Mediaboss Marketing

Social media marketing is a rapidly changing landscape, but perhaps nothing these days changes faster than video. As I wrote a few months ago, video is the medium for social in 2017. Internally, weve given a lot of thought this year to the best ways to approach video and execute for a wide range of formats, from Facebook Live to Snapchat.

So, when I came across this new high-level infographic about marketing in a video-first world, I knew Id have to share. In a world where over 500 million people watch Facebook videos every day, video marketing is too important to be glossed over. This new infographic looks at video from every angle through the lens of a survey of 1,000 consumers and 500 marketers.

Weve reposted the entire infographic below, as well as some key insights for those of you who just want the highlights (because this infographic is a long one!).

Nearly two-thirds of consumers say theyve bought something in the last month as a direct result of watching a marketing video on Facebook.

Webcast, June 21st: 5 Keys to Operational Excellence

When do they watch?

Approximately 84% watch on mobile devices. Mobile is huge. For video creators, this is important. Heres what you can do to better serve this audience:

The majority of your videos should be 60 seconds or less and have a strong hook as early as possible. As far as what types of videos you should create, heres how consumers are likely to respond:

Check out the full infographic below, and let us know in the comments: are you using video for your marketing?

Bob Hutchins (Franklin, TN) runs Buzzplant (www.buzzplant.com), A 12+ year old Internet marketing agency targeting the faith/family market. His team was an integral part of the online campaign for Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ, The Chronicles of Narnia, Soul Surfer, and many other movies, books, music releases, and Viewfullprofile

See the article here:
Everything You Need to Know NOW About Social Video Marketing - Business 2 Community

YouTube apologized after getting hit by allegations that it censors LGBTQ+ content and fixed the bug that apparently caused the issue. Now, the website has apologized yet again and updated its policies in an effort to reaffirm its "commitment that YouTube is a place where all voices can be heard." YouTube chief Susan Wojcicki said she and her team talked to lesbian, gay, bi, trans and queer/questioning creators, employees and volunteers to get feedback on the platform's policies. As a result, the company has "broadened Restricted Mode guidelines to ensure that non-graphic, personal accounts of difficult events are available."

In a blog post, the CEO wrote:

"For example, personal accounts of individuals who suffered discrimination or were impacted by violence for being part of a protected group will now be included in Restricted Mode, provided they don't contain graphic language or content. Soon we'll have new content in Creator Academy to describe in detail how to make videos that will meet the criteria for Restricted Mode."

If you look at the website's guidelines, you'll now find this section:

"Some educational, straightforward content about sexual education, affection, or identity may be included in Restricted Mode, as well as kissing or affection that's not overly sexualized or the focal point of the video."

...

"We know there is a risk that some important content could be lost if we were to apply these rules without context. We value stories where individuals discuss their personal experiences and share their emotions. Sharing stories about facing discrimination, opening up about your sexuality, and confronting and overcoming discrimination is what makes YouTube great, and we will work to ensure those stories are included in Restricted Mode. "

The Google-owned website admits that the mode might still not work perfectly despite the tweaks that it made, but it promises that its systems will get better at identifying entries that should and shouldn't be filtered out over time. In addition to making guideline changes, YouTube is introducing a permanent spot on its US spotlight channel for LGBTQ+ videos to be refreshed weekly throughout the year. It's also teaming up with The Trevor Project to offer crisis intervention to members of the community and to prevent LGBTQ+ youth suicides.

Follow this link:
YouTube says LGBTQ+ video censorship won't happen again - Engadget

Was a raid on NDTVs offices earlier this month politically motivated?

In the two weeks since Indias Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) launched a raid on the offices and the homes of NDTV staffin India, an important conversation regarding government interference in the media has resurfaced. The atmosphere surrounding the issue remainsmurky and longstanding suspicions of the strong nexus between the investigation agency and the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party have once more been brought to the fore.

On June 5, the CBI conducted its raid, prompting a statement from NDTV declaring that it was based on unproven complaints from a disgruntled former employee. The complaint, on the basis of a loan default, was further dismissed as baseless by the organization, which furnished the proof of repayment along with its statement.

Furthermore, the implication that this raid was based on a year-old complaint that was private in nature sparked concerns that it was politically motivated. Days prior to the raid, as several members of the Indian media have been quick to point out, the ruling Bharatiya Janata Partys spokesperson Sambhit Patra was asked to leave an NDTV debate for his accusations against the channel in the face of criticism.

Minister of State for Information and Broadcasting Rajyavardhan Rathore responded to this by saying that while the government was committed to protecting freedom of expression, it was also responsible for preserving the law of the land. While voices within the media have indicated that there may well be a case for this raid and that it was premature to cast this as retaliation for government criticism, several prominent members have a different opinion.

The Editors Guild of India has since issued a statement implicatingthis move as a violation ofthe principle of the freedom of the press within a democracy, pegging it as a possible attempt to silence the media. The Press Club of India subsequently organized a meeting to protest the raid. The CBI, in turn, responded with the argument that NDTV was not singled out in this raid process. Explaining that this raid was not about loan default as much as a larger list of violations of banking sector guidelines, the organization placed this investigation along the spectrum of a long list of others on the issue of banking fraud.

However, the absence of a preliminary inquiry ahead of this raid has not silenced the criticism. The Press Club meeting for instance was the site of incensed conversation. Prominent media figures like Kuldip Nayyar and Arun Shourie even discussed parallels between the current governments attitude towards the media and the time of Emergency under former Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. The ensuing discussion expressed worry at the majoritarian tendencies of the government, a need to move beyond institutional affiliations in the interest of preserving shrinking spaces for dissent, and the absence of protocol in the investigation.

The space for dialogue regarding the actions of the army in Kashmir, the anti-beef agenda, moral policing to name just a few issues has been fast shrinking amid perceptions that the government will seek to retaliate. Comparisons to the Emergency, while perhaps hyperbolic, are nevertheless worrisome as they are indicative of the beginnings of a trend towards heightened censorship in India. The defensiveness of the ruling party in the face of criticism has been on the rise in the past few years, and the NDTV has faced unexpected consequences for the second time in a year, following its24-hour blackout in November 2016.

The recent raids, in keeping with this trend, inspire a feeling of unease and worry regarding what they might foretell.

The rest is here:
In India, Raids Targeting a Prominent News Agency Spark Censorship Fears - The Diplomat

To the editor:

As we are in the season of graduation, I hope you will allow this retired educator to reflect on the Early College yearbook fiasco.

First, let me address the nauseating defense of censorship offered up by John Robich (Richmond County Daily Journal, June 3-4). His attempts to ingratiate the reader by extolling the virtues of the Early College at the expense of censorship is an abysmal failure. He delights that school officials put down the yearbook as if free speech were a rabid dog.

Mr. Robich reinforces his moralistic rant stating the potential threat of information that neither he or any of the public had access to, yet he claims that information potentially inflammatory, controversial and offensive.

Sir, you need a refresher course in Constitutional Law 101.

His most laughable observation goads the reader to be concerned over how posterity might perceive the yearbook in question. Yes, Mr. Robich, the students will remember the yearbook, but not for the reasons you so smugly suggest.

They will recall how obsessed school officials used collusion to steal the work of a year of collaboration. Where are they confiscated books? Have they been destroyed? At least the Nazis burned their books in public. Oh, that one copy still copy still exists to be downloaded to the freedom of the internet.

In his arrogantly condescending tone, Mr. Robich admonishes those who disagree with him to consider the big picture.

Yes, we see the big picture. The educational caste system is alive and well in Richmond County. Do you really think our citizens will acquiesce to such thinking?

At every turn, he insults the intelligence of the readers ability to make their own moral choices. That Principal Waddell made the right and morally good decision would make it astounding that students and parents can make these choices at all! Its a sure bet that next years publication will be closely scrutinizedoopssanitized.

Our superintendents failure to publicly weigh in on the crisis has been noted. Her silence speaks volumes. With the national spotlight on our school system, Dr. Goodman missed an opportunity for transparency in her administration.

Some would want to maintain the status quo. Sorry folks. Pandoras Box has been opened and things will never be the same again.

In recent months, we have witnessed massive student walkouts in our state over social issues. It is to their credit our students chose not to disrupt their education.

Are you listening administrators? Who are the adults in this scenario?

Congratulations to the graduates of Early College. Despite the despicable act of betrayal perpetrated on you, you still hold the promise of a democratic society. Never let anyone or group of people put braces on your brains. My prayer of you, in the words of one spiritual revolutionary, is to continue to ask, seek and knock all the days of your life.

I applaud the Daily Journal for keeping the issue in the forefront. Although our school officials are on report, you can be sure you have not heard the last of their draconian antics.

Vigilance is the price we pay for freedom. I hope Richmond Countys motto Fiat Justicia, (Let Justice Be Done) will prevail in the end.

Eddie Russell

Rockingham

http://www.yourdailyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/web1_letter_web-6.jpg

.

Follow this link:
LETTER: Defense of censorship was nauseating - Richmond County Daily Journal

Subscribe today for full access on your desktop, tablet, and mobile device.

Let friends in your social network know what you are reading about

What teacher in Wall will want to do anything more than teach their classes?

Try Another

Audio CAPTCHA

Image CAPTCHA

Help

CancelSend

A link has been sent to your friend's email address.

A link has been posted to your Facebook feed.

1:48 p.m. ET June 20, 2017

High school yearbooks that featured digitally altered photographs of students supporting President Donald Trump will be reissued.

So, Wall taxpayers will be footing the bill for new yearbooks because some kid decided to wear a Trump T-shirt for his yearbook photo and it was edited because someone on the yearbook staff thought it was inappropriate? (Trump censorship: Wall H.S. to get new yearbooks, June 15).

First of all, what student would wear a T-shirt for his yearbook photo?

But he does learn a lesson. If he stomps his feet and holds his breath he can get daddy to rally round the poor choices. Maybe the lesson should have been, Sorry Charlie. You made a poor choice in your attire. Live with it.

What teacher in Wall will want to do anything more than teach their classes? Why take a chance that some misguided youth and his righteous dad will raise a stink and tag some inflammatory description on the decision. There is censorship in schools every day. Its part of the learning process.

Chuck Person

Barnegat

Read or Share this story: http://on.app.com/2tK2mX7

Read more from the original source:
LETTER: Wrong lesson learned by yearbook censorship - Asbury Park Press