PDA

View Full Version : The "don't have sex" campaign for teenagers


maroule
17-04-2007, 15:32:06
is a flop

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,2058066,00.html

now that's a surprise

The Republicans do pick their fights with gusto

Suggested next fight for the GOP: stop Venom from wanking

King_Ghidra
17-04-2007, 15:40:50
thoguh i also think the campaign is ridiculous and probably didn't succeed, i would tend to be sceptical of the idea that a survey of 2000 people proves the point

maroule
17-04-2007, 16:02:25
that the basis of all surveys, i.e pick a representative sample and extrapolate/correct. 2000 is a good number, most surveys are in the hundreds (500 in France). It's a mature industry and results are pretty reliable, but of course it all depends on how representative the survey is. As it's the Congress paying, it's probably done by an ok supplier.

MDA
17-04-2007, 16:13:20
Originally posted by maroule

Suggested next fight for the GOP: stop Venom from wanking

...and we thought the War on Drugs was hard.

Dyl Ulenspiegel
17-04-2007, 16:37:49
Time for the chastity belts. Maybe Haliburton could provide them.

King_Ghidra
18-04-2007, 08:49:12
Originally posted by maroule
that the basis of all surveys, i.e pick a representative sample and extrapolate/correct. 2000 is a good number, most surveys are in the hundreds (500 in France). It's a mature industry and results are pretty reliable, but of course it all depends on how representative the survey is. As it's the Congress paying, it's probably done by an ok supplier.

thank you i know how surveys work, i have a low opinion of them as a technique

Funko
18-04-2007, 08:58:24
It's no shock that the abstinence only education doesn't stop people having sex. Total no brainer, the surprise is that the kids given better sex education still have the same rates of unprotected sex as those with abstinence only education. (within the limits of it being a small sample survey)

maroule
18-04-2007, 09:34:19
Originally posted by King_Ghidra
thank you i know how surveys work, i have a low opinion of them as a technique

they have been used for decades by all major corporations in the world, to take decisions for absolutely everything (and they cost big bucks), the well known firms use some of the best professionals around (both in quantitative and qualitative studies) and the best graduated money can buy, but KG is NOT convinced.

I guess they have to try harder, then.

King_Ghidra
18-04-2007, 09:55:22
as a sole source of decision making? :rolleyes: don't be a retard

King_Ghidra
18-04-2007, 10:00:10
i'm well aware of the massive use of surveys throughout society, all i'm saying is that my opinion is that they are a of very limited value as they are fraught with risks of innaccuracy, bias, sampling errors etc. That is hardly a controversial point of view, i'm sure we have all studied the pros and cons of surveys in our various educational humanities and work endeavours

Dyl Ulenspiegel
18-04-2007, 10:27:04
Originally posted by maroule
they have been used for decades by all major corporations in the world, to take decisions for absolutely everything (and they cost big bucks), the well known firms use some of the best professionals around (both in quantitative and qualitative studies) and the best graduated money can buy, but KG is NOT convinced.

I guess they have to try harder, then.

You could say the same for LTCM... :D

maroule
18-04-2007, 11:35:52
Originally posted by King_Ghidra
as a sole source of decision making? :rolleyes: don't be a retard


ask any of your friends in marketing in big food/beverage company how they launch products, you will be surprised by how many "retards" we are

(that's including Mrs M BTW, since she is launching new gum brands across EMEA for a market leader)

King_Ghidra
18-04-2007, 11:50:34
as stated previously i am well aware that surveys are used extensively by people in all areas of life.

what i dispute is:

a) how vaulable surveys are in terms of the quality of information
b) that they are the sole source of information used by the information gatherers in determining their plans/successes etc.

in the case of the original article, we have two bits of information:

Its supporters claim that the fact that teenaged pregnancies have fallen in the US from a high of 62.1 per 1,000 women aged 15 to 19 in 1991 to 41.1 births per 1,000 in 2004 shows the campaign is working.

versus a survey of 2000 people who say something a bit different. Now you can believe what you like, but the implication is clear, taking the survey as the sole determinanant of the success of the program would be stupid.

The same is clearly true of business, surveys are no doubt useful in certain situations, but they must be backed up by business knowledge, experience, sales figures, market conditions, etc. etc.

maroule
18-04-2007, 12:28:06
You don't make any sense.
1/ You acknoweledge surveys are used extensively by at least a few reasonnably clever people (since everybody uses them, all the time)
2/ but you dispute how valuable they are, with only one dicernable reason, your prejudice against it

Surveys range from average to extremely accurate, when done with the proper methodologies (that all the big houses use). There are plenty of bad surveys, and useless ones, but there are a lot of shitty books, it doesn't make litterature useless.

as for hammering the obvious (they shouldn't be used alone...) you deserve a big rolleyes... when a business deals with a large amount of customers, you only have two important figures: past consumption (sales figures, when you have them, so you're screwed on anything new) and future consumption (forecasts)... which are based either on surveys or "finger in the air", in other words good old management intuition... feel free to pick you favorite method, or to mix the two, but discarding the use of surveys as the cornerstone of every stage of the life cycle of every mass market product is just plain absurd.

And for your information, a survey on 2000 participants is plenty enough to determine with a good deal of precision if it's a success or not, provided the sample is representative, and provided the answers are not distorted (which is another problem, one of methodology, and how much to correct your raw datas). In our case, I have no information on that. The fact that teenaged pregnacies delined is in no way a proof of the campaign working, as you know there could be no relationship between the two (I'm sure you've read Freakonomics, if not I recommend it)

I don't know why you are contesting the obvious, it's exactly like saying "I think the bankers at Goldman Sachs are really crap with their M&A deal engineering, really, I'm not convinced".