Archives par mot-clé : video

Two dead, one wounded after gunman opens fire at Shops at Merrick Park

A popular personal trainer who apparently had been fired from his job earlier in the day fatally shot one of his former co-workers and critically wounded another at the Equinox fitness center in Coral Gables on Saturday afternoon before killing himself.

The 12:55 p.m. shooting shut down the upscale Shops at Merrick Park mall and scattered scores of scared shoppers and Equinox members onto the surrounding streets, many of them clad in exercise clothes and holding nothing but their workout towels.

More Videos

Gunman opens fire at Shops of Merrick Park1:52 Shooting at Shops at Merrick Park0:49 Miami-Dade SWAT combats rise of synthetic heroin0:56 Cat burglar scales fire escape to steal jewelry0:22 Man burned after e-cig explodes on bus0:41 Feds auction high-end cars seized from drug lord0:53 Thieves swipe cases of booze from Coral Gables liquor store0:32 Country singer Dustin Lynch gives the scoop on Tortuga festival0:25 UM Hurricanes coach Mark Richt reviews scrimmage3:17 Lincoln Road landmarks lit up for Pride1:39


Helicopter Landing at Coral Gables High School responding to shooter at Merrick Park

One dead, two wounded after gunman opens fire at Shops at Merrick Park on Saturday, April 8, 2017.

Juan Diaz-Padron

Witnesses identified the shooter as Abeku Wilson, a 33-year-old bodybuilder who had worked at Equinox for years but, according to two employees, had been let go shortly before he returned to the gym with a handgun, took aim and opened fire.

“Five gunshots,” said Ovi Viera, 41, a nurse from Coconut Grove who was washing his hands in the men’s locker room when he heard the bangs. “It was too loud for it to have been a weight dropping. Within two seconds, people just started running out.”

Wilson shot Janine Ackerman, 35, the gym’s general manager, and Marios Hortis, 42, a fitness manager, witnesses said. One person who declined to be identified said Ackerman did not appear to be moving after being shot in the head. Hortis was conscious and asking for help but bleeding heavily, the witness said.

A rescue helicopter landed at Coral Gables Senior High School, across the street from the mall, and took the victims to Ryder Trauma Center at Jackson Memorial Hospital, where Ackerman later died, a police source told the Miami Herald. A few of her friends and family gathered at the hospital Saturday evening but declined to speak to reporters.

Ackerman, who was originally from New Jersey, lived in Coconut Grove, public records show. Hortis graduated from St. Johns University in Minnesota, according to his LinkedIn profile, and appeared on a Miami Beach modeling registry website as Mario Hortis.

In a news conference, police declined to identify the shooter or his victims, or to confirm if it was the shooter who had initially died. They also would not confirm Wilson’s suicide, saying only that the shooter targeted the victims over an employee-manager dispute. Police sources told the Herald that Wilson turned the gun on himself.

One witness said she saw the shooter, dressed in the personal-trainer uniform of black shorts and black shirt, walk into Equinox through the main entrance holding a handgun. He assumed a shooting stance and targeted a man behind the check-in counter, the witness said.

Two weeks out!!!…. Gotta give it all I got and let my hard work these last few months do the rest on stage!.. Good workout with my Brother @iamdelafuente #FinishStrong #EMMDI #Equinox #NpcNationals2016

A post shared by Abeku Wilson (@abeku21) on Nov 4, 2016 at 5:39pm PDT

“He was very serious,” said the witness, Benedicte, 48, of Coral Gables, who declined to give her last name. “He was not smiling.”

She mimicked him holding the gun with both hands and taking aim — “just really good position” to shoot, she said.

She and her husband, Bruno, 55, heard five shots — first two, then three.

Another man who was at the gym when the gunfire rang out and knew the shooter said Wilson was a “nice guy, quiet. He’s not a crazy guy. This wasn’t someone who decided to kill a bunch of people.

“There was a dance class of 40 people if he wanted to do that,” the man said, referring to a cardio dance class under way during the shooting. “This was personal.”

He said the shooter appeared fine moments before it all began, “although he was agitated earlier in the day after meeting with management.”

Through a corporate spokesman, Equinox declined to offer details on the incident.

“We are working with all of the relevant authorities as they investigate the situation,” Chris Martinelli said in a statement. “Our thoughts and prayers are with the families impacted by this terrible tragedy. Out of respect for them and our entire Equinox family, we will refrain from commenting further until it is appropriate to do so.”

A biography of Wilson posted on a modeling website said he was born in Boston and graduated from the University of Miami with a degree in business administration. He lived in Kendall, according to public records, and frequently posted photographs of his chiseled physique on Facebook and Instagram.

“Abeku is God-fearing, outgoing, charismatic, versatile, ambitious, kind hearted, and has a youthful and loving sense of humor,” the biography said. “He has a positive attitude and appreciates and enjoys the simple things in life.”

The bio also said Wilson had modeled in various print ads, including for Lucky Brand.

Wilson was well known to Equinox regulars, including celebrities, politicians and former politicians who frequent the high-end gym. Former Miami City Commissioner Marc Sarnoff, who trained with Wilson for about two years, said he bumped into Wilson and another trainer while they were working on a machine Saturday morning.

“He said: ‘Sorry. I’m just off balance this morning,’ ” Sarnoff said. “Which was strange. The way he said it, he almost slurred his words.”

“He did his job very professionally,” said Freddy Balsera, the owner of a Coral Gables public-affairs firm and another Equinox regular. “He always had a clipboard, measuring the work his clients were doing.”

Former state Rep. Erik Fresen, who exercises at the gym almost every morning and last saw Wilson on Wednesday, called Wilson “docile — not a meat head, even though he was a big guy.”

“He was honestly one of the sweetest guys there,” said Fresen, who heard of the shooting while on vacation in Spain from fellow Equinox members. “I worked out there at least two campaign cycles. I remember he would always be like, ‘Come, look: You’re on TV!’ when my commercials would air.”

Wilson’s steady stable of clients included model and TV actor Cristián de la Fuente and Univision anchor Maria Elena Salinas.

The shooting forced Merrick Park stores to go on lockdown as police patrols surrounded the mall and closed adjacent streets. Over loudspeakers, a recorded alert told customers over and over again: “Emergency! Evacuate or seek shelter.” Coral Gables police said they secured the scene — that is, they were certain no mass shooter was on the loose — by 1:45 p.m.

“People rushed inside here,” said Tim Hartog, general manager of the Yard House sports bar, who said about 100 people were having lunch at the restaurant’s outdoor patio when the shooting began. “People were hiding under the tables. It was just crazy.”

Lauren DeCanio, a 21-year-old Florida International University student, was on her way to work at the yoga apparel store Lululemon when she noticed the commotion.

“I saw men with towels around their waists,” she said. “Then a man reached out and grabbed my arm, rather forcefully, and said, ‘You can’t go there. There has been a shooting.’ 

A police officer told her and others at the mall to take shelter inside shops. She went into the Chico’s store on the second floor. “I went all the way to the back of the store and just sat there with a group of women,” DeCanio said.

The mall remained closed for the rest of the day. Equinox members who had run out leaving most of their belongings inside called friends and family for rides home.

Miami Herald staff writers Joan Chrissos, Lance Dixon, Joey Flechas, Douglas Hanks, Alex Harris, Susan Miller Degnan and Nicholas Nehamas contributed to this report.

McMaster shows clout in Trump’s first crisis

President Trump launched the first major military strike of his presidency after heavy consultation with his national security adviser, H.R. McMaster. 

The cruise missile attack on Syria capped off a week in which McMaster appeared to consolidate his power by ousting chief White House counselor Stephen Bannon from the National Security Council, though the balance of power inside the Trump administration remains fluid.

The Army lieutenant general showed a steady hand turning Trump’s rhetoric Syria into action, something the president’s team has struggled to accomplish on other fronts. 

McMaster appeared to run a professional decision-making process, drawing praise even as the strike and its consequences are being hotly debated in Washington. 

The top security aide gave reporters an unusually candid account Thursday night of how Trump decided on the strike. The National Security Council met the previous day and discussed three options with the president, McMaster said. Trump then asked his team to focus on two options, peppering them with questions about the varying approaches. 

After they answered Trump’s concerns, the president held a briefing with his team Thursday afternoon where they decided to go ahead with the cruise missile strike.

“This was a very deliberative process,” said Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, who participated in the final meeting. “There was a thorough examination of a wide range of options, and I think the president made the correct choice and made the correct decision.”

McMaster, along with Tillerson and Defense Secretary James Mattis, also briefed key lawmakers as the missiles landed. 

The Syria attack was McMaster’s first time in the spotlight since Trump picked him for the national security role in late February. 

His ascension has pleased Republican security hawks, who were concerned with the direction of Trump’s foreign policy under his former national security adviser, retired Army Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn. 

“Encouraging: The national security decision-making process–agencies coordinated, secrecy kept, action explained–seems to be working,” tweeted Bill Kristol, the founder of the conservative Weekly Standard and vocal Trump critic.

The National Security Council was created after World War II as the main forum for agencies to debate pressing military and diplomatic matters and make policy recommendations to the president.

But the Trump White House had taken a more freewheeling approach, relying on a close team of advisers outside the council for guidance.

Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law who has no prior government experience, has taken on a broad international portfolio that includes relations with China and Mexico, the Israeli-Palestinian peace process and the conflict in Iraq.  

In another unusual step, Trump signed an order in late January naming Bannon to the NSC’s principals committee, which is the last place decisions are made before bringing issues to the president.  

The elevation of Trump’s chief political strategist to a body that decides matters of war drew condemnation across the political spectrum. The president reportedly complained he wasn’t properly briefed on the order. 

McMaster undid that order this week, removing Bannon from the principals committee and bringing other officials, such as the director of national intelligence and the chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff, back on board.

“The NSC is not really where political advisers should be,” said Christine Wormuth, who served as undersecretary of defense for policy after a stint on the NSC during the Obama administration. “Moving him off the council, I think, is very appropriate.” 

The changes, Wormuth said, could “normalize the role of the NSC and have it be the primary venue where decisions take place and recommendations to the president are formulated.”

But national security experts question whether McMaster can keep his newfound traction within the White House amid the constant turmoil in the West Wing.

McMaster reportedly tried to fire Ezra Cohen-Watnick, the NSC’s senior director for intelligence programs who was brought onto the council by Flynn. But he survived after Bannon and Kushner intervened.

The incident raised doubts about whether McMaster truly has the broad staffing authority Trump granted him when he was hired.

Deputy national security adviser K.T. McFarland has reportedly been offered the post of ambassador to Singapore to make way for Dina Powell, an ally of Kushner. But McFarland has thus far remained in her current role.

While rumors about Bannon’s job security have reached a fever pitch since his removal from the NSC, the White House denies that the move represented a demotion.

Bannon attended an NSC meeting Wednesday and was photographed with roughly a dozen senior aides in the makeshift Situation Room at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate Thursday after the Syria strike, albeit seated behind the table.

“As long as Bannon is in the White House and sees the president, his influence on national security matters is not really compromised,” said Richard Betts of the Council on Foreign Relations.

Experts say McMaster is modeling his leadership after Brent Scowcroft, the national security adviser to Presidents Gerald Ford and George H.W. Bush who acted as an “honest broker” of proposals offered by Cabinet and agency heads rather than pushing his own ideas. 

If he can use that low-profile approach to make credible recommendations to Trump in the coming weeks and month, those experts say McMaster could earn the president’s trust.

“Not having that close personal relationship, he’ll have to show that his stewardship will produce options and proposals that are sound, have the support of the interagency and are seen by the president as improving the United States,” said Ned Price, an NSC spokesperson and senior director under Obama. 

McMaster will participate in his first national television interview this weekend on « Fox News Sunday. »

Continued bombing by Assad shows limits of single US attack

President Trump on Saturday praised the U.S. military for carrying out the missile attack on a Syrian airfield and struck back at mounting questions over whether it would help achieve a momentum shift in Syria’s bloody civil war.

In an afternoon tweet, Trump defended the operation against criticism from some members of Congress and military analysts that the nighttime volley of 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles two days earlier did not target the runways at the Shayrat air base in eastern Syria.

Administration officials have said the attack successfully destroyed refueling stations, hangars and some planes, effectively making the base inoperable.

“The reason you don’t generally hit runways is that they are easy and inexpensive to quickly fix (fill in and top)!” Trump wrote on Twitter from Mar-a-Lago after playing a round at the nearby Trump International Golf Club. The president is spending the weekend here after completing a two-day summit at his winter estate with Chinese President Xi Jinping.

In an earlier message, Trump offered: “Congratulations to our great military men and women for representing the United States, and the world, so well in the Syria attack.”

The White House has sought to cast the mission — which came in response to evidence that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s regime had carried out an attack on civilians with the nerve agent sarin — as a major success in putting Assad on notice that he can no longer use such weapons without consequences. Officials announced Saturday that Trump had spoken with King Salman of Saudi Arabia, who offered support for his decision.

But Saturday brought fresh reminders that a single U.S. attack would hardly dissuade Assad from his brutal campaign to crush a six-year rebellion that has claimed hundreds of thousands of lives. Residents in the northwestern town of Khan Sheikhoun, where at least 86 people had been killed in the sarin attack, reported that Syrian warplanes had returned and dropped new conventional bombs.

Since a U.S. Navy destroyer launched the missiles early Friday in Syria, the Trump administration has struggled to explain how the attack — which came four years after President Barack Obama chose not to strike Assad unilaterally after a similar use of chemical weapons — fits into its broader policy on Syria and the Middle East.

Trump aides said that they could not unequivocally rule out future strikes against Assad’s forces, but they cautioned that the president’s decision did not signal a broader ramping up of U.S. military engagement on the ground.

In a letter to Congress on Saturday, Trump said his aim was to “degrade the Syrian military’s ability to conduct further chemical weapons attacks and to dissuade the Syrian regime from using or proliferating chemical weapons, thereby promoting the stability of the region and averting a worsening of the region’s current humanitarian catastrophe.”

Senior administration officials have acknowledged that the targeted operation did not eliminate Assad’s ability to carry out chemical attacks. And Trump, who has attempted to enact a ban on Syrians and those in five other majority-Muslim nations from entering the United States, has not indicated that he is willing to accept more Syrians who are fleeing violence.

Meanwhile, the administration is nearing completion of a review of long-term strategy to combat the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq, which remains the priority over removing Assad from power. A fully developed proposal is expected to be delivered to Trump’s desk in the near future, a senior administration official said.

Among the questions being considered is what level of military support to give Syrian rebel forces, potential military cooperation with Russia against the Islamic State, how to deal with meddling in the region by Iran and what to do about fighting between Turkish government forces and autonomous Kurdish fighters in northern Syria.

Of the U.S. missile strike on Assad, the senior official said: “We don’t yet know if this is a one-time effort or not. We can’t predict what may or may not happen.”

The official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations, added: “Certainly, it’s the hope of the administration that this action will influence [Assad’s] behavior in a positive direction, and we will not see further chemical attacks.”

Foreign-policy analysts cautioned that ordering a military strike before developing a strategic policy carried significant risks for the White House.

The U.S. assault on the airfield drew sharp condemnation from Assad as well as his patrons in Moscow, where President Vladi­mir Putin has offered him political backing and military support. U.S. analysts said that despite his show of force, Trump has offered no broader strategy to achieve a cease fire between the Assad regime and rebel groups to help broker a diplomatic solution.

In recent days, the administration has offered conflicting statements on key questions, including whether Assad can remain in power under any sort of negotiated peace settlement.

“They seem to be celebrating the strike almost as accomplishment in itself rather than as a tool to achieve any particular strategy,” said Jeffrey Prescott, who served as director for Iran, Iraq, Syria and the Gulf States at the National Security Council under Obama from 2015 to 2017. “Even days later, they are basking in the glow, but we do not have a clear sense of why this strike and to what particular end.”

In an interview on CBS News’s “Face the Nation” set to air Sunday, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said the administration’s top priority is defeating the Islamic State.

“Once the ISIS threat has been reduced or eliminated, I think we can turn our attention directly to stabilizing the situation in Syria,” he said, using an acronym for the militant group. “We’re hopeful that we can prevent a continuation of the civil war and that we can bring the parties to the table to begin the process of political discussions.”

Tillerson added that he does not expect the Russians to retaliate for what he characterized as a targeted and proportional U.S. attack on Syrian targets.

White House aides said that Trump, who had campaigned generally on a noninterventionist platform, was moved to act after aides on Tuesday delivered a detailed assessment of the chemical attack and the president viewed television images of dead and suffering children. Over 2 1 /2 days of intensive deliberations with aides, including at the Pentagon, State Department and National Security Council, Trump authorized the strikes.

But the White House did not ask Congress for permission and it offered no public explanation until after the mission had been completed, when administration officials, including Vice President Pence and Cabinet officials, placed calls to U.S. lawmakers and foreign capitals, and briefed reporters.

After considering a unilateral strike in 2013, Obama ultimately asked Congress for permission to strike after evidence was found that the Assad regime had crossed Obama’s “red line” against using chemical weapons. Obama aides said at the time that the president wanted broad political and public support before acting after years of U.S. military conflicts in the Middle East and Central Asia. But lawmakers voted against the authorization.

On Capitol Hill, reaction to Trump’s action has been mixed, with Republican leaders endorsing the president’s belief he did not need congressional approval to act.

But some rank-and-file GOP members, along with many Democrats, have criticized Trump for acting impulsively and betraying his own past opposition to U.S. intervention in Syria.

Analysts questioned whether the Trump administration, in its rapid deliberations over less than three days, had fully considered how to deal with the unknown consequences of the missile attack.

“I do not see any grounds for optimism and worry that expectations be disappointed,” said Tamara Cofman Wittes, a former deputy assistant secretary for Near East affairs at the State Department under Obama. “I worry that Assad could escalate. One possibility is that Assad could hasten his use of conventional weapons to end the war on his terms.

“In this lightning process,” Wittes said, “the idea that [the White House] worked through the second- and third-order effects — I find that questionable.”

The Benefits of Online Video for Law Firm Marketing

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review’s (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC’s  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be  a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.

The National Law Review – National Law Forum LLC 4700 Gilbert Ave. Suite 47 #230 Western Springs, IL 60558  Telephone  (708) 357-3317 If you would ike to contact us via email please click here.

VIDEO: Croatian National Tourist Board and Parks of Croatia Join Forces for New Marketing Campaign

The Croatian National Tourist Board, in cooperation with Parks of Croatia, has created a new marketing campaign that aims to further position parks as one of the motives for travel to Croatia during the preseason, reports Slobodna Dalmacija on April 7, 2017.

The campaign, which was released today, will be carried out in the domestic market by a specially created promotional video on TV channels, while foreign versions of the promotional video will be seen in Germany, Austria, Italy, Great Britain and Slovenia. The campaign will be promoted in foreign markets through April 25th, 2017.

According to the Director of the Croatian National Tourist Board, Ratomir Ivičić, very good results are expected.

“Research, which is regularly conducted by the Croatian National Tourist Board, has shown that the rich and well-preserved natural heritage is one of the most common ways foreign tourists perceive Croatia and Croatian destinations. We have decided to use this fact to approach our tourist offer in the preseason because we believe that this specified segment can be one of the key generators for boosting tourist traffic and extending the season.

This is also a good example of cooperation with the portal Parks of Croatia under one joint project that will, I am sure, achieve very good results and have a positive influence on tourist traffic during this part of the year,” concluded Ivičić.

See the video below!

 

YouTube tweaks ad strategy to curb content stealing

YouTube tweaks ad strategy to curb content stealing

Alphabet Inc‘s YouTube said on Thursday it would place ads on channels only if they reach 10,000 views as it tries to weed out people who make money on the site by stealing content from other sources.

The video streaming service also said once a video channel crosses the threshold, it would review the content to see if it qualifies for the placement of ads.

« By keeping the threshold to 10k views, we also ensure that there will be minimal impact on our aspiring creators, » Ariel Bardin, YouTube’s vice president of product management, said in a blog post.

YouTube has come under intense scrutiny for ads appearing alongside videos carrying homophobic or anti-Semitic messages, prompting a number of companies to suspend their digital ads on the video streaming service.

The company vowed an overhaul of its practices last month, saying it has started an extensive review of its advertising policies.

While brands have demanded greater control over the videos where their ads appear, the step taken by YouTube this week is likely too small to allay those concerns, said analyst Jan Dawson of Jackdaw Research.

« Most of these (extremist) videos are going to get more viewers than that anyway, » Dawson said of the 10,000-view threshold set by YouTube. « They’re popular among the particular audience that they are targeting. »

YouTube also said on Thursday that in a few weeks it would add a review process for new creators who apply to be in the YouTube Partner Program, which lets creators monetize content on YouTube in many ways, including advertisements, paid subscriptions and merchandise.

Any revenue earned on channels with under 10,000 views up until Thursday will not be impacted, YouTube said.

As it grapples with the advertiser revolt, YouTube must walk a fine line between giving advertisers more control and alienating the creators who drive the site’s popularity, analysts say.

While some fear small creators could be hurt by restrictions, the 10,000-view threshold is so low that it will not hamper any people who make a living from their channels, said Jonathan Katz, an entertainment lawyer who represents YouTube artists. Creators understand that YouTube must protect its image to retain the ad dollars they depend on, he said.

« As frustrated as (creators) might be with the YouTube ecosystem at times, they understand that their fates are tied, » he said. (Reporting by Laharee Chatterjee in Bengaluru and Julia Love in San Francisco; editing by Anil D’Silva and Dan Grebler)

Don’t dismiss the commercial value of video marketing

<!––>

Ninety-nine percent – that’s the number of marketers who will continue to rely on video as a cornerstone of their content marketing efforts in 2017.

Wondering why? The answer lies in ROI.

Of those currently engaged in video marketing, 83 percent agree it provides solid return on investment. Consumers agree.

Data shows that among Americans:

  • 79 percent prefer video over text to learn about a product.
  • 84 percent have been convinced to buy after watching a brand video.
  • 91 percent have clicked on explainer videos to learn more about products or services.

“Video is popular because it’s easy to digest,” said Perry Leenhouts, Senior Creative Director at Brafton. “It’s almost a passive form of absorbing information. You just look and listen. You don’t have to read or go to great lengths to find the information you want.”

Don't underestimate how video marketing can boost your business.

Of course, convenience can only take you so far. Ultimately, video is effective because human beings are hardwired to respond to it.

“It’s a very powerful medium,” Perry continued. “You’re not just dealing with words or a graphic; it’s moving images with voice and music, and these are elements that are not only very appealing but also speak to people’s emotions.”

That said, some businesses are wary of the investment necessary to do video marketing right.

Weighing the costs

There’s no doubt effective video marketing costs money – not just for production of the content, but also for promotion.

“A video needs a promotional strategy and a targeted audience to provide high ROI,” Perry said. “If you want to get the most out of your video, promote the hell out of it.”

However, newer and cheaper technologies mean older pricing models no longer apply. It’s easier than ever to produce and distribute high-quality video, and with an ever-increasing number of video production companies jumping into the mix, prices have lowered to remain competitive.

Meanwhile, social media offers brands a way to reach huge audiences at a fraction of the price of old-fashioned video advertising.

“If you want to get the most out of your video, promote the hell out of it.”

Ample options

Advances in technology have also opened the door to numerous types of video marketing, from news-focused video blogs to animated explainer videos.

“If you’re looking for traffic and want to do something low-cost while getting your name out there, vox pops, or man-on-the-street interviews, are a very effective way to engage an audience while keeping costs down,” Perry said. “It’s an easy way to create impactful evergreen content. Then there are video blogs, which are fast, efficient studio productions that allow you to create a high volume of videos at a minimal cost.”

More expensive, time-intensive options include in-depth testimonial videos. Perry pointed out these types of video products can be used for years to come.

“That’s not a piece of content you only use once or for a couple of weeks,” he said. “That is something that can build trust for prospects for a long, long time. It’s a way of introducing and vetting your business in the eyes of a prospect. And you want it to look great, and flow great, and work great. And that takes time and technology investment. The benefits are worth a lot more in the end than the price you pay for production.”

Start with strategy

As with any type of content marketing, the best way to maximize ROI is to plan ahead.

“It’s not a matter of spending money on production and having a great looking video,” Perry said. “Having a great looking video means nothing. There are millions of videos released every day, and they’re all your competition. You have to have a plan. What’s the goal? What are you trying to achieve? Who are you trying to reach? How are you going to distribute your video?”

Also remember where videos sit in the sales funnel. While there’s no hard and fast rule regarding how videos should be used in content marketing campaigns, video has been shown to be effective for bottom-of-funnel viewers looking for information before making a final purchase decision.

At the same time, video can be invaluable in terms of generating brand awareness and increasing top-of-funnel website traffic.

Finally, keep consistency in mind. Don’t expect to set the world on fire with a single video.

While viral fame can’t be forced, a slow and steady approach pays off. One Brafton client boasted more than 100 viewer conversions over a single quarter after switching to a more consistent video strategy. Average time on site increased 92 percent among viewers, and unique video pageviews rose by 309 percent.

Numbers don’t lie, and video marketing offers them in spades. For instance, 81 percent of businesses that invested in explainer videos said the strategy helped increase sales.

Before you can analyze video’s effect on your own sales figures, you must show you understand its commercial value and make it part of your content marketing game plan.

Immediate impact: Gorsuch could begin playing pivotal role on Supreme Court starting next week

Newly confirmed Neil M. Gorsuch is likely to have an immediate impact at the Supreme Court, weighing in as early as next week on whether to consider expanding the breadth of the Second Amendment. He could play a decisive role this spring in determining how voting rights should be protected and in a major case on the separation of church and state.

The Senate voted 54 to 45 on Friday to confirm Gorsuch, ending more than a year of bitter partisan conflict over the ideological balance of the nation’s highest court. Gorsuch will be sworn in Monday, allowing him to join the court for the final months of its term, which ends in June.

A private ceremony at the court, overseen by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., will be followed by an event at the White House. There, Gorsuch’s former boss, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, will preside, marking the first time in the court’s history that a justice will serve alongside one of his former clerks,

President Trump’s pick of Gorsuch to be the nation’s 113th justice will restore a conservative-leaning, Republican-nominated majority to a court that has either deadlocked or drifted to the left since the death of Justice Antonin Scalia in February 2016.

Vote count: How the Senate changed its rules and confirmed Gorsuch View Graphic Vote count: How the Senate changed its rules and confirmed Gorsuch

Gorsuch’s nomination has been a rare, unalloyed victory for Trump, winning unanimous support from Senate Republicans. But it required a brutal fight with Democrats, who are still incensed that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) refused to even hold a hearing for President Barack Obama’s nominee, Judge Merrick Garland. The political clash ended only when Republicans voted as a bloc to eliminate the ability of the Senate minority to filibuster Supreme Court nominees.

In the end, only three Democrats, from conservative states — Sens. Joe Donnelly (Ind.), Heidi Heitkamp (N.D.) and Joe Manchin III (W.Va.) — joined 51 Republicans to support Gorsuch. Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.), who is recovering from recent back surgeries, was absent.

Gorsuch’s arrival at the court as the replacement for another conservative jurist will not immediately alter the majority that has edged the court in a more liberal direction of late, upholding affirmative action, striking down laws restricting access to abortion and declaring same-sex marriage to be protected by the Constitution.

And it is unknowable exactly how the lifetime appointment of the 49-year-old Coloradan will affect the court in the decades to come. Gorsuch has a well-deserved reputation as a conservative on the Denver-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit, even if he has not ruled on many of the high-profile issues that form the public’s image of the Supreme Court.

But reaction to the Senate’s vote — the closest margin since it approved Clarence Thomas more than 25 years ago — makes clear the expectations. Gorsuch was hailed by gun rights activists, antiabortion organizations and business groups, and denounced by environmentalists, feminists and unions.

They will not have to wait long to see where Gorsuch fits in.

How Gorsuch’s judicial experience compares with his Supreme Court predecessors View Graphic How Gorsuch’s judicial experience compares with his Supreme Court predecessors

Within the week, Gorsuch will join his new colleagues in considering whether to hear two lower-court defeats being appealed by gun rights organizations. A case about whether business owners may refuse to offer their wedding services to same-sex couples awaits resolution. Soon, the justices will take up North Carolina’s request that they overturn a decision tossing out as unconstitutional its tightened voting restrictions.

And heading toward the court is Trump’s revamped travel ban on refugees and certain immigrants, a case that Senate Democrats said will test Gorsuch’s independence from the man who chose him for the high court.

“One notable difference between this nomination and those past is that Trump had clear, stated litmus tests for his nominee,” said Elizabeth Wydra, president of the liberal Constitutional Accountability Center, which opposed Gorsuch’s confirmation. “Gorsuch will have the opportunity almost immediately to demonstrate just how closely he fits within two of President Trump’s stated litmus tests for his high-court nominee — guns and religion.”

It seems likely that Gorsuch holds the key to a long-delayed case that is the court’s most important of the term regarding separation of church and state. A church-affiliated school in Missouri is challenging that state’s refusal to let it participate in a grant program that provides playground safety materials.

Trinity Lutheran Church says religious institutions are unfairly excluded from such state programs. The state points to a clause in its constitution that says “no money shall ever be taken from the public treasury, directly or indirectly, in aid of any church, sect, or denomination of religion.”

The court accepted the case nearly 15 months ago, when Scalia was still alive. But it delayed scheduling the case for oral argument until now. That might be an indication that the court has been divided on the issue from the beginning and needs a ninth vote to break the tie.

Gorsuch was an outspoken supporter of religious objectors in two cases involving the Affordable Care Act. In Hobby Lobby v. Sebelius and Little Sisters of the Poor v. Burwell, Gorsuch wrote that a requirement that employers provide contraceptive coverage for their employees could make the religious complicit in what they consider a sin.

The court is also considering a petition from a Denver baker who was found to have unlawfully discriminated against a gay couple by refusing to sell them a wedding cake.

Lower courts ruled that Jack Phillips, the owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop, violated Colorado’s public accommodations law, which prohibits refusing service to customers based on factors such as race, sex, marital status or sexual orientation.

The Supreme Court has listed the case as “under consideration” for weeks, without announcing whether it is accepting the case or turning it down.

That has led to speculation that the justices have decided not to take the case and that one of the conservative justices is writing a dissent against that decision. But it could also be that three justices want to take the case and are hoping Gorsuch will provide the fourth vote required to accept a case.

“It seems likely, in light of his past votes in cases like the Little Sisters and Hobby Lobby, that Gorsuch would be a vote to grant in that case,” said John Elwood, a Washington lawyer who closely watches the court’s deliberations on accepting cases.

On the other hand, Elwood said, “it’s hard to predict how Gorsuch might vote on whether to take issues like the gun cases and voter-ID cases.”

Two gun issues await at Gorsuch’s first private conference with his new colleagues Thursday, when the court meets to decide whether to accept a long list of cases for the term that begins next fall.

The most important is a petition from gun rights activists asking the court to find for the first time that the Second Amendment right to keep a gun for self-defense extends to carrying firearms outside the home.

In cases from California, the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit ruled that it did not. “Any prohibition or restriction a state may choose to impose on concealed carry — including a requirement of ‘good cause,’ however defined — is necessarily allowed by the [Second] Amendment,” it said.

A strongly worded dissent said “any fair reading” of the Supreme Court’s 2008 decision finding a constitutional right to gun ownership for self-defense “compels the conclusion that the right to keep and bear arms extends beyond one’s front door.”

A second case involves whether those convicted of certain crimes can be barred indefinitely from possessing firearms.

On a different subject, the court must soon decide what to do about North Carolina’s request that the court review a decision striking down its voting law. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit said the law was unconstitutional because it was drawn to “target African Americans with almost surgical precision.”

The case already has divided the Supreme Court. In August, the justices split 4 to 4 on whether the decision should be stayed so that the law would be in effect for the November elections. The lack of a fifth vote meant the restrictions did not govern voting in last fall’s election.

Gorsuch may have an impact on cases that already have come before the court. Normally when the court is deadlocked, it issues a one-paragraph statement that affirms the decision of the lower court, without setting a national precedent.

This term, however, there may be cases that the eight justices have already considered in which they reached an impasse but decided to hold back any announcement, awaiting Gorsuch’s confirmation. In that scenario, the court would order new oral arguments to allow Gorsuch to join the deliberations.

One case that seemed to divide the justices at oral argument, for instance, concerned whether the Mexican parents of a boy killed in a cross-border shooting could sue the Border Patrol agent who fired the shot.

Until there is another change on the court, Gorsuch will be likely to reestablish the basic arithmetic of the Supreme Court under Roberts — four consistent liberal justices, four fairly consistent conservatives, and Kennedy providing the deciding vote when there is a deadlock.

But Wydra said the addition of Gorsuch does more than simply replace Scalia with a like-minded justice.

“Substituting Gorsuch for Scalia extends the conservative life of that seat for another few decades,” she said.