Jumat, 03 Desember 2010

Marketing Pilgrim Published: “Viacom Just Wants Google to Stop “Robbing Banks”” plus 4 more

Marketing Pilgrim Published: “Viacom Just Wants Google to Stop “Robbing Banks”” plus 4 more

Link to Andy Beal's Marketing Pilgrim

Viacom Just Wants Google to Stop “Robbing Banks”

Posted: 03 Dec 2010 06:42 AM PST

Just when we thought the Viacom vs YouTube copyright infringement case was finally behind us, Viacom goes and gets all zombie on us–and raises it from the dead.

If you need background on the lawsuit, we have a boatload of information on it, but bottom line is this: Viacom sued Google claiming its popular TV shows were being illegally uploaded to YouTube. Google claimed safe harbor protection. Google won. Viacom is now appealing…albeit in an unappealing way.

Perhaps the most absurd part of this whole suit is that Google pretty much stopped any illegal uploads back in 2008, but get this: Viacom is suing for all the infringement that happened before then:

Some legal observers have argued that the case has become less significant since it was filed in early 2007. Since then, YouTube, interested in licensing professional content, has voluntarily started using audio and video recognition technology to automatically identify unauthorized clips as they are uploaded and let rights-holders take them down immediately or place ads in the videos to generate revenue. Those systems work well, executives at several media companies have said, and Viacom isn’t suing YouTube for its behavior after mid-2008.

So your neighbor’s dog used to bark its head off back in the day, but the dog has since had a session with the dog whisperer and all is well, yet you still want the dog put down?

Oh, but Viacom’s not in this for the vengence. Oh no sir! This is all about setting a precedent so that other video hosts don’t allow the same infringement:

“It’s as if to say, well we’ve stopped robbing banks, so let’s just forget the whole thing and move on,” [Viacom's attorney] Mr. Olson said. “It is exceedingly important in this era of intellectual property and new creative endeavors that we continue to respect what people create,” her added.

See? This is about protecting us from bank robberies and has nothing whatsoever to do with vengeance. ;-)

Pilgrim’s Partners: SponsoredReviews.com – Bloggers earn cash, Advertisers build buzz!

Facebook Looking to Beef Up Washington Presence

Posted: 03 Dec 2010 06:31 AM PST

Just the title of the post alone should be enough to know that Facebook realizes that privacy will be the biggest issue that could get in the way of its continued success. What better way to manage this kind of concern than to hire people who can con, errrr, convince lawmakers and legislators that Facebook should get a pass on these concerns. Off to Washington DC!

You can't blame them since this is how Washington operates. The highest bidder gets the legislation in most cases so it only makes sense to play the game as well. If you think I am being cynical here then you just need to wake up and smell the coffee. Washington works on money and salesmanship at the end of the day. I am not saying it's right and, in fact, I hate that it is the way of the Beltway but it just is.

Bloomberg reports on Facebook's moves to sure up this area.

Facebook Inc. is expanding its Washington office and consulting with privacy advocates as lawmakers question how well the world's largest social- networking site protects the personal information of users.

The company is looking for a public-policy expert and a deputy press spokesman, following the June hiring of Marne Levine to head its Washington office. Levine is a former top aide to Larry Summers, director of President Barack Obama's National Economic Council. The new hires would bring Facebook's Washington team to eight, up from zero three years ago.

Facebook has an incredibly bright future but the talk is that privacy could be the think that could put a few clouds on the horizon.

"A lot of people think Facebook could become bigger than Google, but privacy could be the real Achilles heel for this company," said Sunil Gupta, a professor at Harvard Business School whose research areas include new media. "Privacy will be a huge issue, both in Washington and overseas."

This information comes at an interesting time as the FTC is calling for a "do-not-track" option for Internet users. That sounds nice but can it be enforced? That's a discussion for another place.

What could hurt Facebook in these efforts is quite simply their history with privacy. Their "Oops! We didn't mean it!" approach to privacy where they do what they want and then see just how big of a backlash it creates could hurt them. Of course, it doesn't help that their founder, who is suddenly getting praise for being more polished, has always seemed a bit disingenuous when it comes to people, privacy and his company's success.

“Facebook is a ticking privacy time bomb, no matter how much they spend in lobbying," saidJeffrey Chester, executive director of the Center for Digital Democracy in Washington, which has urged the FTC to address privacy issues at Facebook and other online marketers.

The article addresses the interesting aspect that Facebook has become a premiere tool for politicians in their attempts to stay connected with their constituencies as well as attack their enemies. Isn't Washington grand?

I suspect with quotes like the following, Facebook has created some opposition in the nation's capital that will require either a deeper reach into the wallet or just doing something differently just so it can continue to grow.

The co-chairmen of the House Privacy Caucus, Texas Republican Joe Barton and Massachusetts Democrat Edward Markey, sent a letter to Facebook Chief Executive Officer Mark Zuckerberg on Oct. 18 questioning the company's privacy safeguards. Facebook's response, a 13-page letter dated Oct. 29, explained that the sharing of user IDs is part of the way Internet browsers work and that it is developing technical solutions to further protect its users.

The response didn't satisfy Barton, who is seeking to become chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee in the new Republican-controlled House.

"It seems like not a month goes by without the discovery of a data breach of one kind or another," Barton said in an e- mail. "My committee and its subcommittees are going to take a hard look at the reliability of Internet privacy policies."

To be fair, it's not like Facebook is the only player from the Internet community in Washington. In fact, it is far from the largest either.

Facebook's Washington contingent is still dwarfed by Google, which has about 40 people in its Washington office, including 10 registered lobbyists.

Facebook spent $221,390 on lobbying activities in the first nine months of this year compared with $169,700 in the same period last year, according to federal disclosure reports. Google reported spending $3.92 million in the first nine months of this year. Facebook hasn't registered a political action committee, while Google's PAC gave $208,000 to federal candidates in the past two years.

So the game will continue and the money will go to places that sound nice but after that who knows who really benefits. As a result, one always has to wonder whether the eventual policy that shapes how the American public’s online privacy is 'managed' is really about what is best for the people, for politics or for politicians.

What's your take on Facebook's increasing Washington DC presence? Business as usual?

Have a nice weekend.

How Major CEO’s Are Viewed by Their Employees

Posted: 03 Dec 2010 04:58 AM PST

This is a bit of a 'fun' post. The company that put it together the chart below is Glassdoor.com which is a job posting site that gets it's information from company employees. It also ran as the Business Insider’s SAI Chart of the Day so it has to be accurate, right?!

In a world (tech and Internet) where the CEO of a company often gets more attention than the average CEO, it's interesting to see if the employees of a company carry the same opinion of their leadership as many on the outside do. Here are the results.

What is most interesting is that the Apple, Facebook and Google have (at least according to this information) a cult-like following internally. I would like to see the numbers from the outside looking in because with Steve Jobs picking fights, Mark Zuckerberg's underlying feeling that people are not so bright and Eric Schmidt doing whatever he can to come across as 'different' they manage to garner universal support across their ranks internally.

Maybe that's why they sit on the better side of this chart and their success in the market reflects this ability to 'rally the troops' despite how they act at times. Of course, if those employees are holding any company stock and have seen it sky rocket that doesn’t hurt either.

On the other end of the spectrum, the embattled Carol Bartz (boatloads of fun) and the chair tossing Steve Ballmer don't quite have the near unanimous 'thumbs up' from their employees. While Microsoft is not suffering the same troubles that Yahoo is directly, they are at least in bed together on search which an area that has been a pain point for Microsoft (where's the returns?) and Yahoo (are we even a search company?).

So what is your take on this 'data'? Certainly gives some insight into just what being on top can do for your reputation, at least on the inside.

Join the Marketing Pilgrim Facebook Community

Newspaper Ad Decline Slows, But There’s No Reason to Celebrate

Posted: 02 Dec 2010 06:16 PM PST

When the news is as bad as it’s been for newspaper advertising, any small ray of hope is welcome, like the slight decline in the decline. The Newspaper Association of America has tallied up the numbers for Q3 and came up with a decline in ad dollars of 5.39%. That’s the smallest decline papers have seen since 2007 but is that a reason to celebrate? Not really.

When you look at the complete grid showing the history of newspaper ad dollars, both online and print, it’s still a pretty dismal picture. The actual combined dollars for last year is listed as $27,564 million. The last time dollars were that low was in 1987. Factor in the lack of online dollars and inflation and that’s a horrendous image. From there, the numbers rise steadily, hitting $49 million in 2005 and it drops like the Times Square ball on New Year’s Eve from then until now.

With the rise of the internet, we expect to see print ad dollars give way to online dollars but even there, sales have gone flat. Online is up over last year but not as strong as last quarter.

Putting a positive spin on all of this is NAA President John F. Sturm:

“These latest advertising figures indicate a continuing and encouraging trend toward recovery and growth for newspapers. Print revenue declines continue to slow as the economy recovers, while newspapers' multiplatform transition has allowed online growth to maintain its steady advance at a healthy double-digit rate.”

“Newspaper companies continue to monetize their digital properties, drawing more than 11 percent of their third-quarter revenues from websites that attracted nearly two-thirds of all adult Internet users in October – more than 105.2 million unique visitors.”

As bleak as the situation may be compared to past numbers, I don’t see newspapers going the way of the 8-Track anytime soon. I’m first and foremost an internet user but I still get the Sunday paper for the coupons and retail ad circulars and I’ve been known to gaze at an ad or two inside the sections as well.

What about you? Are you still buying a weekly paper and do newspapers figure into your ad strategy? We’d like to know.


eBay Buys Local Shopping Site Milo.com

Posted: 02 Dec 2010 01:25 PM PST

eBay took another step today toward becoming Amazon.com and away from the collectibles auction site we all fell for more than ten years ago when they bought Milo.com, a website that locates in-stock merchandise on the local level.

According to Business Insider, eBay payed $75 million for the company and they seem to think it’s a good buy. It may be because, as we all know,  when it comes to deals and shopping, local is everything these days. Local isn’t even a buzzword anymore, it’s a god marketers must bow down to every morning and I don’t like it.

I’m a huge eBay fan, but of the old, original eBay where I could find a rare Japanese Lost in Space doll for $400. A steal at twice the price. These days, eBay is all about electronics and brand name shoes and perfume, the kinds of things you buy in a department store. They’re becoming just another deal site and that’s sad.

But I digress. Milo.com is a cool tool, especially during the holidays when you’re looking for that special item that’s sold out all over town.  I used Milo to find a toy that is sold out at my local Target store. If a mom and pop toy store in town showed up next to that listing with an In Stock label, I’d be over there right now with the cash. That wasn’t the case as all of my searches turned up big box retailers such as Best Buy, Sears, Office Depot and Toys R Us. Though it does appear that Milo accepts one-off stores, I didn’t come across any in my test runs.

Overall, Milo.com is a good idea. I often take advantage of the “in-stock” options on sites such as Best Buy and Walmart, and Milo lets me do that all in one place. A true time saver. The search engine needs a little fine tuning and the stores searched need expanding but I imagine all of that will come now that they’ve got eBay money to spend.


Diposting oleh di

Tidak ada komentar:

Posting Komentar

Langganan: Posting Komentar (Atom)