Usenet spam: Postings that promote generic products over brand names
New Guy
anti-brand-name postings?
Who would have a reason to post this material periodically on usenet?
Is someone getting paid by generic product makers to put the word out
that generic products are just as good, if not cheaper, than brand-name
counterparts?
In other words - is this an example of "professional" usenet spam, as
part of a public marketing campaign?
Are there any known examples of this type of usenet spam?
Is there no way for these posts to be filtered properly by cleanfeed and
noceum?
-----------------------------------------------
Path: !news-out.readnews.com!postnews3.readnews.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: misc.consumer, misc.consumer.house, misc.consumers,
misc.consumers.home, misc.consumers.house
Subject: Save Money
From: "Dr. Smith" <dsm...@gmail.com>
Organization: Clinic
Message-ID: <Xns9C91B7F66...@198.186.190.61>
Followup-To: misc.consumer, misc.consumer.house
User-Agent: Xnews/5.04.25
Date: 25 Sep 2009 22:01:16 GMT
Lines: 25
NNTP-Posting-Host: f880c7a3.news.netcarrier.com
X-Complaints-To: ab...@netcarrier.com
Most people don't realize that they spend hundreds or even thousands of
dollars a year buying the heavily advertised (HA) brand products in the
grocery and department stores. There is nothing in the grocery store
that is rocket science. Many of the less advertised (LA) brands or store
brands are just as good or better as the HA brands. You are paying for
the brainwashing that many HA brand manufacturers put in their
advertising campaigns. It is not difficult to make shampoos,
conditioners, cleaning products and all those other products that can be
found in your local grocery or department store.
Why are you paying 4+ dollars for baby shampoo when you can buy the less
advertised brand for half the money? Do you like wasting money? If the
name brand products are better why would companies be spending billions
of dollars in advertising? The answer is that they are not better. They
are trying to convince you that the high price they are charging is some
how justified by a better product. Even over the counter drugs like
aspirin can be bought for half the price of the HA brands. This is a
product that has been around for decades. The LA products are under the
same FDA regulations as the HA brands. Save a lot of money and don't buy
the over priced HA brands.
When you pay the higher price for the HA brands you are paying for the
ridiculous high salaries of the CEO's, private jets, golden parachutes
and for the billions spent on advertising.
Every time you go to the store you can save several dollars. Over time
this can amount to a significant amount of money.
New Guy
> > Does anyone have any theory as to who is responsible for these
> > anti-brand-name postings?
>
If that's true in this case, then should there be more postings from the
same author, on different topics perhaps?
A google groups search for posts by the author "dsm...@gmail.com" shows
posts with these subjects:
- Save Money
- Not Rocket Science
In these newsgroups:
- uk.people.consumers
- misc.kids.consumers
- misc.kids.health
- misc.consumer
- misc.consumer.house
- misc.consumers
- misc.consumers.home
- misc.consumers.house
- alt.consumer
- alt.consumer.free-stuff
- alt.consumers
- alt.consumers.experiences
- aus.consumers
- alt.pharm.indust
- alt.pharmacy.health.informatics
- alt.make.money
- americast.usa-today.money
- americast.usa-today.news
- americast.ushead.money
- alt.alternative.health
- soc.senior.health+fitness
- soc.senior.issues
- net.medicine.public-health.general
- net.medicine.public-health.drugs
- net.medicine.research.general
- net.medicine.support.general
In not one of those cases, where the post spawned a conversational
thread, did "Dr. Smith" return to the thread to participate in the
conversation.
Here we see the same message posted 5 times to alt.health within the
span of a few minutes:
These posts have also been made by someone using the handle "Ziggy" to
these newsgroups:
- microsoft.public.biztalk.general
- microsoft.public.biztalk.jumpstart
- microsoft.public.biztalk.newuser
- microsoft.public.biztalk.server
- microsoft.public.biztalk.xsharp
- microsoft.public.bookshelf
- microsoft.public.br.applicationcenter
- microsoft.public.br.certificacoes
- microsoft.public.br.design.gallery
- alt.fan.states.new-york
- alt.fan.states.north-carolina
- alt.fan.states.north-dakota
- alt.fan.states.ohio
- alt.fan.states.oklahoma
- alt.fan.states.oregon
- alt.fan.states.pennslvania
- alt.fan.states.rhode-island
- alt.fan.states.south-carolina
- alt.fan.states.south-dakota
- alt.fan.states.tennessee
- alt.fan.states.texas
- alt.fan.states.utah
- alt.fan.states.vermont
- alt.fan.states.virginia
- alt.fan.states.washington
- alt.fan.states.west-virginia
- cmi.consumer
- free.uk.scotland.help-consumers
- can.consumers
- rec.photo.35mm
- rec.music.trumpet
- rec.music.makers.piano
- rec.games.chess
- comp.music.midi
- alt.tv.tech.hdtv
- alt.tv.tech
- alt.music.home-studio
And probably hundreds if not thousands of other newsgroups.
If this doesn't constitute usenet spamming, then nothing does.
> Some people are "more intelligent" than others and teach others
> what they know.
This is not teaching. This is spamming.
> For example these people might see others with financial
> difficulties spending their money foolishly. And they are
> simply pointing out ways to better manage money. And thus
> rectify the financial difficulties in question.
Do you believe it is proper to post messages like this to usenet, to
hundreds or more groups?
If you believe that, then there is nothing that can't be justified when
it comes to mass usenet posting. Then nothing can really be classified
as abuse or spam when it comes to usenet according to that logic.
I believe these posts are some sort of professionally orchestrated
effort, perhaps by a marketing company that's been contracted by a
generic product manufacturer, to promote generic products in the minds
of consumers. We don't know exactly what sort of generic product class
is being promoted, and that's probably intentional (it would give away
too much information if a specific product class was identified in these
spams).
I would think that we're looking at the generic pharmaceutical market as
the target for these posts, given that expenditure for drugs is
increasing, the population is aging and drug purchases are growing, and
drug manufacturers (brand name and generic) are always spending money
promoting their products.
I believe we are looking at the results of a marketing or PR firm that's
been hired to promote generic drugs as an alternative to brand-name
alternatives, and one area of their focus is to spam usenet with these
postings.
Rod Speed
> Bill wrote
>>> Does anyone have any theory as to who is
>>> responsible for these anti-brand-name postings?
>> Some people are "giving type" people and like to share.
> If that's true in this case, then should there be more postings
> from the same author, on different topics perhaps?
Not necessarily, it may be the only area he is obsessed about.
> In these newsgroups:
They're mostly pretty appropriate for the sort of posts he has been doing.
> In not one of those cases, where the post spawned a conversational thread,
> did "Dr. Smith" return to the thread to participate in the conversation.
His choice.
> Here we see the same message posted 5 times to alt.health within the
> span of a few minutes:
That may be due to a different problem, it may have appeared
that the post didnt get out, so he reposted it a few times.
That does happen occassionally even with the sort of post you do approve of.
Hardly the end of civilisation as we know it.
> If this doesn't constitute usenet spamming, then nothing does.
You dont know that that is the same individual as the original you howled about.
>> Some people are "more intelligent" than others and teach others what they know.
> This is not teaching. This is spamming.
You dont get to rule on that any time soon.
>> For example these people might see others with financial
>> difficulties spending their money foolishly. And they are
>> simply pointing out ways to better manage money. And
>> thus rectify the financial difficulties in question.
> Do you believe it is proper to post messages
> like this to usenet, to hundreds or more groups?
It can be, depending on what sort of material is in the post.
> If you believe that, then there is nothing that can't be justified when it
> comes to mass usenet posting. Then nothing can really be classified
> as abuse or spam when it comes to usenet according to that logic.
Yes, you get to like or lump the fact that not all have the same opinion you do.
Eventually even you might get enough of a clue to manage
to grasp that usenet is about as close to complete anarchy
as any of us are likely to ever get involved in personally.
Some of us quite like that and use news servers that filter real spam
and accept the fact that it certainly does attract some real loons as well.
Timothy McViegh who got executed for the Oklahoma atrocity did show up at one time.
> I believe these posts are some sort of professionally orchestrated effort,
More fool you. Thats mindlessly silly. So few even know what usenet is, let
alone read it much even if they do know what it is, that no one would bother.
There are hordes more viable places to do that than usenet.
> perhaps by a marketing company that's been contracted by a generic
> product manufacturer, to promote generic products in the minds of consumers.
There's hordes more viable places to do that, like in the mass media.
> We don't know exactly what sort of generic product class is being promoted,
You dont know that ANY generic product class is being 'promoted'
> and that's probably intentional (it would give away too much information
> if a specific product class was identified in these spams).
Utterly mindless silly conspiracy theory.
> I would think that we're looking at the generic
> pharmaceutical market as the target for these posts,
Very bloody unlikely given the content of the post you reposted in full.
> given that expenditure for drugs is increasing, the population is aging
> and drug purchases are growing, and drug manufacturers (brand
> name and generic) are always spending money promoting their products.
And they have enough of a clue to do that where VASTLY more will see that than usenet.
> I believe we are looking at the results of a marketing or PR firm
> that's been hired to promote generic drugs as an alternative to
> brand-name alternatives, and one area of their focus is to spam
> usenet with these postings.
Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you are just as
much of a mindless loon as the poster you originally howled about.