Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Malaysian Gov't Spends $600,000 On 6 Facebook Pages

Posted by timothy on from the driving-aggregate-demand-one-friend-at-a-time dept.

gizmodolt writes "The entrenched Malaysian governing party, Barisan Nasional, has spent almost $600,000 on six Facebook pages promoting tourism in the country. This has sparked criticism from opposition parties, decrying the 'ridiculous' reasoning behind this waste of taxpayer funds and garnered widespread recrimination from Malaysians around the globe, who have made their sentiments known, quite publicly, on those very same Facebook pages."

66 of 92 comments (clear)

  1. Tourism by cgeys · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The summary says these are just pages, but they're actually applications and games. Those do cost a lot more to create. It also seems like with his saying "those are just facebook fan pages" he doesn't really understand how much behind the scenes work such things actually need. Yeah, some lovely video of cute cat on YouTube might go viral, but theres a small change of that with something like promoting a country's tourism. Companies also spend lots of money for marketing and those Facebook pages can be highly valuable resources to them. This being slashdot I'm sure I get responses like "if it's good enough people will come", but that just doesn't work with everything and even then you still need to make sure people know about it. There is a lot of work done behind the scenes on such things.

    The $600,000 might be a little bit high, but it definitely isn't ridiculous compared to how much it can improve a country's tourism. South East Asian countries are highly dependent on tourism. There are many things I feel my country wastes money on, but this seems like a good deal. It definitely isn't waste, as it brings tourist to country and therefore jobs, money and wealth. My country spends cash on a lot more stupid things than that.

    1. Re:Tourism by jd · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Television ads intended to reach the same number of people globally would be pretty much guaranteed to cost more. In the end, you can't make money without spending money.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    2. Re:Tourism by cpu6502 · · Score: 2

      >>>you can't make money without spending money.

      Well then let the BUSINESSES (hotels, amusement parks, restaurants, etc) that stand to profit from the tourism do the spending, rather than using tax dollars.

      This sounds like Corporate Welfare --- the government is providing free advertising which businesses profit from, while the working class have to cover the costs of the ads. Steal from the poor; give to the rich.

      In the US the equivalent is when I have to pay for a new Football Stadium in Baltimore, so the million-dollar owners can get rich off the ticket sales. It's BS and I can understand why the Malays are pissed.

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    3. Re:Tourism by magarity · · Score: 2

      Well then let the BUSINESSES (hotels, amusement parks, restaurants, etc) that stand to profit from the tourism do the spending, rather than using tax dollars

      Most localities do have special taxes just on hotel stays. These go in to the general government fund and usually are more than what the government's tourism promotion agency spends. Umm, a well-run government tourism agency that is, not one spending piles of money on a facebook profile. In this case does it sound like a hotel association could oversee how advertising dollars are best spent but then you run in to a game theory problem; hotels that do not belong to the association spending on promoting tourism benefit from tourists being more attracted to the area without having the expense. This is why a general promotion of a city/province/country is better consolidated through a tax (preferably a tax on hotels and other direct travel related activities) subsidized program.

    4. Re:Tourism by mistiry · · Score: 2

      The government also profits from the influx of tourists spending their money. Sales tax, gas tax, alcohol tax, cigarette tax...

    5. Re:Tourism by rednip · · Score: 1

      Thanks to inflation they can steal the value of your money without ever taking it out of your account.

      Anarchists, Luddites and others have been saying pretty much since people have been banking. The tea party seems to have picked up some of that same 'anti-banking' spirit that challenged George Washington when his administration created the First Bank of the United States.

      --
      The force that blew the Big Bang continues to accelerate.
    6. Re:Tourism by Asic+Eng · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The $600,000 might be a little bit high

      It's quite possible to overspend, even if the spending itself is for a reasonable purpose, and even if the amount of money is not all that high in absolute terms.

      I'm trying to keep an open mind about this. Let's say $30k is a reasonable salary for a Flash programmer in Malaysia. So that's 20 man years development time. I've been searching for the pages, but it's difficult to find them using the names from the article (which is not a good sign):

      The Flash game seems to be here. Didn't feel like starting it, given that it asked to post stuff on my wall and send me email. Sorry about that - but maybe someone would like to give it a spin and let us know?

      Is that really all they have - some plain text and photo galleries, plus a simple Flash game? Or did I not find the right stuff? Finding that should be easy though - otherwise it's hardly useful for it's intended purpose of convincing tourists to visit Malaysia. (I purposely searched for this marketing campaign and didn't find anything which would attract me to Malaysia - that can't be a good result for a country which I'm sure is an interesting place to visit...)

      It really does look like a ripoff.

    7. Re:Tourism by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 2

      No, it isn't. Or are you arguing if a state, say Florida or Nevada pays for TV advertisement enticing would-be tourists to take a trip there and pour money into their local businesses? C'mon, you can't be that dumb.

      That is corporate welfare. There is nothing to stop these businesses to pool money together to launch an ad campaign. Why should the State pay for advertisement? It is the same local businesses who bellyache and bitch to high heavens about government spending and deficit.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    8. Re:Tourism by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 2

      How about flipping that around. Letting sport teams to build their own stadiums but let it be a 100% tax free zone. No taxes on employees who work at the stadium (ie. no income tax), no sales tax, no building permits or fees, etc. We'll leave property tax in there to let them have policy/fire coverage. But we'd also enact a law the government for charging tax to out-of-state visitors who spend money at businesses near such venues. After all, the government didn't bring them in, private money did. They shouldn't have any right to tax them. See how absurd that picture is yet? Probably, but for all the wrong reasons.

      Why should the stadia be 100% tax free? They will be treated just like any other business. No special privileges. If the mom and pop coffee store pays taxes, the stadia owners can pay the tax too. If the employees of the landscaping company pay income taxes the stadia employees can pay the same tax. Just treat them like any other business, with no subsidies.

      The corporate owned media has completely brainwashed Americans into thinking that the corporations have to be coddled and allowed unlimited tax-deductible expenses in the elections, and be taxed at negative rates, given huge subsidies and then spend tax dollars to advertize for them, only then they will create a few mimimum wage jobs. We have the lowest corporate tax rate in the last 60 years, and it is not creating jobs. Bush administration was very lax with enforcement of all regulations. It did not create jobs.

      It is high time we Americans stop subsidizing the corporations and ask them to earn a living on their own.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    9. Re:Tourism by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      The government has an interest in doing the advertising because it means more tax dollars.

      Bringing in more tourists could create more jobs, so while there is a corporate welfare aspect to it, it isn't that simple.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    10. Re:Tourism by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

      It may in some strange way be considered some form of welfare, but it's not corporate welfare any more than good roads or police. Tourist dollars benefit everyone in the state. There is a larger tax-base for state and local programs. Businesses benefit from increased patronage. Residents benefit from more affluent businesses. How do you think Florida manages without state income tax?

    11. Re:Tourism by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 2

      Businesses benefit from increased patronage. Residents benefit from more affluent businesses. How do you think Florida manages without state income tax?

      So the benefits of business profits will trickle down to the taxpayers eventually. What is galling is often the same people who tolerant of such taxpayer funded largess to the businesses argue that government does nothing well, government is a parasite, taxation is theft.

      Let me tell you why the businesses don't pool their own money to create advertising. It is because of the free-loader problem. Some businesses would refuse to contribute to the pool, because they will get the benefit anyway. The only way to create such an ad program is by forcibly collect taxes from everyone and then fund it. Or you have to mandate the membership to the ad pool.

      It is not so different from healthcare. We have mandated that Hospitals can turn no one away. Now people would not buy any health insurance because they can go to the hospital after they get sick and they will be treated. It is expensive to deliver healthcare this way. It is quite painful for the uninsured too. But the tragedy of the commons is that, there will always be welchers and free loaders. And the only way to avoid it is using a health insurance mandate or use tax money to cover all the uninsured or to allow hospitals to turn the dying uninsured patients away.

      If you support government spending on tourism ads, you should at least understand the complexities of the health care issue. Hope you do.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    12. Re:Tourism by Smauler · · Score: 1

      I personally think that if rich countries dropped all subsidies and made corporate/political connections illegal, the world economy would go to shit...

      For a while.

      After everything had gone to shit, manufacturing industries would prosper, innovative industries (not patent industries) would prosper.

      Ok... my point is that the "working man" in the west has a problem. His costs are way higher than that of those elsewhere. We don't need to concern ourself with charity - it's self-defeating at the moment. What the "working man" wants is a level playing field.

      Subsidies are _only_ in place generally because higher living costs require them. (Note - I do realise they can be used as a political tool too). Without higher living costs, subsidies wouldn't be necessary. If living costs were even globally, there should be no subsidies.

    13. Re:Tourism by mjwx · · Score: 1

      The $600,000 might be a little bit high, but it definitely isn't ridiculous compared to how much it can improve a country's tourism. South East Asian countries are highly dependent on tourism. There are many things I feel my country wastes money on, but this seems like a good deal. It definitely isn't waste, as it brings tourist to country and therefore jobs, money and wealth. My country spends cash on a lot more stupid things than that.

      Malaysia spends a lot more then that on tourism campaigns, TV ads here in Oz alone would cost more then that.

      But as you said, it would be quite profitable. Every hotel in Malaysia charges 10% government tax as well as 7.5% service charge so that's quite a little money spinner for the government. Not to mention that Malaysia Airports are owned by the M'asia govt, so landing fees are also a nice earner.

      Malaysian not only has a lot of competition for tourism from it's more established northern neighbour, Thailand (who hardly needs advertising) but it now facing a lot of competition from other SE Asian nations such as Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia. Malaysia does not have the advantage of being as cheap as these nations (average hotel in Kuala Lumpur is about 300 Ringit, or ~US$100) so it needs to get recognised.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    14. Re:Tourism by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Well then let the BUSINESSES (hotels, amusement parks, restaurants, etc) that stand to profit from the tourism do the spending, rather than using tax dollars.

      Who profits from the 10% service tax in Malaysia. Look up who owns Malaysia Airports and tell me who profits from every visitor. The government of Malaysia would be earning more in tax from this then it spends.

      Using tax dollars to encourage a tourism industry is exactly what tax dollars should be spend on, if an industry can be fostered and in Malaysia, that is certainly the case.

      I don't know about where you live, but in the real world the governments job is to encourage economic growth.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    15. Re:Tourism by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Most localities do have special taxes just on hotel stays.

      I wouldn't say that.

      I've been to very few nations where the government has a special "tourist tax" as that's an ideal way to alienate tourism. Rather a lot of governments profit from ordinary taxes generated from tourism. Tourists from richer countries bring in money from external economies that would not have existed otherwise.

      As for Malaysia specifically, they have a 10% government tax and 7.5% service charge. I'm not sure how much of the service charge goes to the Govt. but they'll see 100% of that 10% service charge. Prices are also advertised sans tax and service charge (this is what ++ means at the end of a price in Malaysia). S down town Kuala Lumpur hotel can easily cost 300 Ringit (just shy of US$100), of course a hotel in the sticks will cost less. there are also landing fees collected by Malaysia Airports (govt owned).

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    16. Re:Tourism by petman · · Score: 1

      It's BS and I can understand why the Malaysians are pissed.

      FTFY.

      --
      Dropbox drops it like it's hot.
    17. Re:Tourism by jrumney · · Score: 1

      As for Malaysia specifically, they have a 10% government tax and 7.5% service charge.

      Where do you get this info from? Hotels and restaurants employing more than a certain number of staff are subject to a 6% government service tax (raised from 5% at the beginning of this year), and most also add a 10% service charge to the bill (as tipping is not customary in Malaysia, and the government probably regulates how much is allowed for "tips" outside of what is covered by service tax so they are taking maximum advantage of this).

    18. Re:Tourism by mjwx · · Score: 1

      As for Malaysia specifically, they have a 10% government tax and 7.5% service charge.

      Where do you get this info from? Hotels and restaurants employing more than a certain number of staff are subject to a 6% government service tax (raised from 5% at the beginning of this year), and most also add a 10% service charge to the bill).

      I got the 10% and 6% transposed.

      Thanks for not being a douche when pointing out this simple mistake (HINT: This is sarcasm).

      This is probably because I'm used to thinking in terms of the Oz GST which is 10% and service charges are not customary here.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    19. Re:Tourism by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Who profits from the 10% service tax in Malaysia. Look up who owns Malaysia Airports and tell me who profits from every visitor. The government of Malaysia would be earning more in tax from this then it spends.

      That's actually 6% tax, 10% service charge. But my point stands.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    20. Re:Tourism by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Every hotel in Malaysia charges 10% government tax as well as 7.5% service charge so that's quite a little money spinner for the government.

      A wee bit of errata here, the tax is 6%, the service charge is 10%.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    21. Re:Tourism by mozumder · · Score: 1

      A tax driven economy IS a business.

      Government IS a business. In fact, it is no different from any other economic entity - it's just a lot larger.

      You act as if a new football stadium in Baltimore doesn't benefit the person that never attends a Ravens football games.

      Economics isn't a single-variable function. Every action of every entity in the economy affects everyone else in the economy.

    22. Re:Tourism by magarity · · Score: 1

      Most localities do have special taxes just on hotel stays.

      I wouldn't say that.
      I've been to very few nations where the government has a special "tourist tax" as that's an ideal way to alienate tourism.

      They call it 'lodging tax' or 'hotel tax', not 'tourist tax'. Many, many, local jurisdictions around the world have them for hotels only or hotels and restaurants. Malaysia apparently calls it 'service tax'. So I suppose the question is how does the 600K compare to what was taken in by these taxes and what portion of that came from tourists vs locals who just wanted to eat out?

    23. Re:Tourism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It doesn't. Especially as someone who never goes to Baltimore (me).

      Ignoring for a moment that I agree with you in so far as the benefits to society do not out-weigh the costs, you are both wrong and a liar. Wrong because of, among other things, it can attract tourists and their cash (but again, I agree with you that the payout does not out-weigh the cost). And a liar because, well, did you forget that Otakon is in Baltimore, just a few blocks from M&T Bank Stadium?

  2. As compared to commercials? by Kenja · · Score: 2

    Facebook pages make as much sense as all those stupid Wisconsin state tourism commercials I'm inundated with. The idea behind both is that you spend money to promote tourism which generates money. Not that I'm likely to go to Malaysia due to a Facebook page, but then I dont respond to advertisement in general.

    --

    "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
  3. Sounds like... by chemicaldave · · Score: 1

    ... "social media" experts are to blame.

    1. Re:Sounds like... by Opportunist · · Score: 2

      Please, if you have to use quotes, could you at least put that "experts" in them too?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:Sounds like... by Seumas · · Score: 1

      If you have a pair of tits, are under 40, and have a facebook and twitter account, you can make a living marketing yourself out to the media and businesses as a "social media expert".

    3. Re:Sounds like... by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Please, if you have to use quotes, could you at least put that "experts" in them too?

      What if they were experts, say in engineering or economics as opposed to social media.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    4. Re:Sounds like... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      The combination of "social media" and "experts" just sounds like the combination of "homeopathic" and "doctor".

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    5. Re:Sounds like... by mjwx · · Score: 1

      The combination of "social media" and "experts" just sounds like the combination of "homeopathic" and "doctor".

      How about:

      Robert Homoeopathic, Medical Doctor?

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  4. What's the big deal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    At least this expenditure helps the country.

    Here in the USA we spend $600,000 on a singe bomb to drop on a singe third world shack. These bombs are specially designed to minimize damage to neighboring third world shacks, but the people injured and the relatives of the dead will likely hate America for the rest of their lives.

    I think we should divert 60% of our military expenditures to pointless facebook pages or social programs and paying off the debt.

    By the way, facebook pages are a pain in the ass to code for. Not hard, but a gimped pain in the ass.

    1. Re:What's the big deal? by lennier · · Score: 1

      These bombs are specially designed to minimize damage to neighboring third world shacks

      No, I think you'll find these bombs are specially designed to explode and kill people and break stuff as job #1, with 'try not to kill and break stuff that wasn't on the mission plan, but if a few more brown orphans grow up to become terrorists, that's just acceptable losses' as a distinct #2.

      They don't actually contain marshmallows and puppies, you know.

      --
      You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
  5. Like me! by sakdoctor · · Score: 1, Funny

    When my government asks me to 'like' it on facebook, then it's time for the revolution.

    1. Re:Like me! by chispito · · Score: 1

      When my government asks me to 'like' it on facebook, then it's time for the revolution.

      That easy, huh?

      --
      The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
    2. Re:Like me! by xhrit · · Score: 1

      Funny, I am friended to Obama on myspace.

      --
      Dungeon Tactics : Free Open Source SRPG
    3. Re:Like me! by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      If it was that easy, you can bet your rear that we'd have a better government.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    4. Re:Like me! by delinear · · Score: 1

      The time for revolution is when they start "poking" you.

    5. Re:Like me! by mustPushCart · · Score: 1

      You can do that by liking ''s Revolution!!! help us reach 500k fans!!!'.

      you will be thrown in jail for treason and stuff though.

    6. Re:Like me! by jovius · · Score: 2

      Iceland is currently drafting the new constitution on social media and especially on Facebook, and it has already gathered a lot of positive vibes from people around the world - http://mashable.com/2011/06/13/iceland-crowdsource-constitution/

      After the devastating financial crisis the call for the people to participate must be revitalizing.

      Governments can do very likeable things.

    7. Re:Like me! by slick7 · · Score: 1

      When my government asks me to 'like' it on facebook, then it's time for the revolution.

      The number of "friends" other than political stooges, would be very telling.

      --
      The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
    8. Re:Like me! by mr1911 · · Score: 1

      Apparently not. The government has been "poking" us for years and there is no revolution yet.

      --
      This post comes with a double-your-money-back guarantee!
      Any offense taken to this post is at your sole discretion.
  6. Not that much actually by Damnshock · · Score: 2

    My company works mainly on building apps/making campaings on social networks and I can assure you those numbers are not that expensive. It is more that we would have asked for them but within the same digits range.

    As usual: the "average Joe" doesn't realize how much things cost to do...

    Regards

  7. Government and web by snsh · · Score: 1

    What government puts on the web usually works out to 1/3 propaganda (see the wonderful things our fearless leader is doing), 1/3 vanity (stuff that that gets made without asking constituents first, because you know the constituents will just say it's a bad idea), and 1/3 actually useful stuff (putting up FAQ's, exposing data).

    1. Re:Government and web by xhrit · · Score: 1

      ...and 100% pork. I wonder who's friend in Malaysia owns a web development firm?

      --
      Dungeon Tactics : Free Open Source SRPG
    2. Re:Government and web by KarrdeSW · · Score: 1

      What any organization puts on the web usually works out to 1/3 propaganda (see the wonderful things our fearless leader is doing), 1/3 vanity (stuff that that gets made without asking constituents first, because you know the constituents will just say it's a bad idea), and 1/3 actually useful stuff (putting up FAQ's, exposing data).

      Fixed that for you.

  8. Re:I hate Facebook by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    What do you need a data breach for?

    Besides, what do you think would happen? An outcry? By people who deliberately and voluntarily tell the world how much time they spend on the can? Please...

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  9. Tourism in Malaysia by westlake · · Score: 2

    [T]ourism has become Malaysia's third largest source of income from foreign exchange and accounted for 7% of Malaysia's economy as of 2005. As of 2009, Malaysia ranks 9th among the top most visited countries in the world, after Germany, although the vast majority of Malaysia's visitors are from neighboring Singapore.

    Tourism in Malaysia

    Facebook has 600 million users.

    How much global exposure will a $600,000 add budget buy in you print, television and other media?

    1. Re:Tourism in Malaysia by afidel · · Score: 1

      And very importantly those 600M users probably have a significantly higher wealth profile and thus ability to travel internationally.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
  10. italia.it by ponchietto · · Score: 3, Funny

    The italian government took 7 years and 55 million euro to create www.italia.it.

  11. I think its pretty cheap actually. by Stan92057 · · Score: 1

    I think its pretty cheap actually. If the advertising brings consumers/tourism to there country. What difference does is make? TV ? Radio? Internet? Last time i checked advertising isn't free.

    --
    Jack of all trades,master of none
  12. Ha! That's nothing! by kikito · · Score: 3, Interesting

    My country has spent 600.000 *euros*

    a) On a *single* static website (yes, static, only html + javascript + css)
    b) Whose single purpose is basically *defending copyright*.
    c) When the unemployment rate has recently surpassed 10%
    d) And the site isn't even good looking.

    Judge yourselves:

    http://www.culturaenpositivo.es/

    That's how we roll in Spain. Malaysians are just aficionados.

    1. Re:Ha! That's nothing! by mr1911 · · Score: 1

      Well, my government has spend billions of dollars to determine that the government spends too much money and that will be a problem someday when our credit runs out. We are spending billions more to redefine that as a *big* problem. And we didn't even get a website out of the deal.

      --
      This post comes with a double-your-money-back guarantee!
      Any offense taken to this post is at your sole discretion.
    2. Re:Ha! That's nothing! by loufoque · · Score: 1

      We have the same shit in France, but they're so pathetic we can at least make fun of them.

  13. Re:I hate Facebook by delinear · · Score: 1

    Agreed - Facebook pretty much is a data breech by design. Time and time again in the last few years we've seen news reports of some huge privacy faux pas on FB's part and yet they're still as popular. Why do we need FB to lose people's data when they're already selling it off to the highest bidder?

  14. There is one born every minute, by westlake · · Score: 2

    but then I dont respond to advertisement in general.

    I have heard this before - and very much doubt I would find anything the least surprising about where you live, what you wear, what you eat and drink, the car you drive, or how you stock your medicine cabinet.

    1. Re:There is one born every minute, by Kenja · · Score: 2

      I live in a house, was built in the 50's, I choose the area because it was lower cost then the area I wanted yet still offered a reasonable commute to work and nice landscape (lots of undeveloped hills and woods). I wear pants and shirts, dont know or care what the brands are. I buy the most comfortable at the best price I can find. I tend to cook my own food using "produce" (I am unaware of a name brand potato). Dont really have much of anything in my medicine cabinet other then some old prescriptions, I take what the doctor says will help.

      --

      "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    2. Re:There is one born every minute, by mjwx · · Score: 1

      I live in a house, was built in the 50's, I choose the area because it was lower cost then the area I wanted yet still offered a reasonable commute to work and nice landscape (lots of undeveloped hills and woods). I wear pants and shirts, dont know or care what the brands are. I buy the most comfortable at the best price I can find. I tend to cook my own food using "produce" (I am unaware of a name brand potato). Dont really have much of anything in my medicine cabinet other then some old prescriptions, I take what the doctor says will help.

      You've missed the GP's point.

      People who say they don't respond to advertising are often just oblivious to the fact they do. The last part of that statement.

      I take what the doctor says will help.

      Have you investigated the medicine for yourself. When the doctor gives me something, I'll generally do a Google search on it, at the very least I'll read the packaging. I live in Oz so the doctors are generally trustworthy, but it never hurts to have a cursory understanding of what you're taking (99 times out of 100, what I find online backs up what the doctor said, but it still gives me a better understanding).

      Also what about over the counter medicines such as pain relievers?

      I do respond to advertising. I generally hate advertising so I respond negatively. As a response to advertising, I've stopped watching TV, listening to Radio and reading Print. As a response to on-line advertising I've installed adblock and flashblock. As a response to advertising, I'll go out of my way to avoid products who's advertising annoys me.

      This puts me in the minority of people.

      Advertising is not intrinsically evil, however it's mostly used in an evil manner. I'm more in favour of opt in advertising. I've signed up for several mailing lists for the express purpose of knowing when they are having a sale (Singapore Airlines, Malaysian Airlines, might notice a pattern here), I think advertising would be better if it were sought out rather then pushed on us. Google ads have the right idea, if I'm searching for "shovels" chances are a hardware store is just what I'm looking for, if I'm watching the TV, I don't give a crap about vacuum cleaners, jewellery, cheap furniture and what ever crap is getting peddled. (which is why I don't watch the TV any more, too many annoying ad's). Also google ad's are unintrusive, no flashing lights or noises trying to distract me.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  15. Its nothing to do with developing games.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Its nothing to do with developing games costing a lot.. its all corruption.. http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/mobile/malaysia/article/ad-agency-says-was-asked-for-bribes-to-win-tourism-contract/

    Every country does it.. including the US but you just don't see it easily here.

  16. Not a bad deal by slapout · · Score: 1

    The US spent $500,000 and all we got were shrimp on treadmills.

    --
    Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
  17. Amateur hour? by gadget+junkie · · Score: 1

    Harumph. here in Italy, the state-owned site www.italia.it ran up to 45 millions Euros (about 65 mil USD). Sorry, site in italian. trust me.

    --
    "If a boss demands loyalty, give him integrity. But if he demands integrity, give him loyalty." (John Boyd, 1927-1997)
  18. The Malaysian project pricetag was reasonable. by hey! · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If you want to see real contractor rip-offs of the public, you should look at the US, where it has become an art form.

    I once was invited to a meeting in which a state agency (state withheld to protect the clueless) discussed the next plans for a system it purchased from a major government contractor with an emergency two million dollar federal grant. The agency wasn't a bad agency, mind you. In fact it was a fairly good one, but used to operating on a shoestring. They had no idea whatsoever what things cost, and suddenly they had two million bucks dumped on them that had to be shoveled out the door faster than the speed of thought. A politically connected federal contractor landed the contract and delivered on time and on budget, but the system wasn't really useful unless it was integrated with the agencies various activities.

    So I was asked to come and discuss how this could be done. In truth I think I was invited down so they could pick my brain for for free, because it turned out they didn't have *any* money left over from the two million they'd blown on initial development. Even if I'd offered my services pro bono, they wouldn't have had the money to pay my expenses. After the initial presentation, I asked the disgusted state IT guy next to me how much his department would have charged to build the system they'd just bought for two million. His estimate was sixty thousand. Mine was sixty-five.

    I've always thought that the whole situation must have been a set-up. The grant was dumped on an agency that had no idea how to procure technology, and they weren't given enough time to put together a reasonable RFP or to obtain competitive bids. It was a perfect sting. Had the extent of the waste come to public attention, some hapless state manager would have taken the fall. People love to crucify bureaucrats. The politician behind the earmark would point his finger at his political enemies at the state level, and his (I am presuming) contractor cronies would truthfully say they had done everything they had contracted for.

    The lesson is that while government is often infuriatingly slow, beware of any project where there's pressure to spend taxpayer money before it disappears. Never spend public money in a hurry. "Shovel-ready" equals "graft-ready".

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  19. In Communist China... by vga_init · · Score: 1

    They just have one guy make all 6 pages, and he gets paid less than a dollar

    1. Re:In Communist China... by SluttyButt · · Score: 1

      Oh man! What a farking deal! Did he get a bullet in the head when he went out the door?

  20. Costs a bit more than it sounds by gizmodolt · · Score: 1

    It is indeed true that you need to spend money to make money but perhaps I should put the value of these figures into a Malaysian perspective:
    1 USD is currently 3.03 MYR. The figure is 1.8 Million MYR, in a country where a Big Mac costs 6.95 MYR (2.23 USD). Yay, low cost of living.

    A mid-level Malaysian web developer might get paid around 3,000 MYR (990 USD) a month, so 11,880 USD is my estimate for his/her salary, not 30,000 USD as estimated elsewhere. If all that cost went into development (as an over-simplification), this translates to 600 man-months of work. A team of 60 developers for 10 months, or a team of 10 developers for 5 years? Hmm.

    I can only speak for myself, but I believe the issue most of their citizens have with this is the apparent 'inefficiency', rather than the actual initiative to investment in tourism.

  21. bahaha 404... by boniggy · · Score: 1

    The page just 404'd on me. looks like someone got their nutz in a vice over this one and pulled the page.