NBA rookie shoots down wannabe girlfriend on social media New York Post Orlando Magic rookie Mo Bamba isn't here for hangers-on. After being selected sixth in Thursday's NBA draft, the 7-foot-1 center shot down chatter he was involved with a young woman, after the Instagram user posted a photo of the two, leaving followers …
Best 5 Content Marketing Strategies for Your Small Business Small Business Trends Content marketing is a powerful way to help small businesses gain more customers and grow. Though for content marketing to be successfully executed it needs to have a strategic approach, which is focused on creating and distributing valuable, unique, …
The “Girls” actress said on “Women of the Hour” she “can say that I still havent had an abortion, but I wish I had.” Many people took offense to Dunham’s statement saying abortion isn’t something you should wish for and that her words were “offensive.”
Dunham explained in an Instagram post alongside a picture with the word “choice” that her “latest podcast episode was meant to tell a multifaceted story about reproductive choice in America.”
She continued, “I truly hope a distasteful joke on my part won’t diminish the amazing work of all the women who participated [in the podcast].
“My words were spoken from a sort of “delusional girl” persona I often inhabit, a girl who careens between wisdom and ignorance…and it didn’t translate. That’s my fault. I would never, ever intentionally trivialize the emotional and physical challenges of terminating a pregnancy.”
Dunham added that her only goal is to “increase awareness and decrease stigma” and that she takes “reproductive choice in America more seriously than I take literally anything else.”
She ended her post by pleading with her fans to donate to abortion funds.
Snap Inc. Chief Strategy Officer Imran Khan presented at Advertising Week in New York on Sept. 26, 2016.
Image: kerry flynn/mashable
Snapchat is hoping for more advertisers to appear.
The company, now known as Snap Inc., is looking to convince advertisers and marketers of its value, positioning itself as stronger than other digital networks and touting its platform as a new form of television.
The presentation by Chief Strategy Officer Imran Khan at Advertising Week in New York City on Monday came on the company’s fifth birthday and two days after its rebrand from Snapchat to Snap Inc. On Friday, Snapchat announced it will release a new hardware product, Spectacles, a pair of sunglasses with a camera linked to its app.
“The biggest misconception that I hear about Snapchat is that Snapchat is just another social media company. In fact, Snap Inc. is a camera company. We believe that reinventing the camera will present our greatest opportunity to improve the way people live and communicate,” Khan said onstage at The Town Hall theater in Times Square.
Less than two years Snapchat introduced advertising in its app, and it’s still early days for marketers trying to understand the platform let alone its advertising options. Khan did not have a pair of Spectacles on hand nor share future hardware. Instead, he explained to the audience the current content on Snapchat and where advertisers fit in.
Khan spent the first 20 minutes explaining the app’s three content hubs My Story (for friends), Live Stories (for events) and Discover (for professional content) and its ad products.
“I thought it was an interesting demo of the new ad features for brands and agencies to understand how to use Snapchat,” Jeffrey Sheets, an attendee and an advertising professor at Brigham Young University, told Mashable. “But it also felt a bit like a tutorial of how to use Snapchat for all the old people in the audience and thank goodness for my students to help keep me young.”
Indeed, the majority of Snapchat’s userbase is under 34. Yet, Khan did not use the word “millennials” in his pitch.
He did provide evidence to its activity. While it still pales in comparison to Facebook’s 1.13 billion daily active users, Snapchat boasts more than 150 million daily active users, with 60 million in the United States and Canada. The average user spends 25 to 30 minutes per day in the app, on average.
Beyond its app engagement, Khan credited its fast product cycle with the company’s attractiveness to users and to advertisers, citing several major changes in the last two years.
“We added geofilters so that you can share when and where a moment of a snap [happens]. We added lenses which map your face and turns it into puppy,” Khan said, inspiring laughs from the theater. “We added Chat. We added Discover. We added avatar to run into Bitmoji, and we added Memories.”
For advertisers, Snapchat offers several different ad units: sponsored geofilters, sponsored lenses and snap ads, which can now feature an article, app install, long-form video or web view. Khan dubbed snap ads as “the best mobile video ad product in the marketplace.”
General Mills Chief Marketing Officer Ann Simonds, speaking as part of the presentation, also heralded Snapchat’s innovation and its ability to take risks that turn into smart bets. For example, Snapchat’s vertical video ads initially confused marketers and were then praised as well as mobile ads with sound on.
“Like any partnership, it has to start at a place of mutual understanding. Where’s the shared value?” Simonds said.
“In my humble opinion, a video ad that plays without sound is not really a video. I like to call them moving banner.” – Snap’s Imran Khan pic.twitter.com/HCdfu0PB3G
Marketers from Budweiser, Gatorade and Universal Pictures also gave brand testimonials on video.
For marketers and others [Snap Inc.] is a sign of things to come.
Spectacles, which have yet to receive a release date, provide 115-degree video that could also be attractive to brands, not unlike Facebook and YouTube’s 360-degree video ads.
The change to Snap Inc. provides another signal to marketers. “Most of its users wont care or notice because theyll be busy Snapchatting, but for marketers and others its a sign of things to come,” Peter Petralia, managing director of digital strategy for brand engagement company Sullivan, told Mashable.
Additionally, Snap Inc. has a future in television-like content. The presentation included a video of NBC’s new exclusive content from The Voice, and Khan teased that The Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon will soon air on Snapchat. “Just like television,” he said after a clip aired.
“If you takeaway anything, I fundamentally believe we are just at the beginning of our innovation cycle, and I’m really excited to bring many new great products to our advertising partners in the next five years,” Khan said.
Kayleigh, from Measham, Leicestershire, started chatting with Luke Harlow on Facebook just two weeks before she was killed.
They exchanged 2,600 messages – mainly by text – which led her to believe Harlow was her boyfriend.
She agreed to stay at his flat in the nearby village of Ibstock on Friday 13 November and her father dropped her off outside Ibstock Community College.
On Harlow’s instruction, Kayleigh had told her parents she was staying with a friend.
Beadman, who lived next to Harlow, told police he met Kayleigh for the first time when he went round to the flat on the Saturday evening.
The two men were found guilty of keeping her prisoner between 21:00 GMT on the Saturday and 03:00 on the Sunday, but the judge said it may never be known exactly what went on in the flat during that time.
Here’s a popular right-wing meme that got spread around before the attack in Charlottesville:
So, here’s what I want to ask anyone sharing that (or wearing it on a t-shirt — yes, they sell them): When we replace the stick figures with actual bleeding humans, does that change how you feel about it at all? (WARNING: Graphic fucking video):
It’s not a rhetorical question. I think the answer to that will decide what happens next.
The Internet Could Have Been The Greatest Anti-Bigotry Tool In History
Bigotry is never about hating a real person. The target is always a perfectly hateable caricature we invent to avoid glimpsing the true enemy staring back at us from the mirror. It’s a punching bag, a shape drawn around a bull’s-eye. This is why so many racists have a real Black Friend they can hide behind — when they actually get to know one, a whole different part of their brain lights up (“I mean, he’s not even black to me! He’s just Steve!”). Do I have to point out the obvious, that their entire worldview would change if they could somehow get to know every minority the way they know their buddy? How many times have anti-immigration politicians and pundits gotten caught hiring “illegals” themselves? “Well you see, my illegals are honest and do great work. Not like the rapey stick-figures on those T-shirts.”
I had secretly been hoping that the internet, social media, and smartphones would make it impossible to not put a real human face on those groups. In a connected world in which I can tell you what my cousin’s coworkers considered eating for lunch yesterday, minorities can’t remain abstractions. I was hoping that over time, smartphones would do to racism what they did to UFOs.
You remember UFOs, right? For a generation leading up to the 1990s, some fuzzy flying saucer turned up in the news every month. Now, when there are a thousand times more cameras around, the flying saucers have evaporated like smoke — belief in alien visitors plummeted by the mid-2000s. The myth became impossible to preserve in the face of evidence (or lack of it).
Racism, likewise, is based on a myth — that these people aren’t people at all, that they don’t cry or bleed or want the same things we want, that fixing our discomfort is as simple as making them … go away, somehow. Now we have the technology to see an event like Charlottesville in real-time from half a dozen angles; we can hear the screams, see first-responders desperately trying to resuscitate victims. We can get a mental image of what an ethnic cleansing would really look like — that same chaos, repeated millions of times. That’s the truth behind the edgy frog memes and red-arm bands. Take it in, assholes.
It would be a wake-up call. That was the dream, anyway.
Yes, Cameras Do Change Minds
I’m known as a hopeful optimist, possibly having to do with being a white person who accidentally made a lot of money off of a story he originally wrote as a prank. But it’s not like I just pulled this dream out of my ass — there’s precedent for it.
The presence of cameras all but eliminated the American public’s tolerance for military casualties, for example — we’ve completely built our foreign policy around it. America lost 100,000 troops in WWI, 400,000 in WWII, and almost 60,000 in Vietnam. That last one was the turning point — a flood of full-color footage of maimed soldiers and screaming civilians turned public opinion against the war overnight. The reality of war didn’t change, but you can bet your ass that seeing it made all of the difference. We haven’t had a comparable war since; Afghanistan saw a tiny fraction of those losses (2,400) and so did Iraq (4,500). Suddenly, soldiers’ lives mattered — the myth of the consequence-free war went the way of the UFO.
“Why in the hell did you think a horde of screaming Actual Nazis would have their hearts melted by the sight of dying protesters?” you ask. “If anything, they probably get off on it. After all, Americans don’t seem to care about hundreds of thousands of bombed Iraqis.”
But I’m not talking about the raging Nazis here — it’s only the extreme fringe who’ll walk around in public doing that shit, and some of them try to sheepishly talk their way out of it later. The systemic racism that exists in the world doesn’t emanate from them, it flows from the comfortable indifference of the majority. The most incurable form of bigotry persists specifically because it doesn’t feel like heat coursing through the veins — it feels like nothing at all. I was born in Trump Country and I only met a couple of people who openly called for black genocide, but knew dozens if not hundreds who simply thought society didn’t need changing (and I agreed, at the time). We didn’t want the stick figures to die, we just didn’t think they needed help. What does a stick figure need food stamps for?
The latter are the ones I thought would be turned in this age of pervasive cameras and personal connections. It’s easy for the comfortable casual racist (who, by the way, hates Nazis) to ignore a headline or pie charts about income inequality. It’s harder to ignore a man bleeding in the driver’s seat of his car while his young daughter and her mother sit helplessly next to him, wailing in anguish. I didn’t think it would change overnight, but over the decades I thought these attitudes would be chiseled away one gut-wrenching video at a time. “Do you see? He’s not a fucking statistic. He bleeds. His family loved him just as much as your family loves you. Look.”
But The Sword Swings Both Ways
Hey, did I mention that after years of decline, belief in UFOs has shot back up to its previous highs? The need to believe was always there, so others looking to fill that void simply adapted to the marketplace (“If you think about it, the aliens would have cloaking technology that makes them invisible to cell phones!”).
The point is, if racism is a dying relic, it sure as hell doesn’t feel like it. Oh, I’m not surprised that hate groups thrive in this era — a few charismatic sociopaths have always been able to cast a wide umbrella of influence and mass media has just amplified their reach. I mean, you’ve seen their memes. What I had hoped, though, was that society would be better at spotting them, quicker to see through their tricks. I often wonder how average German citizens would have reacted if camera phones had existed back then and somebody had leaked video from inside a concentration camp. “But lots of German citizens did know about the concentration camps!” Sure, but it’s one thing to have a vague concept of “eliminating” Jews, another to actually see a wheelbarrow full of dead children. It would be meaningless to the true zealots, but most people aren’t that.
And yet …
Modern Society May Have Cultivated A Population Ripe For Hate
It’s too easy to think of Nazis as a different species, like they were aliens who invaded from another planet. If you tell me we shouldn’t humanize them, I say that humanizing them actually makes them scarier: They are not only human, but they are your motherfucking neighbors. After the war, German soldiers and officers went back home and got jobs — it’s not like you blow up the mothership and the foot soldiers topple over. Likewise, your brother or uncle or daughter could join a hate group tomorrow and they would still be family. Some of the people reading this have had this exact thing happen.
Think about it: Even if the worst happens and 20 years from now we’re in an actual shooting war with a new round of Nazis, it’s not like we’ll kill them all. No war ends that way; there’ll be some kind of resolution and the combatants will take off their uniforms and the very next day they’ll be next to you on the subway. If you want to stop that future, you have to start with understanding how Nazis are made, and how regular everyday folks get sucked in. Hate is a prickly shell humans grow around fear, a defense mechanism to replace the terror of the unknown with the cold certainty of rage. You don’t have to feel sorry for them, but hate is like cancer — it’s all about knowing the warning signs and catching it early.
And I can’t emphasize enough how much it doesn’t actually make a difference what goes in those brackets. Reddit’s Trump community The_Donald overlaps strongly with their now-banned “Fat People Hate” community and the anti-woman subreddit TheRedPill. Where you find articles railing on blacks, you’ll find articles demonizing Jews, homosexuals, trans people … hell, go to any right-wing site and notice their bitter loathing of vegans.
It’s hard for most people to grasp how hate can be both arbitrary and murderous, but that’s how the human mind works. Once you switch into that primitive Us vs. Them survival mode, the rationale becomes totally irrelevant. Remember that one of the world’s oldest and most pervasive prejudices is against left-handed people. Skilled manipulators could pull out endless examples of how inherently dishonest and filthy those lefties were, and they always found an audience. That only sounds ridiculous until you realize how great it must have been to wake up every day and congratulate yourself for using your right hand, a.k.a. the hand you automatically used anyway.
If you haven’t built anything you can be proud of — be it a house, career, family, or loving circle of friends — then you need to draw your pride from somewhere. Hate groups let you set the pride bar so low that you can swell with pride over the fact that you woke up this morning with a certain color skin and heterosexual urges, as if both were the result of diligent effort on your part. Imagine eating a delicious cheeseburger and congratulating yourself for having accomplished your noble goal of not being vegan.
But I Still Think The Good Guys Will Win
If you’ve come to the conclusion that the internet really didn’t change anything because people are people and set in their beliefs, the facts say you’re wrong. For instance, the internet era has been devastating for religion in the U.S.A., with the ranks of nonbelievers more than doubling just since 1990. In that same span, support for gay marriage went from 13 percent to 58 percent. Support for marijuana legalization, from 12 percent to 53 percent. I absolutely believe those abrupt changes happened because many Americans were coming in contact with their first atheists, uncloseted gay people, and admitted pot smokers and finding they weren’t monsters. You can strap somebody to a chair and make them watch a thousand hours of PSAs about how this group or that is “just like us,” but it won’t have the same impact as a single positive encounter with one of them. Dogma dies in the face of such experiences.
It’s easy to think of the internet as a cesspool of anonymous harassers but it is mostly a constellation of tight-knit communities that overlap with others, bringing them together in unexpected ways. You’ve heard a lot of talk about online “bubbles” of like-minded people getting more and more extreme in the absence of opposition, but the reason we became so much more open-minded on some issues in the first place is that online communities forced us to mingle across demographics. We may all have joined a forum based on our Babylon 5 fandom, but we quickly realized some of the cool people we were talking to were the type we’d never have run into in our real-life neighborhoods (“Wait, you’re posting from Brazil? What time is it there?!?”). When I was a kid, you’d hear about a deadly earthquake in Taiwan and briefly raise an eyebrow over your coffee. “So sad.” Today, you jump online and say, “Wait, did they say Jiji? That’s where Ironheart69 is from! Has anybody heard from her?”
What I’m hoping is that what we’re seeing now is the reaction to that, the loud rage of a racist realizing his sister is dating a damned Muslim, that his old college roommate turned out to be a trans woman, and that there are black people in horror movies who don’t die. An ideology kicking and screaming as it is dragged out the door, the equivalent of segregationists blocking black children from their schools, knowing full well that theirs was a lost cause.
Over time, lots of those segregationists realized they were wrong, that their rage and the fear at its core were based on nothing. That will happen again. I think. I hope.
'Content marketing' is a game changer Korea JoongAng Daily Robert Rose, chief strategist at Content Marketing Institute (CMI), whose list of consulting clients includes big names such as Dell, Microsoft and NASA, says that such a âdisruptiveâ form of marketing is shifting the way companies around the globe do …
The Football Association reacted “dismissively” to worries about sexual abuse in the game when they emerged in the 1990s, the BBC has been told.
Ian Ackley, who was abused by a man with links to Manchester City, said his father’s calls for better protection “fell on deaf ears”.
Separately, a charity has claimed the FA was too slow to implement criminal record checks in the 1990s, which may have placed children at risk.
The FA said it was unable to comment.
However, letters seen by the BBC suggest the organisation, which runs football in England, was waiting for a change in the law before it updated its child protection policies.
The organisation has now commissioned an independent investigation into the way it dealt with abuse allegations.
Dozens of letters
Mr Ackley told the BBC’s Victoria Derbyshire programme that his father, who is now dead, felt the response to complaints he made to the FA was “very dismissive”.
His father sent dozens of letters to MPs, government departments and sporting bodies, including the FA and Professional Footballers’ Association (PFA).
In them, he had called for better protection for young players, including enhanced criminal record checks for coaches working in the game.
The letters followed a 1997 Channel 4 investigation, in which the first substantive allegations of abuse in football – focusing on coaches at Manchester City, Crewe Alexandra and Southampton – were aired.
Mr Ackley was one of a small number of young players involved in the programme to waive his right to anonymity and agree to speak openly about his abuse.
The letters, sent by his father and seen by the BBC’s Victoria Derbyshire programme, raised concerns about the case and the measures then in place to protect children in the game.
‘Somebody else’s problem’
“This was pre-internet, pre-social media,” Mr Ackley said. “Everything was handwritten and my father diligently wrote to anyone and everyone who he thought would be in a position of influence in order to affect this change. That was his real goal.”
But he said his father felt that the FA and other organisations were “brushing off” attempts to improve safety in the game at the time.
“The replies were dismissive at best”, said Mr Ackley. “They were always alluding to the fact it was somebody’s else’s problem… It was very much giving you snippets of information to appease you.
“Not only was I affected when I was abused, but when I, my Dad and the Channel 4 programme tried to bang this drum extremely loudly we were ignored for the second time.”
In 2000, the FA did launch a new child protection strategy including better training and compulsory welfare officers at all clubs.
But many of the measures did not come into force for a number of years with compulsory criminal record checks not standard until at least 2003, and in some cases as late as 2007.
‘Lack of interest and hostility’
Other critics of the FA say the organisation was not fast enough to put in place enhanced criminal record checks for youth coaches and others working with children.
Those checks include details of convictions as well as so-called “soft intelligence” from local police forces about an individual and whether they should be allowed to coach under-18s.
Before 2002 it was only schools, local authorities and other statutory organisations which could ordinarily access that kind of information.
But in 1994 a Home Office pilot project was set up which allowed a handful of other groups to make use of those checks, including charities like Barnardo’s and Fair Play for Children.
Jan Cosgrove, the chairman of Fair Play for Children, said in 1997 he was approached by a youth league in Bristol to run checks on 50 managers and others involved in the local game.
The police force involved, Avon and Somerset, reported concerns about one coach who was asked to leave the club in question and was later convicted of child sex offences.
Mr Cosgrove wrote to the FA in April 1997 saying that “since Channel 4’s documentary we are receiving regular enquiries from youth football clubs regarding our police checking service”.
He said he later organised a conference at Leicester Football Club for other youth leagues, but he claims he was met by lack of interest and hostility by the Football Association at the time.
He claims executives at the FA contacted local clubs advising them not to take part.
“There was no reason other than we were on their patch. I can’t understand that, you can’t do that with child protection, you have to share,” he said.
“We should have had a relationship with the FA, which would’ve done both parties no end of good, but more importantly it’s the kids who come first, and they haven’t here.”
From 2003 the FA did bring in compulsory criminal record checks for anyone in the game working with children, though this does not apply when under-18s are playing in mixed-age football with adults.
The organisation says it now processes 55,000 checks every season.
The FA’s independent inquiry into non-recent child sex abuse in football is being led by the barrister Clive Sheldon QC.
“The review will commence immediately,” an FA statement said this week. “The findings of the review will be reported to the FA board.
“It is accepted that no final date can be agreed at this stage given the passage of time and the time it will take to recall files for review and to locate all those relevant people to interview who no longer work for the FA.
“The FA continues to work closely with the relevant authorities and respects the ongoing investigation by the police being co-ordinated by Operation Hydrant into childhood sexual abuse in football.”
Former Chelsea footballer Gary Johnson will appear live on the Victoria Derbyshire Programme on Thursday 8 December to talk about abuse in the game.
Can you spot a social media influencer? gulfnews.com Advertisers used to create ads for the masses, that would only target a very small percentage of their demographic. These days, social media marketing breaks down advertising barriers in a way no other medium has worked until now. It has been called …
Hezbollah says social media accounts closed without notice Ynetnews The terror organization says Twitter and Facebook closed its social media accounts, a day after it posted a video showing 2006 kidnapping of IDF soldiers Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev; Hezbollah says social media followers can use backup pages; …