Google Adsense

Watchdog Group Takes Google to Task in Times Square

Written on September 2, 2010 by admin

Filed Under: Advertising, book, marketing

Consumer Watchdog’s InsideGoogle.com has something to say about Google’s disrespect for people’s privacy and they’re saying it at one of the busiest intersections in the world.

The group has purchased advertising space on a 540 sq ft Jumbotron in Times Square and they’re using it to blast Google’s CEO Eric Schmidt. The animated feature is called “Don’t be Evil?” and shows cartoon Schmidt spying on children from the innocent trappings of an ice cream truck.

In a press release, Jamie Court, president of Consumer Watchdog said;

“We’re satirizing Schmidt in the most highly trafficked public square in the nation to make the public aware of how out of touch Schmidt and Google are when it comes to our privacy rights.”

The ad asks people to text the word Evil to 69866 to show their support. I guess “666″ wasn’t available.

“Don’t be evil” is Google’s unofficial corporate motto, but Consumer Watchdog says that Google isn’t doing a good job keeping the mounds of personal data they collect private.

Court says that Schmidt himself is clueless when it comes to privacy and quotes him as saying,

“If you have something that you don’t want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn’t be doing it in the first place.”

Then there’s this, from a recent Wall Street Journal interview;

“[Schmidt] predicts, apparently seriously, that every young person one day will be entitled automatically to change his or her name on reaching adulthood in order to disown youthful hijinks stored on their friends’ social media sites.

“I mean we really have to think about these things as a society,” he adds. “I’m not even talking about the really terrible stuff, terrorism and access to evil things.”

Really? When I started writing about this sign in Times Square I thought it was overkill. Now, I’ve now changed my mind.

John M. Simpson, director of the group’s Inside Google Project, suggests a “Do Not Track Me” list that would keep Google, or anyone from tracking your moves online.

According to a poll conducted on behalf of InsideGoogle.com, 80% of people in the US supported such a list. They also like the idea of an “anonymous button” that allows individuals to stop anyone from tracking their online searches or purchases and a ban on collecting data on minors.

All good ideas, but implementation and enforcement would be very difficult. The trouble is, it’s not just Google who is collecting and / or spreading private data. Schmidt was right about one thing when he mentioned the “youthful hijinks stored on their friends’ social media sites,” and then there are the drunken Facebook updates and the obscenity-filled blog post aimed at your ex.

Maybe, before we go throwing stones at Google, we should be looking at how much information we ourselves put online for all to see.

Not passing by Times Square anytime soon? You can watch the ad on YouTube.

Go here to see the original:
Watchdog Group Takes Google to Task in Times Square

Is There Any Room in Retail for the Small Business?

Written on September 2, 2010 by admin

Filed Under: Advertising, book, marketing

At least once a week, my husband laments the loss of a mom & pop record store we had near our home. They carried mostly used albums and rock and roll memorabilia and a visit there was like hunting for treasure on the beach. If we go to eBay, we can find all those same albums and more but it simply isn’t the same as flipping through stacks of worn cardboard and finding a gem you didn’t even know existed.

It’s a sad fact that the small business is rapidly becoming a thing of the past. comScore is reporting that small business is down 5.6% over last year with those dollars going to the big box retailers we drive by every day. Usually we blame it on the economy, but the big boys are seeing a rise in profits, so why aren’t the mom and pop stores seeing it, too?

The National Federation of Small Businesses (NFIB) says that a poor economy forces prices down and small retailers simply can’t afford to take the same cuts as a Walmart or Target. The Gap can put a 50% off deal on Groupon but what’s a pet shop owner in Sheboygan to do?

Since small businesses can’t compete on price point, they need to compete in other ways such as service and community. Cake companies that create one of a kind masterpieces stand head and shoulders over anything you can buy at Costco. I have a clothing store that I return to again and again because the staff there takes the time to help me put together a look and they’re honest about what works and doesn’t. Try getting that kind of service at Walmart.

Creating a sense of community is also important for the small business. Sponsoring a local sports team, donating to local charities, participating in community fairs and events all help sway customers your way. We have a small chocolate shop that offers free candy making classes for kids once a month. The kids may burn through a few dollars in supplies but while they wait, moms consume coffee and snacks at full price.

When it comes to advertising, social media is the great leveler. Twitter and Facebook are virtually free to use and small companies don’t have to worry about jumping through legal hoops before making a statement online. Now that everyone is going “local” with Foursquare and Facebook Places, it’s the perfect time for small businesses to step up and get customers.

Do you have a favorite small business that is no more? Tell us about it.

Excerpt from:
Is There Any Room in Retail for the Small Business?

Is BP Just Trying To Buy Its Reputation Back With Advertising?

Written on September 2, 2010 by admin

Filed Under: Advertising, Object, book, marketing

Because it is our nature to do such things, most of the world has moved on from the anger or whatever was experienced during the BP Deepwater Horizon oil mess in the Gulf of Mexico. There are still pockets of activism but the mainstream has started to flush that story out of its faulty and extremely short-termed memory and is moving on to something that is deemed more current and important like maybe politics (Oh, please God help us!).

In the wake of this waning uproar it looks like BP is working hard to put its reputation back together and a big part of that is the amount of advertising spend they have put into the stream.

The Wall Street Journal reports

BP PLC spent more than $93 million on newspaper advertisements and TV spots in the weeks following the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, paying out three times as much money on ads as it did during the same time last year, according to the U.S. House Energy and Commerce Committee.

BP also expanded the scope of its marketing efforts in newspapers during that time, running ads in 17 states—including Florida, Louisiana, Alabama and Mississippi—up from just two states last year.

Of course, these activities have gained the attention of headline grabbing politicians who need some press leading up to the November showdown. Regardless of why, this kind of ‘marketing’ is part of the new normal course of action in how to repair a broken reputation that may not have much left in the tank (pun intended). So what is all this ad spend really for?

“Our objective has been to create informational advertising to assure people that we will meet our commitments and tell them how they can get help—especially claims,” said BP spokesman Scott Dean. “It is an important tool to help us be transparent about what we are doing.”

Not everyone is buying that explanation though.

Some lawmakers, however, are more suspicious of BP’s motives. Florida Democrat Kathy Castor, for example, was among the first representatives to take an interest in BP’s ad spending and believes the company is merely trying to burnish its image.

“She has been concerned by all the advertising showing BP polishing its corporate image,” said a spokeswoman for Ms. Castor.

Here’s my question. Because of the moral uproar that all of this mess caused and the hyper sensitivity of people in general when there is a ’cause du jour’, coupled with the new activism (I “Liked” it on Facebook so I participated! Yeah!), should there be any concern about who is taking the advertising money that is being spent to repair the damage?

I am not trying to create something out of nothing. I think it is a reasonable question to ask what outlets are taking this BP money gladly and not caring that it could be aiding and abetting the very ‘criminal’ it was trying to hang just a few short months ago.

I hope we are paying attention here. With the “if it bleeds it leads” mentality that the press takes there is a business reason for it. It sells ads. The news is the means to an end. The end being revenue in a time where it has been tougher to come by than maybe ever in history.

This unnatural and unseemly relationship between those who pay for advertising and those who have decided that human misery is always the lead story is heading in a new direction. Could it be that the media is just fine with feeding their revenue streams from diametrically opposed ends of the same issue?

The company that one day creates news by trashing the Gulf is the same company that is shelling out dollars to make reputation related amends. All that money all ends up with the same media that is supposedly reporting it (not benefiting from it). If that’s not a system that is designed to be abused and bled dry every day then there never will be one.

Maybe there is no sense in questioning this because I bet dollars to donuts that not one of the media outlets will turn down BP advertising money that is designed to make the company whole after it was torn to shreds by these very same people who ‘report’ the news (without any bias Ha!).

This dysfunctional yet symbiotic relationship is something that may be a dilemma for some marketers. Maybe not. So what’s your take? Mountain out of a molehill? Is this really as broken as it looks? As marketers, is there a moral side of our actions or are we just to do whatever it takes to make the bottom line sing? Any thoughts on this one?

View post:
Is BP Just Trying To Buy Its Reputation Back With Advertising?

The Real Cost of Buying Links for SEO: $4 Million

Written on September 1, 2010 by admin

Filed Under: Advertising, book, marketing, seo

I was reading a copy of the Inc. 500 issue on my flight back from Dallas this weekend and came across an article about a seasonal online retailer that was “penalized” right before the Holidays for paid links. He estimated the revenue loss due to plummeting organic search visibility at $4 million in sales.  Now he’s “thanking” Google for the spanking because he’s mended his ways and is reborn as a social media enthusiast.

I’m not sure I buy the “social media has turned things around” story exactly, but I do wonder how many companies and consultants roll the dice and take shortcuts and loopholes to get ahead only to find out later it’s worthless? The notion of paid links is an old story (Paid Links Evil? Dec 2005) but many of the tactics used to shortcut results for SEO will always be a fresh topic of discussion.

It turns out the retailer in the Inc. story was doing SEO internally then hired two SEO companies to help out. The story goes on to say that a SEO company was to “reach out to relevant sites and ask them for links. Instead, one of the companies admitted it was paying for links.”  That’s worded in a way that makes you think maybe the retailer didn’t know the SEO company was buying links.

We don’t buy links at TopRank Marketing.

We never have. Not ever in 10 years of being in the search marketing business. As far as the retailer in the Inc. article, it’s surprising because buying links isn’t cheap.  If a company didn’t know the SEO consultant was buying links, it’s peculiar any way you look at it. Where did the money come from to buy the links? How did the SEO company not report what it was doing? How did the company owner not know what the SEO company was doing?

I polled followers of @leeodden on Twitter whether they or someone they knew knew had ever been penalized for buying links. Almost all of them said yes. When I’ve mentioned that we never buy links to other search marketers, the disbelief was like I told them I didn’t need to breathe air.

The point of relating this story to you isn’t so much about the risks and rewards of paid links, defining exactly what “paid means” (what about a 3 way barter?) or even judging those that sell and buy links. The point is that the online retailer in the story says social media tactics were largely ignored and now they’re committed to blogging, Tweeting and being active on Facebook. He claims all is now well in their SEO world. “We’re back on top.”

The point:  Why didn’t the online retailer commit to a better online marketing strategy in the first place?

It’s been promoted for years that paid links can carry consequences.  People like Google’s Anti-Spam Czar Matt Cutts make their perspective clear and make it easy to report paid links. Right or wrong, it’s the way search engines want to play.  Obviously, paid links with the right anchor text from very authoritative and relevant websites have a positive impact, or SEOs and website owners wouldn’t participate.  It’s important to note that Google doesn’t have a problem with paid links per se, but with paid links that pass PageRank.

The question I have for companies that rely too much on shortcuts and loopholes is, “Why not suspend the “free money now” attitude and invest in a smart and competitive online marketing program that can get results AND stand the test of scrutiny?”  Won’t a customer focused marketing effort that provides optimized and linkable content to a growing social network earn more links, more traffic and more revenue anyway?

I don’t think there’s much reason to put your brand and revenue at risk if you have a long term view of how the search and social web works. The investment in understanding and engaging customers plus the staff, software and time to implement content, analyze performance data and ongoing content marketing is well worth the cost and there’s virtually no risk.

“Don’t bring a sword to a gun fight”

Years ago at a search conference discussion about black hat and white hat tactics, Tim Mayer, ex head of Search at Yahoo! made the comment “”If you’re being entirely organic and going after ‘Viagra,’ it’s like taking a sword to a gunfight. You just aren’t going to rank” when discussing acceptable tactics in really aggressive industries like “PPC” (pills pron casino).

The temptation and pressures to profitability are great in industries that are flush with heavily optimized and marketed web sites.  However, most companies don’t fall in that category and I think smarter and more creative marketing can still win for the vast majority of websites, especially in the long run. We’ve seen it happen with our own clients nearly 10 years.

Why rent when you can own?

The reason I’ve never participated in link purchases or endorsed the practice isn’t as much about Google’s rules on paid links that pass PageRank. It’s because I could never understand why anyone would “buy” something with such risk associated with it when they could “earn it and own it”?   With roots in Public Relations, our online marketing agency has been accustomed to earning media placements and often times highly desirable links since we started the business in 2001. It can take more time to see aggressive results, but when you focus on making creative content and doing the hard work of promotion to earn traffic and links, the cost is one of investment vs. the often higher cost of advertising with no equity in what you’ve purchased. Then there’s the cost if the links are devalued by the search engines and subsequent lost revenue. I’d rather build, promote and earn those links that will be in place indefinitely.

Using that strategy, Online Marketing Blog has accumulated a substantial number and quality of links (according to Majestic SEO). The devil is in the details with this sort of thing of course, since it matters very much what the topic, anchor text and PageRank are of the link sources. But suffice it to say, we experience very good results in each of those areas as evidenced by over 21,000 different keyword phrases that sent organic traffic each month and top visibility for important and challenging keyword queries.

What’s your experience with managing risk with SEO tactics? Have you experienced what the online retailer above went through and focused anew on a sustainable and longer term online marketing strategy?

Gain a competitive advantage by subscribing to the
TopRank

From Clicks to Conversions at the SEOmoz Training Raceway

Written on August 31, 2010 by admin

Filed Under: Advertising, book, marketing, seo

Posted by Dana Lookadoo

This post was originally in YOUmoz, and was promoted to the main blog because it provides great value and interest to our community. The author’s views are entirely his or her own and may not reflect the views of SEOmoz, Inc.

Day 1 of SEOmoz Pro Training was like being at a race track. The course careened from clicks to conversions and from search results to landing pages. The audience watched 9 speakers drive their search marketing race cars at speeds faster than fingers can type. Given the finger-breaking speeds, it was fortunate all SEO fans were well fueled - beginning with a healthy breakfast buffet, mid-morning energy bars, lunch (more all-you-can-eat) and a scrumptious mid-afternoon pit stop with fresh cookies and treats. After everyone was fed each time, it was off to the races.

Todd Freisen was in the sports booth service as emcee, host of ceremonies, referee, judge and time keeper. The event was like a well-oiled machine. Maybe that’s why they call Todd, “Oilman.”

When I said “yes” to attending the Mozinar on a Press Pass, I didn’t realize I was going to be covering a sporting event. GoodNewsCowboy asked me how I was going to recap and condense this “wild ride.” I realized there was a lot of horsepower on-stage and that we were at the SEOmoz Training Raceway.

Mozinar fans experienced exhilaration and gleaned insights as we watched performance race car drivers present their seminar presentations. The following race highlights are condensed from 32 pages of notes. I strongly suggest you buy the Pro Seminar DVD when it’s produced so you can see under the hood for yourself.

From Clicks to Conversions with Local, Social, Analytics and SEO in Between

1st up: Rand Fishkin had pole position and drove a car with a most unusual name, “It’s a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad SERP.”

The results we are seeing in blended search results are even more unusual, starting with changes of the past 2 weeks. For those who attend SEO races regularly and are watching Google, this may be old news. For others, brace yourself. A branded search can have more than 2 results. Rand explained:

• You have to be seen as a brand.
• You have to have lots of links pointing to those pages with the brand name.
• You need to have a high volume set of people searching for those terms, so off-site advertising and media buys can influence the SERPs.

Changes to Image SEO was next, and guess what? Google has a new image search interface.

• Image results don’t always match image SERP’s order, i.e. images for the artist “manet.”
• Understand, and be prepared. You will not always get the same position in the blended results, leading to frustration.
• Image SEO value is reduced by the new overlay.

The image below results from clicking on one of the images for the artist “manet” and clicking on an image

Tip: Write some JavaScript that breaks the overlay to avoid having the image overlay. Not only does it produce the longest, ugliest URL, but “it’s just an invite to right click and steal this image.”

Rand covered 10 Tips for Image Rankings. (Since we are in race synopsis mode, we’ll speed through this.) One quick takeaway was the minimum image size:

Image Pixel Size - If you go smaller than 400×300 pixels your chances to show in image search are dramatically decreased.

So you don’t have to remember any formulas, basic on-page SEO factors for image SEO include page title and surrounding text.

Video SERPs

It’s or easier to get into video SERPs than to get into the regular SERPS. There is lower competition than ordinary results (most of the time), so take the opportunity. Follow this inclusion process to enter your video race for top ranking:

Step #1: Embed Video Content on Your Pages
Step #2: Create Thumbnail Images for Videos
Step #3: Build a Video XML Sitemap & Submit
Step #4: PROFIT $$$

See Google Webmaster Tools for Video to learn more.

Rand’s foot stayed pedal-to-the-metal as he showed how to produce Rich Snippets in the SERPs. Why is this important? This is where you get most of your clicks. His closing remarks were retweeted with fervor:

“If you can stay on top of this, you will have a big win. It demands full-time SEO.”

2nd up: David Mihm was full-speed as he raced through “Ranking in Competitive Local Results.” He explained:

Straight from Google’s mouth:
Local intent is 20% of total search volume (April 2010)

And who would imagine that local results could equal 100% of page 1? Try a search for “dentist chicago.” (If it’s not 100%, it’s close.)

Google organic results are not, however, the dominate factor for local search. Neither are results from Yahoo! or Bing. Local search is now:

• Craigslist
• Twitter
• FaceBook
• Citysearch
• Google Products
• Mobile devices
• Garmin GPS
• Wikipedia
• Virtual Augmented Reality

Understand that local requires a different mindset from traditional SEO, because the ecosystems vary:

• Traditional SEO is about optimizing websites.
• Local SEO is about optimizing locations.

Takeaway:

“It is essential to have a holistic local search marketing strategy.”

“Even if all your boss cares about is that friggin’ 7-pack!”

Resources to claim your listings:

• Google Places
• Bing Local Listing Center
• Yahoo! Local Business Center

“The Big Three” major data providers:

• infoUSA
• Localeze
• Acxiom

Citations - David recommended a new citation finder tool by Darren Shaw & Garrett French: Whitespark.ca Citation Finder

Find local SEO resources on GetListed.org.

3rd up to race: Dan Zarrella racing in the “Science of Twitter” car. Dan warned us he talked fast. Pro Seminar attendees listened attentively, but given the subject was Twitter … many tweeted insights into how one can get clicks and retweets.

PR Agency Settles With FTC Over Fake Reviews

Written on August 30, 2010 by admin

Filed Under: Advertising, Object, book, marketing

Just in case you were wondering there are people out there that are manipulating social media to their advantage. What, you say?! Say it ain’t so! People are always honest when it comes to trying to sell things……right?

Well, of course we all know that trust is a major concern when it comes to social media and the reviews it can generate. Can we trust that the reviewer is being completely objective? Can we trust that the reviewer was not paid to do so or (more innocently?) prodded to do so.

What we can be sure of though is that the FTC (Federal Trade Commission) is paying attention and can get involved to stop such activities even for those few that actually get caught.

The latest story comes from TG Daily

A public relations agency is to settle with the FTC over charges that its staff posed as members of the public to post fake reviews of video games developed by its clients.

Reverb Communications represents a number of games developers, including Harmonix, creator of Rock Band. The company and its owner, Tracie Snitker, were accused of engaging in deceptive advertising by having staff pose as ordinary consumers to post game reviews.

Between November 2008 and May 2009, Reverb and Snitker posted reviews about their clients’ games at the iTunes store using account names that gave readers the impression the reviews were written by impartial consumers, says the FTC.

They didn’t disclose that they were hired to promote the games and that they often received a percentage of the sales.

Ooooops, our bad!

It’s an extremely safe bet to say that this PR agency is not the first and won’t be the last to do such a thing. Doesn’t make it right but it is the reality of our current way of doing business in a social world that believes just about anything. PT Barnum stated famously that there is “ A sucker born every minute” and the those with less than stellar ethics see this as ‘blood in the water’ and a chance to make a killing.

Of course, as any good PR firm would do they denied the charges but since they decided to settle rather than fight the charges it’s pretty much assumed that they got caught with their hand in the social media cookie jar.

Reverb denied the allegations, claiming that while staff had posted reviews, they’d done so after buying the games with their own money and playing them in their own time.

I would recommend in the future though that you don’t release a statement like the one above because no one will believe it. Sorry, that’s just another reality of this social media age we live in.

Of course, if this report is completely on target (and who can be assured of that?) it may have been the best route to take a settlement since it is reported

Under the proposed settlement, Reverb and Snitker are barred from misrepresenting themselves as ordinary consumers, and from endorsing or making claims about a product or service unless they disclose any relevant connections with the seller.

Wow, the FTC is really bearing their teeth and showing how tough they can on this one. As far as penalties go this is just an after school detention kind of punishment which won’t serve as much of a deterrent for others.

Oh well, looks like it’s just best for the rest of the world to rely on that old adage with a new twist – caveat emptor ‘social mediator’.

Join the Marketing Pilgrim Facebook Community

Here is the original post:
PR Agency Settles With FTC Over Fake Reviews

PR Agency Settles With FTC Over Fake Reviews

Written on August 30, 2010 by admin

Filed Under: Advertising, Object, book, marketing

Just in case you were wondering there are people out there that are manipulating social media to their advantage. What, you say?! Say it ain’t so! People are always honest when it comes to trying to sell things……right?

Well, of course we all know that trust is a major concern when it comes to social media and the reviews it can generate. Can we trust that the reviewer is being completely objective? Can we trust that the reviewer was not paid to do so or (more innocently?) prodded to do so.

What we can be sure of though is that the FTC (Federal Trade Commission) is paying attention and can get involved to stop such activities even for those few that actually get caught.

The latest story comes from TG Daily

A public relations agency is to settle with the FTC over charges that its staff posed as members of the public to post fake reviews of video games developed by its clients.

Reverb Communications represents a number of games developers, including Harmonix, creator of Rock Band. The company and its owner, Tracie Snitker, were accused of engaging in deceptive advertising by having staff pose as ordinary consumers to post game reviews.

Between November 2008 and May 2009, Reverb and Snitker posted reviews about their clients’ games at the iTunes store using account names that gave readers the impression the reviews were written by impartial consumers, says the FTC.

They didn’t disclose that they were hired to promote the games and that they often received a percentage of the sales.

Ooooops, our bad!

It’s an extremely safe bet to say that this PR agency is not the first and won’t be the last to do such a thing. Doesn’t make it right but it is the reality of our current way of doing business in a social world that believes just about anything. PT Barnum stated famously that there is “ A sucker born every minute” and the those with less than stellar ethics see this as ‘blood in the water’ and a chance to make a killing.

Of course, as any good PR firm would do they denied the charges but since they decided to settle rather than fight the charges it’s pretty much assumed that they got caught with their hand in the social media cookie jar.

Reverb denied the allegations, claiming that while staff had posted reviews, they’d done so after buying the games with their own money and playing them in their own time.

I would recommend in the future though that you don’t release a statement like the one above because no one will believe it. Sorry, that’s just another reality of this social media age we live in.

Of course, if this report is completely on target (and who can be assured of that?) it may have been the best route to take a settlement since it is reported

Under the proposed settlement, Reverb and Snitker are barred from misrepresenting themselves as ordinary consumers, and from endorsing or making claims about a product or service unless they disclose any relevant connections with the seller.

Wow, the FTC is really bearing their teeth and showing how tough they can on this one. As far as penalties go this is just an after school detention kind of punishment which won’t serve as much of a deterrent for others.

Oh well, looks like it’s just best for the rest of the world to rely on that old adage with a new twist – caveat emptor ‘social mediator’.

Join the Marketing Pilgrim Facebook Community

Read more here:
PR Agency Settles With FTC Over Fake Reviews

PPC Testing Made Easier with AdWords Campaign Experiments

Written on August 27, 2010 by admin

Filed Under: Advertising, marketing, searchengineguide

by Mike Fleming

If you take your PPC campaigns seriously (why wouldn’t you?), you’re always testing.

Mobile Marketing at the Mall: An Interview with Sam Feuer of FastMall

Written on August 26, 2010 by admin

Filed Under: Advertising, marketing

The Mall of America has 4.2 million square feet of gross building space, 4.3 miles of storefront footage, 520 stores and 40 million visitors annually. Now try to remember where you parked, let alone find a bathroom when you need one. Sam Feuer, CEO of Mindsmack has the solution. It’s a smartphone app called FastMall which is as helpful to advertisers as it is to consumers.

I spent some time with Sam this week talking about FastMall and the rise in mobile marketing.
Let’s begin with a short description of your product and how it came about.

Sam Feuer: FastMall is the world’s only true turn by turn navigation for shopping malls and areas around the globe. Our navigation works without the need for GPS, instead it uses a system called MapOS or Map Operating System which we have developed from scratch. Once the user downloads the map to their device, no Internet signal is needed for any route desired including multi-level, elevator only routes. It began as my wife’s idea when we could not find a restroom at our local mall and has spawned into truly useful technology that can be used anywhere in the world for any structure or venue indoors or outdoors.

FastMall is a true advertising platform that can be utilized in many ways for the retailer, mall owner, sponsor, user and of course, venues outside the shopping area including hospitals, museums, universities, airports, conferences and anywhere else around the globe.

Local is the big buzz word in marketing these days. First the internet was about reaching the global market place now we’re using geo-targeting to go local. Your thoughts?

S Feuer: Lets go with globally local, in our case, if that makes sense. We are currently in 21 countries and reach the local shopping malls that the public attends. The idea in our case is to make a significant impact to ensure users can navigate the indoors or areas where a GPS/Internet signal may not be prevalent. Also, in an emergency if there is no Internet, our maps will still work and we are able to even black out the map and find emergency exits in an upcoming release. Our application will also come in multiple languages starting with Spanish and we have just finalized the ability to let those who are visually impaired on any level including completely blind utilize our navigation to feel confident in their ability of navigating a structure or area.

Mobile is the next big thing in marketing. Would you talk about how you see this trend progressing in the future.

S Feuer: Mobile marketing is pretty awesome if we can all harness it effectively. Obviously the idea long term for retailers and tourist areas is to give users of applications an incentive for being there and even doing something. I know 1000′s of times I would have bought something if I was offered something a bit more significant at the point of sale. Even if it was a ploy by the store and sounded good, for the way I shop, I feel a deal will push me over the top. Exclusive deals to make the user feel like a VIP is integral for success as we progress with mobile marketing.

Most mobile marketing requires a smartphone but not everyone has one. Is that a concern?

S Feuer: Not really because on the whole all of this is still in its infancy. As we progress just about everyone will have a mobile device capable of handling technology like our FastMall application. We will all continue to work at enhancing our technology, applications and ability to hit as many people as we can to enhance their lives for the better by saving them time and money through technology.

What would you say is the most important thing a business needs to think about when building a marketing campaign.

S Feuer: Distinguishing the difference between you and the competition through some type of fun/exciting/powerful/memorable visual experience. At the core level though, I am a firm believer that if you build something truly special that solves important problems in our societies and also helps people save money and time, the people will take note and discover you through word of mouth. While running MindSmack.com over the last 12 years, I have paid for advertising 2 times, the rest has been word of mouth.

To download the application or to get information about advertising your business with FastMall, visit the website at www.FastMall.com.

Pilgrim’s Partners: SponsoredReviews.com – Bloggers earn cash, Advertisers build buzz!

Go here to read the rest:
Mobile Marketing at the Mall: An Interview with Sam Feuer of FastMall

Using Pot Leaf in Ads? Facebook Says You Can’t-abis

Written on August 25, 2010 by admin

Filed Under: Advertising, book, marketing

Facebook has taken a stand on just what you can or cannot show in an ad on the social media service. Of course, their decision came a week after said ad was running. As a result, st least a short while it was OK for Facebook to take the money of the Just Say Now organization before it extinguished the campaign.

The LA Times reports

Pot leaves are easy to find on Facebook pages. But the nation’s largest social-networking site has decided they cannot appear in advertisements, prohibiting them as “illegal content.”

The policy was disclosed Tuesday after a national campaign promoting legalization accused Facebook of censoring political speech. The Just Say Now campaign said the popular website rejected its ads after they had run for more than a week. The ads featured the readily recognizable leaf and asked the website’s users to “sign the petition to President Obama to support states’ rights to legalize marijuana.”

“We’re not allowed to show the image of the candidate that we are advancing,” said Michael Whitney, with Firedoglake.com, a progressive blog that is part of the campaign. “That’s why we’re calling out Facebook for this really backwards decision.”

Apparently people in high places at Facebook took offense to the use of the a pot leaf in the ad as more than just tokin’ gesture (pun absolutely intended). They weren’t looking to lose advertising revenue though!

Facebook said it has not banned the ad promoting legalization, just the leaf. “We’d like to reiterate that Just Say Now can promote their campaign and petition through Facebook Ads as long as they use another image,” said Annie Ta, a spokeswoman.

The trouble is that the ad got twice as many hits (pun once again intended completely) as the same ad running with President Obama as the image. (Actually it said the ad was twice as effective but that’s not nearly as funny as hits, right?) Maybe they could use former President Clinton in the ad but since he didn’t inhale it may not be the best option either.

The whole incident draws attention to just how Facebook can be two faced about certain things. Apparently Facebook isn’t totally dead set against marijuana, just advertising it is uncool. Their official statement is

On Tuesday, Ta said the pot leaf was excluded because Facebook does not allow images of drugs, drug paraphernalia or tobacco in ads and then later said, “Our advertising policies prohibit the paid promotion of illegal content.” The policy bans tobacco ads. It says nothing specific about drugs or drug paraphernalia, but it indicates that ads cannot contain or promote “unlawful content” or “illegal activity.”

It’s at this point that Facebook uses some creative ‘wordsmithing’ because the decision is about ‘the paid promotion of illegal content’. As for all the pages on Facebook that use that same pot leaf and then extol the virtues of the herb?

Facebook has numerous pages that include images of marijuana leaves and buds, including some that are devoted to growing marijuana, which remains a federal crime. Ta noted that the website has different policies for its free users. One of the many responsibilities listed in that policy is that users “will not use Facebook to do anything unlawful.”

Self policing on Facebook? If there was ever an oxymoron that’s gotta be it! If you would like to see just how hard Facebook clamps down on the pot culture check out the NORML Fan Page. Gee, no use of pot imagery or selling of anything there, huh?

Sometimes you gotta wonder what the good folks of Facebook are smoking these days themselves.

Go here to read the rest:
Using Pot Leaf in Ads? Facebook Says You Can’t-abis