Typo in advertising

Doesn't an advertiser have a commitment to proof read
or at least ask in writing if the copy they recieved for
printing is correct? I noticed too that some merchants
have begun including disclaimers about the props not
being part of the sale. I can't imagine someone trying to
buy, for example, a color tv and a solid wood entertainment
center for $199.00 and think the store is going to just lay
down and let it go.

mark_

"mark_digital" wrote in message
...
Doesn't an advertiser have a commitment to proof read
or at least ask in writing if the copy they recieved for
printing is correct? I noticed too that some merchants
have begun including disclaimers about the props not
being part of the sale. I can't imagine someone trying to
buy, for example, a color tv and a solid wood entertainment
center for $199.00 and think the store is going to just lay
down and let it go.

As we move toward an idiot proof society we become more idiotic.

"mark_digital" wrote in message
...
Doesn't an advertiser have a commitment to proof read
or at least ask in writing if the copy they recieved for
printing is correct? I noticed too that some merchants
have begun including disclaimers about the props not
being part of the sale. I can't imagine someone trying to
buy, for example, a color tv and a solid wood entertainment
center for $199.00 and think the store is going to just lay
down and let it go.

mark_

---------
This is why people hate lawyers.
We have ambulance-chasers and class-action idiots to thank for the necessity
these ridiculous CYA tactics.

"Mark M" wrote in message =
news:ztuVc.86419$Lj.70981@fed1read03...

"mark_digital" wrote in message
...
Doesn't an advertiser have a commitment to proof read
or at least ask in writing if the copy they recieved for
printing is correct? I noticed too that some merchants
have begun including disclaimers about the props not
being part of the sale. I can't imagine someone trying to
buy, for example, a color tv and a solid wood entertainment
center for $199.00 and think the store is going to just lay
down and let it go.

mark_

---------
This is why people hate lawyers.
We have ambulance-chasers and class-action idiots to thank for the =
necessity
these ridiculous CYA tactics.
----------------------------
----------------------------
----------------------------
Thank the American Bar Association. You may recall there was a time
when lawyers held themselves to a high esteem and did not advertise
their services. We live in a world where a few like to mess with =
tradition
and inturn screw things up. Daytime real life TV courtroom judges =
reeking
with hysteria and yelling "shut up" because plaintiffs and defendents =
talk
over each other aren't helping the perception of law, order and =
civility.

I'm afraid that someday people will sell the rights to their =
confessional
and cameras will be allowed in the booths. Sound farfetched? Not if
money can be made.

mark_

"Mark M" wrote in message =
news:ztuVc.86419$Lj.70981@fed1read03...

"mark_digital" wrote in message
...
Doesn't an advertiser have a commitment to proof read
or at least ask in writing if the copy they recieved for
printing is correct? I noticed too that some merchants
have begun including disclaimers about the props not
being part of the sale. I can't imagine someone trying to
buy, for example, a color tv and a solid wood entertainment
center for $199.00 and think the store is going to just lay
down and let it go.

mark_

---------
This is why people hate lawyers.
We have ambulance-chasers and class-action idiots to thank for the =
necessity
these ridiculous CYA tactics.
----------------------------
----------------------------
----------------------------
Thank the American Bar Association. You may recall there was a time
when lawyers held themselves to a high esteem and did not advertise
their services. We live in a world where a few like to mess with =
tradition
and inturn screw things up. Daytime real life TV courtroom judges =
reeking
with hysteria and yelling "shut up" because plaintiffs and defendents =
talk
over each other aren't helping the perception of law, order and =
civility.

I'm afraid that someday people will sell the rights to their =
confessional
and cameras will be allowed in the booths. Sound farfetched? Not if
money can be made.

mark_

"Charles Schuler" wrote in message =
...


As we move toward an idiot proof society we become more idiotic.
------------------
------------------
------------------
Being dumb and being stupid have had their meanings overlap and
as a result there's practically no differentiation. But what concerns
me the most is the legal system is finding the perpetuator of a crime
a victim too, and victims with rational complaints ar being chastized
like never before for being or doing what is or was a normal activity.
Case in point: A man with little or no camera experience saw an ad
for a camera and liked the price. He didn't know the price advertised
actually was a four figure number, not three. He brought the merchant
to court for not honoring the lower price. The merchant pointed to the
disclaimer about typos. Would you believe the judge actually harrassed
the plaintiff because he didn't call first to verify the price but =
instead
travelled a great distance in person to buy the camera. The plaintiff
replied he didn't have a reason to believe the price was wrong.
I happen to agree with the plaintiff because cameras aren't an every
day item and their prices aren't drilled into our heads. The plaintiff =
lost his
case. The judge actually accussed him of playing stupid. Maybe it's
because the guy is Russian and has been here in the US for two years.
We have kids graduating from highschool after 12 years of schooling
and some are as incoherent as they went in.

mark_

Personally, I would side with the judge in this case, not for the plaintiff
"playing stupid", but for the plaintiff wasting the court's time.

If the price listed in the ad is not the price listed in the store, one of
two things have happened: an error has occured that may or may not be the
store's fault (they may have approved *correct* copy and the newspaper still
screwed up when they printed it), or it's a bait-and-switch scheme (in which
a lower-priced, often non-existant item is used to lure in customers, where
they can then be sold another, higher-priced item).

If the former is the case... hey, it's a mistake. It happens. Get over it.

If the latter... report them to the company's head office, or the BBB, or
even the media.

But going to COURT over a difference in price between an ad and the store?
This Russian has seen too much American TV. Yeah, he's learned what the
American Dream is all about: sue anyone you can for anything you can think
of and get rich. Yeesh.

If I was the judge, I'd not only have tossed the whole thing out, but made
the plaintiff pay all the court costs for wasting the court's time.

--
"Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ
from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are even
incapable of forming such opinions."
-- Albert Einstein


"mark_digital" wrote in message
...

"Charles Schuler" wrote in message
...


As we move toward an idiot proof society we become more idiotic.
------------------
------------------
------------------
Being dumb and being stupid have had their meanings overlap and
as a result there's practically no differentiation. But what concerns
me the most is the legal system is finding the perpetuator of a crime
a victim too, and victims with rational complaints ar being chastized
like never before for being or doing what is or was a normal activity.
Case in point: A man with little or no camera experience saw an ad
for a camera and liked the price. He didn't know the price advertised
actually was a four figure number, not three. He brought the merchant
to court for not honoring the lower price. The merchant pointed to the
disclaimer about typos. Would you believe the judge actually harrassed
the plaintiff because he didn't call first to verify the price but instead
travelled a great distance in person to buy the camera. The plaintiff
replied he didn't have a reason to believe the price was wrong.
I happen to agree with the plaintiff because cameras aren't an every
day item and their prices aren't drilled into our heads. The plaintiff lost
his
case. The judge actually accussed him of playing stupid. Maybe it's
because the guy is Russian and has been here in the US for two years.
We have kids graduating from highschool after 12 years of schooling
and some are as incoherent as they went in.

mark_