Log In
Don’t have an account? Sign up here »
Archives par mot-clé : video
Senate Republicans go ‘nuclear,’ pave the way for Gorsuch confirmation to Supreme Court
Republicans on Thursday cleared the way for Judge Neil Gorsuch to be confirmed to the U.S. Supreme Court, overcoming a historic Democratic blockade by changing the rules of the U.S. Senate — a move that highlighted the fierce partisanship that has seized Congress.
The long-anticipated rules change now means that all presidential nominees for executive branch positions and the federal courts need only a simple-majority vote to be confirmed by senators.
The GOP decision to ram through the rules change is also likely to further divide an increasingly partisan Senate. Several senators openly fretted that eliminating the minority party’s right to block high court nominees could lead to the end of filibusters on legislation — effectively transforming the Senate’s traditional role in the legislative process as the slower, more deliberative chamber.
The ultimate confirmation of Gorsuch, which is expected sometime on Friday, represents a major victory, however, for President Trump as well as for Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, who refused to even consider President Barack Obama’s nominee after Justice Antonin Scalia died in February 2016.
[McConnell: ‘Nuclear option’ helps Senate. McCain: ‘Whoever says that is a stupid idiot.’]
How the Senate voted to alter its rules on Supreme Court appointments
The unflinching discipline displayed by McConnell (R-Ky.) in rejecting pleas from Democrats for a hearing on Judge Merrick Garland enraged them and prompted demands for a Gorsuch blockade by their progressive base. But the Democrats’ high-profile filibuster had fizzled by midday Thursday after McConnell moved to alter the rules and received the backing of his entire Republican caucus.
As he left the Senate chamber, the usually reserved McConnell flashed a bit of showmanship — he high-fived some colleagues, awkwardly embraced Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) and gave a thumbs-up to photographers.
The majority leader argued that ending the filibuster for high court nominees will actually decrease partisan tensions in the Senate and return the upper chamber to a time when filibusters weren’t so commonly used to block nominations.
“This will be the first and last partisan filibuster of a Supreme Court nomination,” McConnell vowed ahead of Thursday’s votes.
Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) responded by warning that “the consequences for the Senate and for the future of the Supreme Court will be far-reaching.”
And Sen. Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.), who supports Gorsuch but opposed the rules change, said it was “everybody’s fault” that the Senate invoked the “nuclear option” and no longer requires 60 votes to confirm Supreme Court nominees. Manchin declared that Republicans will “rue the day that this happened” if they lose their majority.
George Washington “had it right” about the Senate, Manchin said. “We’re the saucer. Should be, anyway. Should be cooling off that tea. . . . The hot tea’s going to scald you now. It’s going to burn you.”
Members of the Senate Judiciary Committee hold a hearing on Gorsuch’s nomination on Monday. (Matt McClain/The Washington Post)
[The Daily 202: The legislative filibuster will be at risk now that the Senate has gone nuclear]
Republicans, determined to restore the conservative tilt of the Supreme Court since Scalia’s unexpected death, worked in lockstep on Thursday to see that Gorsuch would ultimately be confirmed. They remained remarkably united on the three votes needed to set Gorsuch on a glide path to confirmation.
By 1 p.m. on Thursday, most of the drama was over. On a vote of 55 to 45, all Republicans and three Democrats voted to proceed to final debate on Gorsuch, 49, a Denver-based judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit. Senators at that point had the option of using as many as 30 hours for debate.
Thursday was the second time in less than four years that senators voted to reshape the way they offer advice and consent to a president on executive branch and judicial nominees. In 2013, Democrats — angered by years of Republican blockades on Obama’s nominees — pushed through a rules change that allowed all executive branch nominees and lower-court picks to be confirmed with a simple majority vote. But Democrats did not include Supreme Court nominees as part of the changes, believing that lifetime appointments to the nation’s highest court should be handled differently.
Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), a past critic of invoking the nuclear option, said negotiations to prevent the rules change failed this time because of what the Senate has become.
“There’s such a profound lack of trust, and that’s what many of us are committed to trying to rebuild,” she said. “We need to make very clear to the leaders on both sides that there’s no support for curtailing our existing ability to filibuster legislation.”
Sen. Angus King (I-Maine) agreed that the clash was “hard to avoid” because Republicans saw Gorsuch as such an indisputably qualified nominee and Democrats had deep concerns about him.
As it had for much of the past few weeks, Garland’s name hovered over the proceedings in a way that was impossible to miss.
Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) stridently faulted McConnell for blocking Garland, saying that “the senator from Kentucky has made history. . . . He made history in denying a presidential nominee the opportunity for a hearing and a vote which had never, never happened before.”
Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) conceded that Democrats “are still bitter about Merrick Garland and, you know, I can’t blame them for that.” But he added, “If the roles were reversed they would have just tromped all over us. I mean, you know, they’d have done the same thing.”
The carefully staged deconstruction of the Senate tradition began Thursday with a “cloture vote” — a special feature of Senate procedure that ends debate on a bill or nomination, allowing the process to move to a final vote. Schumer and McConnell looked on from their desks at the front of the Senate chamber just a few feet apart as the voting began. Schumer took gulps of water between conversations with Durbin, his top deputy, and aides. McConnell sat calmly at his desk with a solemn expression.
Other senators sat patiently reading, checking their smartphones or filing in and out of the Senate cloakrooms as the clerk called the roll.
“It was very sanitary. Unemotional. Telegraphed in advance. Planned in advance,” said Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.).
[Here’s your guide for dummies to Neil Gorsuch’s confirmation to the Supreme Court]
After about 30 minutes, McConnell stood and switched his vote on advancing Gorsuch from “yes” to “no” — a parliamentary tactic allowing him to bring up the nomination again and to begin moves aimed at changing the rules.
The two Senate leaders then launched a series of procedural maneuvers that culminated with the rules change. McConnell first raised a “point of order” to suggest that Gorsuch’s nomination could be advanced with a simple majority rather than the usual 60 votes. Schumer responded by unsuccessfully moving to delay Gorsuch’s nomination and to adjourn the Senate. Then senators voted, with Republicans prevailing.
McConnell’s move was the culmination of nearly 14 months of work by the majority leader, who insisted just hours after Scalia died in February 2016 that his seat would remain open for the next president to fill. Since the start of this year, Gorsuch’s confirmation has sat atop his to-do list.
His gloating — reserved as it was — was criticized by wary Democrats.
“My GOP colleagues high fived each other after voting to damage pillars of our democracy. This is no cause for celebration,” Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) said on Twitter.
But Republicans remained cheery. Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.), casting his first vote on a nomination to the high court, paused before heading to the Senate floor to record a message using Snapchat. He adjusted the camera to make sure the shot included a statue of Benjamin Franklin behind him.
“It’ll be great to have a fellow Westerner on the court!” he said of Gorsuch, who is from Colorado.
No Supreme Court nominee has ever been blocked by a single-party filibuster. Abe Fortas, nominated to be chief justice in 1968, was the only nominee to get blocked on the cloture vote, by a bipartisan coalition that had enough votes to defeat his nomination outright.
Gorsuch’s nomination was announced in late January, and three days of confirmation hearings began on March 20 in the Senate Judiciary Committee. Formal debate on his nomination officially began Tuesday and was dominated into Wednesday by Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), one of the Senate’s most liberal members, who spoke overnight for more than 15 hours against Gorsuch.
Merkley, among other Democrats, signaled on Thursday that beyond concerns with Gorsuch, they would not necessarily support restoring Senate traditions if they retake control of the chamber.
“We can’t unilaterally disarm,” Merkley said.
But Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) warned that the change to Senate rules “makes it less likely you’re going to have centrist, moderate nominees on the Supreme Court.”
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), who grilled Gorsuch on campaign finance laws during the confirmation hearings, argued that no deal between the parties to maintain a filibuster would prevent Republicans from jamming through a future nominee if the court’s balance was at stake.
Asked what he was thinking as he walked to the Senate floor to vote on Gorsuch, Whitehouse said one word: “Inevitability.”
David Weigel and Kelsey Snell contributed to this report.
Why Serving Up Relevant Content to Consumers Is a Big Responsibility
Though she’s only been in her current position for little more than a month, Carla Hassan, evp, global chief marketer, Toys”R”Us, brought valuable insights to a panel discussion she joined at Adweek and Bloomberg Media’s breakfast event on March 28 called “Marketing In an Interruptive World.” The former Pepsi exec pointed out the importance of placing the consumer first in dreaming up marketing that will resonate with them.
“I actually hate the word digital, and I don’t like to use it because I think everything that we do—if you really start with the consumer, that’s their life,” Hassan told Adweek after the panel session. “Their life is mobile. Their life is digital. So we have to come up with solutions across the board and across all the channels that talk to them. If we start with them, we’ll be able to deliver content that’s relevant to them in the all the spaces they play.”
Take a look at the video to see what else Hassan said. And check out this video featuring Visa’s Kim Kadlec from the Adweek-Bloomberg Media event.
Rocket Fuel Remains the Only Company Currently Integrated with IAS to Run Video Campaigns on Verified In-Stream …
REDWOOD CITY, Calif. – April 6, 2017 (Investorideas.com Newswire) Rocket Fuel (NASDAQ: FUEL), a predictive marketing platform, today announced, in partnership with Integral Ad Science (IAS), research showing that within a particular set of video impressions, up to 70% labelled as ‘in-stream’ were actually misrepresented as in-banner. This research helps brands and agencies make better decisions regarding video ad inventory placement. Through a deep integration with Integral Ad Science, Rocket Fuel is now also equipped to help marketers and agencies address this problem, bringing more transparency to programmatic video buying by allowing them to run video campaigns on IAS verified in-stream inventory.
The study Rocket Fuel conducted looked at more than 47 billion video impression opportunities that were categorized as in-stream by an exchange partner or publisher. Rocket Fuel then used IAS data to determine whether those impressions were actually in-stream or not. The test was deployed across both desktop and mobile, as well as private marketplace (PMP) inventory and Open Exchange to show a complete picture of the drivers of both high and low quality inventory.
« The industry needs a new video solution for brands, » said Randy Wootton, CEO of Rocket Fuel. « We are dealing with a highly non-transparent market where many other video platforms are unable to accurately distinguish an in-banner from an in-stream impression. »
Rocket Fuel also found that traditional strategies that advertisers typically rely on to improve video inventory quality may not be effective, including large player targeting and PMPs. Solutions like large player size targeting only brought in-banner rates down by 4% compared to the average, and PMP showed a higher than average in-banner rate.
However, it is now possible for marketers and agencies to protect themselves from misrepresented in-banner. Using the same types of methods the industry has typically relied on to address similar quality issues like viewability and fraud, IAS powers capabilities that allow Rocket Fuel to provide clients with:
- Independent 3rd party verification, to hold partners accountable.
- Predictive targeting to limit mislabeled in-banner.
- AI-based fraud detection because fraud evolves and machine learning is one of the most efficient ways to identify suspicious impressions before bidding on them.
« This is why we partnered with IAS – to bring more transparency to programmatic video buying and to develop a solution that would allow advertisers to reduce the amount of in-banner video they buy against their will, » continued Wootton. « It’s through partnerships and efforts like these that we’ll continue to see turn around in the industry. »
Backbone Media, an online marketing firm, has been relying on Rocket Fuel for verified placement to deliver quality inventory for its client, the Breckenridge Tourism Office, and has seen strong results on in-stream placements.
« When you’re building a campaign that’s strictly about awareness, it’s hard to point to metrics that can prove whether or not it was a success, » said Morgan Cole, Media Planner at Backbone Media. « With Rocket Fuel, we’re finding that we’re getting real people who are going to interact with Breckenridge and it’s not just inventory lost on users that show little or no interest. A lot of times the programmatic world gets misrepresented by traffic that looks like bots and that’s one thing that Rocket Fuel has addressed. We’ve worked hard with Breckenridge to show that we’re buying the inventory they want and showing their ads to the people we want to see them, and these added layers of protection prove that. »
Rocket Fuel’s verified placement quality solution, powered by IAS, is deployed across Open Exchange, PMP, desktop and mobile, and is compatible with all the most common targeting and optimization tactics that Rocket Fuel typically offers to brand buyers.
About Rocket Fuel
Rocket Fuel is a predictive marketing software company that uses artificial intelligence to empower agencies and marketers to anticipate people’s need for products and services.
Headquartered in Redwood City, Calif., Rocket Fuel has more than 20 offices worldwide and trades on the NASDAQ Global Select Market under the ticker symbol « FUEL. » Rocket Fuel, the Rocket Fuel logo, Moment Scoring, Advertising That Learns and Marketing That Learns are trademarks or registered trademarks of Rocket Fuel Inc. in the United States and other countries.
About IAS
Integral Ad Science (IAS) is a global technology and data company that builds verification, optimization, and analytics solutions to empower the advertising industry to effectively influence consumers everywhere, on every device. We solve the most pressing problems for brands, agencies, publishers, and technology companies by verifying that every impression has the opportunity to be effective, optimizing towards opportunities to consistently improve results, and analyzing digital’s impact on consumer actions. Built on data science and engineering, IAS is headquartered in New York with global operations in ten countries. Our growth and innovation have been recognized in Inc. 500, Crain’s Fast 50, Forbes America’s Most Promising Companies, and I-COM’s Smart Data Marketing Technology Company. Learn more at www.integralads.com.
Contacts
Bite Communications for Rocket Fuel
Bethany Mullinix, 415-817-9990
Rocket_Fuel@biteglobal.com
TechSectorStocks.com – investing ideas in tech stocks- mobile payments, social media, AI and Robotics, Drone Stocks, GPS and more
Like Tech Stocks? View our Tech Stocks Directory
More Info:
This news is published on the Investorideas.com Newswire – a global digital news source for investors and business leaders
Disclaimer/Disclosure: Investorideas.com is a digital publisher of third party sourced news, articles and equity research as well as creates original content, including video, interviews and articles. Original content created by investorideas is protected by copyright laws other than syndication rights. Our site does not make recommendations for purchases or sale of stocks, services or products. Nothing on our sites should be construed as an offer or solicitation to buy or sell products or securities. All investment involves risk and possible loss of investment. This site is currently compensated for news publication and distribution, social media and marketing, content creation and more. Contact each company directly regarding content and press release questions. Disclosure is posted for each compensated news release, content published /created if required but otherwise the news was not compensated for and was published for the sole interest of our readers and followers. More disclaimer info: http://www.investorideas.com/About/Disclaimer.asp
Additional info regarding BC Residents and global Investors: Effective September 15 2008 – all BC investors should review all OTC and Pink sheet listed companies for adherence in new disclosure filings and filing appropriate documents with Sedar. Read for more info: http://www.bcsc.bc.ca/release.aspx?id=6894. Global investors must adhere to regulations of each country.
Pepsi and Kendall Jenner’s controversial ad is also a straight up rip of an old Chemical Brothers music video
This morning, inside Pepsi’s headquarters, some disconnected marketing executive is packing up their office and boxing up their desk for green-lighting the most pitifully dejected, tone-deaf piece of advertising in recent memory. In case you missed it, the soft drink giant is facing serious backlash after clumsily placing Kendall Jenner at the center of some poorly produced, vapid attempt at co-opting the numerous protest movements that have sprouted in this time of considerable tension in the United States and worldwide.
The Millennial-pandering commercial features Jenner at a photoshoot, when all the whimsy is interrupted outside by a massive passing protest. Jenner quickly tears off her wig, wipes away her lipstick and runs outside to join the cause. She pops open a crisp, delicious Pepsi — *psstt* — walks straight up to a law enforcement officer, and offers him the can of happiness that eases all the tension in America! Sadly, it gets worse.
The Pepsi commercial seems to be a thinly-veiled recycling of The Chemical Brothers 1999 music video for “Out Of Control,” though somehow it manages to miss the original’s mark by almost, to be gracious, 100 miles. The original feature stars Rosario Dawson facing a tactical police force in a similarly tumultuous protest scenario. With the power of a bottle of cola, she fends off the riot squad, only for the camera to pan to what is actually a television set in a living room, Dawson actually being the star of a commercial playing on the TV advertising the fizzy beverage. Meta, right?
Its hard to deny both videos’ conceptual similarities. Pepsi has since pulled the controversial ad and issued an apology. They say imitation is the highest form of flattery, though in this case, its unlikely The Chemical Brothers find anything flattering about Pepsi’s mess.
Read More:
Watch The Chemical Brothers’ surreal new video for ‘C-H-E-M-I-C-A-L
Lorde may have just teased new music in a cryptic commercial
Dustin Johnson exits Masters with injured back
AUGUSTA, Ga. — Dustin Johnson, saying Thursday he was « going to give it a try » after suffering a back injury during a fall at his rental home on Wednesday, walked off the first tee and pulled out of the Masters just prior to his first-round tee time.
Johnson, 32, the No. 1-ranked player in the world and the pre-tournament favorite after winning his previous three starts on the PGA Tour, slipped on wooden stairs and fell on his back in a « freak accident, » he said Thursday.
« It sucks, » Johnson said after withdrawing from the first major of the year. « Obviously, I want to play more than anything. It hurts. I was going everything I could to try and play. »
Johnson arrived at Augusta National on Thursday with the intention of playing. He visited physical trainers, warmed up on the driving range and hit a few putts. After much discussion following his warm-up shots, he told ESPN’s Tom Rinaldi that he will « give it a try » and headed to the first tee.
He then headed to the clubhouse just as his group was scheduled to tee off.
« I can’t swing full, » Johnson said. « I can’t make a normal swing. I could go back to about 80 percent.
« … Probably in three days, I’ll be fine. If this had happened Monday, I’d be fine. »
Johnson joins Tiger Woods (2014) as the only other No. 1-ranked player in the world to not play the Masters. He has won each of his past three starts on the PGA Tour.
He was scheduled to play in the day’s final group with two-time Masters champion Bubba Watson and PGA Championship winner Jimmy Walker. Johnson, who won the U.S. Open last June, has six victories since last year’s Masters, where he tied for fourth.
Johnson said he was wearing socks when he slipped on three wooden steps while heading out to the garage to move a car at the home that he is renting in Augusta on Wednesday night.
« He landed very hard on his lower back, » his manager, David Winkle, said Wednesday. He said Johnson was advised to remain immobile and begin taking inflammatory medication and icing the injury in hopes of being ready for the first round.
House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes recuses himself from Russia probe
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) temporarily recused himself Thursday from all matters related to the committee’s ongoing probe into Russian interference in the presidential election, as House investigators look into ethics charges against him.
The House Ethics Committee released a statement Thursday saying it had “determined to investigate” allegations that “Nunes may have made unauthorized disclosures of classified information, in violation of House Rules, law, regulations, or other standards of conduct.”
Nunes denied the charges as “entirely false and politically motivated,” blaming “several leftwing activist groups” for filing complaints with the Office of Congressional Ethics. Nunes said his recusal — which applies only to the committee’s Russia investigation — would be in effect while the House Ethics Committee looks into the matter. He noted that he has asked to speak with that committee “at the earliest possible opportunity in order to expedite the dismissal of these false claims.”
In the meantime, Nunes said, Rep. K. Michael Conaway (R-Tex.) will take the lead on the Russia investigation, with assistance from Reps. Thomas J. Rooney (R-Fla.) and Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), who also sits on the Ethics Committee.
House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) said Thursday that he does not think Nunes did anything wrong, but “fully support[s] his decision.”
“Chairman Nunes wants to make sure he is not a distraction to this very important investigation,” Ryan added.
Nunes came under fire in recent weeks for going to the White House grounds to meet with a secret source and view documents he said suggest that the identities of President Trump and his transition team members may have been improperly revealed in reports on surveillance of foreign targets. Nunes, who served on Trump’s transition team, did not alert the ranking Democrat on the Intelligence Committee before making the trip, or before briefing the press and Trump the next day about what he saw.
[The Nunes-White House question, assessed minute-by-minute]
Democrats have accused Nunes of coordinating with the White House about those reports, and suggested that in talking about them publicly, he might have released classified information. On March 28, the heads of advocacy groups Democracy 21 and Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington sent a letter to the Office of Congressional Ethics asking investigators to launch an inquiry into whether Nunes disclosed classified information. It is not clear whether that letter inspired the inquiry.
Democrats have also accused Nunes of coordinating with the White House about the witnesses appearing before the committee, after he canceled a planned open hearing with former director of national intelligence James R. Clapper Jr., former CIA director John Brennan, and former acting attorney general Sally Yates. The Washington Post reported that the Trump administration had sought to prevent Yates from testifying.
[Trump administration sought to block Sally Yates from testifying to Congress on Russia]
Elsewhere in Congress, GOP members applauded Nunes for stepping away from the probe and heralded the decision as one that could help heal divisions in the House Intelligence Committee and put their investigation back on course.
“The biggest mistake was not consulting with the Democrats,” Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said. “You have to do that if you’re going to be successful around here, especially on national security issues.”
“There’s still a lot of broken trust. . . . It’s too big of an issue not to have everybody work in a professional, serious way to be able to resolve this,” said Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.), a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee. “At the end of it, everybody’s got to trust the outcome.”
Stewarding the House’s investigation now falls to Conaway, 68, who also serves as chairman of the House Agriculture Committee and has a reputation on Capitol Hill as a quiet and diligent lawmaker. Conaway pledged to conduct the investigation “in a very strong, workmanlike manner, expeditiously,” and he said he would be “working with my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to get it done.”
But Conaway is also a Trump supporter, and on various occasions he has sought to sow doubt about the intelligence community’s conclusion that Russia meddled in the 2016 elections with the intention of helping Trump’s candidacy.
A major part of both the House and Senate intelligence committees’ probes involves potential links between members of Trump’s campaign and transition teams and Russian officials. But when FBI Director James B. Comey and National Security Agency Director Michael S. Rogers endorsed that finding before the House Intelligence Committee in an open hearing last month, Conaway questioned the intelligence community’s rationale and logic behind that conclusion.
“The logic is that because [Putin] really didn’t like presidential candidate [Hillary] Clinton that he automatically liked Trump?” Conaway asked Comey. “That might work on Saturday afternoon when my wife’s [Texas Tech] Red Raiders are playing the Texas Longhorns,” he noted, but he suggested that such logic would not apply “all the rest of the time.”
“It’s based on more than that,” Comey retorted, defending the logic by continuing the football metaphor. “Whoever the Red Raiders are playing, you want the Red Raiders to win; by definition you want their opponents to lose.”
In the past, Conaway has also said that if Congress wants to probe foreign interference in the 2016 election, it should also look into how “Harry Reid and the Democrats brought in Mexican soap opera stars, singers and entertainers who had immense influence” getting out the vote in Las Vegas.
“Those are foreign actors, foreign people, influencing the vote in Nevada,” Conaway told the Dallas Morning News in January. Mexican entertainers should be as troubling as Russian cyberhacking and propaganda dissemination because “it’s foreign influence,” he argued, adding: “If we’re worried about foreign influence, let’s have the whole story.”
Helping Conaway is Gowdy, another Intelligence Committee member who has drawn accusations from Democrats of letting partisanship seep into investigations. That was particularly the case when Gowdy chaired a select committee looking into the deaths of four Americans in Benghazi, Libya, in 2012.
Gowdy also sits on the House Ethics Committee, which is now investigating Nunes over allegations he may have disclosed classified information against House rules.
The House Ethics Committee’s announcement that it would look into the matter comes just over two weeks after Nunes’s controversial visit to the White House grounds, and just 10 days after the Democracy 21 and CREW letter was sent to the Office of Congressional Ethics.
That is an uncommonly quick turnaround for the committee, which often waits until it receives a formal referral and report from the Office of Congressional Ethics before taking up an inquiry. The House Ethics Committee did not lay out a timeline during which it expected to complete an initial review.
In the meantime, Nunes pledged in his statement to “continue to fulfill all my other responsibilities as Committee Chairman” in matters unrelated to the Russia probe.
The ranking Democrat on the Intelligence Committee, Rep. Adam B. Schiff (Calif.), commended Nunes for stepping down. Nunes acted “in the best interests of the committee, and I respect that decision,” Schiff said.
He also said he welcomed Conaway’s leadership of the investigation.
“The important work of investigating the Russian involvement in our election never subsided, but we have a fresh opportunity to move forward in the unified and nonpartisan way that an investigation of this seriousness demands,” Schiff said.
In a statement, the House Ethics Committee cited its “institutional obligation” to investigate “unauthorized disclosures of classified information.”
Mike DeBonis contributed to this report.
Senate Republicans Deploy ‘Nuclear Option’ to Clear Path for Gorsuch
Log In
Don’t have an account? Sign up here »
Marvel’s The Defenders’ clever trailer is a video marketing treasure hunt
Netflix seems to be loving clue-riddled trailers, and no one is complaining. In the latest teaser for the upcoming Marvel’s The Defenders series, viewers are allowed their first look at Daredevil, Luke Cage, Jessica Jones and Iron Fist together and working as a team.
And this isn’t all Netflix has gifted.
In the teaser, the gang wait in an elevator before Jessica Jones realises a CCTV camera is watching them. She immediately destroys it. But hidden in the seemingly innocuous teaser are two clues to the new series.
Marvel’s The Defenders’ first trailer is a smart bit of video marketing
The first is a release date. When the camera turns to static, the time stamp halts on 08:18:20:17. That’s right: The Defenders will be coming to your devices 18 August 2017.
The second clue is an IP address in the top left corner: 23.253.120.81. Type it into your browser, and you’re sent off to nybulletin.com. The fictional news site displays multiple stories that could hint to what’s in store for The Defenders.
The main story on the home page is an interview with the Meachums from Iron Fist.
In the interview, the siblings get asked if their pharma company Rand is cursed.
“I deal in reality,” Joy responds defensively. “No, we have no concerns whatsover.”
Next to the interview is an advert for Colleen Wing’s dojo. Clicking it takes you to her website, where you can watch her full advert and read testimonials.
On her site, an advert for Rand takes you to Ward Meachum’s fake LinkedIn account.
Back on the New York Bulletin’s home page is a promo for a series on “Heroes of New York.” Included in the promo is a picture of Claire Temple — the doctor who has featured in all four individual series. While we can all agree she deserves the high praise, this insert may hint to the bigger role she plays in The Defenders.
A few of the stories featured on the site include “Crackpot scientist seeks lost city” (K’un-Lun?), “Luke Cage’d”, “Where is the devil in Hell’s Kitchen?” and “Patsy Walker Mom get permanent house guest.”
Now this is some seriously fun marketing.
Four Myths of Video Marketing That Hold Loyalty Marketers Back
Personalized video has been a serious topic of discussion among loyalty marketers for quite some time. But, for many of those marketers, the decision to pull the switch on personalized video has been a difficult one.
Chris Hall, vice president of customer engagement solutions for Pitney Bowes, talked to Loyalty360 about this compelling topic.
“Video has never been so accessible,” Hall explained. “Desktops, laptops, tablets, and smartphones have created an ‘always on’ society. Screens are popping up everywhere: In waiting rooms, at gas pumps, in banks and stores. As a marketer, you need to understand all that video can do. Grasp where, when, and how it fits within the scheme of established marketing best practices, strategies, and tactics; But first, you need to get past the four myths of video marketing that hold so many businesses back.”
Myth 01: YouTube is the Holy Grail.
The YouTube platform is incredibly successful. It has more than a billion users. They watch hundreds of millions of hours of video every day and their numbers continue to grow at an extraordinary rate. YouTube and YouTube-style videos, however, have their limitations. With YouTube-style videos, you’re offering one-way experiences, not enabling bi-directional interaction. Creating and posting a YouTube video is simple and practically anyone can do it. However, businesses often “get what they pay for.” It’s easy for underqualified personnel to create and post videos on your brand’s behalf.
Myth 02: It’s all about going viral.
Going viral is exciting, but what really matters is what happens as a result of all those views. Is your video reaching the right audiences? Are viewers taking the actions you want? What kind of return are you getting on your video investment in terms of sales, satisfaction, and savings? When you think of video in terms of these types of business results, you’ll see the advantage of applying other metrics such as length of engagement and repeat views.
Myth 03: A video is just a mini-movie.
Movies are one-size-fits-all. The viewer just sits and watches. There are times when you want that from video. Often, though, you can benefit from video that lets you:
• Personalize for individual customers.
• Target to specific segments.
• Create interactive experiences.
• Simplify complex material to match specific viewer needs.
Look for a video solution that gives you the flexibility to adjust the levels of interactivity and personalization to create different types of video for different situations. You’ll want to be able to mix and match different capabilities to create experiences to fit your every purpose.
Myth 04. Video is a standalone channel.
Video may be the preferred form of communication, but it would be a mistake to think that it will replace all other forms of marketing. Relegate it to its own standalone channel and you will lose out. Leading marketers are already looking at video as an addition to their integrated marketing toolkits. They’re using it for onboarding, incorporating it into lead nurture campaigns, adding it to their online portals, and more. When video enriches existing types of customer interaction, rather than trying to replace them, everyone benefits.
Hall said it’s not just a theory that video marketing adds a demonstrable, dollar-sign value-add to your revenue stream. In fact, he noted, marketers that use video see their revenue growth outpace that of non-video marketers by 63 percent.
How? By making it an interactive and personalized experience.
“Just as salespeople greeting consumers when they walk into the store and help them find the products they’re looking for can lead to increased sales and customer satisfaction, making interactive personalized video a core part of your marketing efforts is key to driving engagement,” Hall added. “It put customers in control of their purchase–allowing them to dictate what they see in a given video and when instead of being bored by a generic message or YouTube ad they’ve seen a dozen times already.”
Just getting customers to watch a video can be a hurdle, in and of itself, Hall said, but when it’s customized to their wants and needs, more than half (55 percent) will stick around to watch, well over the industry average.
“Beyond that, a whopping 76 percent of customers will take part in an interactive personalized video for at least four minutes–a benefit that goes a long way not just in improving overall engagement, but leaving customers satisfied and more likely to remain loyal to your brand.”
Despite these positive signs, business video is still finding its place.
“For every high-impact video, there are countless others that have literally no impact at all,” Hall explained. “There are also many that reflect poorly on their brands. Most businesses fail to capitalize on video’s true potential. They don’t integrate it throughout their marketing ecosystems or approach it with the same rigor and metrics that guide their other communications efforts. There are so many ways to connect with customers via video for marketing, sales, service and educational purposes. As a marketer, you need to understand all that video can do.”
As much as video marketing can bring to the table, it would be a mistake to treat it as its own independent channel, Hall said.
“Instead, utilizing an omnichannel communications strategy in tandem with services like EngageOne Video ensures that businesses are reaping all the benefits of video while keeping them integrated with the rest of their marketing channels,” he added.