Mediaboss Marketing

Rush Limbaugh faced rising pressure from critics who are using new media to keep advertisers away from his long-running radio show.

At least 10 companies, including online publisher AOL Inc. (AOL), have dropped the most-popular U.S. talk-radio show after Limbaugh called Georgetown University law student Sandra Fluke a prostitute and a slut. Fluke appeared before Congress on Feb. 23 to speak in favor of President Barack Obamas policy requiring insurers to provide birth control to women.

Much of the pressure on advertisers has come from online activists using Twitter and Facebook to mobilize against Limbaugh. They see undermining the programs economic viability as the way to force distributor Clear Channel Communications Inc. (CCMO)s Premiere Radio Networks (3069Q) to stop syndicating the show.

The tactic of just asking advertisers has been a very successful one, said Krystal Ball, a 30-year-old MSNBC commentator who started a website called boycottrush.org. So as long as that is successful, well continue.

Ball, a Democrat, ran unsuccessfully for Congress in 2010. The campaign targeting Limbaugh is led by groups like Media Matters for America and the Ohio Democratic Party.

The social media world has really exploded, said Terry ONeill, president of the National Organization for Women. I think Rush Limbaugh is going to go down over this.

More big companies, including Sears Holdings Corp. (SHLD), owner of the namesake retailer and discounter Kmart, insurer Geico Corp. (156714Q) and tractor maker Deere & Co. (DE), are taking steps to ensure their advertisements stop appearing on Limbaughs show.

Ads were placed on the program by Deere dealers through a network and not by the manufacturer, said Kenneth Golden, director of global public relations for the Moline, Illinois- based company.

Deere is reviewing the placement of these advertisements, as the company has not chosen to be a current advertiser, Golden said.

Instructions to keep Sears and Kmart ads off of Limbaughs show werent followed, according to Chris Brathwaite, a spokesman for their Hoffman Estates, Illinois-based parent. The company doesnt buy media based on political affiliations, Brathwaite said.

Original post:
Limbaugh Radio Show Faces New-Media Backlash as Advertisers Flee

THE European Union has offered 500 000 euro to fund operations of the Zimbabwe Media Commission and implement a raft of activities, including MDC-T's proposed media reforms.

According to documents seen by The Herald, the EU will use Unesco as a conduit to convey the money. It is understood that the EU chose to deal with Unesco to circumvent sections of Government they claimed to be unhappy with.

EU charge d'affaires in Harare, Mr Carl Skau, yesterday confirmed that the European bloc was supporting various institutional processes in Zimbabwe.

However, according to the documents, the EU would not fund ZMC's strategic plan approved by the body at its retreat in Kadoma last year.

Instead, the EU through Unesco had come up with conditions that ZMC should follow to access the facility.

As part of the conditions, the EU demanded that the ZMC secretariat inherited from its predecessor the Media Information Commission be dissolved.

In the event that the same staff was hired for the new ZMC secretariat, the document noted they should be trained and reoriented to work in line with the new ZMC's mandate.

Through the fund, the EU also wanted ZMC to assume legislative powers and overturn the country's media laws such as the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act and Broadcasting Services Act.

The EU said the environment in Zimbabwe needed to be reviewed because it was not conducive for media development.

It argued that the continued existence of AIPPA was a threat to media freedom because it was the same legislation that Government used to shutdown some media houses.

Originally posted here:
Zimbabwe: EU Dangles 500 000 Euro to Control Media

The ninth annualRIMC(Reykjavik Internet Marketing Conference) took place March 9. Theannual conference, which takes place in Icelands capital,is organized byKristjan Mar Hauksson, SES speaker, SEMPO board director, and founder ofNordic eMarketing.

Here's a wrapup of some of the highlights from RIMC 2012.

The morning welcome was delivered by the President of Iceland. Without slides and in a very relaxed tone, the president talked us through his personal experiences of new media; in particular about how instrumental social media had been as a tool for the people of Iceland to organize and protest after the fall of the banks in 2008.

Prior to the Arab Spring, the people of Iceland had used Facebook and Twitter to petition the government to reject various referenda. President lafur had quickly tuned in to the power of social media, and the ability for him to use such platforms to speak directly to the Icelandic electorate and for the past 18 months has rejected traditional media and global news appearances (on broadcasters such as CNN, Fox, and Reuters), in favor of social media.

President lafurs speech was quite emotive, certainly inspirational, and helped set the theme for the day, which was You are Not in Control. In this perspective the point was that technology has been a genuine and powerful tool for social change; facilitating democratic movement, greater and more personalized communication, plus mass organization and collaboration. It was clear that for President lafur that social media has helped to remove control from the hands of the few powerful leaders and media owners.

The President of Iceland opens the conference (Image Credit: Jackie Hole)

I was interested to see Pariser's keynote; having read the book "The Filter Bubble: What the Internet Is Hiding from You" a few months ago. The book and Parisers talk concerns personalized behavioral algorithms and the inherent dangers of content and behavioral clustering, in how this can lead to ring-fenced views of the world.

Pariser first began to see the most tangible effects of this personalization around the time of the last U.S. elections. Up to a certain point Pariser had seen content shared by people in his Facebook network that represented their own varying left and right-wing interests.

Over time the algorithms at play had learned through Parisers own re-shares, likes and interactions of his own political leanings; then suddenly and close to election time he was presented only with the content that matched his own political preferences. Thus being a completely one-sided view of content from his network. Thinking about this to its logical conclusions Pariser noted a number of concerns with this method of filtering content.

See the original post here:
You Are Not in Control – #RIMC 2012 Highlights

BY DEON J. HAMPTON

RUTHERFORD Municipal firefighters must now monitor what they post on popular social networking sites to ensure that they aren't revealing information from fire scenes not privy to the public.

The Borough Council has passed a resolution to create the social media policy at the request of the volunteer Fire Department.

Fire Chief John Melfa made it clear that the request was a preventive measure and not a result of any inappropriate postings.

"Even though we are volunteers, there is still a code of ethics which must be followed," Melfa said.

Postings on social networking sites can lead the public to assume that the firefighters are speaking on behalf of the department, Melfa said of the 74-member staff.

Under the new policy, firefighters can have user accounts on sites such as Twitter and Facebook, but they aren't allowed to reveal any information about fire scenes.

Officials said the policy came about when firefighters were recently discussing ways to improve the department. Melfa said the department must keep up with evolving technology.

Email: hampton@northjersey.com

See the rest here:
Rutherford asks its firefighters for restraint in social networking

According to a new poll from the Pew Research Centers Internet & American Life Project, self-described liberals are twice as likely than self-described conservatives to block material on social networking websites that they find politically disagreeable.

Thirty-six percent of social media users said they have blocked, unfriended or hidden someone because of politics, but left-leaning participants were far more likely to havetaken that action to express disagreement about a friends political views.

Liberals are the most likely to have taken steps to block, unfriend, or hide disagreeable political messages, Pew concluded. In all, 28% of liberals have blocked, unfriended, or hidden someone on SNS [social networking sites] because of one of these reasons, compared with 16% of conservatives and 14% of moderates.

Sixteen percent of liberal users said theyblocked someone who posted something specific that they disagreed with, compared to eight percent of conservative users.

Liberals are also far more likely than conservatives 11 percent compared with 4 percent to completely delete friends from social networking sites because they disagree with their politics.

There has been no word nor will there likely be any about whether liberals will enjoy reading this story. Many, if the Pew study is to be believed, will just block it from their news feeds.

Follow Alexandra on Twitter Join the conversation on The Daily Caller

Read more stories from The Daily Caller

Study: Liberals more likely to block social-media friends over political differences

Time for Newt to exit the race

Read the original:
Study: Liberals more likely to block social-media friends over political differences