Mediaboss Marketing

The newly added research report by DataIntelo on the Global SEO Software Market is a detailed guide to understand several factors that play a vital role in growth progression. The report is fabricated in such a way that fosters the investment decisions and motivates crucial investment discretion for new businesses looking out for seamless market penetration.

Some of the prominent companies that are covered in this report:

BrightEdgeConductorLinkdexSpyFuYextWordStreamG2 CrowdMoz

*Note: Additional companies can be included on request

Get an exclusive free sample copy of this report @ https://dataintelo.com/request-sample/?reportId=234225

SEO Software Market Report: Introduction

Report on SEO Software market is a comprehensive study that deals with the status and the global position and offers DROC analysis for transforming competitive dynamics and different factors driving or restraining industry growth. The SEO Software market is the most booming and promising sector of the industry. The SEO Software market trend research process includes the analysis of different factors affecting the industry, with the government policy, competitive landscape, historical data, market environment, present and future trends in the market, upcoming technologies, technological developments, and the technical progress in related industry, and market risks, market barriers, opportunities, and challenges.

Why Choose this Report?

DataIntelo, which is one of the worlds top market research firms, has released a new report on the SEO Software market. The report is made with great precision and in a comprehensive manner to help the clients to identify hidden opportunities and gather information about unpredictable challenges in the market. The SEO Software report highlights vital growth factors, restraints, and trends of the market. The research study offers a wholesome analysis of the critical aspects of the SEO Software market, including competition, segmentation, geographical progress, manufacturing cost analysis, and price structure. We have provided CAGR, value, volume, sales, production, revenue, and other estimations for the global and regional markets.

You can buy the complete report in PDF format: @ https://dataintelo.com/checkout/?reportId=234225

The report also includes the impact of the ongoing global crisis i.e., COVID-19 on the SEO Software market and how the pandemic is transforming the market performance. The published report is made with the help of a vigorous and thorough research methodology. DataIntelo is also famous for its data accuracy and granular market reports. A complete picture of the competitive scenario of the SEO Software market is offered by this report. The report has an impressive amount of data about the recent product and technological developments in the markets. It has a wide spectrum of analysis regarding the impact of these advancements on the markets future growth, wide-range of analysis of these extensions on the markets future growth.

Objectives of the Report

The market seems to be evenly competitive. To analyze any market with simplicity the market is divided into segments, such as its product types, applications, technology, end-users, etc. Segmenting the market into smaller components makes it easier to analyze the dynamics of the market with more transparency. All the data has been depicted with the help of tables and figures that consist of a graphical representation of the numbers in the form of histograms, bar graphs, pie charts, etc. Another key component that is integrated with the report is the regional analysis to assess the global presence of the SEO Software market.

Following is the gist of segmentation:

By Applications:

IndividualEnterpriseGovernment Organization

By Types:

Mobile-BasedDesktop-Based

By Regions:

You can also go for a yearly subscription of all the updates on the SEO Software market.

If you have any questions on this report, please reach out to us @ https://dataintelo.com/enquiry-before-buying/?reportId=234225

Reasons you should buy this report:

Table of Contents:

Executive Summary

Assumptions and Acronyms Used

Research Methodology

SEO Software Market Overview

Global SEO Software Market Analysis and Forecast by Type

Global SEO Software Market Analysis and Forecast by Application

Global SEO Software Market Analysis and Forecast by Sales Channel

Global SEO Software Market Analysis and Forecast by Region

North America SEO Software Market Analysis and Forecast

Latin America SEO Software Market Analysis and Forecast

Europe SEO Software Market Analysis and Forecast

Asia Pacific SEO Software Market Analysis and Forecast

Asia Pacific SEO Software Market Size and Volume Forecast by Application

Middle East & Africa SEO Software Market Analysis and Forecast

Competition Landscape

About DataIntelo:

DataIntelo has vast experience in making tailored market research reports in many industry verticals. We also have an urge to provide complete client satisfaction. We cover in-depth market analysis, which consists of generating lucrative business strategies for the new entrants and the emerging players of the market. We make sure that each report is subjected to intensive primary, secondary research, interviews, and consumer surveys before final dispatch. Our company offers market threat analysis, market opportunity analysis, and deep insights into the current market scenario.

We invest in our analysts and take care of them to ensure that we have a full roster of experience and expertise in any field we cover. Our team members are selected for stellar academic records, specializations in technical fields, and exceptional analytical and communication skills. We also provide ongoing training and knowledge sharing to keep our analysts tapped into industry best practices and loaded with information.

Contact Info:

Name: Alex Mathews

Address: 500 East E Street, Ontario,

CA 91764, United States.

Phone No: USA: +1 909 414 1393

Email:[emailprotected]

Website:https://dataintelo.com

Originally posted here:
SEO Software Market 2021 Will Reflect Significant Growth in Future with Size, Share, Growth, and Key Companies Analysis- BrightEdge, Conductor,...

The novel coronavirus pandemic has wreaked havoc on public health in most countries, but it has caused particular destruction in five of the most populous and powerful democracies in the world: the United States, Brazil, India, Indonesia, and the Philippines. These states have five of the highest death tolls and caseloads from COVID-19 of any countries, and all have struggled to control the pandemic. Democracy itself is not the reason for their public health failures. Other democracies, from consolidated and wealthy ones such as Germany and Taiwan to politically shaky and middle-income ones such as Thailand, have developed effective responses that have minimized the viruss toll. Some democracies, such as Australia and Canada, have not only produced effectual public health responses but also taken robust measures to mitigate the pandemics effect on inequality. Several authoritarian states, such as Vietnam, have adopted policies that curtailed the viruss spread; other authoritarian states, including Iran and Russia, have failed in managing the pandemic.

Instead, the vast social and economic inequalities in these five ethnically and racially diverse countries have made the pandemic harder to control. These states have failed to handle the novel coronavirus in part because they have never addressed their historical internal divides, which COVID-19 has brutally revealed. In addition, leaders in these states who have attacked political systems and social cohesion have hindered the pandemic response.

More on:

Democracy

Inequality

Coronavirus

Brazil

India

Beyond revealing inequalities and devastating public health, the pandemic has had two dangerous effects in all of these countries: COVID-19 actually has made socioeconomic inequality worse, possibly for years to come, and has significantly exacerbated democratic regression. In these five states, caseloads and death tolls of the novel coronavirus are falling hardest on racial, ethnic, and sometimes religious minorities and on the poor; poor and minority communities significantly overlap, and many of these same citizens have the preexisting conditions that make them more susceptible to getting extremely sick or dying from COVID-19. The pandemic seems to be further entrenching economic and social inequalities, and some leaders are passing pandemic-era measures that could further hurt poor and minority groups. Furthermore, as often has happened during past major emergencies, political leaders have taken advantage of the emergency to corrode democratic norms and institutionsin these five democracies and across the globe.

Yet the coronavirus pandemic, like many other past crises, simultaneously has caused this damage and offered the chance for societies to pull together and think big about potential policy reforms. Some politicians are finding that promoting major policy reforms in the wake of the devastating pandemic could boost their popularity and win support across the political aisle; in some smaller democracies, such as New Zealand, politicians who have fostered societal unity and equality and embraced major reforms during the pandemic have won electoral victories. Although no solution will be one-size-fits-all in these five democracies, policymakers could utilize the emergency of the pandemic to promote large-scale structural reforms to reverse democratic regression and address aspects of socioeconomic inequality. Because these five countries are among the biggest and most powerful democracies in the world, any steps they take to address their inequalities and combat democratic regression will set examples for states around the world. Yet, if they allow COVID-19 to worsen inequality and accelerate democratic backsliding, they will set examples for other countries as well.

Eyes on Asia

Insights and analysis from CFR fellows on the latest developments across Asia.Monthly.

This paper was made possible by the generous support of the Henry Luce Foundation.

Professors: To request an exam copy, contact [emailprotected]. Please include your university and course name.

Bookstores: To order bulk copies, please contact Ingram. Visit https://ipage.ingramcontent.com, call 800.937.8200, or email [emailprotected]. Include ISBN 978-0-87609-377-1.

More on:

Democracy

Inequality

Coronavirus

Brazil

India

Follow this link:
COVID-19 and Its Effect on Inequality and Democracy - Council on Foreign Relations

Noah Bookbinder, Opinion contributor Published 3:15 a.m. ET April 2, 2021

This sounds apocalyptic and maybe a little crazy. It is not. The Trump presidency showed how quickly and completely our foundations can be shaken.

I worked as a counsel on the Senate Judiciary Committee for eight years. I heard senators that I admired repeat the apocryphal story of George Washington supposedly explaining to Thomas Jefferson that the Senate was the saucer that cools the tea, preventing the House from rushing through ill-advised legislation.

While the filibuster was not part of the framers plan and indeed some of the framers warned against a supermajority requirement for legislationit seemed consistent with this idea of the Senate as an intended obstacle to tyranny by a bare, partisan majority. Perhaps more importantly, I saw the cycles of control in the Senate. I saw how those tactics of delay and obstruction that drove a majority party crazy one year were lifelines when that party ended up in the minority the next.

Those seemed like compelling arguments to keep the Senate filibuster, so I passionately resisted the idea of eliminating it for years. Too slowly perhaps, it has become clear to me that times have changed. The old arguments are no longer enough in fact, our democracy might not survive at all unless Congress passes reforms that a minority seems determined to block. The Senate must get rid of the filibuster in order for us to maintain a democratic system of government going forward, and the sooner the better.

Our democracy already teetered on the brink when Donald Trump, who lost the 2020 presidential election by more than 7 million votes and a substantial margin in the Electoral College, falsely and repeatedly claimed to have won and then actually tried to convince officials in multiple states to overturn the results of the voting in those states.

When efforts by Trump and his supporters to undermine and overturn the election failed, Trumps supporters switched to a quieter but no less dangerous tactic. Bills have now been introduced in 47states to restrict access to voting, curbs which will disproportionately impact non-white voters. Many of these bills are on their way to passing. Efforts are also in the planning stages to aggressively gerrymander districts to benefit the former presidents party.

The cumulative effect of all thisis to prevent a mostly white minority of Americans from losing control of the United States government. There is legislation that could prevent this, but it looks like it will be blocked in the Senate by the filibuster, something that has often happened to bills meant to advance racial equity and justice.

U.S. Capitol building on March 24, 2021, in Washington, D.C.(Photo: J. Scott Applewhite/ AP)

Now, the combination of systematic disenfranchisement of Black and brown voters, aggressive use of gerrymandering, and a system of unchecked money in political campaigns could allow a minority of voters to ensure that those who supportedTrumps abuses are ushered into control of Congress and the presidency; once in power, they have already shown their willingness to use it to further degrade checks and balances for their own advancement. The democracy as we know it might begin to crumble.

We need H.R. 1:It would maintain voting rights and voting integrity that states saved amid COVID-19

This sounds apocalyptic and maybe a little crazy. It is not. We need only look at the four years ofTrumps presidency, moving from emoluments violations, obstruction of investigations, embrace of white supremacists, and sidelining of watchdogs and prosecutors who threatened him to full-scale attempts to overturn an election and incite insurrection, to see how quickly and completely the foundations of our democracy can be shaken.

Legislation before Congress can stop all this from happening. H.R. 1, the For the People Act, contains crucial voting rights protections that will prevent many of the efforts in states to restrict the ability to vote; it will ensure fair, non-partisan redistricting and reform money in politics, as well as curbing much unethical conduct and many abuses of power. We can also shore up our democracy against attack with billslike the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, the Protecting Our Democracy Actand anact to finally grant District of Columbiaresidents the same rights to democratic participation that people in all 50states have.

GOP ex-officials: We need a voting rights champion like Vanita Gupta at Justice, and fast

But if the Senates intractable minority is allowed to continue to prevent all legislation to protect our democratic system, we will run out of time. Efforts in the states to curb voting rights and ensure rule by a shrinking white minority will be able to take effect without any check; after the rules are changed and the deck stacked, it might not again be possible to elect a Congress and a president amenable to protecting democratic participation and checks and balances.

The stakes couldnt be higher. The Senate must eliminate the filibuster while there is still time and quickly enact the For the People Act and as much other important pro-democracy legislation as possible. Once the democracy is secure, we can think about how to build a system of true comity and bipartisanship; but if we dont act now, there may not be a system to fix.

Noah Bookbinder, a former criminal prosecutor for the Justice Department's Public Integrity Section, is the executive director ofCitizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. Follow him on Twitter:@NoahBookbinder

Autoplay

Show Thumbnails

Show Captions

Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2021/04/02/kill-senate-filibuster-save-american-democracy-column/7060951002/

Read more from the original source:
I'm finally done with the Senate filibuster. We're running out of time to save democracy. - USA TODAY

In Georgia and 46 other states across the country, the Republican Party is trying to keep Black and brown people and other members of the Democratic Party's base from voting. The goal isto keep the Republican Party in power indefinitely through a pseudo-democratic system political scientists call "competitive authoritarianism."

In essence, today's Republicans want to turn back history's clock to the Jim Crow era.

The smokescreen for this assault on American democracy is that such anti-democracy efforts are intended to "protect" the "security" of votes against the threat of "voter fraud,""manipulation" and "corruption" by unseen(and of course nonexistent) forces.

But the smokescreen istransparent.

On Tuesday, Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp admitted the truth about the Republican plot against democracy, telling WABE radio,"A lot of this bill is dealing with the mechanics of the election. It has nothing to do with potential fraud or not."

Kemp's statement echoes other public admissions by prominent Republicans and members of the white right: They that knowthey cannot win competitive elections in a real democracy because their policies and proposals are broadly unpopular with the American people. This is especially true given the country's changing racial demographics, and the fact thatthe Republican Party's core appeal is almost exclusively based on white identity politics, racism, and white supremacy. Donald Trump's neofascist presidency only accelerated that dynamic.

Former labor secretaryand political columnistRobert Reich recently wrotethat while "Trump isn't single-handedly responsible" for the Republican turn toward overt racism, "he demonstrated to the GOP the political potency of bigotry, and the GOP has taken him up on it. This transformation in one of America's two eminent political parties has shocking implications, not just for the future of American democracy but for the future of democracy everywhere."

There has been much excellent writing on the legal,legislative and procedural details of the Republican Party's war on Black and brown voters and American democracy.

We know now that the Jim Crow Republicansareattempting to pass at least 350 bills and initiatives that will make mail-in and absentee voting much more difficult, narrow the window of time to vote, remove polling places in predominantly Black, brownand poor communities, add onerous ID requirementsand sabotage many voter mobilization efforts, especially those used by Black churches and other community organizations.

These anti-democracy laws also literally allow Republicans torig the outcome of elections in their favor by expanding their control of local voting boards.

In total, these are de jure examples written in the law of how Republicansand the white right are trying to overturn America's multiracial democracy with the goal of creating a new American apartheid state across the South and elsewhere.

But much less has been written about how these Jim Crow Republican attacks are also a de facto assault on the day-to-day lives, dignity, freedom, safety and humanity of Black and brown Americans. The long arc of the Black freedom struggle is one where the de jure realities of institutional racism and white supremacy cannot be properly separated from quotidian social inequality and injustice. These new attempts by Republicans and the white right to undermine America's multiracial democracy are an open declaration that American democracy is to be first and foremost a White democracy. The Jim Crow Republicans' plot against the rights of Black and brown people is also an attempt to make civic life and representative politics a "whites only" space. Because the Republicans and their allies are literally rewriting the rules of democracy in their favor they stand a good chance of succeeding, at least for now.

White supremacy, on a fundamental and basic level, is a declaration that white people can act however they wishtoward nonwhite people, up to and including maximal cruelty and violence,without consequences. Why? Because whiteness constructs white people as dominant over other groups by definition. This is thelogic of Trumpism and other forms of racial authoritarianism that the post-civil rights era Republican Party has so enthusiastically embraced.

The Jim Crow Republicans have enshrined this principle into law:The Georgia anti-democracy bill makes it illegal to give people waiting in line to vote food or water. President Biden has described such laws as "un-American" and an "atrocity," and other prominent voices have condemned it as well. But these critics are dancing around a more basic and fundamental truth about what is being communicated by the Jim Crow Republicans and their allies.

The real truth and connotative meaning of the Jim Crow Republicans' ban on giving food and water to voters who are waiting in line is that Black and brown people are not quite human the Other,not worthy of the same respect and decency as "real Americans," understood to be white by default.If the Republicans and other members of the white right who write these anti-democracy bills were being fullyhonest, they would simply state,"Do not feed the animals."

To properly understand the breadth of the Republican Party and its forces' attack on multiracial democracy one must locatesuch efforts as part of a larger right-wing campaign to dehumanize Black people and other nonwhites. By implication, votes by such dehumanized people are deemed to be illegitimate and therefore not allowed.

So we reach a teachable moment: What is white privilege? It is understandingthat one's basic humanity as a member of a group of people deemed to be "white" in America will not be challenged. As we seewith the Republican Party's war on multiracial democracy that freedom is by definition denied to Black and brown people in the United States.

In his sweeping and essential book "Trouble in Mind" the late historian Leon Litwackdescribed the informal rules and resulting dehumanization of black people during the earlierJim Crow regime thisway:

The indignities visited on black youths were meant to impress on a new generation the solidity of racial lines and the unchallengeable authority and superiority of the dominant race. Young blacks underwent the rites of racial passage in a variety of ways. But the specter and threat of physical violence "the white death" loomed over nearly every encounter. If they themselves were not the victims, the violence fell on members of the family, friends, and neighbors, almost always with the same intent to remind black men and women of their "place," to impose severe restraints on their ambitions, and to punish any perceived signs of "impudence," "impertinence," or independence."

With their nationwide crusadeto reinstate de jure Jim Crow laws across the United States, the Republicans and their allies are also summoning these old,ugly day-to-day white supremacist cultural norms and rules.

Jim Crow was a form of terrorism, so widespread that millions of Black people (who could accurately be described as internal refugees) fled the South during two great migrations. Jim Crow involved informal rules: Black people could not make eye contact with white people, as that was "disrespectful."Black people were expected to step off the sidewalk and into the street to let white people pass. Black people could not protest or otherwise resist if they were not paid for work they had completed on their jobs. Black and brown adults were to be treated like children and addressed as "boy" or "girl", "auntie" or "uncle". Black adults were also expected to be deferential to white children. Regardless of their income, Black people should not have nicer clothes, cars, homesor personalproperty than white people. At four-way intersections, a black driver was expected to let white drivers go first.

These social rules were enforced by violence and all too often by death.

The informal codes and rules of Jim Crow life were in many waysdefeated by the Black freedom struggle in the 20th century. But as documented repeatedly by social scientists and other experts, the logic and expectation of Black people's deference to white people and white authority still remains. These are the expectations thatfueled the Tea Party, the rise ofTrumpand other recent manifestations of fake right-wing populism in the United States. This is the expectation that drives the Republican Party's ongoing attacks on multiracial democracy in Georgia and across the country. These expectations of white power were also at theheart of Donald Trump's attempted coup, the Capitol attackand the broader right-wing terrorist movement.

Will America move forward as a prosperous and free multiracial democracy or will it instead jettison that project and be pushed backwardinto a white supremacist pseudo-democracy. These are the stakes. We facea battle for the soul of America.

Follow this link:
Republicans have a dream: The end of democracy and the return of Jim Crow - Salon

Throughout history, the United States has exhibited a predisposition to bifurcate an extraordinarily multi-faceted and complicated world in order to make sense of it. During the Cold War, the core purpose of U.S. grand strategy revolved around containing the Soviet Union and combatting communism in every region of the world. Post-9/11, Washington became a town hell-bent on waging war against transnational terrorism. President George W. Bushs Freedom Agenda, enacted in 2005, was powered by the theory that spreading democracy globally was the chief antidote to tyranny in our world. Today, China has replaced terrorism as the one global threat lawmakers and policymakers can rally against.

President Joe Biden is continuing this tradition. Much like his predecessors, Biden not only cherishes democratic governance at home, but is firmly convinced that its the answer to competing against Washingtons two largest autocratic foes: China and Russia. During the campaign, Biden promised to organize a Summit For Democracy to renew the spirit and shared purpose of the nations of the free world. In his news conference last week, Biden raised concern about the decline of democracy worldwide and how it was in the U.S. interest to prove to the world that democracy in fact works. I predict to you your children or grandchildren are going to be doing their doctoral thesis on the issue of who succeeded, autocracy or democracy, Biden said, because that is what is at stake.

Yet amid the consensus against China, Russia, Iran, Venezuela, and every other power the United States has gripes with, the most important questions are being shoved to the side. Is dividing the world between democracies and autocracies really the best bet for U.S. foreign policy? Is forming an anti-authoritarian bloc the most efficient and least costly strategy to meet what are in reality quite limited U.S. foreign policy objectives? What are the consequences, intended and unintended, of such a strategy?

There are several reasons to think the Biden administrations preference for a global pro-democracy agenda may not be the best course of action for the U.S.

First, there are examples in recent history when an us-vs.-them framework produced calamitous costs to U.S. power and prosperity. While the Cold War may have ended on Americas terms, with the Soviet Union dead and communism a floundering ideology, the Cold War mentality also generated ideas like the domino theory: the notion that failing to stop communism in one country would inevitably lead to communism sinking its teeth into others. Its an ideology that drove successive U.S. administrations to deploy hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops into Vietnam, a strategic backwater in Southeast Asia highly adverse to foreign meddling. Seven years of ground combat resulted in more than 58,000 U.S. deaths, tens of billions of dollars in expenditure, and a U.S. Army broken and demoralized. The 2003 invasion and occupation of Iraq, motivated by the noble but nave urge to rid the Middle East of tyranny and oppression, was less destructive to the U.S. military but no less harmful to Americas long-term strength.

Nobody is predicting a similar military or ideological conflict against China, of course. But neither can anyone be confident that following a democracy-vs.-autocracy script will be smooth or lead to unequivocal success for the United States.

Forming two distinct ideological blocs, as the Biden administration appears to propose, will make diplomacy on common threats more difficult, particularly in a world where challenges are increasingly transnational in nature. As David Adler and Stephen Wertheim wrote in The Guardian in December, The commanding crises of our century cannot be found in the conflict between countries. Instead, they are common among them. A bifurcated world between a U.S.-led democratic order on one side and a China-Russia-led autocratic order on the other tends to harden sentiments on both sides and limit space for cooperation. Over time, even the most simple but critical aspects of statecraft like agreements on tension reduction become insurmountable hurdles. A coalition of democracies pitted against a coalition of autocracies is the very opposite of the realism U.S. foreign policy so desperately requiresone that allows countries with different belief systems to collaborate on shared problems.

Finally, the more Washington insists on a global democratic order, the more likely others who dont buy into it will cement coalitions of their own in order to limit U.S. power and influence. Russia and China, two neighbors who are traditionally wary of the others intentions in Asia, are becoming more intertwined at the same time Washington is seeking to contain both simultaneously. Moscow and Beijing are cooperating in more fields with more frequency, from exploring ways to bypass the U.S.-led financial system to engaging in joint military exercises and air patrols. While we shouldnt overstate the possibility of a formal China-Russia alliance, U.S. policymakers shouldnt be numb to these developments either.

We may want an easy solution to a complex problem. Foreign affairs, however, is very often a business where pursuing easy solutions with simple frames of reference can create even more problems. U.S. foreign policy should not be dogmatic, but flexible. Otherwise, Washington risks tying one hand behind its back.

Daniel R. DePetris is a fellow at Defense Priorities and a foreign affairs columnist at Newsweek.

Read the original post:
Don't Divide the World Between Democracies and Autocracies - Defense One