April 2008

The Grr campaign has been launched. I have no idea what its about but I like it although it does remind me of Sprite's Truth Hunter campaign. On one hand, the promotion is far better. They've been using Hamish and Andy by asking contestants to do things that make you go "Grr" for $1,000. One contestant had to get home wearing just his underwear. Another had to listen to the same song for two hours. I've also seen some clever print ads. On the other hand, I'm failing to see the brand tie in. There is a small Optus logo on the website but I'm really not seeing the connection. Perhaps its a shampaign with more to come soon...

This post is aimed at the world of academics and I am sure my views are shared by my fellow undergraduate students. For those of you unfamiliar with the Harvard Referencing System, the title refers to an intext reference. However you would never see a reference from Wikipedia because it is not an legitimately recognised source. This is of course ignoring the fact that Wikipedia now has over two million articles making it the largest ever encyclopedia. This is also forgetting that this is the most contributed to with over two hundred million edits, creating the most unbiased source of information on the Interweb. So why can't this be used as a credible source? To further establish their credibility, Wikipedia has recently implemented a mandatory referencing system, particularly on theory based articles. We've also seen Google launch Google Scholar allowing the search for academic based journals and articles. The way in which we seek information has changed. I am a University student who has never been into the library. So why isn't it possible to reference the biggest source of information on the Internet? Or a blog? Or a podcast? The Internet is no longer a source people can't trust. The academics of today are not living in today's world where the way in which we communicate has changed....