WRITING QUESTION
Description
I need help to emerge these paragraphs together into 1. It won’t take any more than 30 minutes.
Executive Summary:
When focusing on any controversial issue, one can expect to come up against criticism. The case of “The Other Hangover” was a good example of how an aggressive marketing campaign can be successful, yet still draw criticism from some audiences. This case study reviews the marketing campaign focusing on addressing the issue of binge drinking on campuses, the process in how the project team developed the specific ads, the response to the ads, and the eventual conclusion that the ads were indeed successful. This paper reviews additional aspects of the Case Study including criticisms and public relations issues that the team encountered, reviews the sponsorship of the campaign by distilleries and the ethical issue this may or may not create, the message of the ads, and the evaluations of the project.
Executive Summary:
The Other Hangover is the case study that my group selected. It is a nationwide campaign that began in 2010 and reaches across different college campuses and advertises moderation with alcohol instead of binge drinking. Most anti-binge drinking campaigns focus on the physical negative side effects of the overconsumption of alcohol. The Other Hangover studied different campaigns on the subject and found many of those that focus on health aspects of binge drinking are ineffective because the target audience finds those “unrealistic”. The Other Hangover campaign took a different approach. They targeted the target audience’s every day concerns: their social life and reputation. The campaign used an array of different advertising techniques to get the attention of college students. Their advertisement of the campaign was literally everywhere around campus. After the campaign had its reign, a panel of evaluators surveyed the effected audience and presented their findings. The group that funded the campaign and survey was a nonprofit organization of alcohol distilleries, they created a nationwide competition for marketing students to come up with the most effective anti-binge drinking campaign.
Executive Summary:
The campaign about several issues in society, demands total concentration for them to be successful. In addition, even the successful campaign must receive several criticisms that must be dealt with. For example, the campaign about binge drinking experienced several criticisms from different societies due to the image used. Hence, there should include preparation to prevent and solve such issues. There are several considerations that should be applied when introducing any project in an organization in order to avoid the disruption of the official programs. The community might develop different perceptions regarding the message presented, which can be prevented by explaining the intended message. The success can be defined from different angles depending on the evaluation done by the leaders as well as the aim of the project. Attain the short-term benefits is a type of success which can be linked with another hangover.
Needing paper corrected, paper has already been completed instructor is requesting it to be corrected please see instructors notes below I will attach paper and outline
Per the instructor…. thank you for what you’ve done so far. I have one BIG glaring hole in your paper that I am unable to resolve from what you wrote. Let me share that with you: In Table 2, you report p values for the “before” and “after” values. This is before your hypothesis test, so I’m wondering what you’re doing there to generate those values. What is the null hypothesis and alt hypothesis? When you announce those values, there should be some indication where they come from (work shown). The second MAJOR question I have for you is this: In that same Table 2, you say those are not significant, and later on, you say you cannot reject your null hypothesis. But you conclude by saying “There is weak evidence that there is a significant relationship between the difference in satisfaction ratings before and after the brand name change”. Which is it? You can’t really claim both. One thing that jumped out at me early was you using the term “correlation”, and as often as you did. In the first page, you say you used a descriptive correlational technique”. In statistics, that term means something pretty specific. You don’t have two variables, and so I don’t think you’re doing a correlation. Let me say a few things about that assignment. The only variable is the actual scores. You are required to do a hypothesis test because of this language: “Determine whether there is a difference in customer satisfaction ratings before and after
the brand name change.” Whether you treat this as pairs of data, and work with both the original mean and the new mean, or if you treat the pairs as forming a single piece of data (change in scores), your null hypothesis is that the average change is not statistically significantly different from 0. Your calculations should verify that it’s not significantly different from 0, and you go on. I’m available for more questions, or if you just want to talk about the assignment (glege@umassglobal.edu). Thanks, Jerry