Monday, July 21, 2008

On political ads

"I'm sick of Sutrisno Bachir's ads everywhere"
"Why? Isn't this a free country?"
"Yes, ... but, I don't know... I'm a little annoyed here"
"Everyone's annoyed by one thing or two, don't you think"
"I guess you're right"
....
"But hey, why are now people doing ads? I mean political ads? We didn't have this back 5, 10 years ago. Right?"
"For one, I guess, because they are many now"
"What do you mean?"
"When there are many sellers selling similar products, each needs to stand out from the crowd"
"You mean, like that thing you called perfect competition?"
"No, one step before that. It is called monopolistic competition"
"Ugh, monopoly?"
"Not monopoly. Monopolistic competition"
"OK, you lost me here"
"Look. Market spectrum goes this way from only one seller to sooo many: monopoly, duopoly, triopoly, ..., oligopoly, ... all the way to perfect competition, where there are so many sellers already, no single one can affect the market price"
"I see... but didn't you say monopolistic competition?"
"Yes, I'm getting to that term. But first off, let me tell you that that term is an unfortunate misnomer"
"Why?"
"Because it confuses people. Many think that it means monopoly. While in fact the term refers closer to the other extreme: perfect competition. Many sellers ... but not too many as in the perfect competition... Why is it confusing? Because, basically everything in between the two poles -- monopoly and perfect competition -- can be termed monopolistic competition... So I don't blame you if you're confused"
"Ugh..."
"But here's an advice. Don't tell people that I tell you this. When you have four sellers -- ok, let's not call it seller too often, let's use player -- when you have four players, you can safely call the market monopolistic competition... The textbook will require you to prove that the products sold are pretty much similar, too. But don't get too harsh on this..."
"Why four?"
"Because it's not easy to say tetrapoly, hahaha, I'm kidding"
"Examples would be helpful here..."
"OK, since we're talking political advertisements... let me think... OK. Remember Soeharto's era? Back then in the general election, we only had one candidate. That's monopoly. Then we had Gus Dur, Mega, who else... I guess there were 3 presidential hopefuls competing? Oh, Amien Rais? SBY? That was triopoly, at least let's assume it is, I can't find better example... Nowadays we have a lot more: SBY, Wiranto, Prabowo, JK, Sutrisno Bachir, Amien Rais, Rizal Mallarangeng, Gus Dur, Megawati... who else? My point is, now there are many"
"... But not too many"
"That's right. Not too many. Not 200, not 300. Only enough to make it a monopolistic competition"
"Meaning...?"
"Meaning: ads matter. Listen. When you have some competitors, say 5, 6, or 7. And your products are quite similar, what would you do?"
"Ugh... sell smarter? harder?"
"Yes, but how?"
"Nice marketing? Unique?"
"There you go. Unique marketing. Meaning: advertisement. Iklan"
"Iklan"
"Yes, iklan. When you are monopoly, you don't need that. When you are in perfect competition, you don't need that. But you need iklan when the market structure is a monopolistic competition one"
"Oh I see... That's why Soeharto didn't use big billboards at Thamrin or Sudirman or Gator Subroto? No ads on TV? ... But wait, he did have some iklan layanan masyarakat, right?"
"That's different. That's propaganda"
"...?"

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Aku muak dengan iklan-iklan Bachir dan Malarangeng. Mau jadi presiden? Bah!!! Mereka pikir pemimpin lahir dari iklan, bah!!!
Saya kira Rizal Malarangeng belum punya cukup bukti yang kuat bahwa dia layak jadi pemimpin nasional. Contoh kecil saja, ketika RM memandu acara Save Our Nation di Metro TV, saya sering mengamati bahwa sebagai host, RM terlalu dominan mewarnai acara dengan komentarnya yang jauh lebih banyak ketimbang orang-orang yang diwawancarainya.

Satu lagi, apakah bekal PhD Political Science dari Ohio (apalagi bukan dari Harvard or Northwestern, misalnya) cukup buat memimpin bangsa ini? Saya kira RM mesti berkaca kepada kakaknya yang sekarang jadi Jubir ketika terjun ke dunia politik. Kalau pun RM ingin meniru langkah Obama, apa yang telah dilakukan RM secara nyata selain iklan politik mirip SB dari PAN? Bangsa ini nggak cukup hanya dipimpin oleh orang yang gemar beriklan tanpa bukti nyata. Dengan menghambur-hamburkan uang untuk beriklan saja sudah terbukti bukan tanda yang baik.

Obama selain cerdas jebolan Harvard, dia mulai dari bawah dan ikut sistem. Mulai dari aktivis dalam membina orang miskin di salah satu bilangan di Chicago.

Saya bukan meragukan, tetapi biar pun katanya zaman demokrasi, orang juga harus didukung oleh kapabilitas dan track record yang nyata. Lha, seorang taruna Akmil saja harus melalui berbagai jenjang pendidikan pembekalan mulai dari Dikma Akmil untuk kemudian setelah Letda mengikuti Pasis Sussarcab, Selapa, Susdayon, Seskoad, Susdanrem, Sesko TNI (baik di dalam maupun di LN), Lemhanas dan diuji untuk memimpin mulai dari komandan peleton hingga jadi panglima berbintang. Nah, meskipun mungkin di jalur yang berbeda, RM mestinya punya track record apakah dia pernah berhasil memimpin mulai dari tingkat RT misalnya, atau Gubernur Sulsel? Dunia riset dan akademik sangat jauh berbeda dengan dunia nyata Bung…so for me, RM do not necessarily have my vote.

a.p. said...

"apakah bekal PhD Political Science dari Ohio (apalagi bukan dari Harvard or Northwestern, misalnya)... Obama selain cerdas jebolan Harvard ... "

This comment is serious, no?