Search results

In 2016, Santé publique France launched for the first time “Moi (s) Sans Tabac,” a positive social marketing campaign inspired by Public Health England’s “Stoptober” campaign, the aim being to trigger mass quit attempts among smokers. Both programs include a mass-media campaign, national and local cessation help interventions, and the diffusion of various tools to help smokers quit. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the two programs’, specific national contexts and to describe resulting similarities and differences regarding campaign development.

A contextual analysis was performed to determine differences between the two countries regarding smoking prevalence, health services and culture.

Smoking prevalence is about twice as high in France as in the UK, leading to a lower degree of de-normalization of smoking. Moreover, cessation support services are much more structured in the UK than in France: all health professionals are involved and services are located near smokers’ residences.

Campaign progress and cessation tools provided during both campaigns are quite similar. However, Santé publique France needed to adjust the British model by favouring a regional smoking prevention network and by building an innovative partnership strategy to reach the target.

The results could be useful for other countries that wish to develop a smoking cessation campaign based on the same positive messaging at local and national levels.

Negativity towards a brand is typically conceived as a significant problem for brand managers. This paper aims to show that negativity towards a brand can represent an opportunity for companies when brand polarization occurs. To this end, the paper offers a new conception of the brand polarization phenomenon and reports exploratory findings on the benefits of consumers’ negativity towards brands in the context of brand polarization.

To develop a conception of brand polarization, the paper builds on research on polarizing brands and extends it by integrating insights from systematic literature reviews in three bodies of literature: scholarship on brand rivalry and, separately, polarization in political science and social psychology. Using qualitative data from 22 semi-structured interviews, the paper explores possible advantages of brand polarization.

This paper defines the brand polarization phenomenon and identifies multiple perspectives on brand polarization. Specifically, the findings highlight three distinct parties that can benefit from brand polarization: the polarizing brand as an independent entity; the brand team behind the polarizing brand; and the passionate consumers involved with the polarizing brand. The data reveal specific advantages of brand polarization associated with the three parties involved.

Managers of brands with a polarizing nature could benefit from having identified a group of lovers and a group of haters, as this could allow them to improve their focus when developing and implementing the brands’ strategies.

This exploratory study is the first explicitly focusing on the brand polarization phenomenon and approaches negativity towards brands as a potential opportunity.

Focuses on what can be referred to as the “fundamental philosophical issues of corporate governance”. Outlines the interdependence of various kinds of governance. Demonstrates that corporate governance is part of a bundle of governances and that, in this respect, it occupies a leading place to the degree that its principles are becoming consolidated. Then discusses in a more detailed manner what is meant by the term “dominant functionalism”. Then deals with the question of the equilibrium between sovereignty and legitimacy from the point of view of corporate governance. In effect, rules of governance (considered as the designation of a sovereign power) are searching for a legitimizing instance originating outside the framework of those rules. Finally, covers the proprietarialist origins of stakeholder theory, origins which correspond to a moderate liberal tradition.

IT WOULD NOT BE beyond the powers of exaggeration to claim that James Joyce is one of the greatest writers of the twentieth century. But it would be doubly difficult—difficult, even, for a star‐spangled Dubliner whose lips had been royally touched—to substantiate such a claim within the limits of a single sentence. It is true Joyce wrote a great number of pages, but he did not write a great number of books. He was a great humorist in the true Irish tradition: a savage satirist in the manner of Swift (though subtler in his technique) and a natural parodist and punster. He could perform miracles with words, and just as Wilde was a master of the epigram, so Joyce achieved endless subtleties and successes with the pun.

Concern about special education's future is widespread. Now there are calls for special education's abandonment or its nonexistence in any environment other than general education (i.e., for full inclusion or some form of general education only). Some advocates for reform consider special education obsolete, to be rejected in favor of newer ideas known as inclusionary education, and they advocate abandoning special education.

Now may be the time for a second revolution in thinking about what special education is and does so that it evolves into a service that more consistently realizes its promise. Special education is likely to become extinct if its devolution continues. Its collapse would hasten the abandonment of public education. Alternatively, it could evolve to become a viable part of public education, a distinct entity, a clearly identifiable and viable part of educating all children appropriately in public schools.

Among the many causes of special education's devolution, some stand out prominently: (1) confusing must and may; (2) accepting illogic and imprecision of language; (3) responding to all diversities in the same way; (4) spurning science; (5) confusing attribute and person; (6) putting the worst possible face on special education; and (7) misconstruing least restrictive environment.

Better thinking and clearer communication are required to achieve special education's revitalization. These include calling things what they are and relying on new, younger leaders. Clear and wide understanding – consensus – about what special education is and does and acceptance of the idea that we must have it as a separate and distinct part of universal public education would be revolutionary.

As our correspondent on another page suggests, the economic crisis may have reactions upon libraries. The most obvious one he mentions is the increased difficulty we shall experience in obtaining American books. Not all libraries, public or private, make any special collection of books published in the United States, although there has been an increasing tendency to buy more as the relations of the two countries have grown closer through their common struggle; in fact, we know libraries which have spent many hundreds of pounds in the course of the past year or two on the select lists of books which have been made for us by American librarians. It is most unfortunate that the manipulation of dollar currency should have brought about a situation in which even the exchange of ideas between the countries becomes more difficult. One suggestion might be made and that is that our American colleagues should continue to sift the literature of this time of famine for us, so that further select lists may be available in better days.

THREE years of the new age are coming to an end, and the cynic may feel that it is not achieving much. In the greater outside world, perhaps not, but the necessity of all who believe in life is to keep on trying to realize our hopes. In libraries there could be no spectacular material progress in 1947 because the conditions were worse for building, for the production of fittings and even for substantial internal library development were worse than in 1946. Yet we cannot help noticing here and there active signs that our work is not stagnant. The publications of libraries that reach us, and especially the revised and in many cases, their greatly improved annual reports are one encouraging sign.

Librarianship, the comprehensive title Mr. R. Irwin has given to the small, concentrated series of discourses recently published by Messrs. Grafton & Co., is a sort of landmark in our thinking. It is a valiant attempt to establish some sort of arena for librarians ; not, indeed, a “philosophy of librarianship”—that, Mr. Irwin asserts, is not feasible as the term philosophy can be applied correctly only to subjects which are part of philosophy itself, although he admits a philosophy of religion, of science and, tentatively, of history. In spite of this precision, the book is what we ordinary librarians call a philosophy of librarianship. Like all good books, it will be the cause of considerable discussion and probably a good deal of argument, some of which the Editor of a library journal thinks it appropriate to indicate, for the book goes to the roots of current activities. But, in the first place, the author Stands apart as it were to get a comprehensive view and then asserts that librarianship is a word for “ applied bibliography ” and that definition covers every activity, book‐selection, bibliography popularly named, cataloguing, classification and the general exploiting of books. Librarianship is one technique, not several, and he implies that it has suffered from the tendency to teach library subjects as separate techniques, for example, cataloguing and classification which are actually one process. This separation was the result of part‐time and other fortuitous forms of teaching. Since the advent of library schools the tendency of the training and examination courses of the Library Association, and as a consequence of the schools themselves, has been to create a unity of Studies which is the perfect librarian's soundest equipment. That is the briefest Statement is the purpose.