Archives par mot-clé : video ads

Eyeview Expands into Europe to Further its Growth in Leading the …

NEW YORK, May 09, 2017 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Video marketing technology company Eyeview today announced it has opened a UK office to further its growth, building and leading a new category of marketing, outcome-based video marketing.  The European expansion builds upon a 60 percent increase in U.S. client growth and doubling revenue year-over-year.  

“The UK is the 2nd fastest growing video market and we are excited to bring Eyeview’s outcome based video marketing solution to the client base,” says Oren Harnevo, CEO and co-founder of Eyeview.  “‘Clients first’ is our mission and the demand to support campaigns locally in the UK and Europe make for an opportune time to invest.  Whether they are in Europe or the United States, today’s marketers must prove a measured return in sales on every dollar they spend. Our differentiated technology, ability to provide proven, incremental sales for our clients set us apart from competition.”

Across a growing client base including Fortune 1000 brands such as PG, Walgreens, BMW, and Priceline, Eyeview has shifted the conversation around video beyond media metrics and ad delivery to proving that video can drive sales outcomes.   With the expansion of video consumption, Eyeview is delivering on the long-awaited promise of 1-to-1 video, marrying the engagement and appeal of television quality video advertising with precision targeting and personalized creative to drive sales.

To lead the UK expansion, Eyeview has hired Jonathan Setty for the newly-created role of Managing Director, UK, where he will launch the Eyeview London office effective immediately.  Setty will be charged to expand U.S. client demand of outcome-based video marketing across Retail, FMCG, Automotive and Travel segments to marketers across Europe.  Digital video usage is becoming a significant part of UK adults’ media consumption. According to eMarketer’s first digital video viewing forecast, adults in the UK will spend an average of 53 minutes per day watching digital video this year, which is more than double what it was five years ago.

Setty has more than 15 years of digital and ecommerce marketing experience, including seven years at comScore.   Jonathan has also led sales teams across mobile marketing, bid management software and display advertising, including leading sales and partnerships at Criteo from UK market entry in 2010 to its IPO in 2013.  Jonathan joins Eyeview from at AppNexus, where he served as the Director, Advertiser Sales EMEA and prior to AppNexus, Setty was UK’s Commercial Director at Sociomantic.

“For me, what is most exciting is that Eyeview has proven that video can deliver on the long-awaited promise of marrying the engagement and appeal of television quality video advertising with data and targeting capabilities in order to drive sales,” said Setty. “One-to-one marketing across devices, including Facebook and addressable television, presents a new opportunity for marketers.  As an industry we’re at a key inflection point across video advertising, where marketers have become frustrated with legacy ad serving platforms and traditional measurement. Clients demand more creative personalization, financial accountability and quite simply, results.”

“I’m excited to add a leader with deep digital marketing retail, FMCG, automotive and travel experience to lead our European expansion,” said Jason Baadsgaard, Chief Revenue Officer, Eyeview.  “Jonathan joins Eyeview at a point where we’re confident he can continue the rapid adoption of 1-to-1 video and outcome-based video success we’ve had within the US to brands and marketers across Europe.  Jonathan’s extensive experience makes him a tremendous addition as we push the video and industry towards more targeted and accountable solutions. »

About Eyeview
Eyeview is a video marketing technology company and the industry leader in outcome-based video marketing. Eyeview delivers superior return on investment through 1-to-1 video.

Through proprietary VideoIQ® technology, Eyeview easily leverages brand, product and consumer data to create and deliver 1-to-1 video ads to every consumer and ultimately drive sales. VideoIQ® provides an elemental knowledge of video variables that powers a results-driven decisioning engine, capable of making billions of decisions each day, delivering the most relevant message to every consumer across television, desktop, mobile and Facebook.

Headquartered in New York City, with offices in Chicago, Detroit, Los Angeles, London and Seattle, Eyeview serves the nation’s top brands, including PG, Walgreens, Lowes, Honda, BMW and Priceline. Eyeview was ranked as the 2nd fastest growing company in the New York area by Deloitte’s Technology Fast 500TM.

Elizabeth Wynnemer
(612) 205-3637
lwynnemer@eyeviewdigital.com

Comey firing: Reaction from members of Congress on FBI director’s dismissal

President Trump fired James B. Comey as the director of the FBI. The decision came as Comey was leading a counterintelligence investigation into potential Russian interference in the 2016 election. Officials said it resulted from a conclusion by Justice Department officials that he had mishandled a probe of Hillary Clinton’s emails.

Here is reaction from members of Congress:

FROM THE SENATE

Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.)

On CNN: “It is an abuse of power if the FBI was in fact investigating the president of the United States. For the president to fire someone who has him under active investigation is in my view an abuse of power.”

“If there was every any doubt about the need for a special independent prosecutor, which I’ve been advocating for months, there is no question now.”

“Only a special prosecutor can hold accountable anyone who colluded with the Russians … and the president himself has to be deemed a potential target. If not right at this moment then a potential target in the future because his associates in that campaign are targets right now.”

Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.)

“Director Comey has served the country well in a number of different roles. Many, including myself, have questioned his actions more than once over the past year. I believe new leadership at the FBI will restore confidence in the organization and among the people who do the hard work to carry out its mission.”

Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio)

Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.)

“I am troubled by the timing and reasoning of Director Comey’s termination. I have found Director Comey to be a public servant of the highest order, and his dismissal further confuses an already difficult investigation by the Committee. In my interactions with the Director and with the Bureau under his leadership, he and the FBI have always been straightforward with our Committee. Director Comey has been more forthcoming with information than any FBI Director I can recall in my tenure on the congressional intelligence committees. His dismissal, I believe, is a loss for the Bureau and the nation.”

Sen. Bob Casey (D-Pa.)

Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine)

“The Justice Department was really understaffed for a long time, it took a while for the attorney general to be confirmed and his deputy was just confirmed I believe a week or so ago, and it’s the deputy who is a career prosecutor who had been designated to do the analysis so the FBI director’s actions and came up with the recommendation.

“The president did not fire the entire FBI. He fired the director of the FBI. And any suggestion that this is somehow going to stop the FBI’s investigation of the attempts by the Russians to influence the elections last fall is really patently absurd. This is just one person, it’s the director, the investigation is going forward both at the FBI and in the Senate Intel Committee in a bipartisan way. SO I don’t think there’s any link at all.”

Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.)

“While the case for removal of Federal Bureau of Investigation Director James Comey laid out by Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein was thorough, his removal at this particular time will raise questions. It is essential that ongoing investigations are fulsome and free of political interference until their completion, and it is imperative that President Trump nominate a well-respected and qualified individual to lead the bureau at this critical time.”

Sen. Joe Donnelly (D-Ind.)

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.)

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)

“President Trump called me at 5:30 p.m. and indicated he would be removing Director Comey, saying the FBI needed a change. The next FBI director must be strong and independent and will receive a fair hearing in the Judiciary Committee.”

Sen. Kirsten Gillbrand (D-N.Y.)

Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee

“Over the course of the last several months, Director Comey’s decisions on controversial matters have prompted concern from across the political spectrum and from career law enforcement experts.

“The handling of the Clinton email investigation is a clear example of how Comey’s decisions have called into question the trust and political independence of the FBI. In my efforts to get answers, the FBI, under Comey’s leadership, has been slow or failed to provide information that Comey himself pledged to provide.
“The effectiveness of the FBI depends upon the public trust and confidence. Unfortunately, this has clearly been lost.

“The FBI Director serves at the pleasure of the president. Under these circumstances, President Trump accepted the recommendation of the Justice Department that the Director lacked the confidence needed to carry out his important duties.”

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.)

“I know this was a difficult decision for all concerned.

“I appreciate Director Comey’s service to our nation in a variety of roles.

“Given the recent controversies surrounding the director, I believe a fresh start will serve the FBI and the nation well. I encourage the President to select the most qualified professional available who will serve our nation’s interests.”

Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.)

Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.)

Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.)

Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.)

“James Comey had an incredibly difficult job in his role as FBI Director and I am grateful for his service. The issues that our law enforcement, intelligence community, and congressional committees deal with each day are very sensitive and have life or death implications. Director Comey has been the public face representing thousands of committed law enforcement officers and civil servants within the intelligence community. In the days ahead, the American people need clarity and deserve an explanation for his immediate firing. It is unfortunate that over the past year the Director had lost the trust of so many people on both sides of the aisle. It is now important that the Senate confirm the next FBI Director with a thorough and fair process.”

Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.)

The President’s action, and the way it has been handled, is shocking. No one should accept President Trump’s absurd justification that he is now concerned that FBI Director Comey treated Secretary Clinton unfairly. The President in fact celebrated the Director’s mistakes in that investigation. That fig leaf explanation seeks to cover the undeniable truth: The President has removed the sitting FBI Director in the midst of one of the most critical national security investigations in the history of our country — one that implicates senior officials in the Trump campaign and administration. This is nothing less than Nixonian.

Given that the Attorney General supposedly recused himself from the Russia investigation, he should not have played any role in removing the lead investigator from his duties. Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein now has no choice but to appoint a Special Counsel. His integrity, and the integrity of the entire Justice Department, are at stake.

The President’s letter, in which he refers to Russian interference and possible collusion with the President’s associates, is bizarre and raises troubling questions about the President’s motivations.

There simply is no avoiding the compelling fact that this cascading situation demands the prompt appointment of an independent Special Counsel to pick up the pieces of these investigations.

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.)

Manchin said the firing would “not impede the committee’s investigation” into Russia and the election. He wanted to know more about why the firing took place, but brushed off a question about whether the president had abused his power.

“I can’t say whether it was right or wrong, but it’s very shocking,” Manchin said of Comey’s firing. “He got involved a political campaign. There’s a lot of blame and there were a lot of high emotions.”

Sen. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.)

“President Trump’s firing of Director Comey sets a deeply alarming precedent as multiple investigations into possible Trump campaign or administration collusion with Russia remain ongoing, including an FBI investigation. This episode is disturbingly reminiscent of the Saturday Night Massacre during the Watergate scandal and the national turmoil that it caused. We are careening ever closer to a Constitutional crisis, and this development only underscores why we must appoint a special prosecutor to fully investigate any dealings the Trump campaign or administration had with Russia.”

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.)

“While the President has the legal authority to remove the Director of the FBI, I am disappointed in the President’s decision to remove James Comey from office. James Comey is a man of honor and integrity, and he has led the FBI well in extraordinary circumstances. I have long called for a special congressional committee to investigate Russia’s interference in the 2016 election. The president’s decision to remove the FBI Director only confirms the need and the urgency of such a committee.”

Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.)

“Now it is more clear than ever that we need an independent commission to get to the truth of Russia’s interference with our election.”

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)

“Donald Trump’s decision to fire FBI Director James Comey raises serious questions about what his administration is hiding. Why did President Trump fire the person leading the investigation into possible collusion between his campaign and the Russian government? I find it deeply troubling that this decision comes a day after damning testimony by former acting Attorney General Sally Yates on Russia’s ties to the Trump campaign and just days before Comey was scheduled to appear before the Senate Intelligence Committee.

“President Trump has repeatedly taken steps to kill inquiries into Russia’s involvement in the U.S. election. It is clear that whomever President Trump handpicks to lead the FBI will not be able to objectively carry out this investigation. We need an independent investigation into the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia.”

Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii)

Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.)

“I told the president, Mr President, with all due respect, you’re making a big mistake,” he said at a press conference. “The first question the administration has to answer is: Why now?”

“We know the FBI has been looking into whether the Trump campaign colluded with Russia. Were these investigations getting too close to home for the president?

“Mr. Rosenstein, America depends on you to restore faith in our criminal justice system, which is going to be badly shattered after the administration’s actions.

“They fired Sally Yates. They fired Preet Bhahra. And they fired James Comey, the very man leading he investigation. This does not seem to be a coincidence.

“Any person that he appoints will be concerned that he will meet the same fate as Director Comey.

“The American people need to have faith that an investigation as serious as this one is being led impartially.

“If Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein does not appoint an independent prosecutor, every American will rightly suspect that the decision to fire Director Comey was part of a cover-up.”

Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.)

Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.)

Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-Va.)

“The President’s actions today are shocking. It is deeply troubling that the President has fired the FBI director during an active counterintelligence investigation into improper contacts between the Trump campaign and Russia.

“The administration insists there’s no ‘there there,’ yet President Trump has so far fired the acting Attorney General, nearly every U.S. attorney, and now the Director of the FBI. In addition, this President’s choice for Attorney General has been forced to recuse himself, and the National Security Advisor has resigned, as a result of undisclosed contacts with Russian officials.

“Now more than ever, it is vital that our ongoing investigation is completed in a credible and bipartisan way. We also need to hear directly from former Director Comey about the FBI investigation and related events.

“The President’s actions today make it clear to me that a Special Counsel also must be appointed. That’s the only way the American people will be able to trust the results of any DOJ investigation. The only way this Administration can begin to demonstrate a commitment to the rule of law, which has so far been sorely lacking, is to cooperate fully with the ongoing congressional investigations and to support the appointment of an independent special counsel.”

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.)

“While the White House is under investigation by the FBI, firing the head of the FBI raises massive questions, and the Senate should get to the bottom of it. America needs to have confidence that the Department of Justice will fill its traditional role of following the facts fearlessly, and prosecuting whomever has violated the law no matter the office they hold.”

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore)

“I have been long been a critic of Director Comey, for his views about surveillance and torture, his stance on secret law and his conduct during the investigation into Secretary Clinton. But Donald Trump’s decision to fire him now, in the midst of an investigation into Trump associates and their ties to Russia, is outrageous. Director Comey should be immediately called to testify in an open hearing about the status of the investigation into Russia and Trump associates at the time he was fired.

“There can be no question that a fully independent special counsel must be appointed to lead this investigation. At this point, no one in Trump’s chain of command can be trusted to carry out an impartial investigation.

“The president would do well to remember that in America, the truth always comes out.”

FROM THE HOUSE

Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.)

Rep. Jim Banks (R-Ind.)

Rep. Frank LoBiondo (R-N.J.)

Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.)

Rep. Katherine Clark (D-Mass.)

Rep. John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.)

“Today’s action by President Trump completely obliterates any semblance of an independent investigation into Russian efforts to influence our election, and places our nation on the verge of a constitutional crisis. There is little doubt that the President’s actions harken our nation back to Watergate and the “Saturday Night Massacre.” This decision makes it clear that we must have an independent, non-partisan commission to investigate both Russian interference in the U.S. election and allegations of collusion between the government of Vladimir Putin and the Trump campaign. Today’s actions reek of a cover up and appear to be part of an ongoing effort by the Trump White House to impede the investigation into Russian ties and interference in our elections.

“I am particularly concerned that President Trump fired Director Comey based in part on the recommendation of Attorney General Sessions–who was forced to recuse himself from the underlying investigation based on his own actions and misconduct. This shocking decision by the President is beyond the pale and itself warrants independent inquiry and hearings, and reinforces the need for the Attorney General himself to step down given his own obvious and ongoing conflicts.

“Though we may not have always agreed with James Comey, he was critical to overseeing the ongoing investigation into Russian interference with the 2016 election. The Administration’s after-the-fact efforts to rationalize this blatantly self-serving political firing–by complaining about the manner Director Comey handled the investigation into Secretary Clinton’s emails—is too cute by half and does not even pass the smell test.”

Rep. Joe Courtney (D-Conn.)

Rep. Elijah E. Cummings (D-Md.)

“Congress needs to have immediate emergency hearings to obtain testimony directly from Attorney General Sessions, the deputy attorney general, and FBI Director Comey. The White House was already covering up for Michael Flynn by refusing to provide a single document to Congress, and now the President fired the one independent person who was doing the most to investigate President Trump and his campaign over allegations of coordination with Russia. It is mindboggling that the Attorney General — who claimed to have recused himself — was directly involved in the decision to fire Director Comey according to the White House itself. There is now a crisis of confidence at the Justice Department, and President Trump is not being held accountable because House Republicans refuse to work with us to do our job. Congress must restore credibility, accountability, and transparency to this investigation and finally pass legislation to create a truly independent commission.”

Rep. Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.)

Rep. Suzan DeLBene (D-Wash.)

Rep. Theodore Deutch (D-Fla.)

Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.)

Rep. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.)

Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.)

“Director Comey had a very difficult job. I appreciate his service to our country as both a federal prosecutor and the head of the FBI. I had my differences with him on some matters but never lost sight of the fact that he had a very difficult job and undoubtedly had access to facts that perhaps the rest of us did not. I am thankful for his service to our country and am hopeful our President will select an independent minded person to serve as the head of our nation’s premier law enforcement agency. Our justice system is the foundation of our republic. It must be both respected and fully worthy of our respect.”

Rep. Raúl M. Grijalva (D-Ariz.)

Rep. Luis V. Gutiérrez (D-Ill.)

Rep. Alcee L. Hastings (D-Fla.)

Rep. Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.)

Rep. William R. Keating (D-Mass.)

Rep. Ron Kind (D-Wis)

“Today’s rash decision by President Trump to fire FBI Director James Comey is a grotesque abuse of power. I am unaware of any justifiable reason that would show just cause for the firing of the FBI Director. I call on congressional leadership to schedule hearings so we can get to the bottom of this. I hope and pray this had nothing to do with the FBI’s independent investigation into Russian interference and possible collusion of Trump associates with Russia during the 2016 election.”

Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-Ill.)

Rep. Sander M. Levin (D-Mich.)

Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.)

“I find Donald Trump’s firing of FBI Director James Comey to be deeply shocking. As a former prosecutor, I believe his action suggests consciousness of guilt and is similar to what former President Richard Nixon did when faced with investigations against his own associates.”

“Under the leadership of Director Comey, the FBI Counterintelligence Division is currently investigating associates of Donald Trump and perhaps Trump himself. The FBI may also be investigating Attorney General Jeff Sessions. The recommendation by Attorney General Sessions to fire Comey and the President’s action of firing Comey suggest evidence of a massive cover up.”

“In addition, Attorney General Sessions violated his own recusal terms by taking part in removing the head of the FBI who was leading a counterintelligence investigation into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.”

“I again call for a Special Prosecutor to investigate this grave matter. I also call for the House Judiciary Committee to subpoena Attorney General Sessions and FBI Director Comey to testify in an open hearing as soon as possible.”

Rep. Sean Maloney (D-N.Y.)

Rep. Betty McCollum (D-Minn.)

Rep. Richard Neal (D-Mass.)

Rep. Frank Pallone Jr. (D-N.J.)

Rep. Bill Pascrell Jr. (D-N.J.)

Rep. Jamie B. Raskin (D-Md.)

Rep. Kathleen Rice (D-N.Y.)

Rep. Tim Ryan (D-Ohio)

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.)

“The decision by a President whose campaign associates are under investigation by the FBI for collusion with Russia to fire the man overseeing that investigation, upon the recommendation of an Attorney General who has recused himself from that investigation, raises profound questions about whether the White House is brazenly interfering in a criminal matter. While I had deep reservations with the way Director Comey handled the investigation into the Clinton emails which I made clear at the time and since, to take this action without addressing the profound conflict of interest of the President and Attorney General harkens back to a similarly tainted decision by President Nixon.

“The same President who has called the investigation into the Russian hacking of our democracy and the potential complicity of his campaign a ‘fake,’ cannot pretend to have made such a decision uninfluenced by his concerns over Comey’s continued involvement in the investigation. It is more imperative than ever that an independent prosecutor be appointed to restore a modicum of public confidence – now completely lacking – that the criminal investigation will continue without further interference by the White House.”

Rep. Krysten Sinema (D-Ariz.)

Rep. Thomas Suozzi (D-N.Y.)

Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.)

“President Trump’s decision to fire FBI Director James Comey – who less than two months ago told the House Intelligence Committee that the President and his Administration were the subject of criminal and counterintelligence investigations regarding their close personal, political and financial ties to Russia and Russia’s active interference in our 2016 presidential election on Trump’s behalf – should send a chill down the spine of every American, no matter who they voted for. This is not what an innocent person would do; this is an abuse of power, and shows a consciousness of guilt.

“The administration of justice must remain free of political influence, and President Trump has just leaped over that line. If he thinks this will halt or even slow investigations into his and his associates’ conduct, he is sadly mistaken. The American people deserve to know what happened, and Trump’s ‘Tuesday Afternoon Massacre’ won’t interfere. Nobody recommended by this administration can be trusted to oversee this investigation, and so the need for an independent bipartisan commission is now more urgent than ever.”

Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-N.J.)

READ MORE
Trump dismisses James Comey as director of the FBI
Letters from the White House and attorney general on the firing
Analysis: Trump needed a good excuse to fire Comey. Comey gave it to him.
Democrats hate Jim Comey. But they hate that Trump fired him even more.

Report: Facebook’s premium video content slate set to debut next month

Dive Brief:

  • Facebook is preparing to launch its premium, TV-like video content push in mid-June, right around the Cannes Lions advertising festival, multiple unnamed insiders told Business Insider in a report.
  • The initial slate of programming will include about two dozen shows across two tiers of content. One tier will include longer, big budget productions that would be structured like traditional TV episodes, while the other would focus on shorter, less expensive shows that run for five to 10 minutes in length and refresh every 24 hours.
  • Offerings also span video formats, with a virtual reality (VR) dating show from Conde Nast Entertainment already confirmed to be greenlit. Facebook shuttered its Oculus Story Studio, the arm behind producing original VR films, last week, which lead some marketers to speculate VR is not a priority at the social giant, according to Ad Age

Dive Insight:

On a recent Q1 earnings call, Facebook executives emphasized the importance of its push toward video as ad load continues to slow and affect revenue, especially in the back half of 2017. Long-form premium video content might come as one of the more dramatic switch-ups to Facebook’s structure to date, as video on the platform has previously been limited to short publisher postings and live broadcasts which have proved difficult to monetize and have frequently been awash in controversy.

The company is apparently seeking to spur more adoption and revenue for video content with « Ad Breaks, » its own take on the mid-roll format, though some advertisers, including WPP’s GroupM agency, have expressed skepticism as to how much users actually engage with traditional video marketing on the platform.

Debuting a relatively robust slate of programming right around a huge industry event like Cannes might change some minds if the pitch is strong enough — and it will need to be considering how crowded the original digital video space is at the moment. 

Facebook’s two-pronged video strategy of TV-like episodes and also shorter, easily digestible content pits the social giant against both over-the-top services like Netflix — sources told Business Insider that Netflix’s « House of Cards » is representative of the caliber of pitches Facebook has received — and also social rivals like YouTube and Snapchat. 

The shorter video content refreshing every 24 hours is particularly reminiscent of Snapchat’s ephemeral content model. Snapchat’s parent company Snap Inc. has similarly brokered a number of deals for short-form video programming from major media brands including NBCUniversal. 

Facebook is also battling traditional TV, which itself is grappling with a trend toward cord-cutting and declining ratings. Facebook recently unveiled a set-top box app that connects its video content to larger TV screens, pointing to just how much the line between digital video and TV programming is blurring as digital players push hard into the space. 

Marketing Strategies Today: How to create engaging video content …

twitter_videos.jpg

By Mitch Carson

Now that Twitter has launched its own native live video service, they are prioritizing video content on their feed. This means that, now more than ever, Twitter is an excellent way for a savvy marketing executive to reach potential clients or customers.

mitch_carson.jpg

Mitch Carson has been a pitchman on Home Shopping Network, CBS Radio host, and is the CEO of Impact Products Marketing in Los Angeles, CA. Reach him at mitch@mitchcarson.com or http://www.mitchcarson.com

Reaching your potential client base is the most important function of marketing, of course, so it’s a good idea to learn more about the different styles of video upload allowed on Twitter, the various differences between them, and the ways in which you can use each of them to create more engaging content for your business Twitter account. This article will provide you with all the information you will need to start generating excellent video marketing content for your business Twitter.

The first option for generating a Twitter video for marketing purposes is to create a live video feed within the Twitter app itself. This allows the user to create content ‘on the go’, taking advantage of the live and in-real-time nature of Twitter. The live video feature is run by Periscope, but not to worry – you don’t need to download Periscope or have an account in order to use the feature. Note that this feature is only usable for public Twitter accounts.

To use the function, simply create a new tweet and press the ‘Live’ button. Once the camera opens, you may choose whether to film facing front or rear. You may also add a short description in the “what’s happening?” area, so that your viewers know what the video is about, giving them a reason to tune in. Once you have everything set up as you desire, tap the ‘Go Live’ button to start streaming.

While your viewers are watching your live broadcast, they can interact with you, leaving a comment or a heart emoji. You can even respond in real time, making the viewers a part of the broadcast. Once you have concluded your live video feed, simply swipe down and tap the ‘End Video’ button.

After your live feed ends, the video will appear as a tweet, and will remain in your timeline. This allows for repeated views of the same content, generating additional exposure for your business. The broadcast will also be available on Periscope, even if you don’t have an account. You will be able to see the difference between your live content and prerecorded content, by looking in the bottom left corner of the video. Prerecorded videos will have a video length in the corner of the screen, while live content will display the word ‘ENDED’ and the number of live viewers the video had at the time it was recorded.

Another popular method for video marketing through Twitter is by using prerecorded video content. Uploading content that has been previously recorded has several advantages. For instance, you can edit and re-edit your content until it is exactly the way you want it – one way in which live video feeds can be frustrating for marketers.

Uploading a prerecorded video is very similar in function to creating live video content. First you compose a tweet and open the camera icon. Then you choose a video file stored on your mobile device. This can be either MP3 or MOV format. The file may not be any larger than 512 MB, and cannot exceed 2:20 in length. This is fine, because if your video is too long, Twitter will prompt you to edit the length using their trimming tools. This function also works well for recording content directly through the Twitter app and then uploading it separately.

Simply record your content, and then add to it with a second or more recordings if you choose, then upload the entire video at once. The versatility of this method cannot be over stressed – you can use multiple clips to create one video, you can drag and drop various clips into whatever order you choose, or even remove a single clip altogether. Before you post your finished video, you can preview it to make sure it is the content you want, then simply click done and write a tweet to accompany the video.

Another method you can use for creating video marketing content for Twitter is by using video looping. Twitter recently removed the Vine app and replaced it with the Vine Camera app for iOS and Android systems. You can use this feature to create short video clips of up to six and a half seconds, which will then loop automatically. Simply hold your finger on the screen to record, and then upload the resulting video.

Just like with Vine, any video of that length or shorter will automatically loop, so you can actually use this function to promote your business across several platforms at once, such as posting short sections of video content taken from your Instagram and Snapchat apps.

Studies have shown that the most successful video content on various social media platforms play automatically in the viewer’s feed, play silently unless interacted with, and come in under fifteen seconds in length. With that being the case, it’s easy to see why looping short videos on Twitter can be so successful for marketing strategies.

Now that we’ve covered the different ways in which video marketing can be achieved on Twitter, let’s explore a few ways to get the most impact out of your video content. The first and most important thing to remember about video marketing on Twitter specifically is that it’s a mobile app, so you need to showcase your video with that in mind. Keep your videos short and to the point, to avoid boredom in your potential audience.

Also make sure to deliver the message in such a way that it will be understood without volume, as most Twitter users watch timeline-intruding videos on silent. In addition, remember that these videos need to be compelling within the first few seconds so that viewers will stop scrolling and pay attention. This can be achieved through the use of captions or text overlays on the video content.

Another great way to deliver video content to potential clients is to simply ask them what they want to see! This type of content is fairly difficult to quantify, but simultaneously easy to explain – there really is no explanation, because it is all dependent upon the type of business you are promoting.

Regardless, asking your potential customer base what content they would like to see can generate some surprising results. You can use a Twitter poll to ask your followers what they want to see from you, or you can even ask in a video promotion. Doing this will encourage people to keep paying attention, which will generate even more attention for your marketing campaign.

Another important thing you can do to promote your business using Twitter video marketing is to coordinate your video events with other marketing strategies. Timing a marketing campaign with several mixed media elements can be a bit of a hassle, but the real-time nature of Twitter makes it easy to coordinate the promotion of a particular video with real world events or other marketing notions.

In addition, generating video content that comes at the same time of day, or the same day each week, can help to create a following from people who eagerly await your next video offering. Much like a television show, this episodic style of content creation allows people to remain repeatedly engaged, and that directly translates into higher traffic and more people talking about your business.

Finally, an excellent use of Twitter’s video functionality is through answering customer questions, complaints, or problems, and also the use of ‘Welcome’ style video content for your new followers. You can use the Reply function on your video content to add a reply to your video, which means you’ll be able to update your video to reflect questions which you have answered. You can also collect all the various questions and then answer them all at once with a ‘FAQ’ style video.

Posting video content of this nature allows you to stay on top of any issues that might arise, giving you an edge when interacting with potential customers. Welcoming new followers with a special personalized video will make them feel included, and like you want them to be a part of what you are doing, which means you will have more engaging followers in the future.

By following these various methods, you can quickly and easily ensure that your video marketing content for Twitter is useful and brings you the added business you desire. Don’t forget, all content may not always be good, but having no content will always be bad, so get out there and start recording your marketing campaign now!

After French win, Macron fields congratulations but has little time to bask in glory

Emmanuel Macron received congratulations from around the world — including Moscow — on Monday after French voters made the centrist political neophyte their new president and rejected anti-E. U. firebrand Marine Le Pen.

But the raucous celebration among Macron supporters Sunday night — which also served as pep rally for the European Union — quickly gave way to the steep challenges ahead for Macron’s untested leadership.

Among the immediate demands will be trying to maintain momentum in next month’s parliamentary election, in which hundreds of candidates will run under the banner of Macron’s year-old movement, En Marche, or Onward.

The longer-term hurdles are even more daunting. The 39-year-old Macron must try to pull together a nation left with many of the same political scars carried by the United States: deeply divided voters and lingering suspicions of Russian hacking to try to sway the results.

On Monday morning, Macron joined his mentor and soon-to-be-predecessor, François Hollande, in laying a wreath in honor of the country’s war dead on Victory in Europe Day. 

The outgoing president made time to pat Macron on the back and to offer an apparently heartfelt “Bravo,” a sentiment echoed by leaders from around the world, including Russian President Vladi­mir Putin.

In a message to Macron — who has taken a tough line with Moscow — Putin urged the president-elect to “overcome mutual distrust” and wished him “strong health.” 

Macron, the youngest French leader since Napoleon, will be inaugurated Sunday and will have little time to adjust to his new office before he is thrust back into campaign mode with the parliamentary elections. 

Without a majority in the National Assembly — or something close to it — Macron’s five-year tenure as president could be severely compromised before it even starts.

But Macron has beat the odds before.

His election brought to a close a tumultuous and polarized campaign that defied prediction at nearly every turn, although not at the end. Pre-election polls had forecast a sizable Macron victory, and he delivered — winning 66 percent of the vote with an ambitious agenda that borrows from both the right and left.

The landslide was just the latest blow in 2017 for far-right movements that had seemed to be on the march last year but have suffered setbacks in recent months across continental Europe.

In a pointed endorsement of European unity, Macron strode to the stage at his raucous victory party in the grand central courtyard of Paris’s Louvre Museum on Sunday night to the strains of Beethoven’s “Ode to Joy” theme, the European Union’s anthem.

“The task that awaits us, my fellow citizens, is immense and it starts tomorrow,” Macron said as thousands of supporters cheered and waved French flags.

Alluding to the deep divisions laid bare by the campaign, he said Le Pen backers had “expressed an anger, a dismay, and I respect that. I will do everything possible in the five years to come so that they have no reason to vote for the extremes.”

At her own gathering at a Paris restaurant and events center, a downcast Le Pen conceded defeat, telling her demoralized supporters that the country had “chosen continuity” and that the election had drawn clear lines between “the patriots and the globalists.”

She also vowed to make her National Front the “primary force of opposition” to Macron’s government. She later danced with supporters, shimmying to the tune of the Village People’s “Y.M.C.A.”

The repudiation of Le Pen by French voters will soothe Europe’s anxious political establishment. Across the continent, mainstream politicians had feared that a victory would throw in reverse decades of efforts to forge continental integration.

But the outcome instantly puts pressure on Macron to deliver on promises made to an unhappy French electorate, including reform of two institutions notoriously resistant to change: the E.U. and the French bureaucracy.

With a background in investment banking and a turn as economy minister under a historically unpopular president, he may have seemed an ill fit for the anti-establishment anger coursing through Western politics. 

But by bucking France’s traditional parties, Macron managed to cast himself as the outsider the country needs. And by unapologetically embracing the E.U., immigration and the multicultural tableau of modern France, he positioned himself as the optimistic and progressive antidote to the dark and reactionary vision of Le Pen’s National Front.

Le Pen, 48, has long sought to become the first far-right leader elected in Western Europe’s postwar history. Sunday’s vote frustrated those ambitions but is unlikely to end them. 

By winning about 34 percent of the vote, she nearly doubled the share claimed by her father, Jean-Marie Le Pen, in the 2002 election, the only other time the National Front’s presidential candidate has made it to the second round of voting. The result seemed to cement the party’s long march from the political fringe to the center of the nation’s discontented political discourse, if not the pinnacle of its power.

Struggling with chronically high unemployment and recurrent terrorist attacks, France’s mood on the day of its presidential vote was reflected in the dark clouds and chilly spring rains that blanketed much of the country.

Nonetheless, the public voted at a rate that would be the envy of many Western democracies: From the chic neighborhoods of Paris to the struggling postindustrial towns of the French countryside, turnout nationwide was about 75 percent, down slightly from previous votes.

Macron’s victory could have profound implications not only for France’s 67 million citizens, but also for the future of Europe and for the political trajectory across the Western world

After a pair of dramatic triumphs for the populist right in 2016 — with Brexit in Britain and Donald Trump in the United States — France’s vote was viewed as a test of whether the political mainstream could beat back a rising tide.

Many of Europe’s mainstream leaders — both center-right and center-left — lined up to cheer Macron on after he punched his ticket to the second round in voting last month. The endorsements were a break from protocol for presidents and prime ministers, who normally stay out of one another’s domestic elections. 

But they reflected the gravity of the choice that France faced. A victory by Le Pen was seen as a possible market-rattling death blow to decades of efforts to draw Europe more closely together, with the National Front leader expected to try to take the country out of both the E.U. and the euro. 

Former president Barack Obama had also endorsed Macron, and the young French politician often appeared to be trying to emulate the magic of Obama’s 2008 campaign with speeches that appealed to hope, change and unity — while eliding many of the details of his policies. 

The current White House occupant was cagey about his choice, saying before the first round that Le Pen was “the strongest on borders and she’s the strongest on what’s been going on in France.” Trump predicted that she would do well, but he stopped short of endorsing her.

After Macron’s victory, Trump tweeted congratulations shortly after 3 p.m. Washington time on “his big win today as the next President of France. I look very much forward to working with him!”

Stanley-Becker reported from Laon. Benjamin Zagzag in Laon and Virgile Demoustier in Paris contributed to this report.

North Korea detains another US citizen amid rising tensions, state media reports

North Korea claimed it detained another U.S. citizen on Sunday, stoking further discord as the two countries face their biggest tensions in years.

The North’s state media said Kim Hak Song, who worked at Pyongyang University of Science and Technology, was arrested on Saturday on charges of “hostile acts” against the country. This would bring the tally to four U.S. citizens held by the reclusive nation.

“The relevant authority is currently carrying out a detailed investigation into the crime of Kim Hak Song,” Korean Central News Agency said. The report did not specify the nature of the “hostile acts” or offer any further information about Kim.

Officials confirmed Wednesday they also were holding an accounting instructor tied to the school, which was founded by evangelical Christians in 2010. They said Kim Sang Dok, who also goes by the name Tony Kim, was arrested at the Pyongyang airport for “hostile criminal acts” intended to subvert the country.

90 seconds: 4 stories you can't miss
Man shot after leaving Spring Valley pot dispensary

Caption Man shot after leaving Spring Valley pot dispensary

A man was shot when he and his car were struck by 10 bullets soon after he left a Spring Valley marijuana dispensary.

A man was shot when he and his car were struck by 10 bullets soon after he left a Spring Valley marijuana dispensary.

U.S. labor market rebounds as employers add 211,000 jobs

Caption U.S. labor market rebounds as employers add 211,000 jobs

The unemployment rate dropped to 4.4% last month, its lowest level in nearly a decade. (May 5, 2017) (Sign up for our free video newsletter here http://bit.ly/2n6VKPR)

The unemployment rate dropped to 4.4% last month, its lowest level in nearly a decade. (May 5, 2017) (Sign up for our free video newsletter here http://bit.ly/2n6VKPR)

90 seconds: 4 stories you can't miss

Times staff writer Laura King in Washington contributed to this report.

Meyers is a special correspondent.

Twitter: @jessicameyers

ALSO

In a rare direct criticism, North Korea says China’s ‘reckless remarks’ are testing its patience

Here’s what’s driving North Korea’s nuclear program — and it might be more than self-defense

Passing 100-day mark, Trump offers mixed signals on healthcare, taxes and North Korea


UPDATES:

10 a.m.: This article has been updated throughout with staff reporting.

This article was originally published at 6:50 a.m.

House healthcare bill faces upheaval in Senate

The House Republican bill repealing and replacing ObamaCare faces high procedural hurdles in the Senate that will likely force GOP negotiators to throw out key portions of the legislation.

Republicans are using special budget rules to prevent Democrats from filibustering the legislation. But the Senate has long warned the House that the rules could prohibit certain things in the bill from being included.

GOP senators have already flagged two problems: language allowing states to opt out of regulations defining what healthcare services insurers must cover, and a provision banning them from discriminating against people based on their health.

Another part of the House bill that allows health plans to charge older policyholders five times what they charge young adults — a shift from the 3-to-1 ratio mandated by ObamaCare — could also be a problem.

Language that allows insurers to place a 30 percent surcharge on people who let their coverage lapse also poses procedural problems.

The House bill also makes reforms to Medicaid, such as allowing states to impose work requirements, and caps federal payments to states. Both provisions could run afoul of Senate rules.

Senate Republican Whip John CornynJohn CornynCollins on all-male healthcare working group: ‘The leaders obviously chose the people they want’ Congress compares French presidential candidate email hack to US Feinstein slams all-male group of senators working on ObamaCare repeal MORE (Texas) said this week the House bill « will be modified here if for no other reason than the rules, the reconciliation rules, would require it. »

Cornyn said he doesn’t yet know whether the House-proposed changes to insurance regulations — the centerpiece of the compromise between members of the conservative House Freedom Caucus and moderate Rep. Tom MacArthur (R-N.J.) — will survive procedural challenges.

“That’s a good question that I don’t know the answer to,” he said. “That just shows that the House doesn’t operate under the same constraints we do and so we’ll have to work that out.”

The Senate rules are a problem for Republicans because they need to pass the bill repealing and replacing ObamaCare through a special budgetary process known as reconciliation.

The upside of this strategy is that it will allow them to pass it with a simple majority vote, instead of having to overcome the usual 60-vote threshold to get around a filibuster.

Republicans control only 52 seats, and there are not close to eight Democrats willing to vote for the GOP healthcare plan. That means using reconciliation is really the only option for getting a bill out of the Senate.

The drawback is that any legislation advanced on this track must pass a multi-part test known as the Byrd Rule, which requires that all provisions either change spending outlays or revenues — in other words, have an impact on the budget.

And the rule states that the budgetary impact cannot be merely incidental to the nonbudgetary components of the provision.

The Senate parliamentarian, Elizabeth MacDonough, who was appointed to the post by former Senate Majority Leader Harry ReidHarry ReidHouse healthcare bill faces upheaval in Senate Democrats turn tables on GOP in ObamaCare messaging war Democrats and Republicans share blame in rewriting the role of the Senate MORE (D-Nev.) in 2012, will decide what does and does not pass the Byrd Rule.

So far, she has stayed out of the partisan fray in the Senate — not drawing any public complaints from either side of the aisle.

Earlier this year, conservative Sens. Ted CruzTed CruzCollins on all-male healthcare working group: ‘The leaders obviously chose the people they want’ Feinstein slams all-male group of senators working on ObamaCare repeal House healthcare bill faces upheaval in Senate MORE (R-Texas) and Rand PaulRand PaulHouse healthcare bill faces upheaval in Senate Kushner, Trump and Congress need to put an end to federal ‘no-bid’ contracts THE MEMO: Trump faces long war on healthcare MORE (R-Ky.) suggested that Vice President Pence, who serves as the ex officio president of the Senate, ignore the advice of the parliamentarian if it is detrimental to passing the GOP healthcare bill.

But that idea has gained little traction with other Republicans.

There’s also doubt over whether the Senate parliamentarian will approve $138 billion in funding to set up high-risk pools for older, sicker Americans in states that opt out of ObamaCare’s insurance requirements. There’s partisan disagreement on this point, with Republicans saying it’s OK and Democrats saying it’s not.

Language scrapping the mandate on employers to provide health insurance if they have at least 50 workers and to count employees who work 30 hours a week as eligible for coverage could also face procedural objections.

On this point, Republicans note that the parliamentarian has ruled on the reconciliation bill that passed in 2015 that lawmakers could eliminate the penalty for not complying with the employer mandate, rendering it toothless.

The provisions allowing states to opt out of ObamaCare’s regulatory requirements — specifically the waivers related to pre-existing conditions and defined essential health benefits — have popped out as the most problematic under the Byrd Rule, according to Republican and Democratic experts.

“That one could be challenged. Here’s the reason: I don’t know that the [Congressional Budget Office] can say what a state would do,” said Bill Hoagland, an expert on the Senate’s reconciliation rules, who worked for former Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) and served as Republican staff director of the Senate Budget Committee.

“They’re going to be hard-pressed to say whether states will take the opt out,” he added.

Hoagland explained that because it’s hard for the Congressional Budget Office to predict how states would react to the language, it’s very difficult to predict what the budgetary impact of the language would be. If it doesn’t score as saving or losing money, then it doesn’t have a more-than-incidental budgetary impact.

“If it has no score, then technically it would violate the Byrd Rule,” he said.

Hoagland, however, said he did not think the $138 billion in funding for high-risk pools or the scrapping of the employer mandate would be a problem — noting it would have a significant budgetary impact. 

Former Sen. Kent Conrad (N.D.), the former Democratic chairman of the Budget Committee, disagrees. He said the insurance regulatory reforms, the set up of high-risk pools and the elimination of the employer-provided insurance rule are “ripe” for challenge before the parliamentarian.

“You’re not just raising revenue, cutting revenue, cutting spending or raising spending, you’re obviously doing something that has a heavy policy component,” he said.

“It would seem to me that’s ripe for Byrd Rule challenge. What the parliamentarian would decide, I don’t know,” he said. “It has such a heavy policy component.”

Sarah Binder, an expert in congressional procedure and professor of political science at George Washington University, highlighted the provisions allowing states to opt out of regulations for essential health benefits and pre-existing conditions and letting insurance companies charge a 30-percent penalty for lapsed coverage.

She said the insurance regulations seem to have “merely incidental” consequences for revenue and outlays and predicted “a challenge as well on the provision mandating the 30 percent surcharge paid to the insurance company for lapsed coverage.”