Mediaboss Marketing

Are we allowed to have ideas and opinions? Or must they be state-endorsed to be valid?

COMMENT

The rise of social media has been uneasy in more ways than one. From privacy concerns to ethics, there are many shades of gray that need to be explored before we truly come to understand and integrate it in our daily lives. One such complication is very prominent here in Malaysia freedom of speech in a semi-democratic society.

Autocratic regimes such as China have long been wary of social media, a useful tool for organising and disseminating information, but one that could spread news of a governments missteps within seconds of their happening.

China has implemented a set of tools to curb free speech as much as possible while still being able to dubiously claim democracy, such as having proprietary social media platforms more readily available than Facebook or Twitter. But wily Internet users have devised their own workarounds to deliver news to each other on government misdeeds. However, if discovered, they can be arbitrarily taken from their homes and locked up, beaten and abused by secret police, and more. Sounds like a familiar story, really.

Indeed, Chinas efforts have not escaped the sight of our esteemed ruling government of the day. Facebook and Twitter have been bugbears for our politicians, as the slightest gaffe is magnified under the spotlight of social media, and free speech runs rampant in forums, without a way for the government to hold it in check. This is mostly due to guarantees made by Mahathir Mohamad when he was the Prime Minister, that is that the Internet would be unrestricted in Malaysia.

Observe these delicate, probing remarks to elicit a response on the idea of banning Facebook:

The greatest threat so far, however, has been the use of the colonial-era law, the Sedition Act, to silence dissent under the guise of national security. The charges against Adam Adli, Safwan Anang, N. Surendran, Tian Chua, David Orok, Azmi Sharom, Susan Loone and more were called a fear-instilling tactic by Phil Robertson of Human Rights Watch. No one is safe from the long arm of the Sedition Act.

A score of people have been charged under the act since August, leading even the United Nations to make a statement. We are concerned about the recent increase in the use of the Sedition Act 1948 to arrest and prosecute people for their peaceful expression of opinion in Malaysia, said the spokesman for the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Rupert Colville. We call on the government to quickly initiate a promised review of the act and to repeal or amend it in line with its international human rights obligations.

But what, dear reader, does all this mean for you and I?

Read the original:
Social media and the age of sedition

Social media is more than just amassing likes. Companies are using advanced social techniques to rehabilitate corporate reputations.

In a battle against Southwest Airlines this year for control of two gates at Dallas Love Field airport, Virgin America launched a social media blitz using Twitter, Facebook and YouTube, plus an Internet petition to local government officials. The conflict started when the Department of Justice told American Airlines it had to give up its positions at Love Field before it could acquire US Airways. Southwest already controlled 16 of the airport's 20 gates, and Virgin wanted in.

The airline pleaded its case to the DoJ, which would weigh in as it sorted out the competitive landscape. But the final decision was up to Dallas city leaders and it was tough to fight Southwest, a hometown player. So Virgin took its case to the public.

Virgin's "Free Love Field" campaign asked customers on Facebook and Twitter to make supportive posts and to sign and share an online petition. Virgin emailed its top frequent flyers directly to do the same. The airline also publicized its pledge to donate $20 to a local school group for every ticket it booked out of Love Field on a designated day. And Virgin enlisted its founder, Richard Branson, to put out a YouTube video of the celebrity executive writing a cheeky love letter to the airport. "No one should have a monopoly on your love," he said. "My virile young planes yearn for your runways." In one week, more than 20,000 people signed a petition on Change.org urging Dallas to let Virgin fly at Love Field.

In May, the city gave Virgin what it wanted. The $1.4 billion airline now runs 26 flights in and out of Love Field, with another six to be added next year.

"Social technology allows people to publish their thoughts in a way the audience can't avoid," says Luanne Calvert, CMO at Virgin America. "There's no other way we could have been more effective."

If you think social media means simply amassing "likes" and followers and offering ad hoc customer service, you've already lost. Companies are using advanced social techniques to rehabilitate corporate reputations, uncover ideas for breakthrough products, and figure out what competitors are up to. And as Virgin America knows, aggressive, targeted use of social media can influence high-stakes political and business decisions in your favor.

At particularly adept companies, the whole C-suite sees the value of social media. Patrick Doyle, CEO of Domino's Pizza, doesn't go a day without thinking about social media, which he says is inseparable from his business strategy. Being smart on social networks "doesn't start from, 'Let's have a new advertising campaign and put a social media extension on it,'" he says. "A critical part of our strategy is understanding [online] conversation."

Most companies don't reap the full benefits from social media because they're stuck in old thinking, don't know how to properly use digital, or are pushing out one-way messages like they do on TV or in print, says Mark Fidelman, CEO of Raynforest, a sports marketing network, and author of Socialized! How the Most Successful Businesses Harness the Power of Social. "There's a difference between having a presence on social media and using social media well," Fidelman says.

Skillful companies take chances and perhaps make mistakes. But for those that use social media as more than a popularity contest--such as Domino's, Ford, Wells Fargo and Virgin America--the rewards can be dramatic.

Originally posted here:
How Social Media Can Influence High-Stakes Business Decisions

For far too long now Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper has thumbed his nose at the public and media.

That disdain was again on stark display last week when Harper came out to Conservative MP David Sweets nomination meeting for the new riding of Glanbrook-Flamborough at the Warplane Heritage Museum.

In complete campaign mode, Harper, a maniac for message and image control, accompanied by his well-stocked security force and jittery communications officials, managed to keep the media well away from what was a campaign-style event. For more than 30 minutes, he talked in general terms about how productive the country has become under the Conservative banner, with the media far enough away to hear but barely see him. He then refused to allow any questions from the media, waiving them off with a flick of his wrist, as they were led back into a holding area.

This type of contempt for the media and by extension to the public is a slap in the face to Canadas democratic traditions. But its become part of Harpers modus operandi when it comes to ignoring criticism and avoiding unseemly questions.

Every time Harper has come to Hamilton the same scenario unfolds. When he does allow a question or two from the media, it has to be vetted by a communications minion to make sure it does not offend Harpers sensibilities.

While Harper and his acolytes dont seem particularly concerned about their deliberate abandonment of accountability, more troubling is that their kingly process could be a model that future leaders will follow.

Recently, Premier Kathleen Wynne during her trip to Northern Ontario demonstrated her lack of accountability by refusing to meet with the media for questions. It was a troubling sign coming from a premier who recently won a resounding majority election.

Most Canadians dont have the time or connections to gather important political information for themselves, so the media asks the questions that matter and holds the government to account on behalf of the people. By shutting the media out, politicians arent punishing journalists, but rather all citizens who have a stake in whats being done in their names. Some politicians think that they can go over the heads of the media and talk directly to voters through social media or TV, radio and direct mail advertising, but most people see that for what it is: propaganda.

It may be embarrassing for a politician to be asked a critical question, but the cost of not having that question asked is catastrophic to all Canadians.

More:
Governments needs to let the media in

Nuns - Media Control - 7/30/1977 - Winterland (Official)
Nuns - Media Control Recorded Live: 7/30/1977 - Winterland - San Francisco, CA More Nuns at Music Vault: http://www.musicvault.com Subscribe to Music Vault o...

By: Punk New Wave on MV

See more here:
Nuns - Media Control - 7/30/1977 - Winterland (Official) - Video

Best Logitech 915-000245 Harmony Smart Control Add-On Companion Remote for Harm 2014 For sale
Special Offer details check on http://amzn.to/1mgbU76 Best Logitech 915-000245 Harmony Smart Control Add-On Companion Remote for Harm 2014 For sale Remote-Control Extenders, Logitech Logitech...

By: Justin Nur

See the article here:
Best Logitech 915-000245 Harmony Smart Control Add-On Companion Remote for Harm 2014 For sale - Video