This article is from.MSNBC.com It discusses the ongoing movement by a coalition of bloggers to develop a labor union. The objective of the union is to help bloggers receive health insurance, carry out collective bargaining, and set professional standards.
This movement has developed from the growing power of bloggers. Because the field of bloggers is diverse, it is unclear what type of professional organization is needed.
Most bloggers agree that having a union would allow them insurance discounts and press credentials. Others believe that a union could also help set up guidelines for advertising and data on blogger pages.
A union would lead to increased professionalism and regulation. The increase of these elements could lead to a boost of more jobs for bloggers as well as becoming a more trustworthy source of information.
Not all bloggers think unionizing is a good idea. Because there is no regulation on blogging, many consider it to be freedom of expression. Setting up unions may lead to compromising of these freedoms.
The effect of this movement on marketers is great. If bloggers begin to unionize, the will be both positive and negative consequences.
Positive effects would be regulation on bloggers. This lessens that chance that an advertisement will be placed on a distasteful website. Thus, there is less risk for a marketer placing an advertisement. Also, if regulation is enforced, it is more likely that negative blogs would be restricted. This would silence some overly critical bloggers.
A negative consequences of unionizing would be less freedom of expression. If blogs begin to restrict what can and cannot be discussed, important consumer topics could be lost. Marketers would loose a strong outlet of customer reviews that allow them to evaluate and change products and promotions.
Monday, August 6, 2007
e-marketingclass article 2: Differentiate Or Die
This article, which comes from Forbes.com, discusses how products are becoming more and more similar in the consumers’ eye, because they are not taking the time to truly differentiate themselves. Jack Trout, president of marketing at consulting firm Trout and Powers, points out how in a book he had written in 2000, Differentiate or die, told companies that in order to be successful they have to differentiate themselves from their competition, and suggestions on how to do this. Trout’s advice has been taken by many companies, but not all. He sites Coca-cola verses Pepsi as an example. Coca-cola has had a drop in sales because they have given up a lot of profit by trying to target a large population instead of a segment. He uses the fact that if Coca-cola would have differentiated themselves instead of trying to invent many new soft drinks and becoming overly diversified with everything from Coke to Diet Coke, to Cherry Coke and most recently Coke Zero, and just positioned them as a drink for more mature cola drinkers, instead of chasing everybody, they could have stopped Pepsi from becoming as large as they are today.
This article is important for marketers because it is an example of how having too wide of a target market and not being able to differentiate yourself from your competition. A company needs to look at itself and define a definite target market based on how they want to position themselves to the world. If they fail to do this, it could lead to a loss of profits, and the company loosing the strength in its name and image. Also, by marketing not differentiating the company enough, it could leave the company open to a greater loss, new competition coming in and taking its customers away. Market penetration could be easier for a company depending its size, the strength of its name and image, and how loyal its customers are. For a well established global company such as Coca-cola, it would be much harder to take away its customers, than it would be for a smaller, less established company, but it is possible if the company, no matter its size or brand name, stretches itself out too thin trying to be too many things to too many people at once. It’s a marketer’s job to notice when this starts to happen, and try to help the company reorganize itself and take steps towards reaching its primary target audience(s), before it looses them completely.
Sunday, August 5, 2007
E-marketingclass article summary #2 (Hodgeman)
In our e-marketingclass we’ve created a blog and discussed the importance of blogs to potential marketers. I found the following article very relevant and very important to the success of blogs and many other e-marketing activities.
The article discusses tags and the importance of them to consumers and marketers at the same time. In the article they state that “the real goal of tags is to allow people to find what they are looking for quickly”. As an online user, many people use tags and probably aren’t even aware of it. On facebook, or myspace if a user uploads a photo and names the photo, that would be a perfect example of the user tagging their content.
Tags become relevant for marketers through keyword searches. Tags give advertisers the ability to keep ads very relevant to what the consumer is searching for. An example in the referenced article was that if you type in “auto show” you should get car ads on the results screen. Marketers have to be especially careful when tagging their content because it can directly affect the market they reach and the effectiveness of their advertising campaign.
Technorati and Amazon.com are two examples of companies which heavily use tags. Technorati recently started to sell the tags and even sells bundles of tags which result in words related to each other. The selling of tags is very similar to what Google did in selling the results of popular search items. This is just another example of how a company can make money in the ever expanding e-marketing environment.
The development of tags is just another avenue that marketers can target their audience through. Tags originally weren’t developed for that purpose but as online marketing develops and consumers online usage increases, the need for new ways to reach your audience also increases. Advertisers will have to evaluate if this is an avenue in which they will need to expand their concentrations. If they feel it will benefit their company and the profits accumulated then I expect to see a lot more companies investing in this form of advertising.
As a consumer, I feel tags are a very good thing and keep my internet searches relevant. Some people feel that the advertising is excessive and hurts the online experience but at the same time there are others who are doing the online searches only to try and find potential products to purchase and love every relevant advertisement thrown their way. Without tags it would be difficult to find what you’re looking for and overall I feel tags benefit both marketers who need to reach the masses and the public who wants fast relevant search results.
The article discusses tags and the importance of them to consumers and marketers at the same time. In the article they state that “the real goal of tags is to allow people to find what they are looking for quickly”. As an online user, many people use tags and probably aren’t even aware of it. On facebook, or myspace if a user uploads a photo and names the photo, that would be a perfect example of the user tagging their content.
Tags become relevant for marketers through keyword searches. Tags give advertisers the ability to keep ads very relevant to what the consumer is searching for. An example in the referenced article was that if you type in “auto show” you should get car ads on the results screen. Marketers have to be especially careful when tagging their content because it can directly affect the market they reach and the effectiveness of their advertising campaign.
Technorati and Amazon.com are two examples of companies which heavily use tags. Technorati recently started to sell the tags and even sells bundles of tags which result in words related to each other. The selling of tags is very similar to what Google did in selling the results of popular search items. This is just another example of how a company can make money in the ever expanding e-marketing environment.
The development of tags is just another avenue that marketers can target their audience through. Tags originally weren’t developed for that purpose but as online marketing develops and consumers online usage increases, the need for new ways to reach your audience also increases. Advertisers will have to evaluate if this is an avenue in which they will need to expand their concentrations. If they feel it will benefit their company and the profits accumulated then I expect to see a lot more companies investing in this form of advertising.
As a consumer, I feel tags are a very good thing and keep my internet searches relevant. Some people feel that the advertising is excessive and hurts the online experience but at the same time there are others who are doing the online searches only to try and find potential products to purchase and love every relevant advertisement thrown their way. Without tags it would be difficult to find what you’re looking for and overall I feel tags benefit both marketers who need to reach the masses and the public who wants fast relevant search results.
Democrats are Trying Anything to Get Elected
In the article Liberal Bloggers Boo Hillary Clinton at DailyKos Convention, were able to read of the new strategy some Democrats are using in hopes of getting elected. Democrats are reaching out to the internet community by hosting debates with questions fielded from online bloggers. The article discusses how the internet has helped to create new media outlets and given voters the power to express their opinions or disseminate information in a global forum. Rather than politicians marketing a product, these Democrats are trying to convince voters of their "Excellent Policies", or not so excellent.
It appears that these bloggers are rather intelligent people. The article discusses that Clinton is viewed skeptically by the blogging community, mainly for her history of hawkish views on Iraq.
If you would like to view a rather entertaining video on Hillary Clinton, check out this
"Apple Commercial." Disclosure: This video is not intended to show support for Obama, but rather for entertainment purposes only! It's just another channel for e-marketing!
You can visit Mike's E-marketingclass Blog for other interesting links and videos.
It appears that these bloggers are rather intelligent people. The article discusses that Clinton is viewed skeptically by the blogging community, mainly for her history of hawkish views on Iraq.
If you would like to view a rather entertaining video on Hillary Clinton, check out this
"Apple Commercial." Disclosure: This video is not intended to show support for Obama, but rather for entertainment purposes only! It's just another channel for e-marketing!
You can visit Mike's E-marketingclass Blog for other interesting links and videos.
Wednesday, August 1, 2007
This is not about having a bad hair day
It's about having a bad domain name, such as Waveradio.com. When Bose -- the electronics firm that has rights to the WAVE trademark -- complained to the National Arbitration Forum, the NAF ruled that Waveradio.com infringed.
The decision provides a look into some of the legal principles involved. For example, infringement is based on the idea that a name confuses consumers. So, typically, when one mark is found to infringe on another, the two marks are in the same class of consumer goods.
If Waveradio.com had offered hair care products (that let you curl your hair while listening to the radio) instead of "...all you've dreamed Internet radio to be," I doubt there would be infringement, because consumers are not likely to confuse a hair care product with a radio.
But what's not clear to me is exactly why the NAF ruled the party that registered Waveradio.com as a domain name was acting in bad faith. The board notes the party registered it then tried to sell it to Bose for a large sum. But I see lots of domain names for sale on Websites that register domain names for the public. Did the board issue its bad faith finding because the party registered Waveradio.com with the intent to target a particular company? Did the decision stand up to an appeal?
I'm not sure and I'm not an attorney and do not claim to dispense legal advice. Anyway, have a good (hair) day!
link to decision
The decision provides a look into some of the legal principles involved. For example, infringement is based on the idea that a name confuses consumers. So, typically, when one mark is found to infringe on another, the two marks are in the same class of consumer goods.
If Waveradio.com had offered hair care products (that let you curl your hair while listening to the radio) instead of "...all you've dreamed Internet radio to be," I doubt there would be infringement, because consumers are not likely to confuse a hair care product with a radio.
But what's not clear to me is exactly why the NAF ruled the party that registered Waveradio.com as a domain name was acting in bad faith. The board notes the party registered it then tried to sell it to Bose for a large sum. But I see lots of domain names for sale on Websites that register domain names for the public. Did the board issue its bad faith finding because the party registered Waveradio.com with the intent to target a particular company? Did the decision stand up to an appeal?
I'm not sure and I'm not an attorney and do not claim to dispense legal advice. Anyway, have a good (hair) day!
link to decision
Creating Your Own Blog
In class yesterday we walked through the basics of setting up your own blog. Thanks to everyone who took this step. I encourage you all to go through this exercise so you can see just how easy it is for someone to generate web content. With any luck, we'll begin to have visibility on a search engine especially if we remain diligent about generating meaningful commentary (on your individual blogs as well as the class blog).
A few notes to consider...
Remember to always include a reference to the keyword we're trying to establish visibility for, "e-marketingclasss". Try to incorporate this keyword in each of your posts along with other variations (like e-marketing class, emarketing class, etc). e-marketingclass is not a real word (nor is it used on any other sites) so this should make it a little easier for us to learn about how search engines index keywords (which is what I want to demonstrate in our class).
Also, please be sure to reference the class blog in your post (e-marketingclass.blogspot.com). However, don't just put a link to the site with no content around it...we need content as well as the link.
See you in class!
A few notes to consider...
Remember to always include a reference to the keyword we're trying to establish visibility for, "e-marketingclasss". Try to incorporate this keyword in each of your posts along with other variations (like e-marketing class, emarketing class, etc). e-marketingclass is not a real word (nor is it used on any other sites) so this should make it a little easier for us to learn about how search engines index keywords (which is what I want to demonstrate in our class).
Also, please be sure to reference the class blog in your post (e-marketingclass.blogspot.com). However, don't just put a link to the site with no content around it...we need content as well as the link.
See you in class!
E-marketingclass Article Summary
With a lot of the recent e-marketingclass discussion surrounding the consequences of advertisements being placed on web sites such as MySpace and FaceBook, I found the following article to be rather interesting and appropriate for our e-marketingclass.
The article discusses the recent deal struck between Microsoft and Digg. Digg, a relative newcomer to the online market is one of the fastest growing web sites. The two companies both hope to benefit from the deal. According to Kimberly Hill of Ecommerce Times, “Microsoft now stands to be a major player in the online advertising space as the company struck a deal with Web content aggregator Digg to be its exclusive provider of display and contextual advertising. The plan is to bring integrated programs to Digg’s users and advertisers.”
So what does this mean exactly? Very simply, Digg will be able to focus less on advertising infrastructure and more on innovation. Furthermore, Microsoft is getting a chance to become a serious player in the online advertising space. Rob Enderle summed it up nicely by stating, “These two companies are playing Monopoly using the world as a board, and Microsoft is the old master that has been getting its butt kicked by Google, the new player.”
So what does this deal mean for consumers and marketers? First, some marketers do not believe that consumers will even notice the changes on Digg, at least in the short term. With Digg, user-generated content is the sites strong point. Users of Digg are able to look at articles and than rate and rank them on the Web. According to Hill, “News publishers, bloggers and even corporate public relations teams are fair game for readers who either like or don’t like what they see.” By teaming up with Microsoft, Digg is hoping that the consumer will appreciate a more sophisticated approach to online advertising rather than advertising that offers no value. In hopes of this, the two companies are working together on future technology and advertising initiatives in addition to Microsoft running Digg’s current advertisements. Here is where the battle between Google and Microsoft heats up. There is an increasing effort for marketers to improve on targeting and segmenting their audiences in order to provide content relevant advertisements. With Google's recent purchase of DoubleClick, it appears that they are committed to becoming a dominant player in display advertising. However, Google does not have the relationships required to make that happen. Through the purchase of DoubleClick, they believe that this can happen. It may also be important to point out that Google also owns YouTube. Microsoft has realized that Google is heading in the direction of online advertising and that if they are successful, they will own the revenue that comes with it. I believe that the deal between Microsoft and Digg was a move designed to respond to Google's strategy. However, Microsoft was one of the companies complaining about anti-trust issues related to Google and DoubleClick. With this new deal in place, it may only help Google.
The plan between Digg and Microsoft is to bring integrated programs to Digg’s users and advertisers. This is going to allow consumers to receive ads that they are interested in seeing. One of the problems facing MySpace is that it has become cluttered with advertisements that have no value to the user. Digg is attempting to target their advertisements so that the users do not defect or view Digg as selling out. Digg has been attempting to position itself as an online community, however, if it becomes cluttered with display ads they risk losing those members of their community. Through this new deal, Digg will be able to keep intact the “Digg Community” without it becoming cluttered with ads. In return, Microsoft will benefit by becoming a bigger player in online advertising. Advertisers will benefit by having the opportunity to target specific consumers with content specific ads.
The article discusses the recent deal struck between Microsoft and Digg. Digg, a relative newcomer to the online market is one of the fastest growing web sites. The two companies both hope to benefit from the deal. According to Kimberly Hill of Ecommerce Times, “Microsoft now stands to be a major player in the online advertising space as the company struck a deal with Web content aggregator Digg to be its exclusive provider of display and contextual advertising. The plan is to bring integrated programs to Digg’s users and advertisers.”
So what does this mean exactly? Very simply, Digg will be able to focus less on advertising infrastructure and more on innovation. Furthermore, Microsoft is getting a chance to become a serious player in the online advertising space. Rob Enderle summed it up nicely by stating, “These two companies are playing Monopoly using the world as a board, and Microsoft is the old master that has been getting its butt kicked by Google, the new player.”
So what does this deal mean for consumers and marketers? First, some marketers do not believe that consumers will even notice the changes on Digg, at least in the short term. With Digg, user-generated content is the sites strong point. Users of Digg are able to look at articles and than rate and rank them on the Web. According to Hill, “News publishers, bloggers and even corporate public relations teams are fair game for readers who either like or don’t like what they see.” By teaming up with Microsoft, Digg is hoping that the consumer will appreciate a more sophisticated approach to online advertising rather than advertising that offers no value. In hopes of this, the two companies are working together on future technology and advertising initiatives in addition to Microsoft running Digg’s current advertisements. Here is where the battle between Google and Microsoft heats up. There is an increasing effort for marketers to improve on targeting and segmenting their audiences in order to provide content relevant advertisements. With Google's recent purchase of DoubleClick, it appears that they are committed to becoming a dominant player in display advertising. However, Google does not have the relationships required to make that happen. Through the purchase of DoubleClick, they believe that this can happen. It may also be important to point out that Google also owns YouTube. Microsoft has realized that Google is heading in the direction of online advertising and that if they are successful, they will own the revenue that comes with it. I believe that the deal between Microsoft and Digg was a move designed to respond to Google's strategy. However, Microsoft was one of the companies complaining about anti-trust issues related to Google and DoubleClick. With this new deal in place, it may only help Google.
The plan between Digg and Microsoft is to bring integrated programs to Digg’s users and advertisers. This is going to allow consumers to receive ads that they are interested in seeing. One of the problems facing MySpace is that it has become cluttered with advertisements that have no value to the user. Digg is attempting to target their advertisements so that the users do not defect or view Digg as selling out. Digg has been attempting to position itself as an online community, however, if it becomes cluttered with display ads they risk losing those members of their community. Through this new deal, Digg will be able to keep intact the “Digg Community” without it becoming cluttered with ads. In return, Microsoft will benefit by becoming a bigger player in online advertising. Advertisers will benefit by having the opportunity to target specific consumers with content specific ads.
Tuesday, July 31, 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)