How can I think of direct mail at a time like this? It’s the beginning of spring, and you know what that means – NCAA madness. I know I’m supposed to give some facts about direct mail and how it can improve your school’s overall marketing plans, but I’m still trying to get back to a normal heart rate after the Jayhawks of Kansas eked out a victory over the Salukis of Southern Illinois. Hey, a win’s a win no matter how ugly. But I give the Jayhawks credit for grinding out a victory. Just like every sports fan, I have a few opinions after reflecting on this game.
#1 – The defense of the Salukis is incredible. I hope we (the Jayhawks) never face a D like that again.
#2 – The zebras were terrible – for both teams. Hey, what does it mean when the shot-clock hits zero and the ball is still in Julian Wright’s hands? It means it’s a shot-clock violation. Call it once in awhile (We’ll let it slide for this game, though.)
#3 – Our free throw shooting is atrocious.
#4 – UCLA’s free throw shooting is awful, too, and it looks like they will have a home game against us in two days. (Where’s the justice in that?)
#5 – Julian Wright can be great, but he really scares me, especially when his lanky body dribbles up the court. I love you, Julian, but you have guards for a reason, so get ‘em the ball!
#6 – Sasha Kaun, you’re a beast. Throw the ball down, big guy.
#7 – Rod Stewart, I see you have a concert in Kansas City next month. Can my mom get some tickets?
#8 – Brandon Rush, you’re 12 for 15 from the field the last two games. Your mom wants you to be more aggressive and shoot more (and so do the rest of the KU faithful).
#9 – There are WAY too many TV timeouts in basketball, but at least I don’t have to hear Ron Franklin and Fran Fraschilla during the tournament. Seriously, Ron, it’s Sherron Collins, not Sharon Collins.
#10 – Somebody please check Greg Oden’s birth certificate. There’s no way he’s under 45 years old.
So there you have it. KU pulled out an ugly one, but they live to see another day and I’m sure I’ll have some more opinions after the next game. My time is up. Peace out, I’m outta here. Oh, and don’t forget to do more direct mail.
March 26th, 2007 at 3:46 pm
I thought about starting a writers’ group for people with significant others who would rather watch college basketball than talk to us during the month of March. I would likely be the only male in that group. That might make my fiancee jealous enough to turn off the television, though.
March 27th, 2007 at 7:01 am
Do Not Mail Opt-Out Law would be fair to everyone.
The proposed recent “Do not mail” is an Opt-Out law. Only those not desiring advertising mail need opt-out. Anyone desiring advertising mail can do nothing - and continue to receive it. Why deny those wishing to avoid advertising mail the power to do so?
I do not consider handling unwanted advertising placed against my will on my personal property to be a civic obligation!
The US Supreme Court said in the Rowan case in 1970, ““In today’s [1970] complex society we are inescapably captive audiences for many purposes, but a sufficient measure of individual autonomy must survive to permit every householder to exercise control over unwanted mail. To make the householder the exclusive and final judge of what will cross his threshold undoubtedly has the effect of impeding the flow of ideas, information, and arguments that, ideally, he should receive and consider. Today’s merchandising methods, the plethora of mass mailings subsidized by low postal rates, and the growth of the sale of large mailing lists as an industry in itself have changed the mailman from a carrier of primarily private communications, as he was in a more leisurely day, and have made him an adjunct of the mass mailer who sends unsolicited and often unwanted mail into every home. It places no strain on the doctrine of judicial notice to observe that whether measured by pieces or pounds, Everyman’s mail today is made up overwhelmingly of material he did not seek from persons he does not know. And all too often it is matter he finds offensive.”
Furthermore, the Supreme Court said, “the mailer’s right to communicate is circumscribed only by an affirmative act of the addressee giving notice that he wishes no further mailings from that mailer.
To hold less would tend to license a form of trespass and would make hardly more sense than to say that a radio or television viewer may not twist the dial to cut off an offensive or boring communication and thus bar its entering his home. Nothing in the Constitution compels us to listen to or view any unwanted communication, whatever its merit; we see no basis for according the printed word or pictures a different or more preferred status because they are sent by mail.”
We need a nationwide “Do Not Mail” law to create a one-stop, convenient place for homeowners to give senders the aforementioned affirmative notice that we do not want certain kinds of mail sent to our homes.
http://www.newdream.org/emails/ta19.html
Signed,
Ramsey A Fahel