Most statements may be interpreted in more than one way. The CW advertising slogan, "Do Your Own Research" doesn't come off negative in my view. Christopher Ward appears to be saying, we believe that we are offering good value with our watches & you, the customer, are free to do your own comparisons. In fact, we believe enough in the quality of our watches for the price asked to urge you to do so. Which when I first discovered the Christopher Ward brand, that is exactly what I did. At first, I kept thinking that there had to be a catch. After purchasing several CW watches, I can honestly say that the brand backed up that bit of advertising bravado with the style & function of the watches that I own. We live in an age in which many people don't do the research. Our news is consumer driven & people tend to pick their news sources according to their political leanings. What a news outlet deems as news worth the coverage can greatly influence your perception if that is the only news source that you use. I believe the new term for that is "siloed in". The same with our educational system & its traditional reliance on teaching out of textbooks. It is easy to accept what is written in textbooks as irrefutable truth. That is particularly true in the study of history. If one were to study history textbooks over the years, one would be amazed at how the content & way it has been presented has changed. I always urged my sons as they took their college courses to take the material being presented & think with an open mind for themselves. News & textbooks may be influenced by human bias. In circling back to the watch world, isn't Christopher Ward saying, don't be too influenced by the advertising campaigns of watch companies, even our own? Do your own research & form your own opinion! As for whether this is the best advertising approach for CW to take, that can be debated. Any advertising slogan could be criticized & have its detractors. At least this one strikes me as honest & saying, "we have nothing to hide, do your own research." I could think of worse advertising mantras than that!

Delmar

The tagline on the website is: “Premium watches within the reach of everyone”. That’s what doing our research is supposed to make us realize, why not just say it?

Frankly, it’s a question of semantics. Of course they want you to buy their watches. But anyone contemplating a major purchase without doing a little delving to find out about it is a bit of a dope, frankly. Watch, car, holiday destination, new appliance, whatever it is, I try to inform myself and compare a few meerkats before jumping in.

^^ ^^
I think this is pretty much what I said earlier. I think it just comes down to those three words. In this 'woke' age words and phrases can have meanings and attachments outside of their intended remit. You have to be so careful what you say these days...am I allowed to say that.

Des

strapline wrote: ↑Mon Sep 18, 2023 6:28 pm ^^ ^^
I think this is pretty much what I said earlier. I think it just comes down to those three words. In this 'woke' age words and phrases can have meanings and attachments outside of their intended remit. You have to be so careful what you say these days...am I allowed to say that.

Des

Them's fightin' words!

Haha JK. Anyone can find something to be upset about if they go looking for it. I find life to be much easier if I just assume positive intent.

I also associate it with the anti-science movement in the USA...

jterran wrote: ↑Mon Sep 18, 2023 9:02 pm I also associate it with the anti-science movement in the USA...

we've got them here too viz The Flat Earth Society

Amor Vincit Omnia wrote: ↑Mon Sep 18, 2023 12:18 pm @albionphoto I know precious little about science, but a good friend of mine is a very good science teacher and is always going on about controls, fair tests and making reasoned guesses.

A lot of my research recently has been to do with history in various countries. One very good friend of mine whom I see regularly is a highly intelligent retired journalist, but has a complete blind spot about the history of his country since World War II. There is only one version as far as he is concerned and he doesn’t even want to discuss it. He knows that I respect his view but also that I will read books and articles that are likely to give a different perspective – he doesn’t like it, but that’s tough. We enjoy a laugh and a drink together, and local food and culture, but politics and recent history are strictly off the menu. I won’t say more for fear of straying into politics.

I wish I saw more scientists even acknowledging that a control can even be run and then running it in context. Fair tests, reasoned guesses and understanding your measurements are the core to good experimental design as is acknowledging that your results are only valid within the inferential space you've created. It sounds like your science teacher friend has the right idea and I'm glad to see it is what is emphasised.

I understand the "not for discussion at dinner" thing very well. Moving to the US and marrying into a "conservative" in the US-sense family was an eye opener. In another example, I recently spent time with a colleague from another country and certainly kept my mouth shut when certain topics came up. With age comes diplomacy or is it with marriage comes diplomacy.

sproughton wrote: ↑Mon Sep 18, 2023 3:02 pm

albionphoto wrote: ↑Mon Sep 18, 2023 11:15 am As a digression, in my little science world I often find younger scientists believing the answers that instruments give them without knowing enough of the theory to know if the answers are right or need some thought before being presented. It's something I frequently have to mention and correct.

How much of that is down to those scientists being inherently less experienced? Is that a trait that has existed in younger scientists throughout generations and would those same scientists have similar quibbles with the next generation?

I'd imagine, especially in scientific fields, that people are honing their expertise well into their careers and over time would be more capable at identifying which results to accept or challenge.

This could be a matter of experience or training or attitude or even culture. It's hard to say which. Most science Ph.D.s learn to question the technique when writing up their thesis (this is Chapter 2 or 3) and so my approach may have been ingrained earlier in my career. However I do see that the willingness to ask what I call "the second question" is much less common now. The first question is what is the result. The second question is why is that the result? Quite, quite often it's the "why is that the result" bit that matters most. Is it the method I used to get the result or is it a real consequence of what I want to test? I still contend, however, that the first quick answer dominates more than it used to. I'm reluctant to blame "screens" and google but the analogy of just going by the answer on the top of the screen is too strong.

albionphoto wrote: With age comes diplomacy or is it with marriage comes diplomacy.

I've always thought of it as;-

Discretion is the better part of valour.

Guy



Sent from my XPERIA 5 III using Tapatalk

albionphoto wrote: ↑Tue Sep 19, 2023 11:32 am I understand the "not for discussion at dinner" thing very well. Moving to the US and marrying into a "conservative" in the US-sense family was an eye opener. In another example, I recently spent time with a colleague from another country and certainly kept my mouth shut when certain topics came up. With age comes diplomacy or is it with marriage comes diplomacy.

I served my time in Her Majesty's Grey Funnel Line where mess rules forbade three topics of conversation - politics, religion and absent women. As I've grown older I see the wisdom in this but unfortunately the subjects which are left are so boring I no longer go to dinner parties!