As was mentioned in Rebecca Moore s What’s on the Agenda for Marketing in 2017 post, video marketing is becoming increasingly important and profitable, particularly social media video marketing. Of course, to assume that video marketing is one and the same via all social platforms would be a mistake. Just like you wouldn’t post content the same way across all platforms, the video content that you create needs to be unique for each platform that you intend to use. Consider the differences and benefits discussed below for four of the major platforms when planning your social media video marketing strategy.

Video Marketing via YouTube

Since YouTube is entirely video content, it makes video marketing on YouTube a no-brainer. Of course with most people trying to take advantage of video marketing on YouTube, standing out and achieving better results requires a few best practices. Creating unique or unconventional content will be your first priority. With hundreds of hours of video available for audience consumption on YouTube, yours has to stand out from the rest. Ultimately people are on YouTube to be entertained and will steer clear of anything that seems boring, unoriginal, or purely promotional. You want to ultimately tell a story, not overtly sell a product. Aside from content, there are some basic marketing strategies – sort of SEO tips if you will – that you can implement to improve your video ranking on YouTube. This article explains many of them in good detail if you’re keen on trying your hand at them. This includes things like contextual keywords used to be found through a standard search and optimising your video advertisement. You should also experiment with video length and audience targets to see how your advertisements perform one against the other, then keep what works and build on it.

Video Marketing via Facebook

Despite YouTube’s video heavy content, when it comes to social networks and audience reach potential, nothing beats Facebook. With just under 2 billion users, the audience market and potential for exposure is just too big to ignore. And because Facebook videos begin playing automatically, you have added opportunity to hook your audience if you design your video correctly. Audio is only activated after a user clicks on the video, so don’t rely on sound to get your point across. Instead, use intriguing or compelling visuals to tell your story. Depending on the aim of your video, you need to create that video differently. Video on Facebook performs best, then, when it is focused – stick to one purpose and drive the message home. Since the option is there, you should be using audience targeting to your advantage. If your video won’t be appealing to everyone, then turn on custom audiences to ensure that you are reaching the correct target group. This will help you make more of an impact within your video reach. It is also best to keep videos concise and easy to consume.

Video Marketing via Twitter

Although often overshadowed by the likes of Facebook and YouTube, Twitter video marketing is not to be overlooked. In 2015 Twitter released some video statistics that showed a high engagement or 82% of users watching video on Twitter. The general consensus was that “Twitter users love video!” Twitter offers options to upload pre-made videos via file or YouTube link, or the added benefit of creating Twitter videos directly in the mobile app. This opens up the ability to harness spontaneity and create “in the moment.” The types of video content that tend to do well on twitter are informational how-to videos, product demonstrations, behind-the-scenes looks into brands, customer response videos from brands, interviews and events, and strangely enough even promotional videos – when done tastefully – are consumed well on Twitter.

Video Marketing via Instagram

Instagram is seeing video rise in popularity and importance, taking the “sharing content via images” backbone that Instagram has built to a new level. The major benefit of utilising Instagram for video marketing is its very specialised audience. Instagram, with over 600 million users, is an extensive network of eager people who are there specifically to consume visual content. Videos on Instagram can be up to 60 seconds long and you are able to add filters – one of the Instagram claims to fame. Despite the fact that Instagram does offer video ads, your content should nevertheless not be purely promotional. The Instagram audience is there to be awed and amazed, not to consume advertisements. In order to make your 60 seconds count, it is better to create intriguing content that shows your brand personality and utilises humour, as well as engages the community directly through user generated content.

Although the Marine Corps was quick to condemn the secretive “Marines United” Facebook group, the Corps’ leadership has known for years about websites that encourage misogyny and cyber bullying of female Marines, veterans and other women.

Four years ago, Rep. Jackie Speier, D-Calif., warned then-Commandant Gen. James Amos that male Marines were harassing their female counterparts on Facebook pages.

“Back in 2013 then-Commandant Gen. Amos wrote to me saying, ‘We share your indignation,’ regarding deplorable images on social media that denigrate women in the United States Marine Corps,” Speier said in a Wednesday speech on the House floor. 

“They were words — just words. I fear military leadership will say anything to placate Congress and an outraged public but then do nothing.”

While the Marine Corps is moving rapidly to deal with the fallout from the scandal, it is unclear whether the Corps will have any more success than it has in the past in stopping cyber bullying and online harassment.

The latest revelations have sparked a criminal investigation amid allegations that Marines and others were posting “revenge porn” and encouraging sexual assault, potential violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

The potential crimes were first reported
 by Marine Corps veteran Thomas Brennan and
published by the Center for Investigative Reporting’s
 
Reveal on March 4.

Speier is now calling on Defense Secretary James Mattis, a retired Marine general, to ensure that the Marines involved with “Marines United” face consequences for their actions.

“That means heads should roll,” she said. “Talk is cheap. Action is what is needed for the integrity of the military. Survivors must be supported, and that will only happen if those bad Marines are drummed out of the Corps — with no exceptions.”

A Marine Corps spokesman at the Pentagon, Maj. Christian Devine, acknowledged the service’s struggle to combat cyber sexism is not new.

« We’ve obviously had significant challenges to date combating the complexities of online harassment and will need to do more, » Devine told Marine Corps Times Tuesday.

« We intend to deliberately attack the problem while being mindful of an individual’s right to self-expression, » he said.

As Marine leaders were trying to tamp down the Corps’ scandal, new reports emerged Thursday suggesting that the problem of misogyny online and public posting of naked female service members may be far more widespread and involve other services. The
report from Business Insider suggested a vast network of military men actively requesting photos of women, in some cases using specific names and units.

One Marine spokeswoman said new reports are unsurprising.

« We fully expect that the discovery of Marines United will motivate Marines to come forward to notify their chain of command of pages like it.  Things may seem to get worse before they get better;  Marines will attack this problem head-on and continue to get better, » Marine Capt. Ryan E. Alvis said in a statement Thursday.

A familiar problem

In May 2013, Speier and others focused criticism on Marine humor Facebook pages such as “Just The Tip of the Spear” and “POG Boot F***s” for denigrating women.

One image posted at the time on JTTOTS showed two female Marines, each with a black eye, along with the caption: “Should have made that sandwich.” 

Four years ago, the Marine Corps acknowledged that it had received about half-a-dozen complaints about inappropriate content on Marine humor pages. But none had led to a court-martial, said Master Gunnery Sgt. Robert Raines, the Marine Corps’ outgoing senior equal-opportunity adviser.

“I wouldn’t call it a trend yet, » Raines told Marine Corps Times in 2013.

« But it’s definitely something that’s trending toward another issue that DoD will probably have to get its arms around in any way that we can, » he said.

Four years later, the problem has only gotten worse due to apathy from Marine Corps leadership, Speier said on Wednesday.

“It’s abundantly clear that this is not a few bad Marines; rather, it’s another example of a cultural rot,” Speier said.

“It is a blight that infects not just the ranks of the enlisted, but also the officer corps. Military leadership have utterly failed in their responsibility to protect their troops, punish those involved and uphold the professed values of the Corps.”

Will it be different this time?

Officials say the probe, underway for several weeks, could include active-duty military personnel, veterans and individuals who are not affiliated with the armed forces. Beyond the Uniform Code of Military Justice, many states have « revenge porn » laws, with some considering the crime a misdemeanor and others a felony.

Some Marines involved could face UCMJ charges such as “indecent viewing, visual recording or broadcasting” and discrediting the Marine Corps, Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps Ronald Green said Wednesday.

“We’re going to make sure that any active-duty Marines that are out there, if they were involved in this behavior, that we hold them accountable,” Marine Corps Commandant Gen. Robert Neller said Thursday in
an interview with National Public Radio.

Neller declined to say what punishments Marines might face because the investigation is ongoing.

“What could happen is something that I don’t have the authority over right now,” he said. “That’s going to be part of the judicial process — or administrative process — that goes here.”

Marine Corps leaders are plotting their next steps, which are expected to include force-wide messaging and a focused response to the growing calls from members of Congress who’ve demanded near-term accountability and a long-term strategy for addressing what’s become a persistent problem in the ranks.

“Right now, this is an opportunity to remind everybody of what our responsibilities are, what your responsibilities are and what the consequences are and the potential pitfalls are out there on the web,” Neller said.

It remains to be seen whether that will translate to new policies. In a video to all Marines posted on Tuesday, Neller directed commanders first to ensure they understand and enforce existing rules on social media conduct, harassment and abuse. “If changes need to be made,” he added, “they will be made.”

To truly tackle the problems manifested in the “Marines United” scandal, the Marine Corps needs to overhaul recruit training, where young adults, often right out of high school, are segregated for the first 13 weeks of their military careers, according to the Service Women’s Action Network.

For many years, the Marine Corps has successfully resisted calls to fully integrate its recruit training, as the Army, Navy and Air Force do, though there have been efforts to raise the profile of women in leadership roles with hopes it will have a positive influence on male recruits.

“As a starting point, boot camp should be integrated,” SWAN argued in a statement by Kate Hedricks Thomas, a board member and Marine Corps veteran. “Further, women should be fully integrated into all occupations and units of the Marine Corps, and Marine Corps leadership must take a more active role in promoting the capabilities and qualities that women bring to the fight.”

Jeff Schogol is a senior writer for Marine Corps Times. On Twitter: @JeffSchogol.

With reporting by Military Times senior editor Andrew deGrandpre. On Twitter: @adegrandpre. 

President Trump has so far managed to avoid becoming a target for the conservative backlash to Speaker Paul RyanPaul RyanRight targets Ryan — not Trump — on ObamaCare plan Ryan pushes back against critics panning health plan as ‘entitlement’ Gingrich praises House GOP border tax proposal MORE’s ObamaCare repeal and replace plan, even as the White House vigorously whips support for the bill.

Ryan hasn’t been so lucky.

Breitbart News, which has long been one of Ryan’s most vocal foes, panned his American Health Care Act as “Speaker Ryan’s ObamaCare 2.0.”

Powerful conservative groups Club for Growth and FreedomWorks, whose leaders discussed the issue with Trump on Wednesday, have branded the bill as “RyanCare.” A FreedomWorks digital ad included a photoshopped image of former President Obama laughing with his arm around the Speaker.

And in an interview with Breitbart, Sen. Rand PaulRand PaulRight targets Ryan — not Trump — on ObamaCare plan Overnight Healthcare: Top conservative pushes for Medicaid changes in ObamaCare bill The Hill’s 12:30 Report MORE (R-Ky.) said Ryan is working to deceive Trump about the bill, accusing the Speaker of “trying to pull the wool over the eyes of the president.”

Conservative media, outside groups and Tea Party lawmakers have been nearly unanimous in directing their anger at Ryan and GOP leadership, while crediting Trump with being open to helping them improve the bill and negotiate better terms — even as the White House puts its muscle behind the bill’s passage.

“What we’ve seen from President Trump in 49 days in office is that he’s working to keep the promises he made on the campaign trail, so I’m encouraged and optimistic about that,” said Tea Party Patriots president Jenny Beth Martin, who met with Trump on Wednesday.

“What concerns me is that we don’t trust the leadership in the House or the Senate to keep their promises.”

In an interview with The Hill, Martin said she’s grown tired of years of congressional leaders promising to repeal ObamaCare — if only they had the majorities to do so.

“We have heard from thousands of our supporters who are upset about Paul Ryan’s bill. They want full repeal. We’ve seen so many excuses come from Capitol Hill,” Martin continued. “We’ve heard them all and we’re wise to it now.”

In a Thursday podcast produced by RealClearPolitics, House Freedom Caucus chairman Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), who has been at the forefront of conservative GOP opposition to the bill, accused House Republican leaders of “putting Donald TrumpDonald TrumpThe truth about American wages Trump’s administration built (so far) using Reagan’s blueprint Right targets Ryan — not Trump — on ObamaCare plan MORE in a very bad place” by framing the debate as a choice between going with the House bill or siding with Democrats and keeping ObamaCare.

“They’re using that as a selling point, but I can tell you that the last person that wants to be in a fight with President Trump is me,” Meadows said. “Most of these people that are out there doing that, they didn’t campaign with him. I did. … Now all of the sudden, there’s a choice between Nancy Pelosi and Donald Trump? I don’t get it.”

Ryan isn’t taking the criticism lying down.

« It would be good if Republicans spent more energy trying to repeal and replace ObamaCare and less planning for failure, » Ryan spokeswoman AshLee Strong said.

And during a chart-filled PowerPoint presentation Thursday, Ryan argued that the bill was “modeled” on legislation crafted by former Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.), a former Republican Study Committee chairman who is now HHS secretary. A dozen Freedom Caucus members co-sponsored that bill just last December, Ryan said.

“This is the closest we will ever get to repealing and replacing ObamaCare,” Ryan said. “The time is here. The time is now. This is the moment.”

And he’s going into the lion’s den to sell the bill, sitting for tough questions on shows hosted by Fox News’s Sean Hannity and Tucker Carlson.

In a Wednesday night interview, Carlson grilled Ryan, questioning why a bill that Republicans had years to agree on would face such backlash, alleging that Ryan was slow-walking Trump’s agenda. Carlson even jabbed Ryan on the Easter recess, saying that House Republicans were spending too much time away from Capitol Hill.

“We spent a year working on this plan,” Ryan responded. “All House Republicans participated in this. We had these working groups where anybody who had an idea brought it to the table and then we reached consensus as conservatives, as the Republicans, on what that plan look like. We called it ‘A Better Way,’ we put it on the internet, we all ran for Congress in 2016 on that plan. It was modeled on …Tom Price’s legislation. That’s what this is. This is the legislative text of that plan that we ran in 2016 on what we would replace ObamaCare with.”

Meadows disputed Ryan’s claim that “A Better Way” was equivalent to the new repeal and replace plan, saying it was merely a group of broad principles he and other Republicans agreed on, while “most members read about what was in [the AHCA] from a leaked draft to a [news] publication.” 

White House support for the healthcare bill could prove crucial. 

The Hill has reported that Ryan and chief White House strategist Steve Bannon, who hounded Ryan as chairman of Breitbart News, have forged a positive working relationship. Bannon did not respond to a request for comment about Ryan’s handling of the healthcare bill.

A White House official told The Hill that “Trump and his administration have been working collaboratively with House and Senate leadership” and that they are “confident that this is the bill that is going to repeal and replace the disastrous ObamaCare law.”

“This bill will land on the president’s desk, he will sign it,” White House press secretary Sean Spicer said in a briefing with reporters, calling Ryan’s Thursday presentation “a very good PowerPoint.”

Meanwhile, conservative groups and lawmakers are emerging from meetings praising Trump for being open to negotiation, while hanging their displeasure with the bill squarely on GOP leadership in the House.

“The legislation as it is now is House leadership legislation,” said Americans for Prosperity president Tim Phillips, who also met with Trump on Wednesday. “There are good things in it. We appreciate that. But it’s not what they promised, which is full repeal of ObamaCare.”

Like a patient awakened from an enforced period of suspended animation, South Korea’s body politic has been sharply brought back to life.

Friday’s unanimous eight-person Constitutional Court ruling, that upheld last December’s National Assembly decision to impeach President Park Geun-hye, has finally swept away the uncertainty that has paralysed the country for months.

The court’s ruling supports 13 counts of impeachment that argued that Ms Park had been unduly influenced by her long-term friend and confidante, Choi Soon-sil, to pressure leading conglomerates to provide some $70m (£57m) of illegal donations to two private foundations managed by Ms Choi.

Viewed narrowly, the case has been about the excessive influence of an unelected and unaccountable private citizen determining government policy, including the appointment of cabinet members, and persuading the president to sanction bribery and influence peddling.

The court’s decision strips Ms Park of all political authority, exposes her to the likelihood that she will have to defend herself against criminal charges, and marks the start of a 60-day period that will culminate in the election of a new president in early May.

Viewed broadly, the impeachment controversy reflects deep, historical fissures running through South Korean society.

Read more:

• What does this mean for South Korea?
• South Korea’s corruption scandal explained
• Did a puppy bring down South Korea’s president?

For the 77% of Koreans backing impeachment – including the hundreds of thousands of young and middle-aged voters who joined candle-lit demonstrations over the past months – Ms Park’s failings have been proof of the wider institutional and political shortcomings of the country.

This has included: privilege and corruption within the economic elites, underscored by the dramatic arraignment on bribery and embezzlement charges of Samsung Vice-Chairman Lee Jae-yong; favouritism and lack of transparency within an education system that should ideally provide social mobility and success for ordinary Koreans (Ms Choi’s daughter was granted unfair access to one of the elite universities); and an authoritarian predisposition on the part of Ms Park to blacklist her political rivals in academia, arts and the media.

For the roughly 20% of the population opposed to impeachment – predominately citizens in their sixties and above – the attack on the president is a politically motivated witch-hunt, based on rumour and unsubstantiated allegations.

At best, according to this view, Ms Park was guilty of poor judgment in relying on her friend, and the court’s decision represents a capitulation to populist pressure rather than an informed legal decision.

Identity politics is at the heart of the controversy. To her supporters, the campaign against Ms Park is an attack on the legacy of her father, Park Chung-hee, the authoritarian leader who created the Miracle on the Han River that rapidly transformed South Korea into Asia’s fourth-largest economy. Impeaching the president tarnishes and discredits this narrative of success and, by extension, the older generation of Koreans who contributed to the spectacular economic development.

To Ms Park’s opponents, the impeachment is confirmation of the renewed vibrancy and effectiveness of political institutions. To them, it is a reaffirmation of the alternative narrative of national development based on the success of the democratisation movement of the 1980s that ended authoritarian rule.

What comes next?

Looking ahead, the key challenge for whoever succeeds Ms Park will be to unify the country and bridge the gap between these two contrasting narratives.

Among a crowded field of some seven to 10 potential candidates, progressive candidates are likely to be best-placed to capitalise on the widespread opposition to the president and the conservative politicians associated with her party.

Moon Jae-in, the former head of the opposition Democratic Party, is the current front-runner, with some 37% support. But he faces a credible primary challenge from his party rival, Ahn Hee-chung, a local governor and charismatic 51-year-old with a reputation for pragmatism and the ability to appeal across the political spectrum.

Mr Moon has been criticized by the more ideologically radical members of his party for excessive caution in responding to the popular campaign against Ms Park. Moreover, his statements in favour of dialogue with North Korea and a pledge to visit Pyongyang have opened him up to the charge of naivety in addressing the current security crisis, at a time when public opinion is increasingly impatient with the North.

The next president will have little time or resources with which to respond to the immediate challenges. A sharply-truncated presidential transition period means that the new incumbent will likely need to rely on officials from the outgoing administration.

A pro-engagement progressive president is also likely to encounter tensions with a Trump White House that favours a more combative approach towards North Korea and which has rushed to install new Thaad missile defence batteries in the South – a decision fiercely opposed by China. Beijing has been using strong-arm diplomatic pressure and economic discrimination against Korean firms in China to try and reverse the Thaad decision, but already there are signs that this is provoking an anti-Chinese backlash within South Korea.

Foreign and domestic politics will, therefore, be key tests for the next president who will need to respond to the challenge of revitalising a divided and deadlocked polity.

For the now-disgraced former president Park, who entered office in 2013 claiming to govern for all Koreans and who in the 1970s had to adjust to the trauma of seeing both her parents assassinated, the court ruling is surely the definitive end point in a political life marked by tragedy and acute personal disappointment.

Dr John Nilsson-Wright is Senior Lecturer in Japanese Politics and the International Relations of East Asia, University of Cambridge and Senior Research Fellow for Northeast Asia, Asia Program, Chatham House

Since her turn from troubled teen to social media star, Danielle Bregoli’s “Cash Me Ousside” catchphrase has given her an incredible level of notoriety. Between videos with Kodak Black and various radio gigs, she’s stretching her 15 minutes of fame to the max.

Now, the 13-year-old Florida native turned a PR stunt on her Instagram and Twitter pages into a music video for Mook Boy’s “Juvy.”

Tuesday (March 7), it was thought her social media pages were hacked, as well-produced video posts deemed Bregoli “no idol” and “no role model.”

i ᶏᵯ ᵰ⌀ ᶃ⌀ᶑ ᶂ ᶏ ᶘ ᶊ ᶕ  ᶖ  Ð 0 Ꞁ Демократия умирает во мраке

A post shared by Danielle Bregoli (@bhadbhabie) on Mar 7, 2017 at 10:16am PST

According to a statement from her team, Bregoli actually linked up with visual artist and director Glassface to create “a commentary on the state of celebrity, current events and speaks on hysteria, fake news conspiracy theories.”

Bregoli might have almost been in another music video as she claimed Stitches tried to trick her into appearing in one of his visuals without approval from her team. But the Miami rapper denies manipulating the teen and had nothing but praise for her.

Looks like Dr. Phil created a monster.

Check out the video for Mook Boy’s “Juvy” featuring Danielle Bregoli above.