Template talk:Media manipulation

Sales manipulation

I suggest that sales manipulation be moved out to a new separate template. Ive done a very rough sandbox thing on this User:Penbat/sales_manipulation. Sales isnt really to do with media anyway. --Penbat (talk) 15:51, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

I disagree and agree. There are several points here.

Firstly, the creation of a separate sales template is a good idea. I find the name sales manipulation a bit awkward, I'd just go with the more straight-forward sales. (There is currently a page at sales, but it's a place-holder for an album sales template from 2006.) Also there is a marketing template that deals with sales as an aspect of marketing.

Secondly and thirdly is the classification of sales. Both whether the list belongs in this template, and the related question of whether the category belongs under media manipulation. I made both edits. In the case of the category it could be argued that the classification should be removed as sales is a sub-category of marketing. However I would argue that sales is important enough to media manipulation that it is appropriate for it to be a direct sub-category.

Similar arguments could be made in the case of the template, with an addendum. While constructing this template I considered the idea of creating 2 or 3 intermediate sub-headings to group several of the existing sub-headings together. So, for instance you might group advertising, marketing, and sales under one sub-heading; then activism, propaganda, and psychological warfare under another. The problem with that idea is that there is more of a continuum between the different sub-headings than clear distinctions. Do political campaigning and public relations belong with the first group or the second?

Thus, while sales is more connected to traditional media than with mass media it fits within the media manipulation continuum. So I would argue that it belongs within the template. --Andrewaskew (talk) 01:26, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

leaving the template argument to one side for the moment, i think there should be a sales manipulation article covering the elements i list in User:Penbat/sales_manipulation.--Penbat (talk) 06:56, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Sounds like a good plan. Unenticed has a good list. Though, for my part I wonder if it would be better to include the points as part of selling technique, then create a redirect from sales manipulation. This ties in well with existing editing and categorisation. It also avoids possible NPOV controversies. (Not that I'm asserting that the article would be non-neutral, only that some editors might see it as such.) That is, it avoids labeling some sales techniques as persuasion, and others as manipulation, by placing them all under one umbrella of sales techniques.

I don't have time to do the full edit myself ATM, but let me know if I can assist. --Andrewaskew (talk) 03:47, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

This is a gaping hole in Wikipedia although I havent found substantive useful sources. Unenticed, although interesting, isnt a high quality source. There must be good sources on this somewhere.--Penbat (talk) 08:22, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Agreed Not sure how Cold calling or Door-to-door selling is a form of "media manipulation". —Tom Morris (talk) 13:48, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Informecials?

There is a discussion on the relationship of the infomercial page and this template. --Andrewaskew (talk) 05:36, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Sales topics?

How do these topics involve media: Cold calling ·Door-to-door ·Phone ·Pricing ·Product demonstrations ·Promotional merchandise ·? Aren't they all direct person to person contact? BayShrimp (talk) 16:29, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Per this and another posting above, I've deleted

• Cold calling
• Door-to-door
• Product demonstration
• Promotional merchandise
• Telemarketing Phone

Both editors said they didn't appear top be part of the media. 2602:306:C5B4:E3D0:ED6D:9D06:362C:5C7E (talk) 09:06, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Added entry for Fake news website

Added entry for Fake news website, feel free to remove or add to another template if more relevant, or keep it, either way. Sagecandor (talk) 15:15, 28 November 2016 (UTC)