensus, correspondence, coherence and pragmatic) it doesn’t help me with […]

AI STORIES

AI shimmer and sparkle

I have this hunch that sparkles and glow and shimmer are somehow a point in the latent spaces of LLMs that have more connections than you would expect. Perhaps their connotation to magic and to the unknown matches some of the mystique of genAI? Or perhaps these words are used […]

Don’t do a systematic review if you’re in the humanities

This paper is a great example of why you probably shouldn’t use a systematic literature review for a theoretical and conceptual research question like “How does artificial intelligence affect the perception of authenticity and aura in art?” However, if you’re looking for an annotated list of 48 recent articles about […]