Chapter 11, Question No. 6
Choose a company and see what is being said about it in the social-media space, including blogs, any complaint sites, and what the company is doing with social media, if anything. Discuss your findings and suggest any ways the company should do a better job in social media.
I chose the UFC as my company to discuss. I think the UFC does a pretty good job with its social media sites. The UFC stays pretty active on their Facebook page. They make posts every day and the weeks leading up to a fight, the UFC will have many posts about the upcoming event. For the UFC I think they have been marketing themselves very well because they were not very well known a little more than a decade ago. Dana White, the president of the UFC has stated many times, how important it is to use every avenue of advertising. He says that one person might hear about an upcoming event on the radio, another person might see it on a commercial, and someone else might hear about on Facebook or Twitter. The UFC is very active on its social media sites. When I look up complaint sites or blogs about the UFC, I usually find the same two complaints over and over. The first is about Dana White. He is very outspoken, I do not personally have an issue with what he says, there are many people who are. He has no problem cussing out fans or giving strong opinions on many different topics, not just fighting. This is not normal behavior for the president of a large company but they have showed no signs of changing the rules or White's behavior. The other complaints are usually made soon after a fight card is completed. If a fight card does not happen to live up to the hype, fans will voice their opinion.
The UFC recently signed a long term deal with FOX to air events and advertisements on FOX, FX, and Fuel TV. They have stated that their is a direct correlation between the number of people that watch their events when they are advertised during the NFL season and during the off-season. Football season is the time of year when FOX will attract its most viewers and therefore be able to advertise (to a larger audience) about the upcoming UFC events. It is perfect for the UFC because it is the same demographic. I think that the UFC should try to figure out other ways to try to make up the difference from the football season. They should advertise during other sporting events like the NBA and MLB. They do not get as many viewers but they still get a lot and they are a similar demographic. And always explore the new social media that are being created.
I believe the UFC has done a great job with its PR and expansion in the last decade. There is not much I would change but part of the question was to make a suggestion and that is mine.
Sunday, April 21, 2013
Wednesday, April 10, 2013
Journal No. 7
Journal No.7, Chapter 10
Question No. 5
Most people do not like to watch a movie or read a book more than once or twice. However, people can often play the same video game for hour on end, repeating levels and characters. Why do you think this is so?
The reason people like playing video games for hours is because the the you never know what is going to happen. In a movie or a book, you know that everything you are seeing or reading will not change in any way. No matter how many times you watch or read it. Video games offer people a chance to be a part of something where the outcome can be different in a multitude of ways. There are a number of other reasons also. One of those reasons is it gives people a chance to put themselves in someone else's shoes. People get to take part in a fantasy world where they can do things be able to do in the real world. People get the chance to go to war, to be a super hero, or be on a professional sports team. Video games are also a great way to relieve stress for someone who needs to take their mind off of things for a little while. Another reason is that people get a form of fulfillment and happiness from solving a level or beating an opponent. When someone beats a level, they experience a "dopamine rush". Dopamine is what makes a person feel good or happy. Sometimes will get obsessed with beating a level or the game and they will not stop until they do so. People are competitive. What person would not feel good after winning the Super Bowl or saving the world? There is also the self-esteem boost that people can experience when they beat other human players at the game they are playing. Nowadays, people can play against their friends even when their friends are across town. People can play with people across the country or even across the world. That is pretty amazing. For me personally, I have gotten a lot better about spending a lot of time playing video games, I only play once or twice a week. But I have definitely spent hours in the same day trying to beat the same game. And I can understand how people do not get tired of playing video games because my favorite games after all these years, are games like Mario Kart, NBA JAM, Super Mario World. I have been playing Super Nintendo and Sega Genesis games for years and I am still not tired of them.
Question No. 5
Most people do not like to watch a movie or read a book more than once or twice. However, people can often play the same video game for hour on end, repeating levels and characters. Why do you think this is so?
The reason people like playing video games for hours is because the the you never know what is going to happen. In a movie or a book, you know that everything you are seeing or reading will not change in any way. No matter how many times you watch or read it. Video games offer people a chance to be a part of something where the outcome can be different in a multitude of ways. There are a number of other reasons also. One of those reasons is it gives people a chance to put themselves in someone else's shoes. People get to take part in a fantasy world where they can do things be able to do in the real world. People get the chance to go to war, to be a super hero, or be on a professional sports team. Video games are also a great way to relieve stress for someone who needs to take their mind off of things for a little while. Another reason is that people get a form of fulfillment and happiness from solving a level or beating an opponent. When someone beats a level, they experience a "dopamine rush". Dopamine is what makes a person feel good or happy. Sometimes will get obsessed with beating a level or the game and they will not stop until they do so. People are competitive. What person would not feel good after winning the Super Bowl or saving the world? There is also the self-esteem boost that people can experience when they beat other human players at the game they are playing. Nowadays, people can play against their friends even when their friends are across town. People can play with people across the country or even across the world. That is pretty amazing. For me personally, I have gotten a lot better about spending a lot of time playing video games, I only play once or twice a week. But I have definitely spent hours in the same day trying to beat the same game. And I can understand how people do not get tired of playing video games because my favorite games after all these years, are games like Mario Kart, NBA JAM, Super Mario World. I have been playing Super Nintendo and Sega Genesis games for years and I am still not tired of them.
Tuesday, April 9, 2013
Journal No. 6
Chapter 8, Question No. 1
Today many television shows and advertisements try to look amateurish or "homegrown" to emulate what is often seen on the Web. Do you think professional production values will continue to drop, or do you think amateur user-generated content will get more professional over time? Why?
I think it is obvious that this is a fad. We have seen that once something is "hot", there is no shortage of people who are willing to imitate it in hopes of gaining popularity. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Reality shows began a while back. I do not even know which reality show was the first to really grab the public's attention but we'll just say it was Survivor. Once people saw that Survivor was a hit, almost immediately there were 10 times the amount of reality shows by the same time the next year. The thing that is interesting to me is that reality shows are still popular. But, I do think they will lose "steam" eventually. I think this "homegrown" aspect seen on television and advertisements is partly an effect of those reality shows. I believe that other effect is that sites like Youtube and Dailymotion are so popular that people do not mind if things are done professionally or not. But I do believe that these television shows and advertisements that look amateurish or "home-grown" are a fad and they will die down and eventually fade away. We learn that technology is always evolving and that goes for the shows and advertisements that we see. They are much different than they were 10 years ago and they will be a lot different 10 years from now.I do believe that amateur user-generated content will become much more professional because of the technology that is being created and also because people become accustomed to using technology that is very complicated compared to what they used a few years ago. Just think about Smart Phones and all their functions and flip phones from a few years ago. People can use Smart Phones for many different functions including things like cameras and apps. Those cameras and apps can make amateur user-generated content look professional.
Today many television shows and advertisements try to look amateurish or "homegrown" to emulate what is often seen on the Web. Do you think professional production values will continue to drop, or do you think amateur user-generated content will get more professional over time? Why?
I think it is obvious that this is a fad. We have seen that once something is "hot", there is no shortage of people who are willing to imitate it in hopes of gaining popularity. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Reality shows began a while back. I do not even know which reality show was the first to really grab the public's attention but we'll just say it was Survivor. Once people saw that Survivor was a hit, almost immediately there were 10 times the amount of reality shows by the same time the next year. The thing that is interesting to me is that reality shows are still popular. But, I do think they will lose "steam" eventually. I think this "homegrown" aspect seen on television and advertisements is partly an effect of those reality shows. I believe that other effect is that sites like Youtube and Dailymotion are so popular that people do not mind if things are done professionally or not. But I do believe that these television shows and advertisements that look amateurish or "home-grown" are a fad and they will die down and eventually fade away. We learn that technology is always evolving and that goes for the shows and advertisements that we see. They are much different than they were 10 years ago and they will be a lot different 10 years from now.I do believe that amateur user-generated content will become much more professional because of the technology that is being created and also because people become accustomed to using technology that is very complicated compared to what they used a few years ago. Just think about Smart Phones and all their functions and flip phones from a few years ago. People can use Smart Phones for many different functions including things like cameras and apps. Those cameras and apps can make amateur user-generated content look professional.
Thursday, March 28, 2013
Journal No. 5
Chapter 7 Question No. 6
Should someone who runs a pornographic website containing images of him- or her- self be fired by an employer because it could give the employer a bad image, even if the person never states where he or she works on the website? Why or why not?
Personally, I think it is up to the company. People need to be aware of everything they do on the internet. One mistake can have an everlasting effect on a person's life. Once you click send, it is out there. The reason I think a company should have the right to fire someone who has been involved in porn because that could effect the company's bottom line. For example, if customers or possible customers of that company notice that an employee is involved with a pornographic site then that may cause the company to lose money. If a company is losing money or business because of an employee then they should have the right to "cut ties" because of that. It is very similar to the people who warn us students that we should be very careful what we put on Facebook. Companies will check those things and if a person has an inappropriate picture or post that can be the difference between being hired or passed over. I know there are other people that would probably disagree with my view and they probably argue that if a person can do their job effectively and behave (at work) in a professional manner then what they do in their personal lives is nobody's business. But times are changing and with all the great technology that has been created and that will continue to evolve and because of this people now have less privacy than the pre-internet days. If people do not like it then I would suggest that they stay off the internet.
Should someone who runs a pornographic website containing images of him- or her- self be fired by an employer because it could give the employer a bad image, even if the person never states where he or she works on the website? Why or why not?
Personally, I think it is up to the company. People need to be aware of everything they do on the internet. One mistake can have an everlasting effect on a person's life. Once you click send, it is out there. The reason I think a company should have the right to fire someone who has been involved in porn because that could effect the company's bottom line. For example, if customers or possible customers of that company notice that an employee is involved with a pornographic site then that may cause the company to lose money. If a company is losing money or business because of an employee then they should have the right to "cut ties" because of that. It is very similar to the people who warn us students that we should be very careful what we put on Facebook. Companies will check those things and if a person has an inappropriate picture or post that can be the difference between being hired or passed over. I know there are other people that would probably disagree with my view and they probably argue that if a person can do their job effectively and behave (at work) in a professional manner then what they do in their personal lives is nobody's business. But times are changing and with all the great technology that has been created and that will continue to evolve and because of this people now have less privacy than the pre-internet days. If people do not like it then I would suggest that they stay off the internet.
Friday, March 22, 2013
Chapter 6 Question No. 3
Some contend that secretly recording conversations or activities, even when the acts recorded occur in a public space, is a violation of privacy. State and defend your position on the matter.
This is a controversial topic. I believe that people should not be recorded without their own consent unless the person(s) are deemed dangerous or participating in illegal activity and that person(s) could somehow harm others. As I read the question I thought right away that it should in no way be allowed but as I thought more about it, I started to think about different scenarios a person might be in where it is hard to say if it should be allowed or not. The book gives an example of when Rodney King, an African American, was beaten by police officers in Los Angeles. The police officers had no idea they were being taped but the person recording the event knew that what the police were doing was wrong and went ahead and taped it. This was important because it: "gave the entire U.S. population a window into the simmering racial tensions of the second-largest city in the country" (175). This gave proof and merit to the people who had been complaining about being mistreated for decades. People could actually see the mistreatment with their own eyes. There are many other situations that a person could use to argue that people should be allowed to record conversations or activities but the question is whether I feel that it is a violation of privacy. It took me awhile to really consider both sides but I feel that it is simply not right to record someone without their knowledge unless someone is dangerous or in danger (as I stated earlier). I believe that if a person feels the need to record an important meeting or event than the other people that are participating should be made aware that they are being recorded. Some people say or do things "off the record" or discuss things that are deeply private that the person(s) is/are the only ones the message or action is intended for.
According to Digital Law Media Research: "If you plan to record telephone calls or in-person conversations (including by recording video that captures sound), you should be aware that there are federal and state wiretapping laws that may limit your ability to do so. These laws not only expose you to the risk of criminal prosecution, but also potentially give an injured party a civil claim for money damages against you." I am not saying that my view is the way the law works but I want to stress that I believe it a violation of privacy. Even though this was not an easy topic to decide on, I believe that this would bring more harm than good.
This is a controversial topic. I believe that people should not be recorded without their own consent unless the person(s) are deemed dangerous or participating in illegal activity and that person(s) could somehow harm others. As I read the question I thought right away that it should in no way be allowed but as I thought more about it, I started to think about different scenarios a person might be in where it is hard to say if it should be allowed or not. The book gives an example of when Rodney King, an African American, was beaten by police officers in Los Angeles. The police officers had no idea they were being taped but the person recording the event knew that what the police were doing was wrong and went ahead and taped it. This was important because it: "gave the entire U.S. population a window into the simmering racial tensions of the second-largest city in the country" (175). This gave proof and merit to the people who had been complaining about being mistreated for decades. People could actually see the mistreatment with their own eyes. There are many other situations that a person could use to argue that people should be allowed to record conversations or activities but the question is whether I feel that it is a violation of privacy. It took me awhile to really consider both sides but I feel that it is simply not right to record someone without their knowledge unless someone is dangerous or in danger (as I stated earlier). I believe that if a person feels the need to record an important meeting or event than the other people that are participating should be made aware that they are being recorded. Some people say or do things "off the record" or discuss things that are deeply private that the person(s) is/are the only ones the message or action is intended for.
According to Digital Law Media Research: "If you plan to record telephone calls or in-person conversations (including by recording video that captures sound), you should be aware that there are federal and state wiretapping laws that may limit your ability to do so. These laws not only expose you to the risk of criminal prosecution, but also potentially give an injured party a civil claim for money damages against you." I am not saying that my view is the way the law works but I want to stress that I believe it a violation of privacy. Even though this was not an easy topic to decide on, I believe that this would bring more harm than good.
Thursday, February 28, 2013
Chapter 5 Question No. 1
Chapter 5
Question No. 1: With the existence of film and television, do you think still photography is as relevant as it used to be? Why or why not?
I think that photography is definitely still relevant today and I think that it always will be. I know that there are many news sites and blogs that are showing more and more videos. There are also sites like Youtube, which are entirely dedicated to showing videos. I know that saying that newspapers are not a good example of photography still being used because they are slowly being phased out. But I think the best examples are the social networking sites. For example, these social networking sites like Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram are comprised of mostly photographs (over videos). Also, most people do not hang videos of their family members on the wall, they hang pictures. The right picture can capture a moment just as good as video can. Everyone knows the saying, "A picture can tell a thousand words." It can capture joy, love, disappointment, sadness, or many other emotions. I think photography, like everything else, is evolving and changing with the times. What I mean is that cameras are getting more advanced and there is software that is available to improve photos or edit a picture. Media like film and television allow us to see amazing things but so do pictures. The bottom line is that there will always be a place for photography and it is definitely still just as relevant as it used to be.
Thursday, February 21, 2013
Journal No. 2
Chapter 4
Question No. 4: I f you were an emerging artist starting to build a following of fans online, would you offer your songs for free download on your website? Why or why not? If not, what would you charge for your songs?
If I was an artist that was trying to break through to the mainstream, I would offer my songs for free download. I would do this because I would want to build up a strong following. I think it would be a lot easier to build that strong following if you are offering your songs for free. People do not want to pay for music from an artist that they are not familiar with. If a new artists songs are free I think it can help their popularity to grow faster. An example of this is if word of mouth about an artist is growing and people are telling their friends to check this person out, how many of the people are going to pay money when they get t the website. They do not yet know what they are getting and I believe that this would deter a sizable amount of people that refuse to pay money for something that they are not sure that would like. I am aware that are probably many "starving artists" that need the need all the money they can get and can not take the risk of offering free downloads. But if I were an artist then I would not charge money to people trying to download my music as a I make a name for myself. I think after my popularity starts to grow and I start to get a solid following then I would start to charge for my newer songs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)