Winning Elections Essay Example for Free

Winning Elections Essay b) Traditionally, winning elections has been an aim of political parties subordinate to representing political views. However, more recently parties have been adjusting their ideology, possibly to make them more desirable to the majority of the electorate and thus gain political office. As suggested by McKie, recent elections have been less between competing philosophies, much more about which set of managers was likely to get better results. Both Labour, and the Conservatives have moved considerably towards the centre of the political spectrum in the past couple of decades, and if there are fundamental differences between the two parties, then at least one of them is failing to reflect properly the concerns of the middle ground voter. This convergence of party ideology is most probably a move by both parties to make them more attractive to middle England. It is perhaps now only extremist parties that are intent on representing political principles, and this may be a reason for the recent rise in popularity of parties such as the BNP. In the last election, 57% of manifesto pledges for the main parties were non-partisan and couldnt be countered be other parties, this is a mark of the lack of choice the electorate is presented with and illustrates how parties are no longer representing strong political views with each party catering for a different section of society. In 1992 all three major parties were pro-Maastricht, which proves that parties are just pursuing policies that will appeal to the majority of the electorate. Labour used to represent the views of the working class, and their ideology was distinctly socialist, but under Tony Blair, and previously Neil Kinnock, Labour has tried to distance itself from its core supporters and trade unions, as that relationship was a vote loser. This reinvention of Labour ideology has been very prominent in recent issues such as Labours intransigence in not raising the salary for firemen and not having a good relationship with the Fire Brigades Union. The reform of the party came after 17 years of Conservative rule, and it was accomplished by the abandonment of many of its distinctive policies that it had fought and lost of in previous elections. When Tony Blair dropped clause four, it was in order to change the party, and when party reform was fully complete, Labour returned to power. However, some of Labours policy changes may have been due to the shrinking working class, which used to make up the majority of their support. This change in social structure may also be attributable to the Conservatives move towards the centre, as social boundaries have shrunk, the middle class which they traditionally represented is not as easily defined anymore. In the period 1945-1979, policy differences between the two major parties were generally peripheral, and thus both major parties governed for roughly 17 years each. In the two elections where there were substantial and essential differences in social and economic policy (1945 1983), one of the two parties plunged to catastrophic defeat. This was due to both parties projecting the party ideology through policy, thus effectively representing political principles even if it was not going to get them elected. However, there are still some policies that distinguish the major parties from each other. The parties set ideological goals in order to establish the best way to run the country; therefore parties are offering representation of the major strands of opinion. Labours electoral success is partly dependent upon offering a clear and distinctive vision of the nations future, their recent move away from the left has perhaps been in the interest of the electorate, and it would lose Labour political credibility if the electorate suspected that their new stance was the result of opportunistic caution. If one was to argue that political parties simply wished to get elected and this is why they have similar policy, then perhaps it should be questioned why there used to be a very distinct difference between the major parties. This can only be because of changing social structures mentioned previously. Ultimately, there is no way of knowing whether parties simply wish to get elected rather than represent political principles. However, it is likely that getting elected is at the top of their agenda, and perhaps they wish to represent distinct principles when they are in power, however the current Labour government has been acting much like a Conservative government would on issues such as Iraq, and university tuition fees. This perhaps highlights the changing society that we live in which has different political needs than it has in the past century, and political parties have adapted to provide the best options for the electorates needs.

Creative writing Essay Example for Free

Creative writing Essay On Writing by Stephen King is a memoir of the craft of the job as a published author, mainly aimed toward the aspiring ones. The book is divided up into three sections. The first section titled C. V. was all authentic glimpses into King’s life and featured interesting little episodes that King considered his ‘life lessons’ or things that sparked his sense of humor. It also provided a very important part in the basic aspects of being a good writer: King grew up loving to read and read frequently. He started writing and submitting his work at an early age and that’s where C. V. paints the picture of a real-life struggling novelist: how he had to work at several different crummy, though nevertheless interesting, and inspiring book setting jobs while supporting a family, a drug habit, and a fairly large and fairly flawed manuscript. The second section was titled On Writing, a section I found the most interesting and identified the most with as part of being both an aspiring author and a curious one. In this portion of the memoir of the craft, King gives you, flat-out but not in a patronizing tone, what you need to succeed as a decent writer. The best way to summarize how I felt about the section as a whole is this: when he revealed that he taught high school English for several years before the success of Carrie, I was desperately jealous of those students. But at the end of the day, I suppose any reader that is interested enough in King could always be his student by picking up book after book of his and becoming transfixed by his material and intelligence from cover to cover. Lastly, there’s the last section of the book, where King explores his painful memories of the accident from when an oblivious man in a blue van literally ran King over during one of his notorious thought-processing walks. The man, in attempt to calm down his Rottweiler’s in the backseat, veered off road and took King clear off his feet. This section of the book is about that and his slow road to recovery. It literally wrenched my heart when he talked of his wife setting up a table in the stuffy hall that he sat at to write for the first time. It was obvious that writing is more than just a business occupation and it becomes obvious in this section that King has a true passion for the craft. Despite it being far from the definitive writer’s guideline, this book takes on a unique perspective on creative writing spectrum. King lays down the law and then he teaches it, essentially. He shares his techniques, his pet peeves, and his own personal horrific experiences both as child and adult and he does it all within the defined space of what all he can say on a printed page. And he does it well. He constructs a personal ending with tragedy, growth, and experience within a tight covering of his famous storytelling style. And overall, I think Stephen King wrote this simply because he could. He knew it is a select audience that is going to read it and those fans who don’t ever care to be writers won’t read this book. Maybe I’m wrong and they might with the mindset that they might gain some secret insight into the mind of their idol and let me just tell you firsthand if that is the case, they will be disappointed. In not so many words, King says exactly the same thing himself. â€Å"There is no secret to my storytelling. It just is what it is. As true as I can say it, it’s just a lot of hard work, dedication, time, and exceled patience. All of which, I had to learn on my own,† King writes. Lastly, in the heart of the book, in the section On Writing, King writes, â€Å"Now comes the big question: What are you going to write about? And the equally big answer: Anything you damn well want. Anything at all as long as you tell the truth. Your truth. † That’s the biggest lesson I took away from this. But there is more, believe it or not. You can tell it from his writing. And before he gets to the end, King goes ahead and lets the cat out of the bag when he is writing about beginning again after his debilitating accident. He writes, â€Å"I feel that buzz of happiness, that sense of having found the right words and put them in a line. It’s like lifting off in an airplane: you’re on the ground, on the ground, on the ground and then you’re up, riding on a magical cushion of air and prince of all you survey. That makes me happy because it’s what I was made to do. † As a human, I was touched by his childhood anecdotes and often laughed with him about his insecurities. I am still in awe at what he has recently had to overcome physically. But as a writer, I am grateful for a brief glimpse into his vocational, bright burning world. I gained confidence from learning about things I have been doing right and have changed many bad habits or wrongdoings I’d been screwing up on obliviously the entire time because sometimes the coldest hands to wrap around your neck are the true ones. The only bad thing I can say about this book is that it’s too short, something one rarely has the opportunity to state regarding the beloved author. And a huge thank you goes to the beloved author himself Stephen King for a brief indulgence into the life of a genius storyteller.

Embracing The Obsession With Reality Television Media Essay

Embracing The Obsession With Reality Television Media Essay Many shows which have gained major popularity in this era are based on reality television. My family is following the television show Bigg Boss hysterically; and this makes me wonder about the obsession with reality television and its origins. When I think about it, I myself am unable to resist these shows, becoming a devout follower of shows like American Idol, So You Think You Can Dance, Top Chef and many others. This makes me want to know, what is it that has even caused me to become obsessed with reality television, like so many others. Obsession is the domination of ones thoughts or feelings by a persistent idea, image, desire, etc (Obsession) and unlike many consider it, is not necessarily bad. Thus, what I want to do is to completely understand the reasons behind this obsession with reality television, proving that it is good for people to watch these shows rather than ignoring them. To comprehend this obsession, we have to go over why some people relate to reality television, while others watch these shows for enjoyment, fascinating characters and skills, socializing and learning. Reality television is a genre of television programming in which the fortunes of real life people (as opposed to fictional characters played by actors) are followed (Reality television). The first reality television show was Candid Camera which came out in 1948 [and] has been called the granddaddy of the reality TV genre (Rowen). Candid camera was a hidden camera show in which pranks were pulled on random people to catch their reactions, but no one at that time would have called it a reality television show or imagine the impact it would have on the future. Since then, reality television has evolved into many sub genres, such as game shows, talk shows, dating shows and many other forms. Even when it came out, reality television gained international popularity, but it was not until MTVs The Real World that it became an obsession; and in this day and age, it can be said that reality television has something for everyone. A reason as to why people watch reality television is that they relate to the participants on it. In reality television shows, many people who are not professional actors get a shot at fame. Survivor is an example of this, where people get an opportunity to win prizes and become famous, even though they do not have a rich or glamorous background. The feeling that anyone can be a contestant is a major reason as to what causes people to watch. Individuals hope that they might get a chance to win the grand prize and apply for a spot on the show given the opportunity; an example of this can be taken by looking at the American Idol auditions and the sheer amount of people that take part in them. Peter van Beneden while writing about viewer identification with television characters says that according to a study by Sonia Livingstone it was found that it was not sociological or demographic factors that influenced the interpretation, but psychological factors. The most important factor was i dentification. Furthermore, people tend to compare their own stories to those about the contestants on the show, like how the participants used to live before the show and how the loss of a loved one occurred and affected them. Also, people also on the basis of their occupations, some have jobs that are the same as the theme of the show, for example chefs watching Master Chef and aspiring models in America watching Americas Next Top Model. Now, a question that might arises from people connecting to characters on reality television shows is whether relating to the characters is good or delusional. Several people believe that it gives individuals unrealistic expectations, thinking their lives will just work out like that on television. It has been said about reality television that [i]ts a classic psychological flight into fantasy (flight as opposed to fight reaction), which, is easier than dealing with anything as real as our own problems (Aazami). However, think of it in this way, if someone is delusional does it really involve reality television; the concept of people relating to someone existed far before the invention of reality television. Dr. John Grohol said something quite interesting about this, if we start diagnosing people based upon how much they identify with a particular movie, wow, well have tens of thousands of new diagnoses tomorrow! In fact, I see so many teenage and young adult men who think theyre Ba tman and really identify with that character. Moreover, is identifying with a person on television really that awful? If someone with a similar background is doing something remarkable on television, is that not something to be inspired from rather than something to disregard. Watching reality television for amusement creates one of the major controversies going on due to the viewing of reality television. There are many fights on these shows and these attract a lot of spectators. The Jerry Springer show got famous due to all the fights that occurred and the sheer stupidity of the people who were on it. The reason for this show getting popular can be considered that the audience just wanted to be entertained. Fights occur on a lot of reality television shows, where people are confined to a house; I think that even a lot of the viewers of Americas Next Top Model watch it for the arguments. Furthermore, in numerous shows people do uncharacteristic things for attention and sometimes this leads to humiliation. Stunts like these tend to make people talk and raise the popularity of the show. Eating weird items to earn money is a concept that has escalated in shows and this is because the creators of the shows realize that most people want to be entertained, not caring about how it happens and what the consequences are. Again, take the American Idol auditions as an example, there are some interviewees that you admire, while others you can not help but laugh at. Using this as an outlet for amusement is not necessarily terrible, because people might use other sources to quell their thirst for satisfaction, which might be much more destructive. Another thing to consider is whether laughing at others is moral and ethical. A large amount of people find the degradation of others demeaning. Reality television can be considered the guilty pleasure for many individuals and extremely addictive as well, because [w]ith a combination of deception, sexual encounters, drunken ramblings and sudden outbursts its no wonder that reality TV keeps viewers glued to their televisions week after week (Rentmeester). However, if the people are willing to show their characters with all the quirks they possess with the risk of being laughed at, then why is laughing at them absurd, if they are doing something which is the embodiment of stupidity. Moreover, this kind of content attracts media attention and is probably not something that will end. Moreover, these situations are often even left to the perception of an individual and are usually not as harmful as they appear. If someone does something amazing, but embarrassing, would it not be better to commend them for their courage for actually attempting the feat rather than laughing at them. Furthermore, tabloids also make fun of people who have a sense of style which is different compared to the consensus. In comparison to reality television, tabloids are almost never accused to be undignified. In addition, how are the activities shown on reality television shows any different from those shown in magazines? According to the Steven Reiss, the Reiss profile is a comprehensive, standardized, objectively validated instrument that assesses 16 basic psychological needs. Everybody embraces all 16 basic needs, but to different extents. One of those 16 basic needs is curiosity, which is the longing for knowledge. This yearning can be highlighted in people watching reality television for incredible people and skills. In the show Stan Lees Superhumans, the host Daniel Browning Smith, whos been dubbed the most flexible man in the world (History.com) travels around the world looking for people that have some extraordinary talents, such as the man who is immune to electricity and the blind man who uses radar to ride his bicycle. My point of view is that humans are fascinated by anything that we ourselves are unable to do. Viewers watch these shows to find out what makes these people different, as most people try to appreciate things which they are not familiar with. In addition, many reality televisi on shows contain disabled people doing amazing things, like the hip-hop dancer who does not have legs [has] found fame after performing on the Indian version of Britains Got Talent (Arnold). These shows are watched; due to the fact that they show acts which we do not see in our daily lives and this curiosity makes us want more of that show. It enlightens people, as to how anything is possible with absolute dedication. People might argue that reality television gives people impracticable expectations and over dramatizes things, but in a way is that not a good thing. Does it not compel people to believe that they can do activities, which they would not even have attempted? Think of reality television as a double edged sword. It gives people a chance to show their special skills and it gives them the opportunity to shine. To someone skilled, it is a weapon that can be used for fame, while to those who are not it might lead to mortification. Think again of American Idol and how the gifted even from small towns have become famous, while those who are less skilled are laughed at and then usually forgotten. Reality television can also be considered as a social catalyst. From Reisss profile, it was noted that Significant but small differences were reported on the motives of social contact, honor, order, and romance (Reiss and Wiltz). Most of the 16 motives in the Reiss profile indicate that the people who watch reality television usually long for some kind of human contact, like the motive of family which is the need to raise children (Reiss). Equally important, vengeance which is one of the motives involves other people, although it is a negative characteristic. Furthermore, it gives some people who find it hard to start a conversation, a new and interesting topic to discuss with colleagues and friends. Steven Reiss and James Wiltz write relating to this point of view that when they conducted a survey of 239 people it was found that Two of the most commonly repeated truths about reality TV viewers are that they watch in order to talk with friends and coworkers about the show, and that they are not as smart as other viewers. But our survey results show that both of these ideas are incorrect. Although some people may watch because it helps them participate in the next days office chat, fans and nonfans score almost equally when tested on their sociability. This indicates that fans of reality television have the same sociability compared to those who do not like reality television, so it can be inferred that reality television does not destroy social contact, but actually helps it; as it provides people a matter to discuss. Some people argue that sitting at home and watching reality television is a waste of time and equivalent to end of ones social life, because the person leaves home less and loses socializing abilities. However, reality television lets communities gather together in support of a fellow member of the society in a show, such as when the hometowns of contestants on American Idol come together and have parties to commemorate the participants success. Likewise, people take their families and friends to sit in the audience of talk shows and game shows, to have fun and watch the show. Hence, if there is so much social contact as a result of these shows, it can be said that reality television is not the killer of social activity that many consider it to be, but rather a tool that can be used for socializing. Furthermore, there are some people that watch reality television to learn. Reality television is not just fun and games mixed with heaps of drama; it does tend to teach a few lessons and skills, every now and then. Such as, there are instructional shows which teach anyone who is willing to watch, about how to cook food, renovate houses and many other activities. Shows like Project Runway help anyone who watches to acquire knowledge about the current fashion trends and informs individuals about clothes and accessories which a person should never wear. Similarly, shows like Who wants to be a Millionaire educates people and raises their general knowledge about the world. On these shows, people make a lot of mistakes and rather than just making fun of these mistakes, people can actually gain knowledge from these mistakes. The reason why some people make sure history is not forgotten is to make sure we do not make the same mistakes as our ancestors; I think reality television can be used the same way in this generation. The problem countless individuals have with these shows is that the information given on these shows is always the same and nothing original ever comes on these shows. Also, one might argue that there are far better methods of learning. However, if people are watching television anyway, should they not do something constructive with their time and watch reality television as a source of information. Also, the knowledge being shown might be something new for some people and it might even educate people on how something common is done properly. Television is appealing. And if you can use that to help teach your child about something, thats pretty powerful, Rivadeneyra says. With reality TV, we can teach our kids to think critically about what theyre watching. Whats real about the shows and whats not. Its important for them to have media literacy (Weinstein). In America, Survivor led the ratings in 2001-02, and Idol has topped the ratings three consecutive years (2004-05, 2005-06, and 2006-07) (Aazami). This evidence suggests that reality television has dominated the world of the television and it is further stated that The shows Survivor, the Idol series, The Amazing Race, the Americas Next Top Model series, the Dancing With The Stars series, The Apprentice, Fear Factor and Big Brother have all had a global effect, having each been successfully syndicated in dozens of countries (Aazami). These statistics are quite compelling, it was noted that Over 15 million people watched the first Survivor that figure rose to 18 million the second week (oregonstate.edu). These numbers keep on escalating, such that 23 million tuned in [to watch] Multi-Millionaire and 51 million watched the finale of Survivor' (Reality TVs Real Survivor 77). Also, in a study it was noted that between the ages of 18-29 around 68% of the people either liked or loved reali ty television (oregonstate.edu). As mentioned before, there are many reasons to watch these shows and thus it attracts such a large audience. In my perspective, people who are against this obsession with reality television do have some good points, such as people spending way too much time watching television and the networks preying on the viewers by showing them non-stop advertisements. Nevertheless, there are ways to cut down the number of hours that are spent watching reality television such as, downloading the episodes and only going over the interesting parts, without any advertisements. Also, by not viewing the shows alone and by not watching the elimination episodes one can save huge amounts of time (Pagliarini). Audiences are often made to vote and many consider it a waste of money. However, I think that the huge amount of people who vote, vote because it gives them a feeling of empowerment. Reality TV has given the audience more and more power over the years. Whether you get to vote for the winner, or vote for something the contestants have to do, or just play a game to win a prize, the audience has more to do other than just watch the show. What other shows are there where you can possibly affect the outcome besides Reality TV? (Suzanne) . As stated, by going over people how people relate, laugh, admire, socialize and learn using reality television it can be said that reality television does have its negatives, but there are far more advantages of watching reality television. Also, reality television has something that appeals to everyone and if viewed properly, can be of great help in different aspects of life for the viewer. Hence, the obsession which comes with reality television is not something that should be ignored, but rather embraced.

Jane Eyre by Charlotte Bronte Essay -- LTTE women fighters

Charlotte Bronte writes in the famous novel Jane Eyre, â€Å"I am no bird; and no net ensnares me: I am a free human being with an independent will†. As the writer shows the freedom wills is rooted into the woman and they fight for their independence based on their situation. But most of the Asian culture defending the rights and portraying the women into the frames of concerned, beautiful, caring, weak and under estimating them. Women are expected to play a conservative role in the community. Especially they considered as the ‘Honor’ of the family who is responsible for preserving the prestige of the family. While it is true that women are beautiful, care and concern, it does not necessarily compulsion to determine this feature only define the woman. To deteriorate the subordination of women to men, a gang of women stood up against the violence where the whole world was stunned and surprised. It was a Sri Lankan Tamil nation diaspora named Liberation Tigers of Ta mil Eelam (LTTE) with female fighters who wanted to overcome social and cultural norms. They proved the nation as well as the whole world, that they, as women, are no longer inferiors to men. The involvement of LTTE Tamil female fighters in the battle of secession challenged the patriarchal social structure of Sri Lanka. The LTTE women fighters changed the conservative appearance of the Sri Lankan women to reflect the gender equality within the society. Generally a Sri Lankan Tamil woman is expected to be into the house, noiseless, conservative and must admit her whole life to the family. Especially through being conservative means to wear her traditional dress (Saree), having Bindi, a decoration worn by women and jewelries to reflect her cultural identity. In contrast, the L... ...about Iraq war and women. Mostly this source refers the international information not my included topic of essay. I cited this to compare the LTTE women fighters with the international fighters and women. So I quoted on line. For comparing obviously this source gives me evidence. Overall this source is not that much needed for this essay. Wang, Peng. â€Å"Women in the LTTE: Birds of Freedom or Cogs in the Wheel?† Journal of Politics and law, Mar 2011. Web. 05 Feb. 2014. This is also a scholarly journal about LTTE and women fighters that describes well about the battle of the secession. This article is clearly depicts about the floor for the battle and its consequences. But this journal failed to differentiate the equality of the women in the battle and emancipation. So this article not that much used for my argument but it helps to know about the battle background.

The Role of an Angry God in Nathaniel Hawthornes The Scarlet Letter :: Scarlet Letter Essays

The Role of an Angry God in Nathaniel Hawthorne's The Scarlet Letter The Scarlet Letter was a novel that was written in the early 1850s by a renowned author, Nathaniel Hawthorne in 1850. Some people say that Hawthorne intended the book to portray God as a benevolent, forgiving, and loving god. Others, such as myself, believe that he had a different idea of who God was; The Scarlet Letter was written in a way that would portray God as an angry, vengeful, being that was slow to forgive. God put seven years of suffering upon Reverend Arthur Dimmesdale, for a sin whom he committed with Hester Prynne. When he finally confessed and his life looked like it was about to get better, God abruptly ended his time on the earth. Hester Prynne was almost shunned by everyone, even the sunshine. Her daughter, Pearl, was constantly saying things to Hester that would cause her pain. Another man, whose life was damaged by the sin, was Dr. Roger Chillingworth. He was not part of the sin, but still suffered from it. His incredible knowledge of healing, a value to the entir e town, was ruined by the quest for revenge upon Reverend Dimmesdale. All four of these lives were ruined, all because of one small sin committed by two people. A merciful, forgiving, benevolent god would never let that happen. Reverend Arthur Dimmesdale was a young minister, who was greatly loved by the Puritan community. Some said that he would someday benefit the New England Church as much as the apostles had helped the early Christian faith. Unfortunately, that is not what happened. Instead, Reverend Dimmesdale was constantly depressed and physically deteriorating. In a chat with Hester in the forest, Hester asked him if he had found peace, and he responded, "None! -nothing but despair! What else could I look for being what I am, and leading a life such as mine? Were I an atheist... I might have found peace... But, as matters stand with my soul... all of God's gifts that were the choicest have become torment. Hester, I am miserable!" (182). Later in their conversation, Hester said, accurately, to Dimmesdale, "Thou art crushed under this seven years' weight of misery" (188). For seven years, Arthur Dimmesdale's life was filled with nothing but pain and suffering. Would a kind and merciful god put a minis ter that devoted his life to God through the kind of torment that Reverend Dimmesdale was given?

Interview With with a Grunt Sergeant Essay -- Interview Essay

I sat down with a former Grunt Sergeant, Jake Stone, on a calm, sunny, Saturday November morning, to ask about his experience in the Marine Corps. Mr. Stone is a rather frail looking man in a wheelchair that you can tell used to be a powerful man despite his age which is approaching late seventies. I learned a lot from him. For example, Mr. Stone was a training officer during the Vietnam War. He was stationed in California teaching hand to hand combat, bayonets, pistols, rifles, hand grenades, flamethrowers, just a wide assortment of deadly weapons. He led ninety men in a strike team that was prepared to be deployed at any time. They were to be ready to pack up and leave in an hour. Just because he wasn’t deployed, that’s not to say he didn’t see his share of the action, he just didn’t get to see enemy fire, he saw plenty of horrors that would terrify many people. He also had access to quite a bit of classified information that has since been declassified. One of them being a strike team tactic that seems quite dangerous. A jet designed originally designed to drop bombs was outfitted with four marines instead. A few jets would fly real low altitude, and just before the targets, the pilots cut the engines so their flying would be nearly scant, opening the bay doors, the pilots drop the payload of marines, instead of bombs, who’d parachute down onto the enemy from above. This was a strategy designed to confuse and overwhelm the enemy. This idea was scrapped after too many people broke their legs and dislocated ankles in training, I also learned about a training accident that killed twenty one people. His men were practicing a beach style invasion, everyone was fully equipped and had landing vehicles, boarding craft, b... ...e of his accidents and the nature of the officers above him. I may have even asked for more details about his involvement in security detail, I got lots of various detail but no finite description. I don’t know the details which is what I largely base my writing on. I take details and make the reader see it clearly, I did not receive the visual detail I would have enjoyed writing about. I would have asked him more of what his day to day life was like and what he felt at any given time. I expect anxiety but that’s not something I can just assume. I will be looking in the archives for other people with similar stories. Perhaps I would ask about his involvement with the Commandant, four star general in the Marine Corps. I would ask what it felt like to be near the most powerful man in the marines, and to be in a position of securing and protecting him from harm.

Coffee Trends in Singapore Essay

†¢In 2011, the total volume growth of coffee was 5%, which was a similar trend as in 2010 due to the continuous strong economic growth in Singapore. Due to the high density of on-trade channels including chained local coffee shops such as Ya Kun Kaya Toast and Old Town White Coffee and chained Western-style specialised coffee shops such as Starbucks and Gloria Jean’s Coffee, coffee drinking culture has penetrated into the Singaporean market. The manufacturers have also launched high-quality products in the off-trade channel. Hence, consumers are seeking to have the authentic high-quality brewed coffee at home. COMPETITIVE LANDSCAPE †¢Nestlà © Singapore Pte Ltd continued to post the leading position in terms of off-trade value sales with a 40% value share. This success could be attributed to its constant research and development as well as the frequent promotional campaigns due to the companies’ economic scale, which can keep attracting the consumers. Due to the companies’ global strong presence, the company develops not only instant coffee products but also enhances the fresh coffee category by introducing the coffee machines and fresh coffee pods such as Nespresso and Nescafà © Dolce Gusto. PROSPECTS †¢Total volume of coffee is expected to increase by 2% CAGR over the foreacst period. Considering the review period, this growth is slightly conservative, which reflects the current uncertain global economic condition. Although local consumers are becoming more affluent and have more disposable income, their consumption patterns are likely to follow the economic outlook in Singapore, which will reflect, in particular, the growth in on-trade volume.