How far should a company go to protect its brand? What aspects of the private, off-duty time of its employees can a corporation control in order to guard itself against those who would attempt exploit its trademark and sabotage its image? According to Jennifer Van Grove of Mashable (08/04/2009), the sports world seems to be on the front lines of brand protection from attacks via social media. Earlier this month, ESPN told its employees and players they are not allowed to post to Twitter about any topic other than ESPN when referring to sports. The fallout of the pronouncement came to a noisy, tense resolution after ESPN found it necessary to take to the Twitter boards to defend itself. In response to Van Grove’s article, ESPN announced on Twitter it had revamped its original regulations regarding employees’ use of Twitter and other social media. ESPN went on to explain its reasons for the latter declaration by asserting the company was engaging in brand protection. Other sports entities such as the Southeastern Conference and the National Football League have taken similar measures to protect their brands and trademarks, as well as the broadcasting rights of the television stations that transmit their sporting events. The SEC banned ticket-holders from using social media applications to post public updates of sporting events from within the event itself. Catalyzed by loud grumbling from fans, the SEC has come to a decision to permit brief updates via such social media applications as Facebook and Twitter. Live video will not be permitted.

ESPN is showing considerable foresight in recognizing future threats to its brand and image from technological advancements. The company knows it is only a matter of time before the rules are more obviously justified. While the current regulations primarily involve the posting of sports-related media on employees’ websites or social pages, it is clear ESPN is also concerned with the off-time behavior of its employees and players, enough to feel it necessary to warn them the big eye was watching.

As our world gets smaller and more virtual, it is going to be that much more difficult for people to hide their personal delectations. People also have to consider while they may not be aware they are being filmed or photographed, such media could eventually end up on the web. While ESPN may not necessarily be asking its employees and contractors to try to control what others say about the company, they are adamant as to the culpability of employees’ and players in regard to their own pages and posts. Popular consent gives companies every right to expect proper deportment from their employees, both in and out of the office. Most companies today have new employees sign contracts that protect the company in any number of ways from public embarrassment, corporate sabotage and brand infringement.

Trina L. Grant is a social media blogger and Twitter addict. For more samples of her writing, you can check out her blog, Destination Freelance. For more on social media and Twitter, go to her website.

Image courtesy sxc/CraigPJ

In a historic era when most car manufacturers are having to re-invent everything short of the wheel, BMW is quietly but stealthily creeping ahead as the luxury car of choice for the environmentally-conscious individual who can afford a BMW. Every car manufacturer in the country is pulling their hair out, just trying to stay in operation. Meanwhile, BMW is modifying its line of luxury sedans to accommodate the demands of a green-thinking consumer public. While some car companies are just trying to keep their businesses from being swallowed up by the federal government, BMW is modestly winning the battle to be the greenest car company around, and possibly setting the stage for a luxury car coup.

According to an August 26th article from Bavarian Motorsports, BMW has gone far above and beyond the required in its drive to reach the admirable goal of being one of the top earth-friendly car manufacturers. The company has taken noteworthy steps to reduce its non-recyclable output as well as its consumption of natural resources. By diverting a methane source near its South Carolina factory, the company is able to harness more than half the energy required to operate the quarter billion square foot plant. The feat will save the company a cool couple of millions of dollars a year and reduce toxic CO₂ emissions to equate planting nearly 25,000 acres of trees a year. The corporation is making three quarters of a billion dollars in energy- and cost-efficient  improvements to the plant. Proactive steps are being taken to reduce water consumption and hazardous chemical waste production. BMW has the first sun-powered trash compactor in use in an automobile production factory in the United States.

According to its South Carolina plant’s corporate website, the company’s commitment to becoming increasingly self-sustaining has led to installation of machinery at the South Carolina plant that has affected a 16% increase in energy efficiency. The nod from the EPA only adds another feather in BMW’s cap as recognition of its efforts in the clean-car initiative. The website of the South Carolina plant proudly asserts it recycles nearly all the scrap materials left over after the car manufacturing process. The company has ceased using Styrofoam and has instead begun to use a more earth-friendly padding material.

BMW supports environmental initiatives within the community as well. In South Carolina BMW provides corporate funding to support nature conservancies, cultural reinforcement programs, and wildlife federations. It employs corporate initiatives to promote funding for conservation education, as well as supporting education through grants and scholarships. The company annually awards individuals who show outstanding patronage for the state of South Carolina through proactive work preserving the indigenous culture, history and nature of the state. There is an on-site butterfly farm and numerous birdhouses across the campus. BMW has accomplished the safe preservation of the natural wetlands bordering the land around the South Carolina plant.

You can find more about automobiles and clean cars at professional freelance blogger Trina L. Grant’s website. Check out her blog, Destination Freelance, for more samples of her writing.

Image courtesy sxc/pentond

The cars are assembled, now they just need places to recharge. Someone has to pay for charging stations to be constructed. Thus there is a familiar paradox that often plagues the world of business and impedes progress. Someone has to put up the capital for the charging stations to be built, so consumers will feel secure purchasing an electric car knowing there will be readily accessible places where they can plug their cars in. However, no one wants to invest if they are not assured of a solvent return. Now is when we need some Bruce Wayne of the financial world to swoop in and save the day. Well, T. Boone Pickens and Warren Buffet don’t exactly bring to mind Bruce Wayne, but they could probably afford to invest in something like electric car charging stations. Would it be worth it to them, though? Would there be cogent remuneration to justify their investments, or would some crazy event like, say, an oil strike in South America have Americans looking to the jungle to see if any relief from interminably high gas prices was forthcoming?

The numerical figures from sales of electric cars will reveal a predilection of the importance of the environment in the minds of the average United States consumer compared to the importance of their pocket book. There will undoubtedly be a time when all cars are electric or operated by some other means than the burning of fossil fuels. It seems people are too nervous to spend the money for a environmentally-friendly car in the current economic climate. According to an article in the Wall Street Journal by Rebecca Smith (08/06/2009), the federal government has set aside stimulus money in the hopes of expanding and reinforcing the market for clean cars. A budget of $24 million has been set aside by the Department of Energy to promote manufacture of electric cars. That particular earmark does not, however, cover charging stations. It only covers batteries for electric cars.

GM is tooting its own horns about the mileage of its rolling acquiescence to the green movement. The Chevrolet Volt, which the company asserts will get well over 200 miles to the gallon, does use gas, but only as a secondary source of power. Its primary source of power is the battery. Not to be outdone in the race to be the greenest, Nissan throws its hat in with its all-electric showpiece purported to get more than 350 miles to the gallon.  Ford is guarding its hand for now, preferring to hold back any big claims until closer to the cars’ actual release dates, proposed sometime for 2011.

Ford is making efforts to make owning and maintaining a hybrid vehicle as easy as possible. According to Suzanne Ash of Cartechblog.com (08/18/2009), Ford’s new hybrid, the Escape, will be implemented with high tech components to communicate through the country’s electrical infrastructure to the vehicle, and thus the driver. The information would instruct the driver when to stop to let the car re-energize, the duration of recharging and the proper utility rate. Ironically, the cars are being delivered to electric companies, not car dealerships.

For information about technology and electric cars, you can visit Trina L. Grant’s website. For more samples of her writing, visit her blog, Destination Freelance.

Image courtesy sxc/plejeor

There is a certain irony in watching two American passions, one old and one new, collide and find it difficult to co-exist. Such appears to be the case for social media and the Southeastern Conference. Considered the proud daddy of a handful of powerhouse football teams, the regional United States collegiate sports association has made its mark in university-level athletics, bringing names such as Paul “Bear” Bryant, Bobby and Terry Bowden, and “Shug” Jordan to mind. As devoted as Buckeye fans may think themselves to be, they have nothing on the beef-eating farm boys of Alabama who know the life histories of Jesus and Bear Bryant before they can walk. These die-hard fans wean their babies off the bottle with Georgia Bulldog sippy cups, while some proudly carry their Florida State handbags and wallets. They are serious about their sports. As such, they like to talk about the  SEC a lot. Lifelong season-ticket holders who proudly shout the latest results of the game from the tailgate party to the family member at home with a broken leg have embraced communications technology as a method of being able to exchange information about their team at a moment’s notice from their bright orange telephones playing a blaring version of Tennessee’s fight song. As Daniel Howell and Sean Garmer reported in College News on August 15th, ticket-holding fans of the Southeastern Conference can still have their phones at games and sports events, but they better not try to use the video camera on them.

The week of August 15, 2009, the Southeastern Conference, one of the most revered, yet feared, college sports associations in the United States, announced it would take as much legal action as permitted against ticket-holding fans who sent updates of sporting events to social media sites like Twitter and Facebook, from the sporting event. In other words, no tweeting the score, no posting the latest player injury to Facebook.  The decision was met with much protest from fans who had become accustomed to using the latest gadgetry to inundate their lives with team news and trappings in every possible way. They were not going to relinquish their new toys so easily. According to an article posted August 18, 2009 by Adam Ostrow of Mashable.com, the SEC has come to a temporary, tentative resolution amidst all the uproar about its incendiary decision. After much discord, the edict was amended to reflect the association’s intent for there to be no live video made by fans at any sporting events. The fans are allowed to send updates to social media sites such as Twitter and Facebook using “brief descriptions” of the event. They are not, however, permitted to make any “real-time, live video” of the event. Fans may take photographs at the events, but they are not allowed to sell the photographs.

The Southeastern Conference is trying to protect its brand, that is understandable. It is working to prevent its product from being sold on the black market. Other companies are taking more extreme measures to protect their brand and market appeal from unforeseen dangers in the social media realm. ESPN, for instance, has informed its employees they are only permitted to post sports news relating to the channel on Twitter. They have been instructed to monitor what they and others post to their Facebook pages that might be considered inappropriate or cast ESPN in a poor light. They are reminded they are representatives of the company, and their actions might reflect on the ESPN image.

As social media grows and expands in a never-ending display of wonderful new gadgetry and toys, it is going to be all the more important for businesses and individuals to protect their private interests. There is of course, the other side of the story. Where do individuals’ rights to free speech overlap businesses’ rights to protect their image and their trade secrets?

Trina L. Grant is a social media blogger and professional freelance writer. For more samples of her writing, visit her blog, Destination Freelance. To find out more about social media and Twitter check out Trina’s website.

Image courtesy sxc/dimitri

Enter the political arena of the late 1990s when legislators began a major overhaul of the Federal Communications Commission. In 1996 began the first real attempt at major modifications of the original bill. The passing of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 began to open the doors for more free-market opportunities in communications. In 2008, Senator Edward Markly, a Democrat from Massachusetts, introduced more proposed legislation to the original bill of 1934. This proposed amendment contained provisions in it meant to appease opponents of the original plan from 1996. It would greatly expand the jurisdiction of the Federal Communications Commission to cover data transmission by a vast array of media venues. The bill, called HR 5353: The Internet Freedom Protection Act of 2008, was introduced on February 12, 2008. The bill essentially prevented misuse of power by major internet service providers. Proponents asserted the bill would promote fair-market values in the exchange of data transmitted over the internet. The relatively short proposal was succinct and direct in its language, despite the shady areas of opinion of its validity as a plausible, cause-worthy statute. It sought to strengthen the Federal Communications Commission’s control over internet data in addition to telephones, television and radio. Opponents cited risk of privacy invasion and the breakdown of capitalism, charging the bill would block the fair market system by putting a strangle-hold on the rights of telecommunications companies to offer exclusive deals to certain advertisers. By June of 2008, the Recording Industry Association of America had voiced its own concerns about piracy in a written letter to Congress that resulted in Senate Hearings on the matter. Despite their concerns, the RIAA was still in full support of the bill. Unfortunately for Senator Markly, the bill failed.

Not to be dissuaded from his cause, Markly began another round of bargaining when he introduced yet another bill proposal on August 1, 2009. The newest bill, and the source of all the current controversy, is HR 3458, otherwise known as the Internet Freedom Preservation Act of 2009. The amendment proposes legislative restrictions on internet companies to prevent them from slowing competitors ads on their site, or blocking them all together. Supporters of the amendment assert the protection of capitalism and free market enterprise. This time, Markly has made a few concessions to the amendment, in order to appease opponents of the bill and hopefully change their minds and garner their support. Markly hopes to convince his naysayers passing the bill is a matter of protecting our right to freedom of speech. Opponents say constitutional law covering freedom of speech only covers rights being threatened by the government, not disagreements in business practices. The main point proponents of the bill wish to emphasize is the role of the internet as a part of our integral infrastructure, as important to our continuity as a society as electricity and roads.

The question becomes, then, what is the the extent of the importance of the internet in our lives? How essential to the survival of our society has the internet become? Has the internet, to so much a degree unstoppable (YouTube anyone?), become such a gargantuan entity in and of itself that it no longer falls under the same jurisdiction as other media venues? Will the feds have to move over and let the cyber-geeks drive once the controls are too complicated for politicians to operate?

Trina L. Grant is a professional freelance writer and editor. You can find more samples of her writing as well as more information on legislation and communications on her blog, Destination Freelance and her website.

Image courtesy sxc/fumes

I can sense the disbelief writ large on your face and I admit nothing like that is happening.

But we are almost there….

There is this revolutionary new software that has the capacity to understand questions and return specific, tailored answers in a way that was never done before. This software is promising to shake up the Internet.

Is this new software better than the search engine giant, Google? Well, some do go to the extent of saying that the new system may just put Google and the other search engines in the shade.

Harvard University has taken the first step towards what many consider the Internet’s Holy Grail – a global information store that can understand languages and responds to them just as a person does.

Computer experts are excited at the prospect of the new search engine being evolutionary. They are sure that Wolfram Alpha, as it is called, has the potential of becoming as popular as Google but serving a different purpose.

Wolfram Alpha is not only programmed to give the correct and straight answer to a question but will also bring back a ‘neat’ page of related information. For example, if the question is, “How high is Mount Everest?” apart from the answer, it will also show the geographical location, other mountains, nearby towns etc. with the relevant charts and graphs. If you ask it to compare the height of two mountains, it will do that most accurately.

Wolfram’s inventor, Stephen Wolfram from the United States reveals that all the information is assessed by experts first. Wolfram’s team manually enters, and in certain cases automatically pulls in, masses of factual data in different fields, as well as models and algorithms for performing computations with this data. It allows anyone to construct their own computations just by asking questions. This eradicates any doubts or concerns on the accuracy of the information provided, which is the case with other sites like Wikipedia and the like. This software is based on Stephen’s Mathematika software and works by collecting the knowledge on the internet as well as some private databases.

One glaring difference between Google and Wolfram Alpha is that it demands citation when using any of the material from its results, whereas Google lets users do with the information “as they please.”

The long term plan of Wolfram is to serve as a knowledge engine, by providing a single reliable source for all systematic knowledge, where people can find definitive answers of maximum clarity to their factual queries.

People saying that it will shadow Google may not make much sense as it is incomparable to Google. Not that it is any better or worse, but what it offers is completely different. Google searches through web pages and brings back documents that may contain the answers, while Wolfram Alpha is a monstrous database of knowledge, which uses “clever algorithms and heuristics” to compute answers to a wide-range of questions by tapping into its enormous data collection.

Just try and understand the enormity of what Wolfram Alpha does. It computes the answers. It does not simply contain huge amounts of questions and answers entered manually, not does it search for answers in its database of facts. It actually understands what the person is asking and computes answers to specific questions. This makes it much smarter than Google and totally different too.

It works more like an enormous and accurate fact sheet, with the ability to give facts, like whether the Eiffel tower is taller than Petronas towers. You can even check out the nutritional content, including calories of any amount of any food. Mortgage payments can be calculated, equations and formulas can be solved, measurements can be converted, comparisons made and a whole lot of other intelligent and important stuff. Data such as weather and financial are streamed in dynamically, while other data is updated as it becomes available.

Wolfram Alpha is more of a go-to search tool for particular types of knowledge finding and will not be a place to find documents or articles. It belongs more in the toolkits of teachers and students. Although, currently, its strongest areas are where knowledge is more readily quantitative, experts at Wolfram note that they are working through all the content areas that are covered by handbooks, reference libraries and others.

One of the most beautiful features is that result pages can be downloaded onto your desktop as Live Mathematika pages or PDFs. Secondly, all the source information (Web-based and print) checked for that topic is included in link form at the bottom of the page. This allows further research if needed and for determining the accuracy of the results.

Wolfram Alpha could be huge and it remains to be seen if this electronic brain is the “answer” to the future. It would be interesting to see how smart Wolfram Alpha actually is or how much smarter it can get. Will it make mistakes? Since it is in the initial phase, what forms of knowledge will it handle in the future? These questions remain to be answered. But one thing that is sure is that you would still need Google to shop for a new house, find content on the Web or look up a romantic getaway for two. Wolfram does not understand love! But it does understand way better than any other search engine, the importance of factual data.

Well-spread types of Internet scams include: phishing email messages (stealing your information while you complete a web form or login), paid-for-review sites (and other sites making you work for free), sites that advertise some services but never deliver the quality work, etc.

So how to get protected from these?

Once you come across some great offer and wonder if you should try it, take time to follow these steps:

Check out if someone has already fallen prey to this or similar scam:

Scam.com is an awesome forum that has an active section for Internet Scams. You will find it interesting and useful, I am a daily reader there. People share thoughts and experiences on practically all newly launched projects you may be interested in.

Purportal.com is a huge up-to-date searchable database of Internet scams. Just search the corresponding section (email spam, urban legends, viruses, fraud and phishing) and you will be offered the whole list of present and past scams documented there.

Evaluate the website / message look and feel

This is so easy and quick, just make sure the site or an email message looks reputable.

Also, beware of common words and phrases as well as other language signals:

• the word “free” repeated several times (and in CAPS LOCK);
• exclamation marks;
• ‘Sir/Madam’ as the way to address the recipient;
• Bad grammar, etc.

Quickly research the company’s online reputation

Well, Google it! The easiest way to learn what the site / company is up to is to search for it [domainname.com]. Be sure to take advantage of Google’s date operator that allows to search for the recent mentions (look for it in Google Advanced search):

Quick tip: if you like this advanced search, you can have it on your home page forever with this Greasemonkey script.

Remember golden rules:

“If it looks too good to be true—it probably is.”

Your common sense is your best weapon!

Now if the guys passed the test, give them a try but never go too far until they prove they are good.

Post image by jennzebel

Coca-Cola’s promotion has had a significant impact on American advertising and its overall culture. It is even (erroneously) credited with the invention of the US traditional Santa Clause image.

Anyway, Coca Cola advertising history demonstrates how the marketing science has been developing over time. Below there is a visual tour into the company print advertising:

1890 -

Drink Coca Cola

Coca-Cola first print ad was published in 1895 featuring a young Bostonian actress named Hilda Clark who was the company spokesperson.

The ad campaign featured various people and concepts.

“Hospitality”

“Shop Refreshed”

“Drive Refreshed”

Delicious and Refreshing

Coca-Cola Revives and Sustains

It satisfies the thirsty and helps the weary (via stealthsettings.com)

Take one glass of Coca Cola when weary with shopping. It imparts energy and vigo (via stealthsettings.com)

1922 -

Thirst Knows No Season

1929 -

The pause that refreshes: (via adflip.com)

“Thanks for the pause that refreshes. Drink Coca Cola: Delicious and refreshing” (via dismuke.org)

1950 -

Be refreshed!

“Be refreshed! Pause for Coke! Only Coca-Cola gives you the cheerful lift that’s bright and lively… the cold crisp taste that deeply satisfies! No wonder Coke refreshes you the best!”

“Spending the day on the water? You’ll really welcome the cold crisp taste of Coca-Cola that so deeply satisfies… the cheerful lift that’s bright and lovely. No wonder Coke is the real refreshment… anytime… anywhere” (Via flickr.com).

1960 -

Things Go Better with Coke

The “Things Go Better with Coke” campaign was adapted to the youth market by using catchy colors and fashionable concepts.

Burger Hot. Coca-Cola Cold. Taste Bold, refreshing, never too sweet. Ummm! Burger never better. Things go better with Coke.

“This is the time for real refreshment- ice cold Coca-Cola. Coke gives a lift to your spirits… a boost to your energy… a big, bold, unmistakable taste. In Short: Coca-Cola is more than an ordinary soft drink. Things go better with Coke”.

1969

It’s the Real Thing

“Real life calls for real taste. For the taste of your life – it’s Coca-Cola. Here and now.”

1970 -

During the mid-1970s, the political uncertainty in the United States determined Coca-Cola advertising campaign. As the nation questioned its direction, Coca-Cola reminded Americans of their country’s positive values in the “Look Up, America” campaign.

Look Up, America

Look up, America. It’s the real thing. Coke

1976 -

Coke Adds Life

In May 1976, The Coca-Cola Company introduced a new campaign, presenting the brand as the soft drink for all occasions. Aimed at the young and young-at-heart, the new campaign, “Coke Adds Life to …,” was designed to show viewers that Coca-Cola added simple enjoyment to life.

Have a Coke and a Smile

After “Coke Adds Life,” the advertising campaign for Coca-Cola, “Have a Coke and a Smile” was launched – it further emphasized the ‘young’ and ‘cool’ spirit:

1982 -

Coke is It!

In early 1982, Coca-Cola launched a new ad campaign, “Coke Is It!” The direct, positive statement was meant to appeal to the forthright mood of Americans in the 1980s. “Coke Is It!” represented the new taste and concept:

The public, however, demanded the return of the traditional drink, so the campaign turned out to be fiasco.

1993 -

Always Coca Cola

In 1993, The Coca-Cola Company made a dramatic shift in its advertising by introducing the memorable “Always Coca-Cola” campaign, by Creative Artists Agency and later Edge Creative. Animated polar bear became one of the most popular symbols of Coca-Cola.

The Coca-Cola Polar Bear ice skating, from 1995

2002 -

The Coke Side of Life

Coca Cola New Zealand Campaign: “Summer as it should be”

Coca-Cola: Lemon

Coca-Cola Light

Coca-Cola: Recycle

Use your imagination and recycle. Our future depends on it.

Further recommended Reading:

• Slogans War Between Pepsi and Coca-Cola;
• Flickr Collection of Coca Cola Advertisements;
• Official History of Coca Cola;
• Coca-Cola Image Collection;
• Coca-Cola Retro Pop Art Calendar.

Post image: by Mike Licht

I think that’s every person’s business and choice. So what I was looking at in the following anti-smoking campaigns is not the educative value (I personally doubt smokers aren’t aware of the risk already) but creativity and original idea (the way it was implemented).

Street campaigns:

Stop Smoking Bus Advertisement: “Ready to quit?”

Smoke Is Poison Advertisement: 12 meter long chemical tanker that looks like a giant cigarette was used by Cancer Research UK to highlight the toxic smoke in cigarettes (via toxel.com).

Bus stop anti-smoking campaign:

“What we see when you smoke”

This one from the Cancer Patient Aid Association was put on the roofs of outdoor smoking areas (via inventorspot.com):

Anti-smoking promotion for ‘World No Tobacco Day’ found at coffee shops in Dubai, where people come to smoke (via inventorspot.com):

“Fight Smoking“: an ad campaign throughout the gyms:

Anti-smoking campaign as a stylish piece:

This anti-smoking hat looks both stylish and scary (via moolf.com)

Print negative advertisements:

“For more information on lung cancer, keep smoking”

“Before it’s too late”

Wyoming Department of Health: “Don’t secondsmoke the messenger”

“Second hand smoke in the home hospitalises 17,000 UK children a year” (the campaign for Roy Castle Lung Cancer Foundation, the UK medical research charity dedicated to dedicated to defeating lung cancer):

Another campaign for Roy Castle Lung Cancer Foundation: Deathbed:

“Smoking causes premature ageing”

“There is an easier way of committing suicide: try smoking”

“It’s called suicide because it’s your choice. Give up smoking: 0 8008 700 700″

“Non-smoking area”

A similar concept (via adsoftheworld.com):

Post image by darcy.gill

This type of advertisements usually refers to negative aspects of the product or action tackled.

This post is the collection of most persuading advertisements that show what is going to happen if you continue doing that, visualize the affect or the message:

Circumstances: what happens if you do that:

“Smoking causes premature ageing”

Visualization of the harmful effect:

“There is an easier way of committing suicide: try smoking”

Obesity is suicide:

images via Houston logo design

How non-organic food affects your organism:

Smoking harms your lungs:

Smoking looks disgusting:

“What we see when you smoke”

Visualization of the message:

“Please don’t lose control over your drinking”

“Non-smoking area”

“Don’t drink and drive”

“It’s a crime to drink and drive”

Adding humor:

“Hangover is dangerous”

Sensation:

“I’d rather go naked than wear fur”

“It’s no fun when you are dead: don’t drink and drive”

“Spare parts for humans are not as original as those for cars. Don’t drink and drive”

Sources:  Ads Of the World, ChilloutPoint.com