Mediaboss Marketing

(PRWEB) December 17, 2013

topseos.com.au has revealed the ten best social media marketing services in Australia for the month of December 2013. The listings consist of online marketing service providers which have years of experience in professional quality solutions. The listings are produced through a rigorous investigation process which involves the inspection and testing of top social media marketing services to decide which are most effective at supplying their solutions. While there are thousands of online marketing services supplying services the listings are used to showcase the absolute best.

Social media marketing services are put through the topseos.com.au proprietary examination process in order to establish which services in Australia offer the best overall service. Services are picked based on merit established by performance in the examination process. This process consists of the use of a set of examination areas, communicating with client references, and performing various market and industry research projects.

To view the rankings of the best social media marketing companies in Australia click here.

ABOUT topseos.com.au

topseos.com.au is a purveyor of search marketing ratings in Australia. The main purpose of topseos.com.au is to establish and proclaim those individuals or agencies providing best search marketing solutions available. Social media marketing agencies are put through a rigorous analysis to ensure the ratings contain the absolute best agencies the search marketing industry has to offer.

Social media marketing services interested in being evaluated and revealed can visit:

http://topseos.news-prs.com/au/apply-for-rankings

See the rest here:
topseos.com.au Issues December 2013 Rankings of Top Social Media Marketing Services in Australia

1. First, try a circumvention site like https://www.MouseMatrix.com/. Be sure to type https at the beginning of the URL, not 'http'. Even though this site has been widely known for months, many networks have their blocking software set up incorrectly so that sites beginning with https:// are not blocked, and https://www.MouseMatrix.com/ will still be accessible.

2. If that doesn't work, you can join our e-mail list where we mail out new Circumventor sites every 3 or 4 days. Of course, employees of blocking software companies have gotten on this list as well, so they add our sites to their blocked-site database as soon as we mail them out, but in most places it takes 3-4 days for the blocked-site list to be updated. So the latest one that we mail out, should usually still work.

3. If you have a computer with an uncensored Internet connection, you can follow these easy steps to set up your own Circumventor site. For example, if you want to get around blocking software at work, and you have a home computer with an uncensored Internet connection, you can install the Circumventor on your home computer. Then it will give you a new URL, and you can take that URL in with you to work and type it into your browser to get around the network blocking software.

4. If you're trying to get around blocking software that's installed on the local computer, and not on the network, use these instructions to boot from the Ubuntu Live CD. (These instructions include tips on how to tell the difference between blocking software that's installed "on the local computer" and software that's installed "on the network".)

Past news items that generated the most interest:

Report on double standards for anti-gay "hate speech" Peacefire created four pages, on free servers such as GeoCities, which consisted of anti-gay quotes copied from four different conservative Web sites: Dr. Laura, Concerned Women for America, Family Research Council and Focus on the Family. Using anonymous HotMail accounts, we then sent the URLs of the newly created pages to six blocking software companies, recommending that they block the newly created pages as "hate speech". After the companies had agreed to block the sites we created, we told them that all the quotes on those pages had been taken from the four conservative Web sites, and asked why they didn't block those pages as well. The blocking companies did not block those Web sites and did not respond to our inquiries.

WebSENSE publishing daily porn links For five months, the makers of WebSENSE blocking software published a daily list of pornographic Web sites that were not blocked by their competitors, allegedly to show that their own product was superior. Students using the Internet in schools that were using those competitors' products, could access the WebSENSE site and get a list of unblocked porn sites, by clicking a link agreeing that they were over 18 years of age.

Human rights pages blocked In December 2000, Peacefire released Amnesty Intercepted, a report on human rights pages including Amnesty International that were blocked by blocking software.

Candidates' sites blocked during 2000 elections In November 2000, Peacefire released a list of political candidates whose sites had been blocked as "pornography" by major blocking programs. One candidate had carried the statement on his Web site, "We should demand that all public schools and libraries install and configure Internet Filters." He changed his position after finding out that his own site was blocked, and later became a plaintiff in the ACLU's lawsuit to overturn a law requiring blocking software in schools and libraries.

Pro-blocking site blocked In July 1997, librarian David Burt launched the now-defunct FilteringFacts.org site, advocating the use of blocking software in libraries. The site was later blocked as a "Drugs/Alcohol" site by SurfWatch (which has since been bought out by Cyber Patrol).

More here:
Peacefire - Official Site

I am writing to you as a voter in your district. I urge you to vote "no" on cloture for S. 968, the PROTECT IP Act, on Jan. 24th. The PROTECT IP Act is dangerous, ineffective, and short-sighted. It does not deserve floor consideration. I urge my representative to vote "no" on SOPA, the corresponding House bill. Over coming days you'll be hearing from the many businesses, advocacy organizations, and ordinary Americans who oppose this legislation because of the myriad ways in which it will stifle free speech and innovation. We hope you'll take our concerns to heart and oppose this legislation by voting "no" on cloture.

The video above discusses the Senate version of the House's Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA). In the Senate the bill is called the PROTECT IP Act (PIPA). SOPA has gotten more attention than PIPA because it was moving faster in the legislative process. But PIPA is just as dangerous, and now it is moving faster.

PIPA would give the government new powers to block Americans' access websites that corporations don't like. The bill lets corporations and the US government censor entire websites and cut sites off from advertising, payments and donations.

This legislation will stifle free speech and innovation, and even threaten popular web services like Twitter, YouTube, and Facebook.

The bill is scheduled for a test vote in the Senate on Jan. 24th: We need to act now to let our lawmakers know just how terrible it is. Will you fill out the form above to ask your lawmakers to oppose the legislation and support a filibuster?

Visit link:
PROTECT IP Act Breaks the Internet - Fight for the Future

For Those Who Want To Know

This website provides a concise, reliable introduction to vital information of which few are aware. We specialize in providing fact-filled news articles and concise summaries of major cover-ups which impact our lives and world. All information is taken from the most reliable sources available and can be verified using the links provided. Sources are always noted, with links direct to the information source provided when possible.

WantToKnow.info presents this information as an opportunity for you to educate yourself and others, and to inspire us to strengthen democracy and to work together for the good of all.

Frequent visitors can explore our most recent posts at this link. Summaries of recent news articles that should have made front page news are also available here. And you can read key excerpts from 20 of the most revealing major media news articles ever published at this link. For those new to this website, please read on.

Did you know that:

Note: If you are already aware of these cover-ups, please visit our page which will take you even deeper.

If the facts presented above were reported in headline news where they belong, concerned citizens would be astounded and demand to know more. This has not happened, which is why we felt compelled to create this website. The verifiable information presented here may at first disturb you. It may even change the way you look at the world. Yet we invite you to see this as a powerful opportunity for building a brighter future. By sharing this vital information with your friends and colleagues, you can play a key role in restoring a true democracy of the people, by the people, and for the people.

We encourage you to be skeptical in exploring this information. Some of what you read may at first seem quite unbelievable. Yet we also encourage you to keep an open mind and do a little research using the links to the reliable sources provided and determine for yourself whether there is truth to the information provided.

The powerful information presented here is a wake-up call. It is a call to move beyond complacency and apathy to focus on our deeper purpose in life and on creating the world we want to live in. It is a call for each of us to focus on moving from fear to love. If we want to make this world a better place, understanding what's happening behind the scenes can be vitally important. By exploring the reliable, verifiable information and knowledge provided here and spreading it far and wide, each one of us can make a difference.

Read the original here:
Want to know the truth? Verifiable information on banking ...

The propaganda model is a conceptual model in political economy advanced by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky that states how propaganda, including systemic biases, function in mass media. The model seeks to explain how populations are manipulated and how consent for economic, social and political policies is "manufactured" in the public mind due to this propaganda.

The theory posits that the way in which news is structured (through advertising, media ownership, government sourcing and others) creates an inherent conflict of interest which acts as propaganda for undemocratic forces.

First presented in their 1988 book Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media, the "propaganda model" views the private media as businesses interested in the sale of a productreaders and audiencesto other businesses (advertisers) rather than that of quality news to the public. Describing the media's "societal purpose", Chomsky writes, "... the study of institutions and how they function must be scrupulously ignored, apart from fringe elements or a relatively obscure scholarly literature".[1] The theory postulates five general classes of "filters" that determine the type of news that is presented in news media. These five classes are:

The first three are generally regarded by the authors as being the most important. In versions after September 11, Chomsky and Herman updated the fifth prong to instead refer to the War on Terror and antiterrorism, although they say it operates in much the same manner.

Although the model was based mainly on the characterization of United States media, Chomsky and Herman believe the theory is equally applicable to any country that shares the basic economic structure and organizing principles which the model postulates as the cause of media biases.[2]

The size and profit-seeking imperative of dominant media corporations are said to create a bias. The authors point to how in the early nineteenth century, a radical British press had emerged which addressed the concerns of workers but excessive stamp duties, designed to restrict newspaper ownership to the 'respectable' wealthy, began to change the face of the press. Nevertheless there remained a degree of diversity. In postwar Britain, radical or worker-friendly newspapers such as the Daily Herald, News Chronicle, Sunday Citizen (all since failed or absorbed into other publications) and the Daily Mirror (at least until the late 1970s) regularly published articles questioning the capitalist system. The authors posit that these earlier radical papers were not constrained by corporate ownership and were therefore free to criticize the capitalist system.

Herman and Chomsky argue that since mainstream media outlets are currently either large corporations or part of conglomerates (e.g. Westinghouse or General Electric), the information presented to the public will be biased with respect to these interests. Such conglomerates frequently extend beyond traditional media fields and thus have extensive financial interests that may be endangered when certain information is publicized. According to this reasoning, news items that most endanger the corporate financial interests of those who own the media will face the greatest bias and censorship.

It then follows that if to maximize profit means sacrificing news objectivity, then the news sources that ultimately survive must be fundamentally biased, with regard to news in which they have a conflict of interest. In the United States, regulations require that broadcasters disclose such conflict of interest.[citation needed]

The second filter of the propaganda model is funding generated through advertising. Most newspapers have to attract advertising in order to cover the costs of production; without it, they would have to increase the price of their newspaper. There is fierce competition throughout the media to attract advertisers; a newspaper which gets less advertising than its competitors is at a serious disadvantage. Lack of success in raising advertising revenue was another factor in the demise of the 'people's newspapers' of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.

The product is composed of the affluent readers who buy the newspaper who also comprise the educated decision-making sector of the population while the actual clientele served by the newspaper includes the businesses that pay to advertise their goods. According to this filter, the news is "filler" to get privileged readers to see the advertisements which makes up the content and will thus take whatever form is most conducive to attracting educated decision-makers. Stories that conflict with their "buying mood", it is argued, will tend to be marginalized or excluded, along with information that presents a picture of the world that collides with advertisers' interests. The theory argues that the people buying the newspaper are the product which is sold to the businesses that buy advertising space; the news has only a marginal role as the product.

More:
Propaganda model - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia