Like many execs in digital media, I had one of those “wait what?” moments recently when I saw that marketing intelligence company WARC found that the percentage of marketing campaigns leading with TV on its list of most effective advertisers has “steadily increased.” The report also noted a “sharp fall” over the past year or so in social-led campaigns.

WARC didn’t disclose the data it used in its calculations, but I find the notion that advertisers are returning to TV to be far-fetched. To the contrary, the continuing narrative in 2017 is that advertisers are fleeing TV at an accelerated rate. eMarketer expects TV’s share of the advertising pie to shrink from 35.2% today to 30.8% by 2021. If anything, the phenomenon that WARC has noticed is a blip, for the following reasons:

1. TV has its own viewability problem. Bots are such a part of digital media that it’s common to see viewability rates in the 40–60% range. Meanwhile, how do you know that someone is viewing your TV ad? The answer is, you don’t. Personal experience shows that often people check their phones, leave the room and change the channel when a commercial comes on. A 2010 Nielsen study found 14% of viewers change channels during a commercial break and 20% of consumers change rooms during commercials. Considering the average primetime CPM for adults 18–49 was $47 in the 2016–17 season, that’s a lot of waste.
2. TV is no longer the dominant device in the living room. A 2016 eMarketer study found nearly 85% of viewers surf the web while watching TV. Biometric data found that 60% of the time a person is most highly engaged during a TV session is actually while he is doing a non-TV related activity, such as using a digital device or talking to someone else in the room.
3. Younger viewers are tuning out traditional TV in droves. If you’re trying to reach younger viewers, TV isn’t effective and is getting less effective by the day. A 2016 study by digital media firm Defy Media found that consumers 13–24 watch 12.1 hours a week of Internet-based video compared to 8.8 hours on Netflix and other subscription video services. That dwarfs the 8.2 hours a week they spend watching traditional TV. Some 30% of Millennials have also cut the cord, rejecting traditional phones and cable services, according to a 2016 survey from GfK MRI.
4. TV advertising is still far too wasteful. While the majority of digital advertising is bought and sold programmatically and uses reams of data to determine whether the target consumer is likely to be interested in the product, most TV inventory is still based on demographics. This is outdated thinking; it’s much more effective to target consumers who are interested in your product category and have bought that product in the past than viewers who just happen to be between the ages of 18–49. A decade ago, media sellers might have argued that video on TV was more effective than banner ads, but that video was now ubiquitous and a much better buy.

The caveat with this argument is that TV is changing. In a few years, most inventory will likely be bought and sold programmatically, the way that digital media is. That’s not the case in 2017 though. Some top advertiser may have had success with TV-led campaigns recently, but there are smarter ways to go about it.

We all set SEO goals for ourselves. And if someone asks us outright, we’ll all say that our dream is to be on the first page of Google results. Those of us who are being honest with ourselves know that it takes time and money to make that happen. As most legitimate marketers will tell you, the best SEO hack is, of course, having great content. The next layer is solid keyword research and a targeted PPC campaign. Of course, you’ll want to make sure that you’re following the same types of best practices that you would with any other type of content. Provide a variety of video content, make sure that it’s high-quality, and provide value to your audience.

Chat with us in Facebook Messenger. Find out what’s happening in the world as it unfolds.

Prosecutors formally charged Mr. DiNardo, who knew the victims, with all four murders and Mr. Kratz with three of them, and both men face a host of related charges.

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

On Thursday, a lawyer for Mr. DiNardo said his client confessed in an agreement that would spare him the death penalty.

Officials said the murders sprang from three separate deals to sell the victims between a few ounces and four pounds of marijuana last week. But they had no explanation for the larger question of why relatively small-time drug transactions would set off a killing spree.

“I’m not really sure if we could ever answer that question,” Matthew D. Weintraub, the Bucks County district attorney, said at a news conference.

The arrest of Mr. Kratz, who has a history of burglary, theft and related arrests, widened the scope of an already sprawling case, one that has transfixed the Philadelphia region, with frequent live TV updates and helicopters hovering over the farm in affluent Solebury Township while authorities dug with cadaver-sniffing dogs.

Mr. Weintraub said that excavations on the farm, which is owned by Mr. DiNardo’s parents, had yielded four bodies positively identified as the missing men: Jimi Taro Patrick, 19; Dean Finocchiaro, 19; Thomas Meo, 21; and Mark Sturgis, 22.

Mr. DiNardo has been described by prosecutors, his own lawyers and the police as mentally ill — last summer, he was sent involuntarily to a mental hospital — and another young man who socialized with him and two of the victims said Mr. DiNardo had talked about killing people and having people killed.

Mr. DiNardo lived 30 miles south of the farm with his parents in a four-bedroom stucco house with a pool in Bensalem. The close-in Philadelphia suburb is overlaid with strip malls, and where an American-born population mixes with immigrant strivers from Asia and the Middle East.

Mr. DiNardo’s grandfather, for whom he was named, acquired numerous properties in Philadelphia and in Bucks County, including storefronts and an apartment house. Before his death, he worked with his son, Antonio DiNardo, to build homes on Wayland Circle in Bensalem, a cul-de-sac where the family still lives. A neighbor said that, as a teenager, Cosmo DiNardo would volunteer to cut lawns and shovel snow. “Cosmo has been a baby to us,” said the neighbor, a physician who asked to be identified by only his first name, Abid, to protect his privacy.

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

But Mr. DiNardo was no baby to Bensalem police, whose chief, Frederick Harran, said the department had 30 contacts with him since 2011.

Only one of those contacts had led to an arrest: In February, officers responding to reports of gunfire found Mr. DiNardo in a car with a 20-gauge shotgun. He had been prohibited from possessing a firearm because of his prior hospital commitment.

Mr. DiNardo graduated in 2015 from Holy Ghost Prep, a private Catholic high school in Bensalem, and attended Arcadia University in Glenside, Pa., for one semester. According to the Philadelphia Inquirer, Mr. DiNardo was barred from returning to the school after making disturbing remarks.

Photo

The complaints filed against the two men stated that Mr. Kratz admitted he intended to rob some of the victims, and to being present for three of the killings — but not to taking part in any of them.

Mr. DiNardo told investigators that on July 5, he agreed to sell Mr. Patrick, who was a year behind him at Holy Ghost Prep, four pounds of marijuana for $8,000. Mr. Patrick, the only one of either the victims or the accused enrolled in college, had just finished his freshman year at Loyola University in Baltimore.

Mr. DiNardo drove his former schoolmate to the farm in Bucks County, not far from the art colony and quaint tourist destination of New Hope.

Newsletter Sign Up

Continue reading the main story

Thank you for subscribing.

An error has occurred. Please try again later.

You are already subscribed to this email.

View all New York Times newsletters.

• See Sample
• Manage Email Preferences
• Not you?
• Privacy Policy
• Opt out or contact us anytime

There, the complaints said, Mr. Patrick admitted that he had only $800, and Mr. DiNardo offered to sell him a shotgun instead.

Instead of going through with the gun sale, Mr. DiNardo shot and killed Mr. Patrick with a .22-caliber rifle, the complaints said. He then drove a backhoe to the site, dug a hole and buried the body.

The location was so remote, the district attorney said, that if Mr. DiNardo had not told police exactly where the body was, “I don’t know if we would ever have found it.”

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

On July 7, two days later, both suspects told investigators, they drove to Mr. Finocchiaro’s home in Middletown, ostensibly to sell him four ounces of marijuana, but decided on the way to rob him instead. Mr. DiNardo said he had taken a Smith Wesson .357 Magnum handgun that belonged to his mother.

Each suspect claimed that, after driving him to the Solebury site, the other one shot Mr. Finocchiaro in a barn.

Mr. DiNardo wrapped the body in a blue tarp and used the backhoe to put it into a metal tank he called “the pig roaster,” which Mr. Weintraub, the district attorney, described as “an old oil tank that had been converted into a cooker.”

Both suspects said Mr. DiNardo had arranged another meeting that night to sell marijuana to Mr. Meo, who showed up with his friend, Mr. Sturgis. The young men were childhood friends who worked for a construction company owned by Mr. Sturgis’s father. They drove with Mr. DiNardo in his silver 2016 Ford pickup truck to the farm, where Mr. Kratz was waiting.

“When they turn their backs on me, I shot Tom in the back” with the Smith Wesson, the complaints quoted Mr. DiNardo as saying. Both suspects recalled Mr. Meo falling to the ground, screaming, while Mr. Sturgis ran and Mr. DiNardo shooting him as he fled.

The complaints said that Mr. DiNardo ran out of ammunition and, to make sure Mr. Meo was dead, he drove over him with the backhoe.

Mr. DiNardo used the backhoe to put both bodies into the same tank that held Mr. Finocchiaro’s body, poured gasoline on them, and lit it.

“There was an attempt to burn the bodies, to deface them, to obliterate them, but I don’t believe it was successful,” Mr. Weintraub said.

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

Both suspects said that they returned to the farm the next day, according to the complaints. Mr. DiNardo used the backhoe to dig a hole and then put the three partly burned bodies into it. That day, Mr. DiNardo gave two guns, the Smith Wesson and an Intratec 9-millimeter pistol, to Mr. Kratz, who later told investigators where to find them.

It was that same day that investigators began to focus on the farm, after detecting a signal there from Mr. Finocchiaro’s cellphone.

Before this arrest, Mr. Kratz, who lives in Ambler, in neighboring Montgomery County, faced criminal charges three times in eight months. Two of those cases, both in Philadelphia, are still pending: He was arrested in June 2016, and again this past February, and each time he was charged with burglary, theft, receiving stolen property, and related charges.

Continue reading the main story

The revised GOP ObamaCare replacement bill is testing the promises that centrist Republicans have made during the legislative debate.

Several moderate Republican senators previously raised alarm with an amendment from Sen. Ted CruzTed CruzNew GOP health bill puts centrists in vise Insurers warn Cruz provision will ‘skyrocket’ premiums for sick people Pence pitches governors on ObamaCare repeal bill MORE (R-Texas) that they worried would undermine protections for people with pre-existing conditions. They also expressed opposition to the deep Medicaid cuts in the bill.

Now, the Cruz amendment has been included in the bill and the Medicaid cuts remain, putting centrists on the spot. 

So far, Sen. Susan CollinsSusan CollinsNew GOP health bill puts centrists in vise Pence pitches governors on ObamaCare repeal bill GOP budget would cause irreparable damage – but there is a way out MORE (R-Maine) is the only moderate to oppose the measure, with the others saying they are undecided and still reviewing it.

Whether leaders can flip these moderate Republican senators will decide whether the bill lives or dies. Collins and conservative Sen. Rand PaulRand PaulNew GOP health bill puts centrists in vise Pence pitches governors on ObamaCare repeal bill Kasich opposes revised Senate ObamaCare repeal bill MORE (R-Ky.) have already announced their opposition, so one more “no” vote would sink the bill.   

Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) has been one of the most vocal Republicans on the issue of protecting people with pre-existing conditions, touting the “Jimmy Kimmel test,” that no one should be denied care.

He praised the previous version of the bill, which did not include the Cruz amendment, as being “very cognizant of pre-existing conditions.” 

Cassidy says he is still reviewing and making up his mind about the revised bill.

The Cruz provision would allow insurers to sell plans that do not meet ObamaCare’s requirements, including the ban on discriminating against people with pre-existing conditions. Conservatives argue this would allow younger and healthier people to buy cheaper plans.

Moderates and many health experts, though, warn that only sick people would remain in the more generous ObamaCare plans, leading to price spikes for people with pre-existing conditions. That dynamic could make coverage prohibitively expensive for some.

Sen. Chuck GrassleyChuck GrassleyNew GOP health bill puts centrists in vise Co-founder of firm behind Trump-Russia dossier won’t testify before Senate Overnight Cybersecurity: Trump dodges on Putin hacking denial | Senate panel wants Trump Jr. to testify | House approves cyber amendments to defense bill MORE (R-Iowa) warned earlier this month that the Cruz amendment could be “subterfuge to get around pre-existing conditions [protections],” according to Iowa Public Radio.

Now that the amendment has been included, Grassley’s office says he is studying the bill and awaiting an analysis from the Congressional Budget Office that is scheduled for release on Monday.

The revised bill does include $70 billion aimed at helping bring down costs for people with pre-existing conditions remaining in the ObamaCare plans.

But the inclusion of the amendment appears to break from the previous GOP line that protections for people with pre-existing conditions were not being touched.

“We’re not going to do anything to change the current law when it comes to pre-existing conditions, I know which is a big concern with the House bill,” Sen. John CornynJohn CornynNew GOP health bill puts centrists in vise GOP budget would cause irreparable damage – but there is a way out The Hill’s 12:30 Report MORE (R-Texas), the No. 2 Senate Republican, said last month.

Separately, moderates had also objected to the Medicaid cuts in the initial Senate bill. The language ended funds for ObamaCare’s Medicaid expansion in 2024 and imposed a lower cap on Medicaid spending starting in 2025.

Those cuts remain in the newer version of the bill, though the new measure does add $45 billion in additional funding for opioid abuse treatment.

Moderates such as Sen. Shelley Moore CapitoShelley Moore CapitoNew GOP health bill puts centrists in vise Centrist Republicans push back on GOP healthcare bill  Five takeaways from the GOP’s healthcare reboot MORE (R-W.Va.) had previously said that opioid funding was not enough to win their support for the bill and that they needed Medicaid changes as well. 

“More opioid funding would be very good and very beneficial, but the core for me is the Medicaid provision,” Capito said last month. 

Capito says she is reviewing the latest bill and waiting for the CBO analysis.

Other senators have taken even stronger positions in defense of ObamaCare’s Medicaid expansion.

« You have to protect Medicaid expansion states. That’s what I want, » Sen. Dean HellerDean HellerNew GOP health bill puts centrists in vise Pence pitches governors on ObamaCare repeal bill Trump touts GOP healthcare bill in weekly address MORE (R-Nev.) said at a press conference last month announcing his opposition to the original bill in strong terms.

Sen. Lisa MurkowskiLisa MurkowskiNew GOP health bill puts centrists in vise Centrist Republicans push back on GOP healthcare bill  Five takeaways from the GOP’s healthcare reboot MORE (R-Alaska), who is also still reviewing the bill, likewise said last month that, “my position on Medicaid expansion and my support for it hasn’t changed.”

Some of the moderates have suggested their concerns with the Cruz amendment have been eased by the fact that the language does not repeal ObamaCare’s requirement that there be a single “risk pool,” helping prevent the market from splitting in two — one for healthy people in cheaper plans, and one for sick people in expensive plans.

“There are some other issues but there is an attempt at a single risk pool,” Cassidy said of the Cruz amendment on Thursday. 

However, experts dispute that there would, in practice, be a single market if the amendment became law. 

Sabrina Corlette, a professor at Georgetown University’s Health Policy Institute, said the requirement for a single risk pool is an “illusory requirement,” and that in effect, sick people would be in a separate pool and “have to pay a heck of a lot more.”

Joe Antos, a healthcare expert at the right-leaning American Enterprise Institute, agreed that the market would in effect be split into healthy and sick pools under the amendment, and argued that there is not enough money in the bill to make coverage affordable for people left in the sick pool, where the plans still comply with the ObamaCare regulations.

“You have to pour a lot more money into the compliant plans to make this work,” Antos said.

It is possible that more moderates will announce their opposition after reviewing the bill, though they will be under intense pressure from leaders to support it.

“It’s 172 pages, guys,” Heller told reporters on the way to his car on Thursday. “So I’ve got a weekend of reading.”

Many small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are turning to content marketing to draw in potential customers, without directly selling or advertising to them.

This marketing method involves text articles, videos or social media posts about a business’s product or service that aren’t explicitly promotional. It’s about stimulating interest around a relevant subject, rather than posting about a promotion or product launch.

Here, SME owners and experts share their tips on how to master your next piece of content marketing.

It’s all about value

A common mistake that many businesses make when it comes to content marketing is not adding any value to their product or service, thinks Janet Murray, the founder of online business PR community, Soulful PR.

“Effective content marketing should be about answering customer questions more generally about the area in which you operate,”
she explains. This not only gives you an opportunity to help customers, but also talk about what you sell at the same time.

“For example, if you offer accountancy services, you might create a blog post about how to find a great accountant – or if you make laundry bags, you might one that compares the costs and features of different bags, including those of competitors.”

It’s an approach that worked well for online photo printing company, PhotoBox, which created a guide to hanging canvas prints, which
it also sells, says the firm’s search engine optimisation (SEO) executive, Matt Johnson. “We broke it down into simple steps and even created a video, which is the most digestible and shareable type of content for this kind of topic. We received more than 12,000 views in just under a month,” he says.

As a result of the content, sales increased by 50pc in three weeks.

Remain relevant

For content that will be better read and shared, stay on top of what’s taking place in the news and on social media, advises Laure Moye, owner of boutique cake and chocolate business, Pudding Fairy.

“If a relevant topic comes up in the news, I use it to create a new, fresh and current piece of content that can be distributed quickly.”

She suggests taking 15 minutes each morning to research the top trends of the day. “I set up Google Alerts (a service that sends a list of daily articles to the user that match certain search terms) for keywords such as ‘wedding trends’ and ‘cake trends’ – and chefs whom I admire.

“For example, an alert once brought up a report on the cost of weddings, so I used that idea for a blog post about how much a cake might cost.”

To attract attention to these posts, use trending hashtags on Twitter and Instagram when posting your content,
so that as many people as possible see your article or video, she adds.

Focus on results

SMEs must keep track of how many products or services were sold as a result of their content marketing, explains Tim Gibbon, founder and editor of news information directory, the Social Media Portal.

Record the metrics that demonstrate how audiences reacted to an article, video or series, he says. “The very nature of the activity
or campaign needs to be defined beforehand to assign the right key performance indicators (KPIs) and in turn calculate the return on investment.”

Importantly, measure campaigns in ways that relate to the type of content. For example, video content should be measured by at least view counts, social media shares and comments.

Mr Gibbon adds that, ideally, businesses should be looking at the traffic driven back to a defined destination, such as a product purchase or information page.

He suggests using web analytics tools, such as Google Analytics, to record the data.

However, warns Mr Gibbon, SMEs should remember that while results are the goal, they shouldn’t be at the expense of content that won’t resonate with your target audience. If a story doesn’t have a meaning or purpose, people won’t read it, which doesn’t help them or you.