Sharon-Style Endorsements

Transcription completed 9:27 AM 4 July 2017 and 1:34 PM


Sure we like her style, so of course we copy her words. She could make torture sound stylish.

Yeah, but she doesn’t support torture.

That’s right we do. We use her wordage no matter the product.

Her products never sold – never turned a profit. Why do you think yours will?

Her words fit our lie.

Do you think that will backfire on you?

We’ll see her response.

What if she doesn’t respond?

She always responds – eventually.

You could lose a lot of money in the meanwhile.

Or we could work something out.

She doesn’t negotiate. What if you don’t see her response coming?

We’ll take the hit and go from there. We’ll have arguments ready.

Oh, forgot to tell you, even when she loses (and she almost always does), she wins big in back channels and her opponent loses big out front and out back in unrelated areas. She’s ripe for winning big out front. It’s a question of which battle she’ll pick first. The fight is definitely coming – and it will not be in a court room.

What do you think about the vegan companies copying her words? Even her own people do it to her.

Yeah, vegans too on Facebook. That’s low and with no credit given.

One company even trade marked her words.

One said she’s part of a cause and you give your work over to the cause so everybody in the group can copy and spread it.

Yeah, but they put their name on it not hers. Yeah, that’s because most of them are Jews and she writes about Israel. Jews – and everybody else who goes against her principles.

At least she’s consistent.

Yeah, sometimes to a fault. She always slides back from it though when carried too far. If everybody else did that we wouldn’t have a job.

I think they want more names associated with the cause, so they take her stuff and put a bunch of different names to it, so it no longer belongs to her. Creepy huh?

Yeah. Wow, she’s got a zillion fights to pick from, which one will it be? She’s been sleeping for a while, should be interesting. It always is. What the f___k has she been doing?

Piling work.

Why?

Timing. She’s looking for a stretch of time where all she has to do is type and arrange what she already wrote. She packages it, then sends it out to the world. She picks the time and place for all of it. It’s a major production project.

So, it was like she dropped out of the sky for you to use?

Yeah, our prayers answered. We use her own words against her product by using her words on our product. Now I’d say that’s brilliant.

I’d say it’s sneaky. Cut throat.

That’s the business we’re in.

What if she did that to you?

We’d sue her ass. Humiliate her all over the world. She wouldn’t dare do that. Besides, she has enough words. Every time we steal her copy, she writes new copy, changes just like that. She constantly makes up new stuff because we keep stealing her current stuff. She does our work for us.

You sure she’s okay with that?

She’s too old and damaged to care. Like taking candy from a baby. A really old baby.

Do you believe in God?






 

Advertisements

Elmhurst Dairy Switches To Milking Nuts

Elmhurst Website: http://www.elmhurst1925.com/

Now this is what I’m talkin’ about – milking a nut

 

nutmilk

After nearly 100 years in business, a dairy company was forced to close its doors. But rather than throw in the towel, they decided to start making plant-based milks instead.

Starting over is never easy – especially if, for most of your life, you’ve been certain that the life path you’ve chosen is right for you. But after 92 years of business, starting over is exactly what the New York City-based company formerly known as Elmhurst Dairy did.

Their story is a realization of the American Dream — what began as a small family business in 1925 in Elmhurst, Queens that provided milk across Brooklyn and Queens, soon grew into one of the largest dairy companies on the East Coast. If you grew up in the New York Metropolitan area, the carton of milk that came with your school lunch was most likely from Elmhurst. But the way that people consume milk has changed.

Since the mid-1970s, milk consumption in the United States has been steadily declining by 25 percent per capita, according to data from the USDA. More people than ever are choosing to grab a glass of non-dairy milk such as soy, coconut, almond, and others over the traditional cow’s milk that the dairy industry has long campaigned for as the key to building strong, healthy bones.

The decline in dairy milk’s sales have had an undeniable effect on the dairy industry. In California, several farmers have given up on dairy in favor of planting almond groves. And this past August, Elmhurst Dairy, an East Coast dairy staple that survived the Great Depression to go on to provide dairy milk to over 8,300 stores and 1,400 public schools, announced that it would be closing its doors — but not for long. Henry Schwarz, son of the company’s co-founder lamented the company’s closing to The New York Times: “Pasteurized fluid milk has sort of gone out of style. There isn’t much room for our kind of a plant. I tried to keep this open because it was my father’s plant and he asked me to do so.”

Elmhurst was out of the dairy business — but they weren’t out of the game. At this year’s Natural Products Expo West, the largest natural products trade show, they emerged rebranded as just “Elmhurst” with four varieties of non-dairy milk on display — hazelnut, almond, walnut, and cashew…

Finish reading: 92-Year-Old Dairy Plant That Switched to All-Plant-Based Launches Line of Minimally Processed Milks | One Green Planet






 

Assault Advertisements – a partial remedy

One day I checked how my Word Press sites were looking on my Kindle tablet.

Was I ever surprised to see the ads popping up for foot fungus and a bunch of other creepy stuff next to my food posts. Food, non-food, it didn’t matter. Grotesque stuff. Who would even make an ad like that if they truly wanted to sell a product? I can’t imagine, except by those who didn’t really want to sell a product at all but wanted to hurt some other person’s intellectual material or the person or their company.

When I had one of my own images at the end of the post, which I often do, that flippin’ fungus foot was practically on the plate of my beautifully prepared meal.

When checking around the internet, I found I wasn’t the only one whose material was being assaulted by that rotted foot. That fungus was everywhere, and the impression of the sites where I saw it was always the same – disgust. So it worked to turn a person against where it was placed – next to your post. Very, very close to your own lovely image. These ads don’t fall out of the air.

So what I did was make a signature banner that I placed beneath the last photo or text in all my posts.

The two seen above are examples. I placed them on all posts on all sites. It took a long time. Then I realized that my name was being associated with those Assault Advertisements. Now I had to remove them all. I still haven’t completed that task with thousands of posts and pages, but I did devise a simpler way to keep the flippin’ fungus foot off my plate.

I now insert 5 horizontal lines beneath every post and page. That way if somebody hacks into my site dislodges all the images leaving a ? box in their place, I don’t have to go back and reinsert thousands of this particular signature image. and it keeps that flippin’ foot off my meticulously prepared meal.

See if that gives you a wee bit more peace of mind.

Remember, without the bloggers, the ad agencies would not be placing any ads at all. We’re their money, not the other way around. How many bloggers make money off of ads on Word Press? Not many. So considerations need to be given to ‘we the blogger’ whose material gets assaulted by unscrupulous people and other entities warring against our brand.

We need a say in what can and cannot be placed next to our posts.

We need a say in what we find offensive.

If somebody wants the privilege of advertising on my sites and beneath my posts and in my sidebar for free, interrupting the flow of my presentation, startling the reader with pop-ups that don’t belong to me, or videos that automatically start playing, to make the reader look away from my site, then they need to abide by some rules. They need to show a little respect.

Word Press or the person who owns it does not own me nor my material. Sometimes I get the feel that that’s how WP regards it’s bloggers who don’t pay high prices for their sites. We get the crumbs.

I’m not looking for an advertisement-free site. I believe in advertising. But these Assault Ads go too far.

I am nobody’s slave and nobody owns me nor my work. Although Word Press gives me free usage of some of their themes with which to build my sites, they’re a billion dollar company with very few employees and very little overhead. That’s a lot of money. And all they do is sell advertisement space. That’s their business. The Word Press bloggers are cash cows for Word Press.

‘We the blogger’ deserve a better product and ‘we the blogger’ deserve a say in who hitches their wagon to it.






 

Google CEO Sundar Pichai: ‘thousands of calls’ on YouTube boycott

Google was forced to make an all-out public relations push after big advertisers complained their ads ran next to objectionable YouTube videos.

Google made ‘thousands of calls’ to prevent advertisers from boycotting YouTube

  • Google execs were forced to make “thousands and thousands” of calls to calm nervous YouTube advertisers
  • Effort came after some big brand advertisers threatened a boycott
  • Uproar began after big-name brand ads found next to objectionable YouTube videos
Michael Newberg | CNBC
Susan Wojcicki, CEO of YouTube.

An uproar that began with hate speech on YouTube was quelled only after a major charm offensive by Google.

The Internet giant was forced to make an all-out public relations push in recent weeks to reassure big advertisers after some well-known brands had their ads placed next to objectionable content on its video service, Google CEO Sundar Pichai said late Thursday.

In an effort led by chief business officer Phillip Schindler, the company reached out to calm “thousands and thousands” of YouTube clients nervous that their brands might be next to suffer the same embarrassment, Pichai said on a conference call with Wall Street analysts after the company’s Q2 earnings report on Thursday.

The effort came after a slew of well-known brands, including McDonald’s, Audi and AT&T, said they would temporarily suspend advertising on YouTube after the Times of London discovered ads placed next to racist, sexist and xenophobic content.

The uproar caused at least one financial analyst to downgrade the company’s shares…

Finish reading: Google CEO Sundar Pichai: ‘thousands of calls’ on YouTube boycott


AFP Comment: Hey, what’s good for one is good for the other. Maybe we should ask those You Tube people if they want the ads of McDonald’s, Audi, AT&T and others placed next to their videos. I’ve seen some pretty horrible stuff placed next to my posts and I have no control over it. That’s not fair. Word Press always says they can’t control it, so how is it that You Tube can?

The point isn’t to get an upgrade and pay for not having the ads placed next to your stuff. The random practice of placing ads plus the purposeful practice of placing ads next to people you want to bump out or compete with are the problems with ad placement.

Think about this, who in their right mind would want to put foot fungus and pus-dripping enlarged eyeballs or Oprah Winfrey (the multibillionaire who can’t stop crying in public) beside and beneath the same posts with food pictures? It’s grotesque and used to not only sell a product (even though no one likely knows what the product is), but to encourage people to look away from the writer’s post at something putrid. It’s an assault of the writer’s brand. It doesn’t even have to be about the ad agency or the company it represents selling foot fungus products.

No one is going to want to make a recipe that has foot fungus images attached to it. It’s a disgusting trick that ad people use. They blow off your post and make the image so disgusting that people can’t help but click on the ad just to see what’s on the other side.

Equally disgusting is the financial analyst who downgraded You Tube’s shares because the big companies didn’t like where their ads were being placed. Yeah right. They didn’t like it, but they engage in the very same tactics. And who tattled? Oh! A Brit! No surprise there. It probably was British Secret Intelligence Service (what are they called MI6?) having a bland afternoon and decided to stir the stink.

So what is a person to do? What does the person who is not a big company nor even a little company do with all those thorns in their sides, put there by unscrupulous companies and ad agencies?

Follow this thread and you’ll be seeing soon enough. I don’t know much about Audi, but I have a lot to say about McDonald’s and AT&T.