Another principle is that advertisers should clearly distinguish advertising, public relations and corporate communications from news and editorial content and entertainment. Particularly amid growing numbers of media sources and use of brand integration in entertainment, it’s a line that’s often hard to distinguish, Mr. Snyder said.
“If consumers are unaware the ‘news’ or ‘entertainment’ they are viewing actually is advertising, they are being misled and treated unethically,” the IAE commentary states.
[via Andy Russell on the YPRP listserv.]
March 2011
93 posts
There are corporations in this nation, some of the biggest corporations in this nation, who do not pay taxes.
It is not that they are cheating. It is not that they are doing something wrong. We have given them tools.
” —Rep. Marcia Fudge (D—OH), passes PolitiFact’s fact-check treatmentI’m currently drinking coffee and staring out a window. Ask me a question!
I think this is our first fight, Edith Zimmerman.
That small house is awesome. I’m more impressed with a 300 square-foot space that’s functional and livable than I am with a 3,000 square foot space that’s roomy and wasteful. Anyways, tiny house lol etc.
The fast-moving events that have ousted long-standing dictators in both Tunisia and Egypt are a wake-up call to global companies that they may not have been paying sufficient attention to yet another kind of risk—this time, political.
“I wouldn’t say that it’s a matter of companies having ignored political risk,” says Roger Schwartz, national political lead at Aon Crisis Management. Companies have just been self-insuring themselves on political risk, he adds. “I think that after Tunisia and Egypt, they may be reassessing their exposure and reassessing that approach.”
This is particularly true for American companies, Schwartz says. “As a rule, European companies have been more proactive about insuring against political risk. American firms have tended to take a more roll-of-the-dice attitude of dealing with things when they happen.”
“Are we in a bubble? Yes, this is a bubble. All the frenzied startup activity and still the VCs raise more money to invest. … it’s also like the housing boom where everyone could be a home owner. In 2011 every young person can be an entrepreneur, esp if he or she knows how to code. That’s the bubble, right there.”
— Scripting News: The limits of Twitter and Facebook, the bubble (via razorsharp)
Wrong. The total amount of money going into early stage isn’t more than the size of one small VC fund. And VC funds disappear regularly.
The real danger is in the sale of private company shares in the secondary market. SecondMarket alone will do $1B in private company share transactions this year. That’s a sucker’s market, where you’re buying stuff you don’t understand but you think you do (Twitter, Facebook). It’s like buying stock in Ford because you drive a car.
Make no mistake there’s a battle raging for the soul of new media. Not the clichéd war between print and Web or between Silicon Valley and New York, but rather a series of internal battles being fought within nearly every publication. It’s the battle between journalism and churnalism.
On on side are things like Demand Media, The Aol Way and the seduction of cheap hackery that is designed simply to generate easy page views and to help investors to sleep at night. On the other side is stodgy, snobby, old-school journalism which needs to find a new online home if it’s to survive the decade. The latter carries with it the seduction of everything Woodward and Bernstein – and is the only way to really build a media franchise that stands for something and can demand Vanity Fair-like ad premiums.
No company represents this tug of war more ably than our overlords at Aol, to the point where sometimes the battle rages within a single soldier. No sooner had ad sales guru turned CEO Tim Armstrong laid out his SEO-centric “Way”, and renamed the company’s media properties as “towns” ruled by “mayors” than he pulled an apparent 180, acquiring the Huffington Post and naming its founder Arianna Huffington as head of all content.
In a surprise move late Wednesday, Senate Republicans used a series of parliamentary maneuvers to overcome a three-week stalemate with Democrats and pass the governor’s controversial budget repair bill.
With a crowd of protesters chanting outside their chambers, Senators approved an amended version of Gov. Scott Walker’s bill, which would strip most collective bargaining rights from public employees.
The new bill removes all fiscal elements of the proposal, but still curbs collective bargaining and increases employee payments for pension and health benefits.
After the session, Senate Republicans scattered, answering no questions. But Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald said in a release, “Enough is enough.”
But no one could explain Wednesday how the Senate managed to pass components of the original bill that seemed to have fiscal elements, including changes in pensions and benefits.
Fitzgerald’s spokesman, Andrew Welhouse, said Republicans were following the advice of their legal counsel, who advised them which parts of the bill could be passed.
The move ended a bizarre two-and-a-half hour stretch of state government in which the Senate surprised everyone by gaveling in quickly and passing the governor’s bill into a conference committee, scheduled for less than two hours later.
The word quickly spread that the Republicans were planning to ram the measure through in committee, by stripping the fiscal elements of the bill. Within an hour, the rotunda began to fill with angry protesters, while an even larger crowd gathered outside the building.
The conference committee lasted less than 15 minutes, and featured an angry speech by State Rep. Peter Barca, D-Kenosha, who accused the Republicans of violating the state’s open meeting law.
Moments later, the Senate adopted the bill, 18-1, with only Sen. Dale Schultz, R-Richland Center, voting no. The Assembly is expected to take up the measure at 11 a.m. Thursday.
Remember, after heath care passed, how tea party protesters broke into the Capitol and handcuffed the doors closed so no police could get in, while yelling about how they were taking their government back? No? That’s right, because it didn’t happen. But the very thought is terrifying, right?
Here, it’s worth mentioning that Tea Party supporters have some better options than public demonstrations at their disposal to further their legislative goals. I hear one of those options is the corporate treasury of a sprawling, privately held and well-capitalized conglomerate based in Wichita, Kansas.
Is there a progressive equivalent to Koch Industries?
They removed the “budget-repair” part. The reason the Democrats left the state to begin with is because Wisconsin’s upper chamber can’t pass any fiscal bills without 3/5 of the members present, according to Senate rules. With the Democrats missing, Republicans lacked that 3/5 quorum, and couldn’t hold a vote. So, they simply stripped all fiscal provisions from the bill, eliminating the need for a 3/5 quorum, and passed it that way. What makes this extraordinarily slimy is that Governor Walker has insisted from the beginning that the bill’s purpose was to fix the state’s fiscal situation. Now, he and the Wisconsin GOP are implicitly admitting what everyone’s known all along: the bill wasn’t about fixing the budget. It was actually about busting up the unions. Good luck spinning the PR, Walker. You’ve done a bang-up job so far. source
totally sickening. all the “it’s for budget reasons” was a sham they’re willing to dump entirely? sickening. revolting. disgusting. shameful.