PHOENIX – Each fall, thousands of Monarch butterflies migrate away from winter temperatures along the East Coast to the warmer climates in southern California and Mexico.
Because Arizona is geographically close to each, it’s possible to see an increase in Monarch and Queen butterflies in the garden or backyard this time of year, said Lauren Svorinic, assistant director of exhibits at the Desert Botanical Garden.
One tip to attract them, according to Svorinic, is to plant milkweed and other flower blooms. Monarch caterpillar larvae feed on milkweed, and full-grown butterflies like the nectar from the flowers, she said.
Another way to see more than 1,100 butterflies at once is to visit the « Mighty Monarchs and the Plant Protectors » exhibit at the garden, which opens Saturday, Sept. 30 and runs through Nov. 19, 2017.
Svorinic said there are 13 species of butterflies, including Monarchs and Queens, that freely fly within the enclosure.
The butterfly exhibit is open daily, 9:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., (same hours at the garden) and is included with regular garden admission, which is $13 for children and $25 for adults.
IF YOU GO:
Monarch butterfly exhibit at Desert Botanical Garden (Sept. 30 – Nov. 19)
Time: Daily, 9:30 a.m. – 5 p.m.
Admission: free with regular garden admission www.dbg.org
StackCommerce, which sells articles sponsored by brands and published on websites, has acquired the online video marketing company Joyus in an all cash transaction to expand its advertising footprint in media targeting women and work more with online video.
The media market for fashion, women’s health, and shopping is a new one for StackCommerce which has worked closely with websites like Mashable, Engadget and others. The company’s service is similar to Wirecutter, offering brands a chance to sell their gear on websites with sponsored reviews.
Now, with Joyus, which started life as an online Home Shopping Network and pivoted into providing video reviews for websites like Aol (which is owned by Oath, which also owns me and my words) or Refinery29, StackCommerce can go after publishers that focus on health, fashion, beauty, and design.
While Joyus had raised $67 million in financing from investors including Accel Partners, Marker, Steamboat Ventures, InterWest Partners, and TimeWarner Investments, StackCommerce took a much more capital efficient approach to its growth.
The Los Angeles-based startup had raised a minuscule $800,000 in seed funding back in 2012 (it was the company’s only outside investment). Backers in that round included 500 Startups, Amplify.LA, Draper Associates, EchoVC Partners, Paige Craig, Tim Draper, and Wavemaker Partners.
Terms of the acquisition were undisclosed, but a person familiar with the transaction said it was less than $50 million.
As a result of the acquisition, Joyus’ team is getting cut, according to a person with knowledge of the deal. Select team members will be joining StackCommerce in specific roles that have yet to be determined the person said.
While this is StackCommerce’s first acquisition, it likely won’t be the company’s last. The company, which is working with over 750 publishers today, will likely want to expand its suite of monetization tools to include data targeting and personalization and subscription-based services.
From its humble beginnings in Los Angeles, StackCommerce has grown to employ 65 people form its headquarters in Venice. The company rolled out two new offerings earlier this year including a Brand Studio product that lets publishers make on-demand advertising copy using the company’s editorial and video resources, and a feature called Momentum which distributes the company’s white-labeled reviews and advertisements across different social media properties.
Featured Image: Photo by Brian Ach/Getty Images for Wired/Getty Images
When Catalans go to the polls on Sunday, they’ll find just one question on the ballot: “Do you want Catalonia to become an independent state in the form of a republic?”
How did we get here, what’s at stake and what could happen next?
Why do Catalonians want independence?
For “independistas,” the fight for freedom has been a three-century project, one that can be traced back to 1714, when Philip V of Spain captured Barcelona. (Even today, pro-independence Catalonians insult Spanish loyalists by calling them “botiflers,” or allies of Philip V.)
Since then, Catalonian nationalists have consistently pursued some degree of autonomy from Spain. By 1932, the region’s leaders had declared a Catalan Republic, and the Spanish government agreed on a state of autonomy.
But when Francisco Franco came to power in 1939, those gains were lost. Franco systematically repressed all efforts toward Catalan nationalism. Under his dictatorship, the New York Times writes, “the government tried to stamp out all Catalan institutions and the language, and thousands of people were executed in purges. Virtually no Catalan family emerged from that period unscarred.”
After Franco died, the fight for independence started again in earnest. In 2006, Spain granted Catalonia “nation” status and taxation power. But Spain’s Constitutional Court struck down this ruling in 2010, arguing that while Catalans were a “nationality,” Catalonia was not a “nation.” More than 1 million Catalonians protested the finding, to no avail.
Today, Catalonia enjoys a broader degree of financial control over its regional finances than most other parts of Spain. But that isn’t enough for many residents. As the Times article explains: “Many Catalans have grown to adulthood believing that they were, simply, not Spanish.”
There’s another issue too — Catalonia is the richest region in Spain, and the most highly industrialized too. It houses many of Spain’s metalworking, food-processing, pharmaceutical and chemical industries. It also boasts a booming tourism industry, thanks to popular spots like Barcelona. The region makes up about 16 percent of Spain’s population and accounts for 20 percent of the Spanish national economy.
Catalans often complain that they contribute more in taxes to the Spanish government than they get back. In 2014, Catalonia paid about $11.8 billion more to Spain’s tax authorities than they got back. But as the BBC explains, “the complexity of budget transfers makes it hard to judge exactly how much more Catalans contribute in taxes than they get back from investment in services such as schools and hospitals.”
How has Spain responded?
Aggressively.
Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy has condemned the vote as illegal. “I say this both calmly and firmly: There will be no referendum, it won’t happen, » he said. He and others have argued that the vote would undermine the rule of law, and that it could set a dangerous precedent.
A group of Castellers form a human tower called a “Castell” during a demonstration on Catalan National Day in Barcelona. Demonstrators from across the region, some urging full independence, others calling for more autonomy from Madrid, marched on Tuesday under the slogan “Catalonia, a new European state.” (Gustau Nacarino/Reuters)
Rajoy has sent thousands of troops in to stop it from happening. (They are living, at the moment, in cruise ships off the Catalan coast.) Spanish police have seized millions of ballot forms and arrested more than a dozen pro-independence officials. Websites informing Catalans about the election have been shuttered.
Catalonia’s own police force has been ordered to follow the lead of Spain’s paramilitary Civil Guard, and to help stop the vote from taking place. They’ve been told to clear out all polling stations by 6 a.m. Sunday, and to confiscate ballot boxes. (It’s not clear whether, or how, they will abide.)
Critics of Rajoy say that his argue that his inflexibility has made the situation worse. “His brand of Spanish nationalism is eerily close to that of erstwhile dictator Francisco Franco, a die-hard centralist for whom the unity and cultural homogeneity of Spain was sacred,” wrote academics Sebastiaan Faber and Bécquer Seguín.
What do Catalans want?
There’s not a lot of good polling. But the surveys that do exist suggest the region is divided. One of the most recent opinion polls, from July, suggests that Catalans are about evenly split on the question of independence. Forty-one percent of those surveyed said they were in favor; 49 percent said they were opposed.
There are some other clues too. In 2014, Catalan leaders held an independence referendum that they framed as an “informal” survey of the region’s mood. About one-third of registered voters participated; 80 percent of those voters expressed a desire for independence. Catalonia’s separatist parties were supported by about 48 percent of Catalans in the 2015 parliamentary elections. Parties loyal to Spain garnered about 40 percent of the vote.
But Spanish loyalists are boycotting Sunday’s election. So on Sunday, most voters will almost certainly support independence, even if turnout is low.
How do “no” voters explain their vote?
“No” voters, especially those who’ve moved from other parts of Spain, worry that Catalonia’s economy will suffer if the region breaks away from Spain. It would be nearly impossible for a newly independent Catalonia to join the E.U. and the World Trade Organization, which would raise the cost of exports and imports. Jobs would likely be lost.
They’re concerned, also, that Catalonia could become less accepting of those who’ve migrated to the region. One no voter, a transplant who’s lived in Catalonia since 1979, said he worries that the region’s nationalism could become a kind of racism. “They have created a monster of illusion and excitement,” Gabriel Zafra, who runs an association of migrants from Extremadura, told the New York Times. “They have promised them the land of Narnia. They have promised them a Catalonia full of flowers, where happy people go to church on Sunday. That is a lie.”
“I don’t want to compare it to Serbia,” he said. “But if this continues, I might have to.”
As the Associated Press explains, “no” voters, who feel both Catalan and Spanish, see themselves as the “silent majority.” Speaking out, they say, comes with social isolation, stigma and very occasional verbal and physical violence.
Can Spain actually stop the vote from happening?
Despite the Spanish government’s best efforts, voting will likely take place, at least in some places. Parents are camped out at schools to ensure that they can be opened for voting. (“We will stay until Sunday,” one woman told the New York Times. “On Sunday, we will resist entirely. ») An app has been devised to help voters find polling stations.
But as the BBC writes, “it is hard to see Sunday’s vote as being free or fair.”
Where does Europe stand?
European officials have expressed firm, though muted, support for Spain’s central government. A European Union official said Friday that people should respect the constitution and rule of law in their countries.But E.U. officials also say that they won’t mediate the clash between Spain and Catalonia, calling it an internal matter. It has galvanized secession-leaning politicians across Europe too.
Nicola Sturgeon, the first minister of Scotland, which itself has questioned leaving the United Kingdom, offered her quiet support of the independence effort. And politicians in Belgium’s Flanders region, who themselves have called for secession, sympathize with Catalans and wonder if their region might be next. “There is already a dynamic (toward independence around Europe). You only have to look at Scotland. It’s an evolution that no European government can avoid,” Jan Peumans, speaker of Belgium’s Flanders regional parliament, told the Associated Press.
In Italy, the far-right Northern League, which wants more autonomy for Italy’s north, spoke out against the arrest of Catalan leaders.
What happens next?
Of course, no matter what happens Sunday, Catalonia is a long way away from independence. Spain won’t recognize the result of the referendum or any independence vote in the regional parliament. Spain is already bracing for major protests, and months of messiness.
Leaders in Madrid have said that they’d support constitutional reforms that grant Catalonia more money and greater financial autonomy if Catalonian leaders cancel their vote. The vote will go on, but perhaps Catalonian leaders would be willing to negotiate these things afterward.
With passions high, though, the moment for compromise may well have passed.
But Mr. Kim would be unlikely to see that as much of a victory and he has rejected any talks that would ultimately require him to disarm.
In any case, there was no indication that Mr. Kim’s government was prepared to talk or had even responded. Speaking at the residence of the United States ambassador to Beijing after a meeting with China’s top leadership, Mr. Tillerson, the former chief executive of Exxon Mobil and a newcomer to diplomacy, was cagey about whether the probes yielded anything, or seem likely to.
He would not say if the North Koreans had responded, beyond the exchange of threats that, in the past week, have included declarations that the country might conduct an atmospheric nuclear test and that it had the right to shoot down American warplanes in international waters.
“We can talk to them,” Mr. Tillerson said at the end of a long day of engaging China’s leadership. “We do talk to them,” he added, without elaborating or saying whether serious conversations are actually taking place. When asked whether those channels ran through China, he shook his head.
“Directly,” he said. “We have our own channels.”
During the 2016 presidential campaign, Mr. Trump said that, if elected, he would sit down and negotiate directly with Mr. Kim, perhaps over a hamburger. He seemed confident that his deal-making skills could extend to nuclear disarmament, but at times talked about getting other powers — chiefly China and Iran — to deal with North Korea for him, because they would have more leverage.
But Mr. Tillerson seemed to suggest that the urgency of the problem, with Mr. Kim “launching 84 missiles” in his brief few years as the country’s leader, and its efforts to develop a hydrogen bomb, called for direct talks. And while he said the ultimate goal of those talks had to be denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula — something the two Koreas agreed on in 1992 — progress toward that goal would be “incremental.”
Photo
The North Korean leader Kim Jong-un visiting a farm, in a photo released on Friday. Mr. Tillerson said it was important to lower the temperature of threats being exchanged between the United States and North Korea. Credit
Korean Central News Agency
His comments marked the first sign that the Trump administration has been trying its own version of what the Obama administration did with Iran: using a series of backchannel, largely secret communications that, after years of negotiation, resulted in a nuclear accord.
Advertisement
Continue reading the main story
But Mr. Tillerson was quick to distinguish the very different circumstances of North Korea and Iran — Pyongyang has nuclear weapons, Tehran just a program that could have led to them — and then added: “We are not going to put together a nuclear deal in North Korea that is as flimsy as the one in Iran.”
Mr. Tillerson’s comments came as the administration is nearing major decision points about North Korea. While he argued that economic sanctions were finally beginning to bite — “the Chinese are saying it is having an effect,” he argued — he did not claim they would change the North’s behavior.
His visit to China came as the Pentagon was considering a variety of far more aggressive military moves, including whether to strike at North Korea’s missile launching sites if it sees preparations for an atmospheric test – which would spew radioactivity into the skies — or use missile defenses to try to shoot down missiles.
But all those approaches risk public failure, and if they did not stop Mr. Kim he would appear able to absorb, and ignore, an American effort to strip North Korea of its nuclear arms.
American intelligence agencies are looking for ways to step up sabotage of the program, beyond the intensification of cyber attacks launched against some of its missile sites, secretly ordered by President Barack Obama in 2014.
Speaking less than an hour after he left a meeting with President Xi Jinping of China, Mr. Tillerson said the most important thing was to lower the temperature of the threats being exchanged in recent days between Mr. Kim and President Trump.
“The whole situation is a bit overheated right now,” he said. “If North Korea would stop firing its missiles, that would calm things down a lot.”
Newsletter Sign Up
Continue reading the main story
Thank you for subscribing.
An error has occurred. Please try again later.
You are already subscribed to this email.
View all New York Times newsletters.
See Sample
Manage Email Preferences
Not you?
Privacy Policy
Opt out or contact us anytime
When asked whether that caution applied as well to Mr. Trump, who tweeted last weekend that if the North were to keep issuing threats, “they won’t be around much longer,” he skirted any direct criticism of the president.
“I think everyone would like for it to calm down,” he said.
A study conducted by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington think tank, and released in recent days, suggests that at times of diplomatic engagement with the United States, North Korean provocations usually decline. But it is unclear that the trend applies to Mr. Kim, who at 33 has invested dramatically in the nuclear capability, seeing it as critical to his hold on power.
Advertisement
Continue reading the main story
There is a long history of negotiations, both secret and public, between the United States and the North, most ending in disappointment. The biggest success came in 1994, when President Jimmy Carter intervened in a crisis that seemed to threaten the resumption of the Korean War
But there are risks in the talks, too. American intelligence officials believe Mr. Kim is racing ahead to complete his ability to strike the United States with a weapon, figuring that at a minimum that would give him huge negotiating leverage. Some former officials, like Michael J. Morell, who served as acting director and deputy director of the C.I.A., have written in recent weeks that Washington should give up on the hopeless goal of denuclearization, and work on how to deter the North from ever using its weapons.
Video
Defending Against a North Korean Missile
The United States uses two different categories of missile defense to counter North Korea. Here’s how they work and — sometimes — how they don’t.
By ROBIN STEIN and DREW JORDAN on Publish Date August 27, 2017.
That the United States would be in contact with North Korea is not surprising, said Narushige Michishita, director of the Security and International Studies Program at the National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies in Tokyo, “but it sounds a little too early.”
“The timing is unexpected,” he said. “It was perfectly clear that both North Korea and the United States, and others, are in the prenegotiation bargaining process.”
In Japan, where Prime Minister Shinzo Abe recently dissolved the lower house of Parliament and called a snap election, the news that the United States was already in direct contact with North Korea could give ammunition to Mr. Abe’s opponents. The Japanese leader has steadfastly maintained that it is not the time for dialogue with North Korea, arguing in a recent Op-Ed article in The New York Times, that “emphasizing the importance of dialogue will not work with North Korea.”
“Now,” Mr. Michishita added, “the opposition party members can say, ‘Look, you have been talking about pressure, but the U.S. is just leaving you behind.’ ”
Mr. Tillerson’s comments came after three back-to-back meetings in Beijing’s Great Hall of the People, just off Tiananmen Square, after his trip was delayed by a malfunction in his plane. The aging Boeing 757, which his predecessors all complained about, stranded him in Japan during a refueling stop.
He eventually got to Beijing, albeit half a day late, after boarding a C-130 cargo plane, leading to the unusual sight of an American secretary of state walking off the rear ramp of an aircraft better known for shuttling tanks than diplomats.
Advertisement
Continue reading the main story
That left Mr. Tillerson with just six hours or so to meet with Beijing’s leadership before most of the country shut down for Golden Week, a holiday that starts with China’s national day. That will be followed by the 19th Communist Party Congress, a meeting that occurs once every five years.
The congress represents Mr. Xi’s moment to solidify his reputation as one of the strongest Chinese leaders in decades. In the period leading up to the Congress, Beijing has sought to preserve the status quo.
That was reflected in the public comments of Mr. Tillerson and his Chinese interlocutors, none of whom mentioned the words “North Korea” in public as they made opening remarks. Instead, they talked, as if on cue, about Mr. Trump’s November trip to the region, which will include stops in China, Japan and South Korea.
Mr. Xi told Mr. Tillerson earlier that he wanted to ensure that a planned visit by Mr. Trump to China in November would be a success, according to a summary of their meeting issued by the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The Chinese Foreign Ministry noted that China’s foreign minister, Wang Yi, and state councilor, Yang Jiechi, who also oversees foreign policy, did discuss the North Korean crisis with Mr. Tillerson. But those accounts did not give any details.
But at the end of the day, settling into a couch at the residence of Ambassador Terry Branstad, Mr. Tillerson tried to sound optimistic that traditional diplomacy would help resolve the North Korean issue, even though it has failed past presidents.
He insisted that the ultimate goal of the negotiations would be complete denuclearization, a goal many experts believe is foolhardy to attempt, because the North has made clear that its nuclear arsenal is a pillar of the state. That is acknowledged in the North Korean Constitution.
“They can change their Constitution,” Mr. Tillerson said. “Especially the people running North Korea — it’s pretty easy for them to change it.”
President Trump has worked to defend his administration’s response to the growing humanitarian crisis in Puerto Rico amid escalating backlash from critics.
Trump on Saturday continued to tout federal efforts to respond to devastation left by Hurricane Maria earlier this month while lashing out at the mayor of San Juan, who had criticized the storm response in an emotional plea for federal help.
Lawmakers have called for aid including food, water and medicine to be more quickly distributed to storm victims on the island, which saw massive power outages following the hurricane. Meanwhile, Democrats ripped into Trump on Saturday for his tweets going after the San Juan mayor.
Here is a look back at Trump’s response to the disaster.
Approval of disaster declarations
Trump approved disaster declarations for U.S. territories including Puerto Rico last week after the hurricane made landfall as a Category 4 storm, wreaking havoc on the islands.
The president also pledged his support for Puerto Rico as the storm hit the U.S. territory earlier this month.
Puerto Rico being hit hard by new monster Hurricane. Be careful, our hearts are with you- will be there to help!
Trump announced during his appearance at the United Nations last week that he would visiting the hurricane-ravaged U.S. territory in the wake of the storm’s devastation, but did not specify when.
“Got hit with winds they say, they’ve never seen winds like this anywhere,” Trump said.
“Got hit as a 5, Category 5 storm, which literally never happens, » he continued.
Administration officials travel to Puerto Rico to survey damage
The administration sent Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Administrator Brock Long and Homeland Security Adviser Tom Bossert to Puerto Rico to survey the damage on Monday, in what White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders was an “unprecedented movement” planned by the White House to respond to the hurricane.
Trump highlights Puerto Rico’s debt and poor infrastructure
The president went on to issue a series of tweets on Monday, saying the island nation was « in deep trouble, » and pointed to its outdated infrastructure and large debt that complicate recovery efforts.
Texas Florida are doing great but Puerto Rico, which was already suffering from broken infrastructure massive debt, is in deep trouble..
Trump announced on Tuesday he would be visiting the hurricane ravaged island next week, and touted his administration’s response to the crisis.
The president said his administration has “shipped massive amounts” of food, water and supplies to Puerto Rico, adding that the island « was hit as hard as you could hit.”
Trump cites Atlantic Ocean for slow movement of aid
Trump caught flak for his response to criticism that his administration was not doing enough to aid the island.
While detailing steps that the federal government was taking on Tuesday, Trump noted the difficulties of sending aid to « an island sitting in the middle of an ocean. »
« It’s a big ocean, it’s a very big ocean. And we’re doing a really good job, » Trump said.
He repeated the assertion during a news conference, saying, « This isn’t like Florida where we can go right up the spine or like Texas where we go right down the middle and we distribute. This is a thing called the Atlantic Ocean, this is tough stuff.”
Trump amends disaster declaration
Trump amended his previous disaster declaration on Tuesday for Puerto Rico by declaring that the island would no longer need to split costs with FEMA for cleaning up debris and « emergency protective measures, » instead handing 100 percent of the bill to the federal government.
FEMA was previously providing assistance to the island on a cost-shared basis before Trump’s change.
The administration temporarily lifts the Jones Act
White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders announced on Thursday that Trump agreed to waive the Jones Act, temporarily lifting shipping restrictions on Puerto Rico and enable the hurricane-ravaged island to receive necessary aid.
Several lawmakers had called on the administration to waive the restrictions, as had been done after other hurricanes slammed into Texas, Louisiana and Florida last month.
On Friday, the three-star general newly put in charge of coordinating the military response in Puerto Rico said that the Defense Department had not sent enough troops and vehicles to the hurricane-ravaged island, but planned to send more.
San Juan mayor says towns waiting for Trump response
San Juan Mayor Carmen Yulín Cruz said on Friday that while she appreciated the president’s call to the island’s capital city, she pointed out that there are « 77 other towns waiting » for a response from Trump.
« They’re waiting anxiously and will be very grateful to you and to the American people if you continue to step up to the moral imperative that you’ve taken on all over the world to help those in need, » Cruz said. « So help us. »
« And I know he can do it, because he did it yesterday with San Juan. Somebody heard me, and they just came to San Juan and things started moving and rolling. But this has to happen on a continuous basis with the entire island of Puerto Rico. »
Cruz issues plea for help, criticizes federal storm response
However, Cruz issued a more emotional plea for help later on Friday, in which she condemned the federal government’s response to the natural disaster.
« I will do what I never thought I was going to do. I am begging, begging anyone who can hear us to save us from dying. If anybody out there is listening to us, we are dying, and you are killing us with the inefficiency, » she said.
White House disputes that recovery efforts hampered by NFL controversy
As Cruz’s comments gained traction, the White House continued to face criticism after The Washington Post reported on Friday that Trump and his team effectively « went dark » after departing for Bedminster, N.J., last Thursday night for a political rally in Alabama.
Trump sparked backlash at the rally by blasting NFL players who kneel during the national anthem, which dominated headlines over the weekend amid the federal response to Puerto Rico.
Sanders pushed back on the report on Saturday, tweeting that the president has received daily updates from FEMA and his chief of staff John KellyJohn Francis KellyMORE.
WP story on PR is false. @POTUS gave military first responders 100% support has been updated daily on efforts by Gen Kelly and @fema
Trump unleashed a barrage of attacks early Saturday targeting the « poor leadership » of the San Juan mayor and other Puerto Rico officials.
Various Democratic lawmakers ripped Trump over the tweets Saturday, blasting him for going after officials in the storm-ravaged island while spending the weekend at his New Jersey golf club.
The Mayor of San Juan, who was very complimentary only a few days ago, has now been told by the Democrats that you must be nasty to Trump.
On Monday, I attended several sessions at Advertising Week, including #Sponsored and The Rise of Celebrity Influencers for Subscription E-Commerce Marketing. If you want the read the top news stories from Advertising Week, I can recommend Adweek’s coverage of the event. But, you already know that Tubular Insights is no longer reporting news. Instead, we are focusing on delivering strategic insights, critical data, tactical advice, and trends in the digital video marketing business. And the biggest epiphany that I experienced while listening to panelists talk about #Sponsored content and the value of celebrity influencer marketing for small businesses, subscription boxes and services, and e-commerce was the answer to this question: “Is it worth paying Kim Kardashian West $500,000 for a #sponsored #ad?”
Celebrity Influencers Sponsored Content
Now, no one actually mentioned Kimberly Kardashian West during the sessions that I attended. But, none of the influencers on any of the panels that I attended disclosed how much they get paid by brands to create a sponsored video. But in the session moderated by Ashley Iaconetti, a reality TV personality who first appeared on ABC’s The Bachelor, it became clear why Paul Desisto, a senior talent agent at Central Entertainment Group (CEG), Jolie Jankowitz, the Director of Influencer Marketing for FabFitFun, and Caitlin McLarnon, the Growth Marketing Manager of the US division of HelloFresh, have all worked with Ashley before and would love to work with her again.
Yes, Iaconetti is a fan favorite because she is very open with her emotions. But, CEG’s clients, FabFitFun, and HelloFresh are all trying to leverage influencers to improve their company’s bottom line. And Iaconetti provides a better return on marketing investment (ROMI) than Kardashian West, who is also a reality television personality, would. Wait! How do I know that? Nobody even mentioned Kim Kardashian West during the session on The Rise of Celebrity Influencers for Subscription E-Commerce Marketing. And nobody mentioned what they had paid or would pay Ashely Iaconetti, either. But, we do know what the Kardashians ask for.
According to “This Is How Much the Kardashians Get Paid for One Instagram Post,” by Sarah Karmali in Harper’s Bazaar UK, Michael Heller, the CEO of digital-marketing firm Talent Resources – the company that arranges many of the reality-TV family’s deals – told US Weekly that some companies have been known to pay up to $500,000 to get access to Kim Kardashian’s (103.3 million) Instagram followers, while sisters Khloé and Kourtney can earn up to $250,000 a post.” (They have 69.1 million and 58.7 million followers respectively).
So, there you have it: You could call it the Kardashian Standard. But, it should come with the following warning: This is what you’d have to pay if you measure influencers on only one dimension: Reach.
Engagement: The Influencer Metric That Matters
But, Desisto, Jankowitz, and McLarnon don’t use any of the Kardashians. But, they all use Iaconetti. Why? Because they measure more than reach; they also measure engagement. And based on my analysis of what they did and didn’t say during the session, they know how to calculate ROMI.
Now, return on marketing investment (ROMI) is calculated using a different formula than the typical return-on-investment (ROI) formulas that most chief financial officers (CFOs) use. It’s different because ROMI measures operational expenditures (OPEX), while ROI measures capital expenditures (CAPEX). But, the amount spent on marketing is typically expensed in the current period (quarter); it isn’t “tied up” in plants and inventory. So, when most CFOs ask their chief marketing officers (CMOs) to report the ROI of an influencer marketing campaign, they’re asking for the wrong measure of success.
Here’s the formula for calculating ROMI: (Incremental Revenue Attributable to Marketing * Contribution Margin – Marketing Spending) / Marketing Spending.
So, Kim Kardashian West charges brands $500,000 for a single Instagram video post like this one. It appeared Aug. 22, 2016, and got more than 16 million views.
A post shared by Kim Kardashian West (@kimkardashian) on Aug 22, 2016 at 12:33pm PDT
Well, SugarBearHair, the sponsor of Kim’s Instagram post, charges $79.99 for a 3-month supply of Gummy Hair Vitamins. And, let’s say that SugarBearHair’s contribution margin is 50%. This is a scientific wild ass guess (SWAG). So, Kim’s #ad needed to generate over 25,000 orders to deliver $2 million in incremental revenue – ($2 million * 50% – $500,000) / $500,000 – for SugarBearHair to get an ROMI of 1. In plain English, Kim’s Instagram post needed to generate $2 million in orders for SugarBearHair to see $1 in profit for every $1 it spent on her sponsored content. Usually, marketing spending will be deemed as justified if the ROMI is positive.
But, what if Desisto, Jankowitz, and McLarnon had identified 10 micro-influencers who didn’t have Kim’s reach, but had an even greater impact on the purchase decisions of their followers. And let’s say they paid these micro-influencers an average of $25,000 apiece to generate $3 million in orders. Do the math and you’d get ($3 million * 50% – $250,000) / $250,000 = an ROMI of 5. In other words, they got $5 in profit for every $1 they spent on sponsored content. Yes, it took more work to find 10 micro-influencers with above average engagement rates, but that effort resulted in more revenue and higher profits.
That’s the strategic insight that I had while listening to panelists talk about #Sponsored content and the value of celebrity influencer marketing for small businesses, subscription boxes and services, and e-commerce. That’s the biggest takeaway that I’ve had so far from Advertising Week. Let me know what you think about my big epiphany. Share your thoughts on Facebook or Twitter.
Lt. Gen. Jay Silveria had an important message for the U.S. Air Force Academycadets ata moment of crisis.
Five black cadet candidates at the academy’s preparatory school in Colorado Springs had found racial slurs written on the message boards on their doors.
Silveria, who took over as the school’s superintendent in August, urged the approximately 4,000 cadets to reach for their phones.
“I want you to videotape this so you have it, so you can use it — so that we all have the moral courage together,” he said, surrounded by 1,500 of the academy’s faculty, administrators and athletic coaches.
“If you can’t treat someone with dignity and respect, get out.”
Silveria’s forceful denunciation has been heard far beyond the walls of the academy in Colorado, introducing the veteran officer to a national audience.
“I wanted to have a direct conversation with them about the power of diversity,” Silveria told CNN’s Brook Baldwin on Friday, referring to the cadets. “Ultimately, these men and women are going to be lieutenants in the United States Air Force.”
Baldwin read Silveria messages of support on Twitter and asked him whether he believed Washington needed better leadership. He replied that his “message to the cadets was not about that.”
He said his speech was intended to show the cadets that they were all united “as an institution protecting these values.”
On Twitter, Silveria has been widely praised for his leadership, with some suggesting he should run for office one day.
This is what power, leadership, and advocacy looks like…. Excellent words from Lt. Gen. Jay Silveria! https://t.co/4BmjKZCYgx
A video of the speech on the Air Force Academy’s Facebook page has been viewed more than 1.7 million times, and a tweet of the same has been shared more than 22,000 times. Commenters praised the general for his leadership and unequivocal response: “This is how you respond to racism in America.”
Silveria, who graduated from the Air Force Academy in 1985 with a bachelor of science degree, succeeded the academy’s first female superintendent, Lt. Gen. Michelle Johnson.
In his 32-year career, Silveria has nearly 4,000 hours of flight time, including combat missions over Iraq and the Balkans, making him one of the Air Force’s most experienced pilots, according to the Colorado Springs Gazette.
“When it came time to pick the next superintendent, Lt. Gen. Jay Silveria was the obvious choice,” Gen. David Goldfein, the branch’s chief of staff, said at Silveria’s appointment ceremony, according to the Gazette. “I don’t believe we have an officer serving in the Air Force today with more combat time, more joint credibility, or more operational understanding of the art of modern war.”
Shortly before the ceremony, Silveria, the Air Force Academy’s 20th superintendent, was promoted from major general to lieutenant general, the rank required for the position, the Gazette reported.
He was previously deputy commander of U.S. Air Forces Central Command and deputy commander of Central Command’s Combined Forces Air Component in southwest Asia, according to Military.com.
« If you can’t treat someone with dignity and respect–then you need to get out. »-Lt. Gen. Jay B. Silveria, Superintendent @AF_Academypic.twitter.com/njCktv5Fmp
Tom Price, President Trump’s embattled health and human services secretary, resigned Friday amid sharp criticism of his extensive use of taxpayer-funded charter flights, the White House said.
The announcement came shortly after Trump told reporters he considered Price a “fine man” but that he “didn’t like the optics” and planned to make a decision by the end of the day.
“I’m not happy, I can tell you that. I’m not happy,” Trump said as prepared to leave the White House en route to his private golf club in Bedminster, N.J.
In a statement, the White House said Trump would designate Don J. Wright as acting secretary. Wright currently serves as the deputy assistant secretary for health and director of the Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion.
Price submitted a four-paragraph resignation letter to the White House in which he said he regretted “that the recent events have created a distraction” from the administration’s objectives. “Success on these issues is more important than any one person,” he continued.
A short time later, HHS staff received a message from Price praising the staff as “dedicated, committed” and saying it had been “a great joy” to serve with them.
He closed: “Duty is Ours — Results are the Lord’s!”
Price had announced Thursday that he would reimburse the government for a fraction of the costs of his flights on charter planes in recent months. An HHS official said Price would write a check for $51,887.31, which appears to cover the cost of his seat on chartered flights but not those of his staffers.
Politico, which first reported on Price’s repeated use of chartered jets, has estimated the total expense of the taxpayer-funded trips exceeded $400,000 — and it reported early Thursday evening that his White House-approved flights on military planes to Africa, Europe and Asia cost more than $500,000.
Besides the charter flight issue, Trump has also directed some of his frustration at Price over the inability of Republicans in Congress to pass a health-care reform bill.
During a speech in July to a gathering of Boy Scouts, Trump said — jokingly at the time — that Price could lose his job if a bill didn’t pass.
“He better get the votes,” Trump said. “Otherwise I will say, Tom, you’re fired.”
Outside the administration, Price has been a controversial figure since the time of his confirmation hearings nine months ago, but it was the revelation of his high-priced transportation for his travels as secretary that got him in trouble inside the White House.
The repeated reliance on charters, including for distances as short as between Washington and Philadelphia, contrasts markedly with the travel of his two immediate predecessors during the Obama administration.
As the reports prompted the HHS inspector general to begin an examination of the trips, the secretary initially said that he would suspend such trips until the inquiry was complete.
On Thursday, he amended that to say that he would no longer take such flights, issuing a statement in which he said that his private-charter travel had been approved by legal and HHS officials but that he regretted “the concerns this has raised regarding the use of taxpayer dollars.”
House Speaker Paul D. Ryan, who had pushed for the then-Georgia congressman to lead HHS in the Trump administration, released a statement calling Price “a good man. He has spent his entire adult life fighting for others, first as a physician and then as a legislator and public servant. He was a leader in the House and a superb health secretary.”
The ruckus prompted by the secretary’s travel habits followed complaints earlier this year by Democrats and other critics about his ethics for a separate reason: private investments he made while a House member in health-care companies that could have benefited from bills that he sponsored.
At his confirmation hearing in late January, the Senate Finance Committee’s senior Democrat, Sen. Ron Wyden (Ore.), accused the nominee of “a conflict of interest and an abuse of position.” The main focus of such criticism involved Price’s largest stock purchase in 2016 — between $50,000 and $100,000 — in an Australian biomedical firm called Innate Immunotherapeutics.
The investment coincided with final negotiations on the sweeping 21st Century Cures bill, aimed in part at helping to accelerate clinical trials and approval of drugs like Innate’s.
Price acknowledged that the purchase, and several smaller ones he’d made in the company the previous year, occurred without an investment broker. As part of his confirmation, he testified before members of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee that he had learned of the company from a House colleague, Rep. Chris Collins (R-N.Y.), an Innate board member.
The 2016 investment was done through what’s known as a “private placement offering” made by a company to a select group of potential investors. Price contended that he received no insider information ahead of time.
Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), the HELP Committee’s ranking member, reacted to Price’s departure Friday by focusing on “the serious, unanswered questions about improper financial benefits.” She also faulted his approach to health care as “ideologically driven,” particularly on women’s health and reproductive rights.
“The fact that this decision took this long only indicates the extent to which the Trump Administration allows its senior officials to put themselves, and partisan politics, ahead of families and communities,” Murray said in a statement.
Other criticism of Price revolved around his uncommon reliance on campaign contributions from the health-care industry. During his 2016 campaign for a seventh House term, he accepted more than $700,000 from physicians, hospitals, drug companies and health insurers, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
Price’s views — abhorring the Affordable Care Act and other forms of what he regards as government intrusion into health care — fit neatly within the Trump administration’s orthodoxy. But the secretary, an orthopedic surgeon before pivoting into politics, arrived at the helm of HHS holding a variety of views that deviate from the basics of federal health policy.
He has been a longtime member of an alternative medical group called the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, which opposes Medicare, the highly popular government insurance for older Americans, and offers training to doctors on how to opt out of the program. The group also opposes mandatory vaccination as “equivalent to human experimentation,” a stance contrary to requirements in every state and recommendations of major medical organizations and the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
At his confirmation hearing, Price equivocated on the subject of vaccination, though he made positive statements about it later on.
In public speeches in the years before he became secretary, Price deplored HHS’s Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services — a key agency within the department he would run.
Perhaps most notably, Price as a congressman supported policies that favored his fellow physicians. He championed tighter limits on medical malpractice cases against doctors. And at his confirmation hearing, he said: “Anything that gets in the way of the patient … their families and physicians making the decisions about what kind of health care they desire . . . we ought not go down that road.”
The new acting secretary is trained as a physician and public health specialist focusing on family medicine and preventive care. Before arriving at HHS about a decade ago, Wright had extensive experience in occupational health. In response to the 9/11 terrorist attacks and Hurricane Katrina, he convened conferences designed to improve hospitals’ preparation for various kinds of disasters.
Wright has held several senior roles at the department. During the final two years of the George W. Bush administration, he was the department’s principal deputy assistant secretary for health and, in that role, also served as the alternate U.S. delegate to the World Health Organization Executive Board.
In 2012, he became the department’s deputy assistant secretary for health and director of the disease prevention and health promotion office. In February, he was named HHS’s acting assistant secretary for health.
Lena H. Sun, Paige Winfield Cunningham and Kelsey Snell contributed to this report.
Ever been blasted by an annoying autoplay video on a website? You’re not alone in your frustration.
Incensed by disruptive, annoying digital marketing techniques, users are fighting back. Ad blockers were the first step. Now, new browser options will allow people to block autoplay video content, too.
That’s good news for users who are sick of annoying, disruptive ads. But for brands that rely on disruptive techniques (and for publishers who rely on autoplay ad revenue), the rise of autoplay block will be a tough pill to swallow.
So why do digital marketers insist on annoying potential customers with autoplay video content, and is there an alternative?
A History of Annoyance
Marketers have long sought ways to break through the digital clutter. Pop-up ads used to seriously cramp our web-surfing style by forcing us to divert our browsing pattern—at least until browsers offered the option to block them entirely. Display ads disrupted our ability to absorb content, until ad blockers came into vogue. These days, nearly 20 percent of US users deploy an ad blocker, according to Business Insider, a figure that’s cutting off one marketing pathway to customers as well as throttling publisher revenue.
Autoplay video has all the hallmarks of its disruptive predecessors. It’s annoying, distracting, and irritating. And, unfortunately for users, it’s everywhere.
Autoplay video wasn’t always the video marketing norm, however. Facebook, ever the trendsetter, started autoplaying videos in users’ news feeds back in 2013 and normalized the practice. Other sites followed suit. “Since Facebook made autoplay video acceptable again, publishers have jumped on the bandwagon. It’s widespread,” said Eric Franchi, a digital media and marketing angel investor and co-founder of the ad-tech firm Undertone, in Adweek.
Unlike our visceral reaction to, say, an annoying pop-up ad, the use of autoplay on Facebook didn’t receive widespread derision. Perhaps that’s because on Facebook, content we want to see—video from friends, family, or publishers we follow—is intermixed with video content we didn’t ask to see, like sponsored posts.
It’s also possible that autoplay video content piques our interest in a unique psychological way. Humans are curious by nature, and showing us a split second of autoplay video as we wander through our news feed is often enough to hijack our thought process and distract us from whatever we were originally thinking or doing, tempting us to watch longer and capture a new nugget of information.
Now, Facebook has taken things a step further by making autoplay videos play with sound by default. If videos without sound captured our attention, imagine how effectively distracting videos with sound will be.
Autoplay Revolt?
Of course, not everyone is happy with the autoplay video revolution. When you’re reading a news article and suddenly a video blasts sound from a player buried in a sidebar, it’s infuriating. I’ve even had problems figuring out where the sound is coming from on a website, particularly if I have multiple tabs open.
Survey data show plenty of people share my frustration. Nearly 80 percent of users report reacting negatively to autoplay ads, according to a Hubspot survey.
What’s more, four out of five consumers report that they’ve closed a browser or left a website because of an autoplay ad or a pop-up—defeating the purpose of the ad entirely.
As a result, the tech giants are swooping in. Apple offers an autoplay block feature on its latest Safari browser. According to TechCrunch, the option allows users to keep autoplay videos paused until you elect to unpause them.
Google has made changes to its browser, Chrome, to similarly block annoying ads. The latest version will only allow autoplay videos if the user has shown interest in the clip by clicking or tapping somewhere on the site during the browsing session, according to The Verge. “This will allow autoplay to occur when users want media to play, and respect users’ wishes when they don’t,” the company said in a statement.
Like ad blockers, the trend toward autoplay could leave disruptive-ad-dependent brands reeling.
A Better Alternative
Autoplay video is reviled by users, forcing many of them to leave a website rather than play the ad. Other users may listen to just a second or two of the video before browsing elsewhere, crippling that video’s effectiveness. And now, browser changes will make it easy for users to opt out of disruptive autoplay ads.
It’s clear marketers need to reduce—even eliminate—their reliance on disruptive video marketing. To get people’s attention, marketers don’t have to annoy or abuse. They just need to offer the type of content consumers want in the format they want it in.
Native advertising—which refers to sponsored or branded content that looks and feels like the content around it—offers one alternative. Less disruptive and more effective, native advertising has major plusses for marketers looking for new ways to reach their target audience. Using thought leaders and influencers to expand your content reach is another viable option.
Generally speaking, focusing on delivering great content in an appealing way should be the goal. Digital marketing isn’t about wrenching eyeballs away with the most annoying ad possible. Content marketing and native advertising offer more effective alternatives.
