On Over Advertising

Advertising-- it is a concept with which we are all familiar and is very prominent in this country, as well as many others. As a person whose philosophical ideals align much more closely with capitalism than socialism, I understand the need for advertising and believe that it should exist in many of its current forms. However, there are a few examples where I feel that advertising has gotten completely out of hand. In some scenarios I believe that advertisements are inappropriate and should be removed.

First off, why are there now full commercials in movie theatres before the start of the movie? Of course the previews can be considered advertisements and have been around for quite some time, but I'm not talking about previews. I go to the movies paying twenty bucks just for the ticket, and then another twenty on snacks, and now I have to sit there and watch ads for cars, jeans, and soft drinks? You have got to be friggin' kidding me. The exorbitant ticket and snack prices apparently don't rake in enough money for these movie theatre bastards. Now I have to pay to watch commercials! At home it's a different story. The commercials are necessary to pay for the programming. But in the theatre, the feature presentation has already been paid for ... by me and the rest of the audience!

In that same vein, I get really pissed (angry, not drunk) when I buy a DVD and I have to sit through ads encouraging me to buy DVDs for other movies. I spent the money, I own it, it's mine. Why should I have to watch all of the fluff at the beginning? And you do have to watch it. Try to hit the main menu button and the words "Action prohibited" appear on the screen. I will grant that most of these DVDs do have some encryption that allows me to skip to the main menu each subsequent time I watch the movie. But it's still a lousy thing to do sticking all of those DVD previews, and sometimes other commercials as well, on a purchased item.

Another thing that gets to me are these little commercials popping up on the bottom of the screen during a program. These are usually ads for a new show on the same network. Well I say to hell with your new show! If you waited until the commercial break to let me know about it, I might've given it a chance. But the star of the new show had to keep popping up in the corner of the screen, waving to me like a moron. I'm now so annoyed at this guy for constantly interrupting my shows that I refuse to ever watch the new program.

And finally, there is another new trend that also causes an interruption while the show is in progress. Apparently the various networks are so desperate to milk every second they can out of commercial air time that they can no longer run the credits at the end of a show. Now the second program begins, and part of the screen is covered by some box in the corner. And what is this box obstructing my view? The credits for the previous show! Give me a break! Were the extra ten seconds that necessary? Now everyone gets to miss part of the screen at the beginning of the next show, which is sometimes a major issue when there are subtitles or some other writing that the viewers should see. So the air time for the credits has been sacrificed in order to squeeze every last second of time out of the show and use it for commercials.

In summary, although I am in favor of advertising, I am against over advertising. In the above mentioned scenarios, perhaps along with a few others, the advertisements are inappropriate and therefore unwelcome. And to all of the big wigs that have a hand in placing ads where they don't belong, I'm just about ready to walk up to you and place my foot where it doesn't belong!

On Splitting The Bill (Part 3)

When it comes to splitting the bill, the issues are numerous. In previous posts I have discussed most of the issues that can arise. In a great many situations the bill will be shortchanged by one or more parties and the person that calculates what each person owes is usually the one with the lowest mathematical abilities. I will now conclude this topic by mentioning one final issue.

Let us assume that a group goes out to dinner. The bill arrives, the calculation is performed correctly, and each individual is ready to put in the proper amount (the chances of this are extremely slim, but we shall use this hypothetical example to illustrate that we still have not cleared all of the obstacles). Although it may seem like we have come to the end and nothing can go wrong at this point, this is not the case. We must always keep in mind that common sense has not been granted to everyone, and this creates problems.

A bill is given, each person is to pay a certain amount, and people begin taking out money. This is what should happen. But if you are with a large enough group, there is a great chance that this will not happen. It may be common sense to me that when going out to dinner with a large group, I should have money in order to pay. But not everyone has that mindset. Unfortunately, cash is not used as often nowadays. I have even witnessed individuals use a debit card for a purchase of less than a dollar. And people that fall into that trend often fail to bring actual tangible money.

Now we have a group of individuals handing over credit cards to be used in conjunction with the cash that was collected. Now the server is given insane instructions to take some cash, $50 on this card, $100 on this card, $40 on this card, et cetera. It is absolute mayhem! This confuses the servers, is a real hassle for those that have to run all of the cards, and delays everyone at the table.

And then in this scenario the tip becomes another problem. With everyone handing in different credit cards, no one had the foresight to go into the cash pile to remove the tip before handing it all to the server. Consequently, all of the cash was applied to the bill and a few credit cards were rung up for the amount indicated. Now someone has to place the tip on their credit card which was not charged the full amount (if we stick with our assumption that all parties paid what was expected).

Simply put, it is a hassle for everyone when someone pulls out a credit card when people are splitting the bill. It is always the same story with these people. They say "I just assumed that I would take the money and put the whole thing on my card." Well unfortunately for everyone, there happen to be more people with this mentality than there should be. So we have three or four credit cards now, with each person thinking they would be the only one to pull that stunt. Think again!

So the next time you go out to dinner with a group, follow these simple steps:

1.) Pay what you owe

2.) Let the person that actually can calculate be the one to calculate

3.)For the sake of convenience and simplicity, bring cash

On Splitting The Bill (Part 2)

Last week I discussed the main problem when it comes to splitting the bill. I will now mention some further issues. I've already explained that, people being people, the bill will usually come up short if everyone pays for their own order. The obvious solution that springs to mind is to have the bill split evenly so that everyone puts in the same amount. However, even this method of splitting the bill is not without its problems.

One rarely encountered but serious issue is the person that takes extreme advantage of the fact that the bill will be split. This person will order an extremely expensive entree, several appetizers, and highly costly drinks. If each individual were to pay for himself or herself this person would pay at least double and probably triple what everyone else pays. But in a situation where the bill is split evenly, everyone must chip in to cover the expensive order and the glutton walks away laughing.

Another isssue, believe it or not, is that some people still shortchange the bill in this scenario. The method chosen specifically to alleviate this problem can still be subject to an individual putting in less money. It sounds strange, but there are people that are told to put in $50 along with everyone else and yet this person will slip in a mere $20. Over the years I've encountered at least ten people that pull this stunt. The wonderful thing about this situation is that they are easily pinpointed. After the bill comes up short, simply ask each individual if they put in the fixed amount. These culprits always respond in the same manner-- "I think so. I just took money out of my pocket and threw it in. I didn't count it to see exactly how much it was." I will grant that most of the human population is retarded, but these people must be absolutely insane if they think that people are that stupid. No one grabs loose bills out and throws them in without counting. And even if they did, we once again look to probability. If money were grabbed randomly and thrown in, it would work out that half the time the bill would be short and half the time the bill would be over. But this is the excuse that is used.

Moving on, we have further problems still. Splitting the bill evenly amongst all parties can considerably reduce the frequency of coming up short. But now to add a tip and divide by the number of people present involves a little math. Granted, the mathematics used is very basic and taught in third grade, but it is mathematics nonetheless and this leads to another problem. The check comes, people are ready to split the bill, and then who grabs the check to figure it all out? The person that got left back in kindergarden always seems to be the one that suddenly takes control. Well this is just dandy! The person that can't add two rocks together is going to tell us all what we owe. Now everyone has to wait around while the idiot comes up with a number that will almost certainly be incorrect. Then after everyone gives said amount, we will be told that something is wrong. Well no shit Sherlock! Maybe we shouldn't let the moron that failed fingerpainting handle the finances.

Unfortunately, that is the person that takes control and no one wants to say anything, including myself. I've already angered many people in the past due to my bluntness and my lack of political correctness and diplomacy. The last thing I need is another person going around and saying that I'm a mean and horrible person. And I'll tell you the reason why my bluntness seems so terrible: it's because I'm right, and the truth often hurts.

The problems of splitting the bill still do not end there. Next week I will vent about one final issue and wrap up this topic.

On Splitting The Bill (Part 1)

Humans, members of the species Homo sapiens, are social animals. Even the loners, such as myself, have the need for social contact. As a result of this, there will arise many occasions where one finds himself or herself out with a large group. For teenagers large groups present no problem. The group would simply meet somewhere outside and stay in that location, each typically drinking a cheap 40 oz. of malt liquor that was self-bought. But for adults, the location of choice will most certainly involve money. There are a few problems with this and the main problem is one that I will now address.

A large group at a table will inevitably receive a single bill for everyone. At this point a decision must be made concerning the method for splitting the bill. There are basically two main ways to divide a bill. One option is to divide the bill by the number of people present, each paying an equal amount. Another option is to have each individual pay for what they ordered. Although this method is theoretically the most fair, I will venture to say that this results in a shortage at least 95% of the time (probably more).

There are two possible reasons for the shortage: one is malicious and the other is innocent. Given the ever-declining mathematical abilities of the general population, it seems quite possible that individuals do miscalculate what they owe and therefore give less. While a mathematical error can easily explain a shortage, unfortunately it cannot explain why almost every mathematical error results in a lower amount than is necessary. For if the cause was truly an honest mistake, would not the error result in a shortage only half the time and an overage the other half? Sadly, logic reinforces my cynicism and we must explore a more deliberate explanation.

The phenomenon of social loafing is well-known whereby one or more members involved in a group project fail to contribute, knowing full well that the others in the group will work harder to pick up the slack. The phenomenon of shortchanging the bill seems analagous to social loafing in my opinion. An individual, or perhaps a few individuals, will deliberately fail to give the full amount of what is owed knowing that the other members will kick in extra money to cover the bill.

In fact, this phenomenon happens so often that those who cover the shortage get used to paying extra. I recall two separate occasions where I was out with a group and each member was someone like me (i.e. a schmuck that gives extra money). On both occasions the end result was that there was too much money, and money was given back to everyone to avoid giving the server a tip of 80% or more. Events such as this are extremely rare, and two times out of a large number of group events through the years is a small and negligible percentage. Therefore, when out with a large group it is highly probable that someone will not kick in enough money.

Next week I will discuss further issues with splitting the bill. Until then, pay what you owe!