Mediaboss Marketing

More and more companies include content creation as part of their marketing strategies. They do it for SEO purposes, or because they have read 2014 is the year of content marketing, or simply because they truly believe that content is the king.

Your competition is probably running their own blog or/and is doing some other kind of content marketing already. You probablyfeel like you must createsome sort of content, even though you have no idea where to start.

But what if you had no time/no resources/no skills to produce the kind and the amount of content that youd like to present?

You can outsource it.

For me, outsourcing any kind of content creation to someone from outside the company used to seem like taking the easy way out. You know, you hire aprowho will produce the entire content for you. Theywill deliver one of the best pieces youve ever read. But still, it wont be a result of your work. So its like going with a shortcut, isnt it?

Not at all.

It took me a whileto understand that as long as you are honest and want to produce quality content for your audiencetheres nothing wrong with it.Additionally,outsourcing content creation can bring you the quality you might be looking for. You still need to have a clear vision of what content you want to publish (and why you want to do it) thenpick the best writers to make sure they present your vision perfectly.

Besides, nothing stops you from writing content yourself whenever you have time. You can run your personal blog or publish your own thoughts on your companys blog. Its simple as that.

I believe there are certain circumstances under which outsourcing makes more sense than remaining responsible for content creation. Here are some of them:

Visit link:
6 Reasons Why Outsourcing Content Creation Isnt a Bad Idea by @krystianwlr

Blocked in China, Internet censorship
Have you ever heard about internet censorship in China? If you are going to travel in China, please DO check out this video to know about the websites that are blocked in China. FB CEO Mark...

By: Learn Chinese with Meggie Liao

Continue reading here:
Blocked in China, Internet censorship - Video

Your customers are growing tired of all the marketing being thrown their way on social media, says analyst Kim Celestre

Less than half of the audience here at ThinkLA's Social Media breakfast raised their hands when they were asked if they find marketing useful in their personal lives.

That's not exactly a ringing endorsement from the hundreds of marketers, advertisers and other media professionals who filled this seaside banquet hall.

What many here know and fewer will readily admit is that most marketing is junk. That truth persists with little regard for differences in medium, format, audience or data.

As the old and oft-repeated saying goes: half of all the effort and money spent on advertising is wasted, they just don't know which half.

Social media doesn't change that scenario so much as it amplifies what out-of-control junk marketing looks like. Any marketing that fails to provide value to a consumer is junk and there's a lot of it making the rounds on social media.

"The reality is most of us don't listen because the message doesn't pertain to us," says Kim Celestre, senior analyst at Forrester. "The fact is, your audience is getting impatient with the marketing you're putting out there."

Affluent, always-connected consumers may be some of the most valuable targets for marketers, but they're also especially good at ignoring advertising, she adds.

Celestre encourages brands to embrace "utility marketing" marketing that their customers can use. "You need to demonstrate your brand promise and not just talk about it," she says.

[Related: 5 Ways to Improve Your Social Media Campaigns ]

Excerpt from:
How to Make Sure Your Social Marketing Isn't 'Junk'

Just because I cannot resist theelectromagnetic pulseof Apples media control machine, it does not mean I have to buy its products. And based on reports of a so-called iWatch, there arefour reasons I willnotbuy one.

To be sure, journalists are being briefed on the details of the iWatch on the condition that they do not name the briefers. A case in pointis the New York Times which wrote [the iWatch] is expected to come in two sizes and combine functions like health and fitness monitoring with mobile computing tasks like displaying maps. It will have a flexible screen and, like the new phones, will support technology that allows people to pay for things wirelessly.

The anonymous briefers told the Times that the iWatch will have a tougher-than-glass flexible display panel that is protected by synthetic sapphire; a postage stamp-sized circuit board; a wireless battery charger, HealthKit, for storing health data andHandoff for pushing contentamongconsumers Apple devices.

It is unclear to me why media outlets cannotname their sources for these reports are the briefers lives at risk if they are named?

Here are four reasons I will not buy an iWatch.

1. I do not understand the value of wearable health and fitness monitoring

I do not sharea passion for wrist bracelets that keep track ofhealth and fitness statistics. In my daily life, I do not see many individuals who wear such devices.

More broadly, I do not understand what personal pain these devices are designed to relieve. Perhaps people who were college athletes and got used to timing how fast they run and continue to crave the dopamine rush of those statistics are among the consumers who buy health and fitness monitoring devices.

I do not crave this information but I would certainly buy such a device if my doctor prescribed one. Since I do not anticipate that happening, I am confident that I will not buy any health and fitness monitoring device.

2. I do not see a compelling need for wireless payment

Here is the original post:
4 Reasons I Will Never Buy An IWatch

Mozilla's efforts to keep mobile Firefox competitive include adding remote streaming-media support to a new build of the browser.

The star of Firefox for Android Beta 33 -- released Thursday night -- is the "send to device" video-streaming feature that enables you to stream videos on your mobile gadget to a TV or another second screen. When you load a site on your mobile device that includes embedded video, an icon will appear in the URL bar letting you know you can begin streaming.

Tapping the icon will open a list of connected devices you can stream to. Once streaming, a media control bar will open at the bottom of the screen that lets you pause, play, and close videos. The bar is persistent, so you can load other websites while streaming.

Using the feature with Roku requires one more step than using it with Chromecast. Roku requires you to first add the Firefox Channel to your Roku service.

Meanwhile, the also-just-released Firefox Beta 33 for desktops introduces a competitor to Microsoft's Skype and Google's Hangouts. Citing numerous services -- but not by name -- that require turning over personal information and account registration, the as-yet unnamed Mozilla service doesn't require anything except Firefox.

Powered by WebRTC (Real-Time Communication) -- the plugin-free browser protocol for streaming audio, video, and data -- Firefox's new service allows for free video calls between Firefox Beta users. To use it, you go to the Firefox Customize menu and add the speech bubble icon to your toolbar. Adventurous Firefox Beta users can test it out here.

Mozilla has been a long-time proponent of WebRTC, and Google was one of WebRTC's earliest adopters. Google has liberated Hangouts from requiring a plugin thanks to WebRTC, although using it requires a Google account while Mozilla's upstart system doesn't.

However, not everyone is a fan WebRTC. Microsoft would rather see its competing ORTC protocol, short for Object Real-Time Communications, adopted by browsers. Given that both are relatively new, it could be awhile before that standards battle gets resolved.

Full release notes for Firefox Beta 33 are available here.

See the original post:
Firefox for Android beta ushers mobile streaming to Chromecast, Roku