Tuesday, March 25, 2008

Dirty Politics


What is up with stupid politictians these days? They are being caught left and right for scandalous behavior. First was Bill Clinton, then the senator who tapped his foot under the bathroom stall, which apparently is a 'no-no' in the little boy's room. Next was the governor of New York's little prostitution scandal. And now the mayor of Detroit is charged with eight felonies. You'd think that these public figures would have better judgement.

CraigsList in Hot Water Again


According to a CNN report today, Craigslist is in trouble again. Apparently someone placed a false ad online which said that everything in an Oregon family's home is up for the taking. As scavengers were tearing apart the home, taking everything in sight, the family pulled up, in complete shock. The authorities are looking for the culprait and people are being asked to return anything taken.

Nothin' But Net... Neutrality


In my previous post, “Let Freedom Reign?,” I discussed the U.S. government’s censorship of commercial but not political advertising. I explained how misleading ads cannot appear for products like diet pills or even toothpaste; however, it is legal for politicians to broadcast untruths about their opponents.

The debate over political advertising spills over into the Web’s arena. Search engine Google has taken a strong position on the content of its political advertising, making rules that political advertising on its site must not include misleading information or attacks on a candidate’s personal life.

Although this seems to be benign, who decides what stays and what goes on Google? How much censorship is too much? Can the public trust Google to make good judgments?

The fight against net neutrality is spreading across the Web.

According to a CNETnews.com article, “Internet content providers such as Google, Microsoft and Amazon.com” are in favor of net neutrality. But how neutral is the Internet when Google is not allowing it’s searchers to see certain political advertisements that are on other Web sites and even on T.V.?

Wouldn’t you rather use a search engine that displays all the results of your key-word search, and not just what it thinks is politically correct? I know I would.

Monday, March 17, 2008

The Hire

After reading Rebecca Blood’s article "Weblogs: a History and Perspective," I am very appreciative that technology has allowed computer illiterate people like myself to create their own blog. Apparently the original bloggers had to know HTML code and craft their own Web sites. YIKES!

In Blood’s article she also mentions a quote by Greg Ruggiero, "'you cannot participate in the media. Bringing that into the foreground is the first step. The second step is to define the difference between public and audience. An audience is passive; a public is participatory. We need a definition of media that is public in its orientation.’"



After reading this quote it made me realize that online blogs and interactive media are two forms of communication that allow the audience to be participatory. The blog, for examaple, allows for instant reader feedback (unlike other forms of traditional news media).

I also realized, from an advertising/PR perspective, how perfect the blog is. It can be used for a million different things. It's the perfect venue to promote a new product and for companies to spread a controlled message about that product. And, creating online traffic to the blog site is no big deal these days. It's pretty simple to define and reach a specific target audience.

Creating viral buzz about new products is the way to go. Blogs and the Internet in general are borderless and cost effective venues for promotion. They’re a PR and advertising professional’s dream.


One brand took these realizations to heart. BMW’s interactive media campaign took Ruggiero’s advice and made their audience active not passive. The company made a series of Hollywood-grade short films called "The Hire" starring Madonna and Clive Owen to demonstrate the capabilities of the "Ultimate Driving Machine."



BMW devised this marketing plan to particularly appeal to the technology-savvy BMW consumer. These individuals actively logged onto the BMW Web site and spread the link to friends all across the globe.

According to Wikipedia (which duh, knows all), "BMW saw their 2001 sales numbers go up 12 percent from last year and the movies were viewed over 11 million times in four months. Two million people registered with the Web site and a large majority of users, registered to the site, sent film links to their friends and family causing the site to go viral and sales to skyrocket. The films proved to be so popular, BMW ended up producing a free DVD for customers who visited select BMW dealerships."

Case in point - online interactive media is the way to go. The blog is a great place to start.

Thursday, March 6, 2008

Let Freedom Reign?


America is the land of the free and the home of the brave. At least that’s what we tell ourselves before every major sporting event, as we stand up from our stadium seats and take off our baseball caps to sing the national anthem.

But, how free are we? Take communication for example. How free are Americans to speak? How much does the First Amendment protect?

In 1942 the Supreme Court ruled that pure commercial speech is not fully protected by the First Amendment. Since then, advertising has been closely watched for deception – anything that is false or misleading.

Interestingly enough, political speech is fully protected by the First Amendment. So political advertising can legally be false or misleading. A candidate can say anything he or she wants to about an opponent without legal repercussions. The theory is that the truth will come out in the end, and by limiting political speech, it will limit the marketplace of ideas.

Australians feel differently. Down Under, the Aussies believe that political speech should be censored. Candidates are libel if they make a false statement about an opponent. The country's government believes that people are indeed rational, but the public must be making rational decisions about politicians based on truthful information, not lies.

In the U.S. a false attack ad could run so close to an election that there's no time for the other candidate to rebuttal. Thus, the public could make their decision to vote for someone based on false information.

To me, it’s a scary thing that U.S. citizens could possibly be choosing their next president based on an intentionally misleading television commercial. Is the Land of the Free allowing too much freedom in the political realm?