Jan van de Bergh is on a slippery slope: he starts to compare figures in China. He compares the figures on ad spending in 2006 of two research firms, Nielsen and CTR and finds a substantial gab between the totals (US$ 49.5 billion and US$ 36.9 billion).
Why is that dangerous, you will ask? Because figures in China are not facts, they are tools to make companies spend more money in China. They are not a reflection of the reality, or better, they are reflecting that we can have different conflicting realities next to each other at the same time.
Of course, if you are living in China for a while, you know how to deal with those differences in articles, business plans or whatever. We are not looking for the truth anymore, just a reality that meets the demands of today.
2 comments:
That's a great comment. If figures are not facts but tools to make companies spend more money which one has the strongest pushing effect? The high estimate or the lowest estimate? And what is the effect on spendings when there is no figure? Like for the web. If there is no figure, you don't exist?
In this case we go for Nielsen :-)
Post a Comment