Are You Familiar With Wikis?

15 Apr




Unknown platforms have risen the last few years to provide various outlets for marketing platforms. Some popular platforms that have risen the past several years include the internet, mobile platforms and social media. Social media encompasses various socially inter-connected sites such as Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn. Facebook is both a personal and commercial social networking platform, as is Twitter, where as LinkedIn is primarily focused on business.


Before social media became popular, the precursor was already gaining traction. The precursor was Wiki’s, a platform that allows users to collaboratively add, modify and delete content through an editor; the data that is generated by users is publicly accessible by the users and, typically, the public. Wiki’s have since grown in popularity and one of the most popular internet sites today is Wikipedia, a global encyclopedia edited purely by non-paid users. Google ranked Wikipedia as the 4th most popular site in 2010 (Bosker, 2010).


This report will analyze the marketing applications of wikis, the effectiveness of the marketing capabilities, and future developments in terms of marketing, new products, and new services.



Wikis began to gain popularity approximately a decade ago when corporate intranets began utilizing them for internal knowledge databases by internal users (Hasan, 2006). Since the internal corporate wikis were only viewable by corporate users inside the intranet at the company, sensitive business information could be shared and edited among corporate users (Hasan, 2006). Such collaboration allowed for increased efficiency and productivity among corporate users. Corporations strive to continuously increase their productivity by the nature of their being. Wikis allowed corporations to have a central database of knowledge. Wikis also were highly popular in identifying and fixing computer bugs (Hasan, 2006).


Besides the use of wikis for internal corporate use, certain companies have adopted wikis for technical assistance for their customers. For example, telecommunication provider has a wiki that is commonly used by its customers to troubleshoot common problems, to set up accounts and to answer any other common questions that a customer may have (, 2013). The use of such a wiki allows for to save time, and more importantly money, by minimizing the amount of time it has to utilize a live person to answer a question (, 2013).




A wiki also is similar to a bulletin board, or a forum. A forum is a system where users can create user accounts and then start discussions. Other users can then respond to them. Users can also upload files and other media to share. Wikis and forums are very similar, except the primary purpose of a Wiki is to archive information and to make it easily accessible; where as a forum’s primary purpose is to allow interaction with its users (, 2013). Never the less, companies commonly use forums, a close relative of the wiki, to interact with their customer. Such personal and close interaction with customers allows for powerful marketing tools.





Wikipedia is one of the most popular sites on the internet, however its applications to marketing and commercial applications is limited. Wikipedia was first formed in 2001 by Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger, with the aim of creating an online encyclopedia edited by users and always being free. No commercial advertising was allowed (Wikipedia, 2013). Another important factor of Wikipedia is its neutrality, and consequently, limited commercial applications. Never the less, Wikipedia still forms a powerful tool for corporations and marketing as it provides highly in-depth, accurate and relevant information to users seeking that information.


However, marketing on Wikipedia is highly limited as noted by Camusio (n.d.): “Please do not try to promote your product or business. Please do not insert external links to your commercial website unless a neutral party would judge that the link truly belongs in the article; …if you are writing about a product or business, be sure you write from a neutral point of view, that you have no conflict of interest, and that you are able to find references in reliable sources that are independent from the subject you are writing about”. Essentially promoting a product is sure to result in moderation and possible removal from the encyclopedia, and, accordingly, opportunities for advertising are extremely limited. Corporations rarely utilize Wikipedia as an advertising platform.



ProductWiki is a free, wiki-based information site on commercial electronic products (CrunchBase, 2012). It covers various consumer electronics, such as televisions, cellular phones, gaming consoles, cameras, and the like. Utilizing the Wiki model, ProductWiki creates a repository of information pertaining to consumer electronics. In particular, it provides an excellent marketing opportunity for consumer electronic.


However, given the business model of ProductWiki, in particular the lack of commercial advertising; it prohibits the advertising of commercial interests. Accordingly, it presents limited marketing opportunities for companies and firms.






In general, Wiki-sites present limited marketing opportunities. Given that the essential thesis of Wiki sites is anti-corporate, marketing opportunities are limited. A corporation is highly limited in its ability to market itself on wiki sites. Any marketing that occurs is in the same lines as natural organic marketing—ie. Word of mouth. We see that there are essentially no marketing opportunities on wiki sites due to the ‘communal’ nature of the wiki.


In terms of development, wiki’s are extremely limited. They will never become mainstream advertising channels due to the limited nature of input from corporations and the non-professional nature of the users.




In conclusion, Wiki’s emerged out of a need for information sharing in the corporate sector. In particular, corporations utilized Wiki’s as a way of sharing information efficiently and risk-free among employees. When Wiki’s branched out to the common population, a certain anti-corporate bent developed, and given the intrinsic nature of the common man among Wiki’s, corporations have limited input among Wiki’s. Hiring individuals to influence Wikis is not a smart way; it will only serve to fuel a backlash.



Work Cited

Bosker, B. (2010). Google Ranks Top 13 Most Visited Sites On The Web (PICTURES). Huffington Post. Retrieved from

Camusio, Z. (n.d.). Wikipedia Marketing – 5 Steps to Visibility on Wikipedia. Retrieved from

CrunchBase (2012). ProductWiki. CrunchBase. Retrieved from

Hasan, H. (2006). The Wiki: an environment to revolutionise employees’

interaction with corporate knowledge. OZCHI 2006 Proceedings. Retrieved from (2013). Welcome (Wiki). Retrieved from

Wikipedia (2013). History of Wikipedia. Retrieved from


Current Controversial Issue: IS TRADITIONAL MEDIA DEAD?!

15 Apr



Traditional Media Is Dead

The print media industry received some more bad news last week after a new 24/7 Wall St./Harris poll (The harris poll, 2010) showed that despite the fact that 67% of those surveyed prefer to receive their news from television, newspapers or magazines, fully 55% of the respondents also believed that traditional media as we know it will not exist in ten years.

This shouldn’t come as a big surprise as newspapers and magazines have suffered large circulation losses in the past few years with some publications moving to an online model only or completely shutting down as financial losses mounted.

There are several reasons for the decline of traditional media including the recession which wreaked havoc with advertising revenue and circulation as businesses cut back and job losses mounted.  But more importantly it is the move to online news that has had the biggest impact on both the bottom line and the future of traditional or old media.

Also the poll revealed 50% of the respondents  now get almost all their news online and in the 18-34 year-old demographic 65% use this method versus just 33% of those 55 and older (The harris poll, 2010).

Those are not encouraging numbers for publications such as The New York Times or The Washington Post which have suffered millions of dollars in losses from their newspaper operations in the last few years and whose audience is clearly getting older and shrinking rapidly.

The networks and newspapers though have only themselves to blame for their less than rose future.  As the economy sank and readers fled online they reacted by making deep cuts in personnel, reducing the size and content of their publications and in the process becoming less newsworthy.

Take Newsweek for example.  They revamped the magazine by changing its focus, reducing the number or pages and raising the cover price.  The end result was steeper losses and a sale to a billionaire with no experience in publishing for $1 plus assumed liabilities of over $40 million.

Now under new management the magazine is seeking to regain some of its former glory but will be doing so without many of its star writers who left after the sale to Sidney Harman was completed.

Harman like the owners of other magazines, newspapers and television and radio stations arrived a little late to the online media blitz and are struggling to catch up but they find themselves in a difficult situation as the public expects the content to be free even though providing the news has a very real cost to it that is not fully supported by online advertising.

There is a management saying “Adapt or Die” and in this case the traditional or old media is adapting but it may be too late to save them from death.



Traditional Media is Not Dead


Traditional media is not dead – it’s fueling social media.

A recent study for instance found that 95% of local news is being created by newspapers, not blogs or other social media, which are simply regurgitating what they find in papers.

Traditional media is not dead now and never will be. Look closely at the survey results and you’ll see that people still want information; they are just changing the way they want to receive it. As the younger generation takes over, they might look for their news online BUT they are not abandoning traditional media altogether.

Patricia Wilson, founder of Brand Cottage, an agency with offices in New York and Atlanta, specializes in media planning and social networking, and helps clients harness the power of both new and old media. She says,

“Television is still the number one media choice by American consumers and is far from dead. In fact, Nielsen’s ‘State of the Media: Consumer Usage Report 2011‘ reported that the average American watched traditional television for an average of 33 hours PER WEEK.”

What’s changing is the shift to multi-tasking and cross-platform usage while watching TV. Nielsen also showed that roughly 40 percent of U.S. tablet and Smartphone users engaged mobile devices daily while watching TV.

These so-called experts write so many posts on the untimely demise of traditional media because they need controversy and “hot” topics, but all they really want is to drive traffic to their website or blog. Experts are charging people for their lack of knowledge. While we agree that social media may be the future, it is still not an exact science. Social media has existed since the first human being set foot on earth; in the past, though, we simply referred to it as creating tribes. Today we can connect globally online, but we’re still just looking for our tribe. Seth Godin, in his book, Tribes: We Need You to Lead Us, points out that we need everyday individuals who can connect and lead groups of people around ideas — today’s social media influencers. Whereas before we only had a one-way communication flow from brands to consumers, social media has now helped open up communication to the masses, that is why people feel fresh of them.




Klepic J. (July 26, 2012). Traditional Media is Not Dead. The Blog. Retrieved from

 Consumer Usage Report (2011). State of the Media. Retrieved from

 Marx W. (Jan 14, 2010). Traditional Media is Not Dead – In Fact, it’s Feling Social Media. Biznik. Retrieved from

 Irvine D. (Nov 1, 2010). Majority Believe That Traditional Media Will Be Dead in Ten Years. Accuracy in Media. Retrieved from

 The harris poll (Oct 28, 2010). Troubles for Traditional Media- Both Print and Television. Retrieved from

Debate: Do you Think GREEN MARKETING is a Scam to Sell More Products?

15 Apr

Six Green Scams You Should Look Out for 

Nowadays, so many companies are claiming that they are “environmentally friendly”, but an “environmentally friendly” label isn’t necessarily insulation against bad business practices. Here are a few of the tactics green-themed marketers use to make themselves look “greener” than they really are:

  1.  We give a portion of our proceeds to the cause. 
    This sounds good, but it can be a red flag. Unless the organization specifies exactly what percentage it’s donating (and whether it’s a percentage of profits or of gross sales), the amount could be minuscule. I Googled the phrase, and found that use of the vague language is widespread — and deliberately so. The lawyered text allows the companies to change the percentage at will. After all, one tenth of one percent is still a “portion.”
  2.  Our product is “natural.” 
    As Sally Deneen writes in AOL’s WalletPop, there are at least six reasons why “natural” on a product label is totally meaningless. According to Deneen, “Natural is such an abused term that it should send your B.S. meter spinning….Nevertheless, it is the most common green claim used on cosmetics and kids’ products, according to a report called The Seven Sins of Greenwashing. Even worse, each new year brings a slew of new foods and drinks claiming to be ‘all natural.’” My t-shirt is “natural,” because its cotton, even though cotton has more pesticides sprayed on it than any other product. That juice is natural because it doesn’t have any added artificial chemicals, even though it’s full of sugar.
  3.  It’s a hybrid! 
    Not all hybrid cars are created equal, and there’s nothing magical about the technology. Hybridize a big SUV and its mileage will improve, but it will still suck. Sure, the Toyota Prius gets 50 mpg and managed to extend its halo over the entire category, but it doesn’t really compute. The Cadillac Escalade Hybrid, for instance, gets just 20 mpg city/21 mpg highway. The Lexus LS 600h, that big luxury hybrid clocks in at 20 mpg city/22 mpg highway. Many hybrids emphasize performance over economy, but they still wrap themselves in green. Fox says the BMW X6 Active Hybrid is the “quickest hybrid in the world,” but you’ll have to put up with 17 mpg in town and an undistinguished 19 on the highway.
  4.  Our healthy ingredients mean its health food. 
    Wrong! Many products with smug “no sugar added” or “no artificial ingredients” labels are packed with calories and fat. A great case in point is upscale ice cream. The Brownie Special at Ben & Jerry is 1,020 calories. The Mud Pie Mojo at Cold Stone Creamery is 1,180 calories. The Mint Chip Dazzler at Haagen-Dazs is 1,270 calories (Nutrition facts). Then there’s frozen yogurt, which gets people thinking “its yogurt, so it has to be healthy.” As Nutrition Action points out, the FDA serving for frozen yogurt is a half cup, but most chains “typically serve up one cup or more.” That can mean 300 calories even from that small serving. “And some snackers are so proud of their ‘low-cal’ yogurt that they go heavy on the toppings,” the invaluable newsletter reports. “Unless it’s fresh fruit, don’t.”
  5.  We make a green product, so we treat our workers better. 
    In truth, most products sold in the U.S. are made in factories in Asia, and it’s the truly rare company, environmentally friendly or not, that pays a lot of attention to the conditions for workers that far from home. Price is the deciding factor. American Apparel deserves some credit for making its clothes in downtown Los Angeles, but the company has a raft of other problems, apparently. According to the New York Times, even after 10 years of pressure from American multinationals, working at a Chinese factory is no picnic. “Chinese companies routinely shortchange their employees on wages, withhold health benefits and expose their workers to dangerous machinery and harmful chemicals, like lead, cadmium and mercury,” the story said. Workers making the Apple iPad reportedly toil under such inhumane conditions that some leaped off the factory roof. This is an instance where “buy local” really does matter.
  6.  It’s a green product, so you need it.
    A lot of environmental stuff doesn’t really work all that well: the cleaner (no harmful chemicals!) that doesn’t clean, the “recycled materials” oven mitt that burns your fingers. And a lot of it is just junk: Gadgets you can easily live without, from wind-up radios and solar hat fans to LED frisbees and solar phone battery chargers. Not buying something is sometimes the greenest choice.



Why Green Marketing and Corporate Social Responsibility are not scams to sell more?

The green marketing and corporate social responsibility are really what the company wants to contribute to the society. In most of the time, it is just our customers over think it. The reasons why it is not scams to just sell more are because:

  1. Marketing is all about how to improve the brand image, encourage people to know more about the company, its products. It is true that increasing sales is one of the goals for marketing. The fact is that no matter company is using green marketing or not, its marketing strategies are targeting more sales. Therefore, people cannot say that green marketing is just scams to sell more, because even the traditional marketing is also doing the same thing. It is the nature of business.
  2.  Is the green marketing easy to do? No! Green marketing is actually more difficult to do and usually less effective than other marketing strategies. To market your products as “green” you may need to go through an expensive and lengthy process of getting environmental certifications. These certifications, which governments, industry associations, trade associations and consumer advocacy groups all distribute, require products to meet certain standards for energy use, efficiency or recyclability. Meeting these standards may be difficult, especially while keeping prices low. Therefore, it is not necessary for a company to do green marketing just want to sell more.
  3.  Everyone is watching you! Green marketing is not a safe and cost effective way for a company to do. If your company’s marketing makes claims about its green products or an overall commitment to environmental sensitivity, it may open you up to enhanced scrutiny from consumers and environmental protection groups. Analysts may examine everything from how much energy your manufacturing processes use to where you acquire raw materials and how much packaging you use to ship your products to market. All of these actually making the green marketing sound not a good idea to do. Company does not need to use green marketing to sell more when the traditional marketing just worked fine.
  4. Green marketing is more a way for the company to states that they do pay social responsibility to our society. Sometimes it is just simply because of the pressure coming from government and competitors.

Green marketing is more like tool to improve a company’s image which to say the company has the responsibility for the environment and consumers. The increasing sales are just the side output of the better image. It is not the primary of the green marketing.


Work Citations

Motavali J. (Sep 9, 2010). The daily green. Retrieved from

Deneen S. (July 7, 2010). Daily Finance. Retrieved from

 The Seven Sins of Greenwashing (Apr. 2009). Environmental Claims in Consumer Markets. Retrieved from

EJF. (2007). The deadly chemicals in cotton. Environmental Justice Foundation in collaboration with Pesticide Action Network UK: London, UK. ISBN No. 1-904523-10-2.

Gastelu G. (July 15, 2010). The Fox News. Retrieved from

Barboza D. (Jan 5, 2008) The New York Times. Retrieved from

Nayan Ranjan Sinha. Why Is Green Marketing Chosen By Most Marketers? (March 5, 2013) Retrieved from

Dennis Hartman. Advantages & Disadvantages of Green Marketing. (March 5, 2013) Retrieved from

Should we Blame Food Companies for Obesity?

15 Apr


It is interesting that since when the obesity becomes a problem, because in the old days, looks fat could be a symbol of wealthy. Over the years, when the problem of obesity becoming more concerned by the society, people are trying to figure out that who should took the responsibility for it.  In this debate, it will discuss on whether or not the food industry should be held accountable for today’s obesity problems.


There are several reasons for people to argue that the food companies should be responsible for the obesity problems. The main three arguments are: The food companies use licensed cartoon and other entertainment characters targeting young children, over sized package and misleading information on the package.

Targeting Children

There are many regulations on the food industry to not targeting children. On the other hand, people believe and it is also true that food industry uses a lot different way to indirectly targeting children. Like what doctor Yoni FreedHoff said in his video that it is unethical to use the cartoon characters for the package and pay the super market to put those product at children’ eye level. Also according to the research done by Harvard’s school of public health, from 2006 to 2008, food companies increased the use of licensed cartoon and other entertainment characters targeting young children, and that most foods marketed with such characters failed to meet IOM standards for snack food suitable for school children.

Over Sized Package

The over sized package is also another major reason that the food industry contribute to the obesity problem. People with lower income tend to not read the label but preferring to rely on the visual estimations of the package’s weight and volume to infer the amount of product it contains. Marketers create size labels that give the consumer an understanding of how much they have eaten. As a whole, consumers tend to choose the ‘medium’ sized product when given options, so marketers have responded by adding larger sizes, which have made the regular size that people used to consume appear too small.

Misleading Information

The misleading information on the package is very common on today’s product. For example, when a juice based product say that they have no sugar added to the product which is true, but what people don’t know is how much sugar contains in the original concentrated fruit juice. Most of those sweet product are contains 70% sugar of it whole product.




On the other hand, there are also a lot people suggest that it is not only food industry’s problem, because they are only doing what they suppose to do. People from this group suggests that government, customer itself contribute more problem to obesity than food companies.


People suggest that marketers should not be responsible for all kind of attractive advertising to promote people to consume more. What marketer does is only responsible to its shareholders and creates more profit for the company. All they have done are only creating things people need and deliver the information to customers.


People also suggest that government actually should take most part of the accountabilities for the problem of obesity. People think that it is government’s problem that does not set the right regulation to guide the food industry to the right track. It is government’s problem that allows marketers to target children in many different indirectly ways.


According to the research, it is actually customers themselves should take the responsibilities of choosing the food. Media always say that customers should not be blamed because they are been told by marketers of what they should do and buy.  The truth is it is customers themselves cannot control their own and let their own desire took over them. Also, because customers seek better value in terms of volume and price, it forces food company have to increasing their portion size to match their needs. It is also the family and their neighbourhood influenced on what they are eating which also potentially lead to eating unhealthy food.


All in all, no one can say they are not responsible for the obesity problem. There is no doubt that the food companies and government should take most of the credit but on the other hand, customers also need to think about themselves and find out if there is any problem that created by their own.  If all three sides can work together, the obesity problem properly can under control.




Paid, Earned, Owned & Shared Media – What’s Your Online Marketing Media Mix?

18 Mar



In the Content Marketing Trilogy of Discovery, Consumption and Sharing, there are a mix of media types online marketers employ to facilitate the connection between brand information and consumers / buyers across the customer lifecycle relationship. Those media types are often characterized as Paid, Earned, Owned and Shared media.  What do those media types mean and where do they fit within an online marketing mix?  Here’s a 30,000 foot view of each media type and what they might contribute to a content marketing strategy:


Paid Media – Often thought of as “traditional” online advertising through display ads, pay per click search ads and sponsorships. The pro for paid media is it’s ability to be implemented pretty much on-demand, the ability to have some degree of control and also that it scales. The growing popularity of social advertising on sites like Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn (YouTube as well) adds another option for marketers to gain presence in channels where consumers and buyers are spending their time. The appearance of brand messages and content within paid media can work together with social sharing and organic search.


Earned Media – The result of public & media relations efforts to gain coverage in publications – on and offline. Or essentially, brand presence within media without having to advertise. This definition also extends to brands that behave online in such a way that “customers empowered to publish” create content on the brand’s behalf inspiring buzz and word of mouth.


Owned Media – Media, content and assets that the brand controls, like websites, blogs, newsletters and brand social media accounts. Brands are increasingly behaving like publishers with editorial staff managing content creation steams. “Content Marketing” is the hot topic when it comes to Owned Media and can facilitate brand information discovery through search and social channels. Content engages customers and fosters relationships throughout the customer lifecycle. Brand content to serve both broad and niche audiences is not immediately scalable, but can provide long term growth benefits without corresponding growth in costs.


Shared Media – Brand social web participation and interaction with consumers on content on sites like Facebook, Twitter and YouTube that  results in content is “shared media” since it’s a result of a shared interaction. Because of the nature of social sharing and engagement on social media sites, Shared Media can propagate across an individual’s network to others, and so on and so on.  Paid and Owned Media can inspire Shared Media. Shared Media can inspire Earned Media.

As more online marketers are exposed to these terms most commonly used by Advertising and Public Relations Agencies, I think it’s useful to explore what they mean for content marketing and the options for marketers to best facilitate consumer information discovery, consumption and sharing.

Within your marketing organization, do you refer to media in these terms? Do you use different definitions? Which of these media are in your online marketing mix?


Google Glass — Start Your New Amazing Experiences Today!

28 Feb

Last year Google surprised the world when it announced that it had developed Google Glass, a pair of web-connected smart glasses that could take photos and videos, and display information gleaned from the internet. The firm said it would launch a public trial of the voice-controlled specs with a small group of developers early in 2013. On February 20th it announced that it now wants a broader group of people to join the developers peering into the future using its new technology.

The company has launched a website for folk who want to apply to test the Explorer trial version of its glasses and who are willing to cough up $1,500 for the privilege of having them. It has also posted a video (see below) that shows how the specs can be used in various situations, including navigating on a road and taking photos of memorable moments. Data and images are displayed on a tiny screen that appears at the top of a person’s field of vision. This is mounted in a flexible frame that also incorporates a camera, a microphone and a computer.

Although its new gadget is still in its early stages and has plenty of room for improvement (not least in the design of the bulky arm that houses its battery), Google is clearly hoping that a broader field test will help it to iron out imperfections faster, as well as stoke interest in the device. It says it is looking for a diverse group of guinea pigs willing to share their experiences with the gizmo via social media.

The web giant’s move is another sign that the nascent market for wearable technology is developing fast. Other companies such as Japan’s Olympus are also experimenting with smart goggles and there is much interesting work being done to shrink displays even further, as Babbage has noted elsewhere. There has also been plenty of action recently in the market for smart watches that link wirelessly to people’s smartphones. Rumours have been flying that Apple and Samsung are working on web-connected timepieces and Google has also filed a patent that suggests its Glass technology could be used on wrists too. Small start-ups such as Pebble are busily churning out smart watches as fast as they can. All of this is definitely worth us keeping an eye on.

Work Cited:

The ENDLESS Tuition Fees — Who Should We Blame?

28 Feb

As an International student, I’m always very sensitive about my tuition fees. Recently, I found that my tuition fees are increased again, so I did some researches in order to find out why tuition fees keep rising? 



Tuition fees have become the single largest expense for students attending post-secondary institutions in Canada. Over the past 20 years tuition fees have skyrocketed and as a result students are now being forced out of university due to the overbearing cost of education.


In Canada provincial funding of universities has declined as a percentage of university revenues over a 20 year period and as a result universities have passed the additional cost of operations onto students. This research seeks to identify some solutions to this problem by looking at the issue from the perspective of the student, the university and the corporate partners in the community.
In order to understand the impact of rising tuition fees on students I have conducted research that proves that students are more likely to drop-out when tuition fees increase. I have also proven that students who graduate from university will have a higher income throughout their life as compared to students who drop-out. Students are very price sensitive to the costs of education, especially low income students, and reducing the ability for these students to attend post-secondary institutions will continue to widen the gap between the rich and poor.
To reduce tuition fees, universities, corporations and students must pro-actively work together to find new solutions to a long-standing problem. I have also short-listed a number of solutions and provided an implementation plan for each of them within this paper.






Students must educate themselves on ways of reducing their total cost of education and university student associations must do more to instruct students on how to apply for scholarships, bursaries and awards.

Provincial governments must recognize that students are struggling to pay tuition fees and that this is a direct result of reduced funding. Governments should also understand that a more educated workforce will produce a higher amount of output, and therefore pay a larger amount of tax in the future. This increase in tax revenue could be put back into the education system. Students must also be aware of their right to protest and continue with the student protests seen in Quebec in order to lobby the government and educate the public about how high tuition fees impact society.

Corporations often partner with professional sports franchises in order to publicize their business through naming rights and event sponsorship. This model has already been applied with much success at the university level and should be expanded for academic purposes. Corporations who partner with universities may wish to participate in co-op programs and will have the opportunity to have young minds invigorate their business with new ideas and concepts.

By supporting education society will benefit, and by reducing tuition fees society will benefit further. Graduates will come from all walks of life, not just the wealthy and the gap between rich and poor will ultimately decrease.


Work Cited: