Quora is one of several highly-popular social media companies, including Groupon and LivingSocial, that is absolutely white-hot at the moment, and attracting a ton of user, media, and investor interest. But is all this interest translating into increases in user sign-ups, of which we count ourselves as one of them)? O.K., technically, we're not brand new to Quora, as we began using it several months ago, but we're still interested in this subject to see how Quora's subscriber growth mirrors that of other social media firms. And, by the way, you can follow us and check out are contributions on Quora by visiting here.
As it turns out, Quora is not just a social question-and-answer site where users just ask and respond to questions of all sorts. According to this study by KISSmetrics and Semil Shah, some subscribers vote on answers, while some users send private messages to other users based on similar interests and activities.
For a full rundown on how Quora users are utilizing the site, check out this cool infographic:
It will be interesting to monitor Quora's subscribe base and usage patterns over time to see how these metrics change...if at all. However, if the growth and usage arcs of other social media companies are any indicators, we can expect to see several significant changes in the next 6, 12, 18, and 24 months as the Web 3.0 world evolves.
As LinkedIn, the world’s largest professional online network, rapidly closes in on its eighth birthday in May of this year (almost a lifetime for Web-based businesses these days!), the company just surpassed another major, and even more spectacular, milestone yesterday: the 100 million member mark.
Interestingly enough, more than 50% of the company's members come from outside the United States, with one-quarter alone based in Europe (20+ million) and the United Kingdom (5+ million). Nearly 10%, or just over 9 million, are in India. Overall, LinkedIn has members in over 200 countries and territories.
The diversity and accelerated growth in membership are impressive, and certainly represent attractive qualities as the company races toward its highly-anticipated initial public offering (IPO) in 2012. Another big sign of growth? LinkedIn started off 2011 with nearly 1,000 full-time employees located all around the globe, up from around 500 at the beginning of 2010.
To commemorate the membership milestone, LinkedIn produced the following infographic which details interesting membership figures and demographics. Check it out by clicking on the image for a larger view:
Keep your eye on LinkedIn over the next 12 months as it prepares to go public. The company has been introducing features and services left and right for companies and individual professionals, and it promises even more to come. And as Facebook continues to focus more on consumers than businesses, LinkedIn may become the de facto social media outlet for companies of all sizes.
Following the recent collective investment of $500 million in Facebook by Goldman Sachs and Russian investment firm Digital Sky Technologies, there has been an onslaught of media coverage, as well as a ton of discussion in the blogosphere and Twitterverse, asking the $64,000 (well, let's add about six zeroes to that for accuracy) question: what is Facebook really worth?
Estimates about Facebook's valuation are all over the map, even those by so-called industry insiders and deeply-informed financial analysts, and range from a modest $15 billion to the more widely-reported figure last week of $50 billion. The broad spectrum of forecasts has been fueled by widespread speculation concerning the timing and scope of Facebook's future initial public offering (IPO), rumored to occur some time in 2012, and Goldman Sachs' recent offering of private shares in the social networking company to its preferred clients. An editorial in my hometown newspaper, the Ventura County Star, even compared the $50 billion valuation, which the author felt was outrageous and unfounded, to the heady days of the dot-com era when many companies were both overvalued and unprofitable.
I wouldn't go that far. While $50 billion may be a stretch, Facebook is the real deal and is here to stay — it warrants a multi-billion-dollar valuation. Here's why. Based on reports last week in the Wall Street Journal, and according to individuals with knowledge of Goldman Sachs’ offering to investors, Facebook generated net income of $200 million on revenue of $777 million in 2009. While revenue and net income figures for 2010 have not been disclosed as of this writing, multiple financial analysts and tech insiders collectively estimate Facebook’s 2010 revenue to be approximately $2 billion, driven primarily by tremendous growth in its online advertising business. Indeed, this is a far, far cry from the dot-com days, when so many companies had ZERO revenue or products on the market, and it's certainly nothing to sneeze at. But $50 billion, 25 times last year’s revenue? No way!
More than likely, based on revenue and growth rates right now, and augmented by conservative forecasts regarding its future operations, Facebook is legitimately worth $10-15 billion at the present time. There's no doubt that, like the Google IPO in 2004, the company can command a multiple of 2-4 times this in the equity markets once it becomes public. But is CEO Mark Zuckerberg, and TIME's Person of the Year for 2010, willing to withstand the Securities and Exchange Commission's ongoing scrutiny? Only time will tell.
And speaking of time, let's take a look at how Facebook's valuation has changed since its founding in 2004, as reported in this great piece by TechCrunch. Click on the image for a larger view of the rising curve:
The Wall Street Journal has a slightly different take on these figures in this story, which also analyzes the fluctuations in Twitter's valuation since 2006.
This will definitely be a situation to keep close tabs on, particularly since hot social media companies, such as Groupon, continue to generate huge venture capital investments and are constantly eyeing billion-dollar IPOs and exit strategies.
Yesterday, CMAC President and CEO Keith R. Pillow once again co-hosted the nationally-syndicated radio show, "The Business of Life," with host and creator Coach Ron Tunick from 4:00 - 6:00 p.m. PST. The show is heard locally in Ventura County on KKZZ-AM 1400; nationwide on dozens of affiliate stations; and online through "The Business of Life" Website.
Additionally, Keith was the featured guest from 5:30 - 6:00 p.m. PST, during which he discussed marketing strategies for small businesses.
In addition to his radio show, Coach Tunick is also a successful entrepreneur, business executive, motivational speaker, and best-selling author. Currently, he is president and CEO of Nations Transaction Services, Inc. in Newbury Park, California. Drawing from a successful background in finance, banking, sales, and management, Coach Tunick helps companies grow and thrive through positive business practices which he discusses as a sought-after speaker and in his book, The Thinking Room: A New System for Success.
Here's another interesting look at current Twitter usage statistics, which continue to shift as rapidly as the site's traffic and user base growth rates.
Do you think you're located in one of America's top tweeting states? Well, that's exactly the question that HubSpot sought to answer when analyzing the latest data from its Twitter Grader tool. The following findings were reported yesterday in this post on AllTwitter.com, MediaBistro's unofficial Twitter resource. Take a look at the map below, and see how your state fared against others in the nation.
The infographic attaches a percentage to each state based on how much higher, or lower, its tweet rate is compared to the national average. The top three states, as indicated by the map, are Massachusetts, Washington, and Oregon. All three states used Twitter more than 60% more than the national average, with leader Massachusetts at 69%.
The research also reviewed the top gainers, states that experienced the most growth in Twitter usage from 2009-2010 compared to the national average. Based on this date, the fastest-growing state over the past year was Utah at 66%.
Click on the map to view a larger version of the graphic:
Even though we're only four days into 2011, amazingly insightful research regarding Twitter usage and demographic statistics continues to pour in from all corners of the globe. Case in point: the recently-released results of a joint study by Harvard and Northeastern University which tracked the nation's tweets minute-by-minute over the last three years to determine precisely what their mood is at various time of the day.
A waste of time, you think? Perhaps not. The research revealed that Americans are happiest in the morning and late evening, and most depressed on Thursday afternoons. Interestingly enough, Americans are happiest on Sunday mornings, the study found. Some of these variations can be explained by the three-hour difference between the West and East Coasts; essentially, this means that the West Coast is happy three hours after East Coast residents. A detailed analysis of the study can be reviewed in this post on Business Insider.
To summarize their results, Harvard and Northeastern researchers created the following time-lapse video showing a typical day's tweeting activity, with red being grumpy and green being happy:
And the insights don't end there. According to the researchers, several interesting trends can be observed in the data on both daily and weekly bases. Check out the following graphs, as well as the cartogram illustrating state-by-state variations:
Daily Variations Weekly Variations Cartogram For additional insight on Twitter usage statistics, please check out our pre-Christmas post, entitled "The User Demographics And Usage Patterns Of Twitter," which discusses the prestigious Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project's findings that only 8% of American adults that are online are now using Twitter, among other interesting data.
According to the findings of a recent study conducted by the prestigious Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project, only 8% of American adults that are online are now using Twitter. This statistic was widely reported last week by many mainstream media outlets and technology blogs when the study's results were first released, but a deeper analysis of the research reveals some additional..and truly surprising...insights.
Interestingly enough, in the 10-year lifespan of the Pew Internet Project, this is the first time the organization has surveyed users about a single, company-specific online application or activity because the Project's mission is to look generally at online usage patterns rather than at specific brands or technologies.
First, let's take a look at Twitter's current demographics:
As this chart shows, groups notable for their relatively high levels of Twitter use are:
~ Young adults: Internet users ages 18-29 are significantly more likely to use Twitter than older adults. ~ African-Americans and Latinos: Minority Internet users are more than twice as likely to use Twitter as are white Internet users. ~ Urbanites: Urban residents are roughly twice as likely to use Twitter as rural dwellers. ~ Women and the college-educated are also slightly more likely than average to use the service.
Secondly, how are all these groups ACTUALLY utilizing Twitter? Check out this great chart which compares the frequency of different activities. The service is primarily used for posting personal updates, although 62% post work updates and just over 50% of all Twitter users share news stories and communicate directly with others users via direct message:
So what does all this mean? Even with all the hype and buzz surrounding Twitter as a micro-blogging platform, and its willingness to be embraced by techies, politicos, professional athletes, recording artists, film and TV actors, and many other individuals, the service has much room for improvement in attracting an ethnically-diverse range of users and compelling them to utilize Twitter in a broader spectrum of ways.
Given the success of and reception to this study, I'm sure we will see follow-up surveys from Pew which will attempt to update these findings. Stay tuned...particularly as Twitter's usage and popularity continue to evolve.
For those keeping score at home, celebrities, professional athletes, and other noteworthy personalities continue to attract record numbers of Facebook and Twitter followers, as well as YouTube viewers. It's hard to believe that, in today's day and age, music artists such as Lady Gaga, Justin Bieber, and Britney Spears can garner more followers and eyeballs than other, and seemingly far more important, individuals such as President Barack Obama, Warren Buffett, or Nancy Pelosi. It's both impressive and mind boggling...all at the same time.
Need more proof? As reported today by Mashable and countless other print, broadcast, and online media outlets, Lady Gaga's YouTube viewership (i.e., total views of all her videos on the service) has just hit the 1 billion views milestone, with Bieber a close second at just over 962 million views. The Fame Monster announced the news via her Twitter stream this morning, as can be seen below:
Bieber is expected to hit the 1 billion mark on November 1. Incidentally, Bieber still holds the the record for the most-viewed YouTube video of all time for his smash hit song “Baby,” which has 366.5 million views as of this morning:
Need more evidence that proofreading is absolutely paramount in the marketing and communications process? Then look no further than this gem, which I snapped with my BlackBerry several weeks ago:
This lousy, unprofessional banner was placed in the storefront window of a new computer repair retail location situated in a local shopping center I frequent a great deal. At the time, the store had not opened yet. I even called the number listed on the banner to offer the owner my services prior to the grand opening, but I never received a response. The obvious questions: how could the owner miss such a glaring mistake, and how did the banner manufacturer not catch this before producing it????
Interestingly enough, when I returned to the store a week and a half later, the offending error had been painted over in a non-matching shade of yellow, and new copy, outlined in black electrical tape, was in its place. How professional...
The moral of the story, beyond the simple need to proofread for idiotic spelling and grammatical errors? If you're going to spend the money to create any form of advertisement or piece of marketing collateral, such as this banner, please make sure it is professionally produced and manufactured. And if you make a mistake, don't cover it up with paint and electrical tape; simply make a brand new one! Argh...
Unfortunately, nothing can derail a marketing campaign faster than a major typographical error, a regrettable breach of etiquette, the incorrect translation of a foreign language, or some other noteworthy faux pas. And in the social media age, where such errors can go viral in a matter of seconds and almost instantly gain worldwide notoriety, the potential embarrassment and humiliation knows no bounds, either culturally or geographically.
Marketing and public relations textbooks are filled with famous examples of mistakes like these. Now, enter Exhibit #Gazillion, and the next addition to these tomes, courtesy of the redevelopment commission of the city of South Bend, Indiana.
According to WANE-TV, the CBS affiliate in Fort Wayne, Indiana, an embarrassing South Bend digital billboard with a very noticeable spelling error, has been pulled because of the severity of the typo. Situated at the intersection of State Road 23 and Ironwood in South Bend, and installed just this past Thursday, the billboard encouraged people to go to "southbendon.com" to review the "15 best things about our PUBIC schools." Obviously it was supposed to say "public", but the "l" was left out. A photo of the billboard follows below:
Inexplicably (and ironically), WANE-TV's sister station, WSBT-TV, reports that four people from the Blue Waters Group, the ad agency responsible, actually proofread the copy before the billboard went up, and the mistake got by all of them. There's no comment from any of the principals involved on EXACTLY how such a noticeable error slipped through the cracks on an ad with hardly ANY text. Unacceptable!
Click here if you'd like to view the WANE-TV news segment on this story...
Editor's Note: The following is a well-written guest blog post from Katie Delahaye Paine, chief executive officer of KDPaine & Partners, LLC, a New Hampshire-based research consultancy that provides public relations (PR) measurement and accountability for corporations, non-profits, and government agencies worldwide. This article first appeared in The Measurement Standard, a monthly newsletter published by Paine, and generally regarded as the world's first and most comprehensive PR measurement publication.
__________________________________________________
Despite the best laid plans, public relations measurement programs can sometimes go awry. You can't always anticipate how everything will go, and your elegant research design rarely seems to play out quite as you planned. Let's face it, unforeseen problems and errors can creep in, and part of your job is to figure out how to get the job done anyway.
But there are certain errors your program just won't survive. These mistakes will ruin your data or analysis and leave you with no options but to learn an expensive lesson and start over. Here are 10 fatal research errors to avoid:
1. Clipping systems that miss clips. We won't name names, but you should regularly test your provider. Do what we call a "Pub/Month" check: Look back over the statistics for the last year and see on average how many articles you get in your key publications. If you are below that for the current month, or if you have zero clips for the month, someone's probably missing your clips.
2. Dirty data from your content provider. This means errors like not differentiating between nytimes.com and The New York Times. Again, check the data on a monthly basis to make sure that it includes what it's supposed to.
3. Bad circulation figures (impressions). It doesn't matter if it's off by 10 or even 100. But we've seen cases where providers have moved commas and made the NY Times circulation 14 million instead of 1.4 million. Do a reality check.
4. Corporate articles that end up in product categories and vice versa. This needs to be checked monthly or even weekly for the first six months to make sure that it reflects reality.
5. An unclear definition of tonality. Ask three people what a positive article is and you'll get three different answers. We define it as "leaves the reader more likely to do business with, invest in, or go to work for the company." How you define it is your own business, just make sure it's consistent.
6. An unclear understanding of key messages. Again, do a monthly reality check.
7. Not comparing apples to apples in a competitive analysis. This includes errors like looking at your own local coverage but not the local coverage of your competition.
8. Not being clear about the universe of publications. Make up a written list of search terms as well as a list of the print/online publications, and social media outlets to be covered.
9. Not having control of the names and mailing list for your survey. Beware of merging lists: You can end up with two surveys in one household just because the middle initial is left off one name but not the other.
10. Not being clear about what social media you want to measure. Are you interested in user reviews, Facebook, Twitter, blogs, Foursquare, or all of the above? Chose the outlets your target audience uses.
Haven't heard of it? That's O.K., because that's not the real title.
I'm actually talking about The Social Network, a major theatrical film scheduled for release just two months from today on October 1, 2010, and directed by critically-acclaimed filmmaker David Fincher. Written by master screenwriter Aaron Sorkin (A Few Good Men, Malice, Charlies Wilson's War, and NBC's "The West Wing"), and adapted from Ben Mezrich's 2009 New York Times best-selling book The Accidental Billionaires, The Social Network is a dramatization of the founding of the global social networking phenomenon Facebook. The film's tag line? Check out the official movie poster below:
The dramedy, distributed by Columbia Pictures, features an ensemble cast, including Jesse Eisenberg, Andrew Garfield, Justin Timberlake, Brenda Song, Rashida Jones, Max Minghella, Rooney Mara, Malese Jow, and Joseph Mazzello. Although no one from Facebook's senior management team, including co-founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg, were involved with the project, one co-founder, Eduardo Saverin (played by Garfield in the film), was a consultant for Mezrich's book. In the film, Eisenberg, who most recently starred opposite Woody Harrelson in last year's Zombieland, portrays Zuckerberg.
Not enough star power for you? Two-time Academy Award-winning actor Kevin Spacey is the film's executive producer, and Nine Inch Nails frontman Trent Reznor, along with partner Atticus Ross, is providing the musical score. And let's not forget Fincher's own impressive directorial resume, which includes Se7en (1995), The Game (1997), Fight Club (1999), Panic Room (2002), and Zodiac (2007). In addition, he received an Academy Award nomination for best director for his 2008 film, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button.
Academy Award-Nominated Director David Fincher
As you would expect, much of the advance hype, and the overall theatrical marketing strategy for the film, have been driven by a plethora of social media and online marketing tactics. The centerpiece of these efforts is a recently-launched Facebook-themed and highly sophisiticated Website, TheSocialNetwork-Movie.com, which opens into a large-form portal with photos, videos and cast information arranged into Facebook-like collage. Naturally, the site maintains the same theme used in the teasers, trailers and TV spots for the film, with words such as “Punk,” “Traitor” and “Genius” displayed either on their own or overlayed over other photographs. Like most online destinations for new films, the site also contains access to cast information, an official synopsis, cast publicity stills, and news stories about the film.
What's interesting about all this, besides the obvious, is how QUICKLY the book has been turned into a completed feature film with major Hollywood talent behind it. If you know Hollywood like I do, it often takes years, sometimes decades, for all the stars to align on a given concept. And the bigger the acting and production names involved, usually the more time it takes, mostly because of existing contracts, previous commitments from the players, and of course, financial support, which is in limited supply these days in The Entertainment Capital of the World.
But the need to move quickly is certainly understandable: worldwide user participation and advertiser and investor interest in Facebook have never been higher, particularly as the company moves toward its highly-anticipated IPO in the next 18 months. As a result, there's no doubt that Columbia Pictures, part of Sony Pictures Studios, wished to leverage all of this interest and activity by purchasing the rights to the book and releasing the film just over one year after the book's release.
And without further adieu, here is the official trailer for the film:
As reported today by Street & Smith's Sports Business Journal, and as summarized in this piece by MediaBistro.com's new online sports media publication, SportsNewser, the NFL's 2010-11 broadcast advertising sales, including spots for all regular-season games televised across the league's five authorized broadcast outlets (i.e., CBS, NBC, ESPN, FOX, and NFL Network) and super-expensive slots for Super Bowl XLV, are nearly sold out -- even though the season does not officially begin until Thursday, September 9.
Considering the lingering effects of the recession on all advertising forms, and the dramatic and widely-reported reductions in sports marketing expenditures over the past 24 months, this is unprecedented news, even for a major sports league as the NFL, long regarded as the most prominent and successful marketing juggernaut in global professional sports.
To date, sales executives at CBS, NBC, ESPN and NFL Network all state that their respective ad inventories are at least 90% sold for the season. FOX Sports verified its regular-season business is more than 95 percent sold, an increase of over 20 percent above last year’s pace, when networks were selling their NFL games in the middle of the worst recession in generations.
Much of the advanced sales have been attributed to the networks' early efforts to move inventory, and to the resurgence of automotive manufacturers, many of which dramatically cut, or altogether elminated, their broadcast advertising budgets in 2009. According to Neil Mulcahy, FOX’s executive vice president of sports sales, "Sales levels heading into this season, led by a resurgent auto category, have exceeded our best expectations. In addition to autos, we’ve seen year-to-year growth in almost every category we do business with."
Even more impressively, FOX Sports, according to sources, will enter the 2010 season with nearly all of its ad inventory already sold for Super Bowl XLV, to be played in Cowboys Stadium for the first time on February 6, 2011. Most of the remaining Super Bowl spots are in the fourth quarter. What makes this so unbelievable? FOX Sports is securing approximately $3 million for a stand-alone 30-second spot, though most of the spots are sold as larger packages. While much is made each year about the scope and expense of new ads debuting during the Super Bowl broadcast, it is unfathomable to think that this many brands are making such large-scale commitments more than six months out, and without any visibility whatsoever as to which teams (and their DMA markets) will be represented in the big game. Wow.
The broader implication of all this is best summarized by Ed Erhardt, president of customer marketing and sales at ESPN:
“The story to me is that the NFL is the No. 1 entertainment brand in the country. Advertisers are going to go where there’s an audience and passion and live viewing, and NFL and college football have that.”
With just under two weeks to go until the aggressively-promoted official start of the 2010 National Football League (NFL) season, and with exactly one week until my own fantasy football league's draft in Las Vegas, these two converging forces prompted me to be contemplate exactly HOW ubiquitous fantasy sports has become over the past two decades, and more specifically, HOW extensively the fantasy football genre has grown in recent years. Simply stated, fantasy football is BOTH an integrated marketing and content development success story whose sports, societal, and cultural significance cannot be ignored or underrated. Having said that, let's look at this sports phenomenon more closely.
Frankly, ever-expanding interest in fantasy football, and the subsequent explosion in print, online, broadcast, and social media content over the past 10 years, can be attributed to the tremendous investments by media companies, and a host of smaller providers, to produce and distribue intelligent information, products, and online vehicles which cater to insightful, discerning participants clamoring for higher-quality information that can be consumerd across multiple technology platforms. If that sounds like a mouthful, you're right...it is...but it is absolutely true. And there would be no supply for any of these products without sufficient demand, of which there is plenty. Without question, fantasy football is not just big business; it's GINORMOUS business.
According to the latest estimates and consumer research from the Fantasy Sports Trade Association (FSTA), a professional organization formed in 1997 to serve as the authorized voice for and official advocate of the industry, there are approximately 30 million fantasy sports participants currently in the United States and Canada. More impressively, those individuals spend almost $4 billion annually on league registration and transaction fees, print and online magazine subscriptions, software applications, "insider" scounting reports, and other related products and services. Of those nearly 30 million individuals, approximately 85%, or about 23 million, play fantasy football, with total spending alone in the fantasy football arena estimated to be between $800 million and $1 billion each year. The numbers, which are staggering, represent a doubling of the market since 2005 which saw only 12 million fantasy football players enter leagues around the country.
Beyond the sheer size of this audience and its impressive annual purchasing power, the real catalyst behind fantasy football's growth, and the vast amount of marketing dollars invested in the category, is its highly-desirable consumer demographics. As outlined by both the FTSA and The Fantasy Football Times, a popular Web site offering player news and analysis, consider the following consumer behavior statistics:
~ The typical participant spends a minimum of $200 per year on fantasy football. ~ On average, fantasy football players devote at least 30 minutes per day, and 3-4 hours per week, managing their teams. Somes estimated claim the weekly total is much as nine hours. ~ The core age group is 12-48, with 25-34 containing the greatest number of players. ~ Average fantasy football players' household income from $60-100,000 per year. ~ Gender breakdown: 93% male, although the number of females is growing. ~ Ethnicity: 91% white. ~ Age: 13% are teenagers. ~ Education: 70% have a bachelor's degree or higher. ~ Football Fanatics: 50% claim to be diehard football fans.
What does all this mean? The profile of fantasy football players represents a group that has been historically, and notoriously, been a very difficult one to reach. As a result, high-profile consumer brands such as General Motors, SprintNextel, Verizon, Goodyear, and Papa John's are dumping millions of dollars into advertising, promotional, and social media support for fantasy football products such as TV shows, scouting magazines, Web sites, and online games. The attraction is best summed by Chris Russo, senior vice president of new media and publishing for the NFL, in this great piece from 2005 in USA Today: "It's the most attentive audience that you're going to get. These people aren't just spending five minutes on the Web site. They're going on the Web site and spending an hour and a half."
And the marketing implications for fantasy football now go much further, especially with the explosion of social media platforms and their usage by consumers. In a MediaPostop-ed which generated a ton of attention just prior to the start of last year's NFL season, Catalyst President and Managing Director Cory Treffiletti wrote:
Without a doubt, fantasy football is the most perfect example of integrated marketing in existence today. It marries the best of online marketing and social media with real-world events and that most basic of human traits: pure, unbridled competitiveness.
While marketers and sports sites are thrilled with fantasy football players' dedication to the category, other businesses — where the fantasy players work — may be less happy. Almost two-thirds of fantasy football players say they check their fantasy teams online during work, FSTA says. According to new estimates from outplacement company Challenger Gray & Christmas, it costs companies nationwide over $250 million for every 10 minutes of the workday that employees spend on fantasy football.
Finally, if you ever wondered how the magical world of fantasy sports got its start, I highly recommend viewing ESPN'sdocumentary on the genre, entitled "Silly Little Game, which innovative filmmakers Adam Kurland and Lucas Jansen developed for the network's critically-acclaimed "30 For 30" series. You can also view this well-reviewed installment of the series below:
Oh, and more thing: please wish me luck next week at my draft in Vegas. I am drafting eighth out of 14 teams, which is not a very strong draft position. I'll need all the help I can get!
The hits just keep on coming for beleagured BP, which continues to fumble its management of the public relations fallout from the ongoing oil spill crisis in the Gulf of Mexico. And it only has itself to blame for these ridiculous blunders, which look they they're coming from some novice, early-stage start-up rather than a huge multinational, billion-dollar corporation with seemingly endless resources.
In its latest gaffe, and as first reported by AMERICAblog, and then subsquently picked up by MSNBC, the Washington Post, Gizmodo, and other blogs, BP deliberately, and rather amateurishly, used PhotoShop to digitally alter a July 16 image of its Houston command center, and then released the modified photo to media outlets worldwide without proper disclosure.
According to Washington Post reporter Steve Mufson, "A blogger...noticed that the oil giant altered a photograph of its Houston crisis room, cutting and pasting three underwater images into a wall of video feeds from remotely operated undersea vehicles." The Gizmodo story actually reveals specifically where the alterations were made, and even more disturbingly, that its metadata clearly show the original image was captured all the way back in 2001. Here is a composite of the altered and unaltered image:
As if this is not enough, AMERICAblog further reported today in a follow-up that BP has faked ANOTHER photo on its Web site, this one of its "top kill" initiative last month to stop the spill. Check out the story here. The lead on this story sums it all up: "It's starting to look like Capricorn One over at BP," a humorous reference to the famous 1978 film starrring Elliott Gould and James Brolin about a Mars landing hoax.
Mufson hits the nail on the head in his lead, "Apparently BP is no more adept at doctoring photos than it is at plugging deep-sea oil leaks." And adding perspective, as well as accurate insult to injury in his piece on MSNBC, Wilson Rothman writes:
Though the command center alteration doesn't seem to be an attempt to hide facts or confuse the public, it heightens skepticism for the company at a time when it should be trying to build trust. As the AMERICAblog reporter John Aravosis wrote, 'I guess if you're doing fake crisis response, you might as well fake a photo of the crisis response center.'
Even more compelling is Flowtown's data on how these outlets' stories are shared, precisely which stories are being shared, and who their biggest influencers are. Dig deep into the the company's graphical analysis to see what I'm talking about.
For example, MC Hammer is one of Mashable's and The Huffington Post's biggest influencers, while Mariah Carey shares New York Times content a great deal. Entertainment blogger Perez Hilton is all over this study; how does he have time to share this much information?
Neither Marketing Mulligans nor CMAC claims credit for any of the images featured on this blog, unless otherwise noted. All visual content and guest blog posts are the intellectual property of their respective owners. In addition, all brands mentioned in this forum are either trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners.
In no way, shape, or form is the author or company responsible for, or have control over, the content of any external links listed on this blog. Please note that information here may contain errors or inaccuracies, although the author endeavors to make all content on this blog as factual and as accurate as possible. As a result, the proprietor does not make any warranties as to the correctness or reliability of the site's content. If you own rights to any of the images or written content used here and wish to have it removed, please contact CMAC as soon as possible.
Academy Award-Nominated Director David Fincher
Posts
