Posts filed under ‘3. Web 2.0’
Political candidates and social media: don’t miss out on spreading your message
Walter Schwabe from “fusedlogic” recently asked via Twitter ‘if a candidate’s use of social media would affect your support for them?’. We don’t have access to the answers that Walter received from the Twitter community but we will offer our own here.
There is a lot more to a candidates platform than whether or not they use social media in their campaign. The real community issues and how that person proposes to deal with them if elected is what matters. Their use of social media is a secondary element. However, since social media is an important and effective communications tool a candidates use of things such as Facebook, Twitter and YouTube or a website with interactive dialogue can be a benefit for them and the folks in the community who live online.
With the increase of social media as a key and sometimes only source of news and information for many people, not using the web can be detrimental for a candidate in communicating their ideas and plans for the future. If a candidate doesn’t use social media in their campaign, they run the risk of missing out on opportunities to connect and promote their vision for the community to a segment of voters who use social media in place of traditional media such as newspaper and radio.
And then there is the future use of social media from city hall. If a candidate makes use of social media and is elected then there is a possibility that they will make use of online communities and communication while in office. This can be a good thing in bringing communities, large or small, into the new age of online communications.
If your candidate of choice isn’t using social media but you do, encourage them to take part in online activities even if it means that you set things up and maintain it for them. Although ghost-blogging and ghost-tweets are typically frowned upon by online communities, something is better than nothing and who knows, maybe your candidate might take an active part once they see the value of social media.
Dean
Movies from the web – no more trips to the video store
Years ago when we purchased our first video tape deck (BTW it was a Beta) trips to the video store became a weekly routine. I remember spending an hour and sometimes longer browsing through the titles on the shelves looking at blockbusters and the odd and unusual. Then we switched to satellite and pay-for-view movies became our source of entertainment with a trip to the local video store as a backup when the pickings were slim on the satellite feed. Then came online DVD stores – order via the web and the movie is shipped over night right to your door. Now there is a new option – downloading movies (legally of course) from online video stores such as iTunes.
This was how it was explained to me by a fan of iTunes and AppleTV…
“I drive down to Block****** and pick out a DVD. Sometimes they have what I want, sometimes they don’t. I get home and it doesn’t work – it skips, jumps, bad sound or no sound. Take it back to Block****** and trade it for another one. Get home and sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn’t. Now with my AppleTV (essentially a computer hooked up to your TV and home theater system) I order up a movie from iTunes and by the time dinner is cooked, the movie is downloaded. No more wasted time driving down to Block******. And when winter turns foul – no more going out when it’s twenty below. No wonder Block****** is going out of business.”
You don’t need an AppleTV since any computer will do the same job as long as it can be hooked up to your TV. iTunes is a free download – runs on a Mac or on Windows. Movies – rent or own, TV shows and even audio books.
Although this might sound like an advertisement for iTunes and AppleTV it isn’t meant to be. We just wanted to share with you alternatives to traditional TV. Alternatives which reflect the changing world of media consumption. The control is now in the hands of the consumer in how, where and what they consume.
Dean
_Sponsors_________________________________________
Strategic Online Marketing
_________________________________________________
Corporate Computer and Network Specialists
You might not use the web but they do – know your market
A small business owner mentioned to me that they didn’t think their target market were big on using the web for shopping or research into products or services. They felt that the older demographic that they market to didn’t use the web that much. The “older” group they referred to were the boomers aged 45 to 60. As we chatted it occurred to me that this boomer business owner was not a big web user and was basing their online marketing efforts (or lack of ) on their own experiences and not what their target market was tuned into. That surprised me since they were normally very responsive to the buying public with the choice of products and services they provided.
Rather than inundate them with stats and surveys and online marketing industry white papers, I suggest they ask their customers what they use. Perform your own mini-survey. My suspicion is that this business owner would be surprised at the results. My other advice was to consider meeting the marketing needs of their market by using a mix of old and new media. More and more boomers are using the web but many still tap into more traditional marketing and advertising methods. With a little online activity they might even reach into the Gen X demographic, who could make use of their product or service and expand their business opportunities.
Remember – you might not Facebook or YouTube or Google (or Bing) but they do! They being the folks looking for the products and services you offer!
Dean
_Sponsors_________________________________________
Strategic Online Marketing
_________________________________________________
Corporate Computer and Network Specialists
Campus radio
This article on the demise of a university campus broadcast radio station in Waterloo, Ontario got me thinking about the state of campus radio in general and in Alberta in particular.
University or college stations have a certain freedom that commercial radio stations don’ t have and may never have. The station mentioned in the article is closing after students voted against continuing to pay a fee to subsidize the station. Critics say they lost relevance with their audience. Some of their critics have suggested that they should move to the web and iTunes. There was speculation that after the closure of the station a new entity will open up and deliver content via the web. That method may be more relevent in delivery but content still needs to be of value to the audience to make the station a success.
Here in Alberta there are only three campus radio stations according to Wikipedia…
Alberta
CJSW-FM 0090.9 FM Calgary University of Calgary
CJSR-FM 0088.5 FM Edmonton University of Alberta
CKXU-FM 0088.3 FM Lethbridge University of Lethbridge
SAIT also has a station not listed in this entry. NAIT – CHNR 92.3fm and Augustana College – CLCR 101.5fm also have closed circuit stations
With all of the colleges in Alberta, why don’t we have more campus radio station? The current technology of the web supports easy access to producers and listeners. Some diehard volunteers, legal advice re: copyright etc., some funding for Socan fees (maybe), some gear and away you go.
“Q: We’re a religious, educational, charitable or fraternal organization or institution. Do we need a SOCAN licence for the music we perform in public?
A: Under the Copyright Act, there are certain exemptions, but specific conditions must be met in order to qualify for the exemption. The exemptions are:
* Religious – Music as part of worship or service
* Educational – Forms part of the curriculum
* Charitable -
o The organization is a charitable organization
o The performance at the event is done by the charitable organization itself (as opposed to independent contractor performers)
o The performance of music directly furthers a charitable object. – from SOCAN’s site
While visiting one of our local colleges last week I saw that the students association still publish their news via paper. To their credit they also publish the “paper” online. Maybe they would sponsor a campus radio station?
Dean
_Thanks to Our Sponsors_________________________________________
Strategic Online Marketing
_________________________________________________
Corporate Computer and Network Specialists
Thoughts on CRTC hearings on Fee For Carriage
We are following the CRTC hearings via Twitter, online news, CPAC video (when it works) and even caught a few mainstream media segments regarding the big battle between broadcast networks and the distribution channels of cable and satellite.
Here are some of our thoughts on the situation . . .
The distributors of content are in control. Not the creators or the consumers. How long will it be before they apply the cable programming model to internet distribution? Be afraid – very afraid!
Canadian broadcast networks will die the same death as newspapers if they don’t change their model. Too much redundancy. The same list of shows appear on US and Canadian networks. This model of redistribution is based on the old model of over the air signals beamed into geographic regions that had no other options. Cable and satellite and web have changed all that.
CRTC should legislate the cable and satellite distribution folks to carry only Canadian broadcast networks. Block the original US versions. This reduces the redundancy and gives the Canadian broadcasters the monopoly they need to survive. Oh, did I say monopoly? I meant competitive advantage.
Why don’t cable and satellite providers carry international channels? Back in the days of C-band satellite (remember those big six foot dishes?) we could get programming from all over the world. Now it’s just the same limited programming choices repeated across the various time zones.
When CEOs of the two big cable TV outfits agree to not compete in each others geographic market (Rogers in the east and Shaw in the west) and get away with it, where’s the CRTC to protect the Canadian citizens? Where’s the competition in that model?
Canwest’s Asper suggested that if they had just implemented fee for carriage and raised monthly subscription fees without telling the consumer they wouldn’t be going through all of this pain and agony. That’s the kind of executive leadership that has taken Canwest-Global into creditor protection and eventually into bankruptcy.
Canwest-Global closed Red Deer’s CHCA TV station because of lack of viewing audience. They claimed a 55% penetration of satellite delivery in the area made it impractical to continue over the air broadcast. Would weak programming from Global’s version of CHCA have had something to do with loss of audience numbers? Ya’ think? Why didn’t they get the channel onto satellite feeds to the area?
CRTC should legislate that satellite carry local and regional stations. Since they don’t pay for the signal anyway, what’s it going to cost them?
Local TV has differing definitions. For Canadian broadcasters it means content they produce – local = Canada. For viewers it means regional coverage and programming from our immediate geographic area – local = Red Deer. What if this same definition was applied to newspapers. No more local papers like the Red Deer Advocate. Just the Toronto Globe and Mail (Red Deer edition?). Too limited a choice? Well then just add the Toronto Star to your list of choices. Still too limited? Then here’s one more – Montreal’s Ce Soir. Lot’s of choice there. Two languages as well! What more do you want?
Cable and satellite companies should stick to distribution of TV like they do with the internet. They provide the pipe that delivers the content. Stay out of content creation and management. Might even be a conflict of interest.
A CRTC spokesperson asked visitors to turn off their phones and other devices being used to live-blog the hearings through channels such as Twitter because they were interfering with the sensitive and delicate communications systems in use at the hall. Ya’ right! Nice try. Sorry but you can’t choke freedom of speech in today’s web connected world. Note to CRTC – get with the times. This is how news is reported in the 21st Century! Underwood typewriters and telex machines aren’t used anymore.
The CRTC started all of this fee for carriage nonsense back in the ’70s when they asked broadcasters to fore-go fees in order that fledgling cable companies could gain a foothold. The CRTC has to deal with it now and not pass the buck. Oh wait – they have. Twice they have passed a ruling saying no to fee for carriage. Why don’t the broadcasters just let go and look for other models? Billions of dollars in revenue may be the reason.
At least the folks from Canwest-Global were honest and open when the CRTC panel asked them if they would apply the revenue from fee for carriage to support local TV stations. They said no!
Those are just some of my random thoughts on the hearings. Curious to know what you think . . . leave a comment below.
BTW: many of the tweets coming out from the hearings are re-tweets of someone else’s comment or opinions. A lot of noise? Not really. It’s easy to scroll through repetitive tweets that are only 140 characters long versus redundant newspaper articles which are 400 – 800 words long. The good thing about re-tweets is that the message jumps from one network of followers to the next. You tell two people. They each tell two people. And on and on it will go. That’s the magic of the new online communication culture.
Dean
