“Go Further With Ford.” Is Ford grammatically correct? Part 2, The Response.

Wednesday, December 5, 2012

Hi. Some months ago, I wrote a piece that challenged the use of “further” in Ford’s campaign. Last Friday, having never received the 2013 Ford Fiesta I requested for having pointed out the error of their ways, I emailed Ford corporate’s advertising department to make sure they’ve read my article. They’re busy, and I guess it’s possible that they missed it.

I would look great in this car.

I would look great in this car.

I stopped short of explaining the importance setting a good example by using correct grammar in their commercials, not wanting to sound as if I were lecturing them.

Just two days later, which is impressive, I received the following email response. Read it over, and let me know what you think and how I should respond. Please be kind. I’m still holding out hope that they’ll send me the car.


Thank you for contacting Ford Motor Company. We appreciate the time you have taken to write us regarding our Go Further campaign.

Go Further is Ford’s Global Brand Promise that was announced April 30, 2012 and ads began airing in the U.S. on national television that evening. While Go Further will be used in Ford’s marketing and advertising, it is not a tagline but, put simply, a description of Ford’s culture. It’s who we are and who we have always been. It’s also what makes Ford different from any other automaker because it promises that we are always going to go further to deliver great products, a strong business and a better world for each other and for our customers. Our One Ford business model and the four product pillars (Quality, Green, Safe, Smart) remain unchanged and support the Go Further brand promise.

Ford has a history of people working together to develop ingenious, attainable products and services that make people’s lives better. The goal of people serving people is what makes us unique.

Go Further means going where no one expects a car company to go by delivering the best in Quality, Green, Safe and Smart products.

Go Further means partnering with our dealers, collaborating with our suppliers, serving our communities and empowering every employee to make a real difference in our company.

Go Further means continuously improving quality, customer satisfaction and favorable opinion to increase value for all our stakeholders.

Go Further is who we are. Go Further is what we do.

Going along with our Go Further campaign, many of our new 2013 models now feature our class-exclusive SYNC and MyTouch technologies which give you the convenience of hands-free communications to ensure the safest driving experience possible. Several new models also feature our new EcoBoost engine technologies providing all the power our drivers crave without sacrificing on fuel economy.

If you are in the market for a new Ford or Lincoln vehicle, please contact our Marketing Program Headquarters at 1-800-334-4375. We are here Monday – Friday, 9 A.M. – 6 P.M. EST to assist you. When you call, we can send you a new vehicle brochure as well as set up a demonstration drive at a time and dealership of your choice to experience the vehicles first hand.

Thank you for contacting Ford Motor Company.

Ford Motor Company
Ford Marketing Program Headquarters

Me again. Someone just asked me if I wrote the response. No. I didn’t make this up. What you just read is exactly the text of the email Ford sent me. If I had, written it that is, I wouldn’t have been clever enough to pick “Raul” as the person who wrote it. -wf


“Mitt, you ignorant slut!” The question no one asked at Tuesday night’s debate.

Thursday, October 18, 2012

In the 1970s, CBS’ “60 Minutes” had a recurring segment during which two consummate journalists would briefly argue some issue. It was serious television that apparently caused the writers at “Saturday Night Live!” to wonder what these overly-civilized professionals really thought of each other. The result was SNL’s own late night “Point/Counterpoint,” starring Jane Curtain and Dan Aykroyd.

Here’s one of those SNL segments. Take a look. You’ll enjoy it. (Sorry, but you may have to sit through a brief commercial.)

By comparison to Tuesday night’s second debate between President Obama and Mitt Romney, the SNL skit seems tame, save perhaps only the colorful language, and certainly less troublesome.

I only wish I had been in the audience and that CNN’s Candy Crowley had called on me for a question.

“Mr. President,” I began, rising to my feet. “Governor Romney. Do either of you seriously believe that this contentious, in-your-face, confrontational, substance-poor ‘discussion,’ if I can call it that, of the most critical issues of our time demonstrates that either of you have the temperament, are mature enough to be our President and Leader of the Free World?”

I’ll leave it to you to speculate how the candidates might have answered. Me? I’m emailing Jane Curtain and Dan Aykroyd to check their party affiliations and availability in 2016. At least they’re funny.

-Next Contestant
(www.NextContestant.us is the political blog from the author of the WordFeeder.)

Breaking News: Israeli agent steals Iranian bomb!

Friday, September 28, 2012.

Despite photographic evidence to the contrary, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in New York following his dramatic “red line” speech at the United Nations yesterday, denied reports circulating throughout the Middle East to the effect that an Israeli Mossad agent, known only by the code name “Felix,” has stolen a prototype Iranian bomb.

The picture, taken through the lens of a tourist’s souvenir spy glass against the backdrop of the moonlit desert, is considered proof positive that Iranian bomb development is farther along than CIA intelligence has recently reported.

Believing the rumors to be true, western-leaning Arab leaders in the region are saying privately, “Mazel tov!” to Israel for having stolen the device without having to resort to a full-on air attack on Iran’s famed Acme Bomb Factory, widely believed to be the facility where the device was developed.


Kate’s breasts.

Saturday, September 15, 2012

For the record, this piece isn’t meant to be the least bit funny or clever.

I haven’t seen the pictures of Kate Middleton sunbathing. Probably never will. I’ve always assumed she had breasts, although, to be honest, even though I like breasts on women as much as the next guy, I’ve never thought about her in quite that way. In any case, they’re her breasts. Ms. Middleton and her husband seem like good people. Their high-profile lives notwithstanding, I think they have a right to their privacy – as do all the starlets and other notables the paparazzi have chased, embarrassed and otherwise annoyed to those celebrities’ detriment.
Keep reading…

President Obama: “I have a plan to pay off the entire national debt. Unfortunately, …”

Wednesday, September 12, 2012

“..unfortunately, it requires electing Mitt Romney President.” Thank you, Mr. President. What irony. Here’s how the plan works.

Yesterday, it was announced that our government has made another $2.7 billion by exercising our option to buy additional AIG stock, and then selling it. The stock market is up. Our total profit to date on the AIG bailout is now $15.1 billion. This is great. ..Or is it?
Keep reading…

Dating Romney

Thursday, September 6, 2012

Hi. A couple of days ago, a wrote a piece that gave my advice to a friend who is a liberal when it comes to social issues, but who believes we need a fiscal conservative in The White House. Her dilemma has to do with compromising her social concerns in return for getting us out of our current economic and financial mess. I did my best to assure her that it wasn’t a matter of one or the other, but of setting priorities.

And then it occurred me, after having watched some of the Republican and now Democrat Conventions, that I didn’t go far enough. Consider this brief article to be a postscript to the one I wrote on Tuesday.
Keep reading…

Don’t you think it’s time our government went to unit pricing?

Tuesday, August 28, 2012

This is from my political blog, www.NextContestant.us.

I’m not kidding. You know how the grocery stores show you how much an item costs, but then gives you the price per ounce? It’s called “unit pricing.”

Round numbers, there are approximately 312 million Americans. Our national debt is just under $16 trillion. The simple math is that, on a per capita basis, we’ve each borrowed $51,282 to fund our national debt. How many people in your family? Just the three of you? Okay, 3 times $51,282 is $153,846. That’s your family’s share of the national debt.