Colin.jpgWhat has regrettably become the sole motivation for the use of technology, when it comes to communicating with customers, is not giving them better service, but rather increasing profit by lessening cost, while further degrading service. Corporations like other forms of what could be analogized to biological cancer have as their sole raison d'etre the yearly increasing of profit (growth), no matter what effect this monomaniacal goal has on fairly, morally, and reasonably supplying of goods and services to the customer.

While there are many examples as to how this corporate increasing of profit at any cost is being implemented across the board in all their business activities, one glaring example that I wouild say all of us have and continue to experience is what has now become the exclusive 21st century unidirectional way in which the customer is now being required to communicate with the company they have been doing business with, where literally all the onus is now on put on the customer.

Throughout this unidirectional process the customer is constantly subjected to disingenuous and often downright lies expressed in orwellian newspeak, which starts from the moment the customer calls: "You have been chosen to take part in a survey to improve your service," while in fact nobody choose you. All customers who call are told they were chosen, which is in complete derrogation of what chosen actually means in English- if all are asked, nobody is chosen.

And of course, this whole endeavor has nothing to do with improving service. Rather it has to do with making you the customer bear the cost of being an unpaid supervision force to monitor the behavior of this company's underpaid and overworked employees, who are put in the unenvyable position of having to incessantly deal with pissed off customers, who have been keep on hold for outrageously long periods of time, because the company is trying to save money and increase profit by not hiring enough people to answer the phones in a timely manner.

So what you get is a reality where better technology actually gives the customer and the company worse service than what was had in a pre-automated reality. What the company has come to rely on in this process is customer apathy, based on what companies know really well: When push comes to shove, most people will do nothing and just go along with their unacceptable reality. And of course, this unacceptable practice is made all the more acceptable by corporate and foundation owned or supported media completely blacking out more and more outrageous corporate behavior to avoid the public ire that might come, if people realized what was going on.

One very under-utilized weapon that the consumer has in hopefully turning around the further derogation of their rights to receive reasonable service and other rights they are entitled to is to refuse to do business with businesses that either don't treat you in a manner you have a right to be treated or who act in a way that further denigrates our rights in this putative democracy, where all are at least in theory created equal. The BlackoutNFL movement just might be a prototype for such action in all areas of concern. Check it out.


08 2017

1 Comment

Congratulations on writing a truly pop PC article. I certainly do agree the argument but not so much with the components. For instance, Black Lives Matter has one of the most valid positions I can think of and especially considering who resides as our president elect and the philosophies of those who choose to support them. However, the focus is too narrow to suit me. There other factors which Black Lives Matter seems to avoid. For instance, the shameful figures of single mothers within the Black communities whose fathers have deserted their children at birth but do go one to impregnate other women whose children they will likewise abandon. Where's Black Lives Matter position on that? And then there are those figures that something like 80% of murdered Black people are killed by Black People. You can't just look past this.
As for Kaepernick, the inherent reasons for his behavior are unquestionably salient and for the same reasons. Look again at our leadership and who supports it. On the other hand, I'm not too impressed by armchair protestors. If Kaepernick really felt that strongly, why didn't he refuse to take part in a game run by an organization like the NFL with its history on race? Just walk off the field in front of the cameras. Instead he chose to continue to collect his salary as did all the other sympathizers in the league. Apparently money trumped conviction to the cause. In essence, I also find it to be a poor choice of means to demonstrate. To demean the national anthem is to demean the flag and every member of the military who swore an oath to defend it. Without them, we know where we would be.
So I can't really fully embrace this article. Not because I believe in blaming the victims but because you can't excuse their behaviors either. In conclusion, I fully expect to be reviled for having said any of this. Save your breath.

Leave a comment