August 2015 - Page 2 of 2

Welcome to the Social Media Election

Social Media – Think most everyone saw this coming.

Getty

Social media is driving the 2016 presidential race, as candidates of both parties increasingly view Facebook, Twitter and Instagram as key battlegrounds in the fight for the White House.

Campaigns have used social media in past elections. But in recent months, it has threatened to overtake traditional news outlets, paid advertising and the campaign stump as the top venue for candidates to rally voters, hit their rivals — and even make news.

And those best able to harness the power of social media are showing they can use it to generate the most buzz.

The Bernie Sanders campaign has parlayed the liberal senator’s formidable social media presence and a #feeltheBern hashtag into record attendance at rallies around the country.

When Donald Trump fires off a late-night Twitter tirade, it shows up in the feeds of more than 3.7 million followers.

“I think one of the most interesting things this year is that it’s no longer a question of if candidates should be using these platforms, it’s how and how often,” said Erin Lindsay, a principal for digital at Precision Strategies, a consulting firm founded by veterans of Obama’s 2012 reelection campaign.

In recent days, social media has even doubled as a virtual debate stage, with candidates sparring in a manner inconceivable just a few election cycles ago.

When former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R) said at a conservative forum, “I’m not sure we need half a billion dollars for women’s health issues,” Clinton’s team pounced. “.@JebBush: You are absolutely, unequivocally wrong,” her account said, retweeting a reporter who had covered Bush’s remarks.

The two tangled again on Twitter this week. When Clinton sent out a graphic detailing the amount of student debt held by Americans, Bush’s campaign sent back with a similar image slamming what they called a 100 percent increase in student debt during the Obama presidency.

The beef was on. “Fixed it for you,” Clinton responded, having modified the graphic to read “F. The grade given to Florida for college affordability under Jeb Bush’s leadership.”

Bush then posted a version of Clinton’s campaign logo — the letter “H” where the bar in the middle has been replaced by a right-facing arrow — with the arrow pointed up and the rest of the “H” was comprised of the word “taxes,” repeated over and over.

Interactions like that can make news. “Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush Are Having a Photoshop Battle on Twitter,” AdWeek declared; “Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton Got into a Twitter Fight” saidVanity Fair; and Wired went as far as to call the back-and-forth an “Epic Photoshop Battle.”

Campaign aides also use their own accounts to respond to rival staffers and reporters who write stories they disagree with.

Just as frequently, candidates are using social media to connect with and energize their supporters.

Sometimes, that takes the form of a glimpse into a candidate’s life: Bush posted a picture to Instagram recently of a tortoise on a lawn at the Reagan Library. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) gave supporters an inside look at his announcement via Snapchat. And Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) has made a habit of posting pictures of his unglamorous meals, including a slice of sausage pizza in the Charlotte, N.C., airport.

Strategists say that candidates are most successful when they customize their message to each individual platform and can respond swiftly.

“I think depending on the platform you’re on, you need to be either more playful or clever,” said Marie Danzig, the global head of creative and delivery for Blue State Digital and a former Obama campaign staffer. “You need to operate more quickly on Twitter than you do on Facebook. I think Snapchat and Periscope will continue to become more of the norm in terms of providing behind-the-scenes content.”

Clinton’s campaign has been particularly aggressive about finding novel ways to engage with her supporters. Her Instagram account likes photos that mention the campaign and, earlier this year, her Facebook account left a supportive comment under a photo from the popular blog Humans of New York that purported to show a young boy distraught that he would not be accepted because he was gay. Signed with an “-H,” it received over 94,000 “likes.”

“It forces candidates to show more personality,” said Lindsay. “Authenticity is a big thing in social media. I think the candidates that are the most successful are the ones that are clearly the most comfortable.” Teddy Goff, one of the co-founders of Precision, also works as a senior adviser to Hillary Clinton on digital communications.

This strategy has its limits. In a piece addressing politicians’ social media presences more broadly, BuzzFeed News’s politics editor Katherine Miller said that Clinton’s “tweets often evoke an elaborate pasteurization process, wherein aides calculate what needs to be said (topic) with the maximal amount of safety (substance, tone).”

Danzig said that “there is a little bit of risk of fatigue” when candidates are taking shots at one another on social media.

But the continued rise of social media in presidential politics is, in many ways, a case of candidates meeting supporters where they have their conversations. A Pew survey released this year found that in 2014, 71 percent of online adults used Facebook, 26 percent used Instagram and 23 percent used Twitter.

Since 2012’s election, the number of mature, major social media networks has grown — with platforms such as Pinterest and Snapchat growing in popularity. As Americans continue to make using social media a part of their routines, candidates are as well.

“It’s become much more interactive, less about your posting your own beliefs in your own feed,” said Danzig. “So I think we are seeing the candidates wake up to that and make sure that they’re having more of a conversation rather than using it as a PR channel.”

By David McCabe

Original POST

A way to get fit and also have… fun?

Love this idea and agree with the philosophy behind it. Change up your routine and give this fitness approach a try!

Can exercise that is intense also be fun?

Researchers in Denmark recently began delving into that issue and in the process developed a new approach to intense interval training that could appeal even to those of us who, until now, have been disinclined to push ourselves during exercise.

High-intensity exercise, usually in the form of short bursts of very arduous intervals interspersed with rest, has much to recommend it. Many studies have shown that even a few minutes of these intervals can substantially improve health and cardiovascular fitness.

But high-intensity interval workouts have a drawback that is seldom acknowledged. Many people don’t like them and soon abandon the program.

In a telling study published last year,researchers in New Zealand asked overweight, out-of-shape adults to complete three months of high-intensity interval training, using one of two common types of training programs. One consisted of either four minutes of fast jogging, a rest, and four more minutes of strenuous jogging. The other consisted of 30 seconds of all-out effort, followed by rest, and was repeated three times.

Some of the exercisers’ sessions were supervised, and some were supposed to be done on their own.

Both programs would have been expected to round the volunteer into much better shape.

They didn’t. Few of the participants became significantly more fit, especially in the 30-second hard interval group. The probable reason, the researchers speculate, was that most of the participants had quit doing most or all of their assigned exercise early on in the study.

This finding and others like it troubled Jens Bangsbo, a professor of physiology at the University of Copenhagen in Denmark, who studies high-intensity interval training. In studies at his lab, repeated hard intervals had almost invariably made people fitter, faster and healthier.

But those studies typically had involved highly motivated athletes riding high-tech stationary bicycles and had been supervised by the scientists, who personally had cajoled the participants to complete each interval.

Those were hardly real-world circumstances, Dr. Bangsbo realized.

So he and his colleagues began to wonder if there might be more practical and palatable approaches to high-intensity interval training.

“We wanted to create a workout that could be employed by everyone, from the nonexperienced person to the elite athlete,” Dr. Bangsbo said.

After some trial and error, they came up with a candidate routine and named it 10-20-30 training.

It has become my favorite interval program.

The essentials of 10-20-30 training are simple. Run, ride or perhaps row on a rowing machine gently for 30 seconds, accelerate to a moderate pace for 20 seconds, then sprint as hard as you can for 10 seconds. (It should be called 30-20-10 training, obviously, but that is not as catchy.) Repeat.

The enticements of this particular program are many. It is easy to remember and low-tech, requiring no gym membership, heart rate monitor, or flow chart, as some complicated interval programs seem to demand. You don’t even need a stopwatch to monitor the 30-, 20-, and 10-second time changes. You can, like me, count to yourself, which seems to make the intervals pass quickly.

Perhaps best of all, the grueling, all-out portion of the workout lasts for only 10 seconds, which is far more manageable for most of us than 30 seconds or 4 minutes.

But of course the program must be effective if scientists are to recommend it. So for a study published in December in The Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, Dr. Bangsbo and his colleagues set out to test the routine with a large group of average exercisers.

Approaching running clubs throughout Denmark, the scientists found 132 mostly middle-aged, recreational runners who agreed to substitute 10-20-30 training for two of their usual weekly workouts.

As a result, their weekly mileage fell by about half.

The scientists also recruited 28 runners to serve as controls and continue their normal training.

All of the runners underwent physiological testing at the start of the study, including a simulated 5K race.

Then the scientists turned the runners loose to continue with or abandon their training as they chose.

After eight weeks, almost all of the runners in the 10-20-30 group were still following the program. And when they repeated their 5K runs, they had shaved an average of 38 seconds from their times. Most also had lower blood pressure and other markers of improved health.

There were no changes among the runners in the control group.

Of course, any regular interval training should improve someone’s athletic endurance and health if it replaces slower training, which is why serious athletes incorporate interval sessions into their regimens.

But in Dr. Bangsbo’s study, the 10-20-30 program not only allowed the runners to train less while growing faster, it seemed to make the workouts pleasurable.

“The running clubs in our study reported much improved social interactions between members” during the workouts, Dr. Bangsbo said, because when the fastest runners turned around after each set of five 10-20-30 sprints, as most did, they found themselves following the slower runners, who had the satisfaction of being in the lead, at least for the moment.

You can undertake the program solo, too, or, as I have, with dogs. They are likely to be enthusiasts. This is how they always have run.

If you wish to try 10-20-30 training, Dr. Bangsbo recommends starting by replacing one or two of your normal weekly workouts with a 10-20-30 session.

Warm up with an easy jog (or pedaling or rowing), then ease into the intervals. The 30-second portion should feel relaxed; the next 20 seconds moderately hard; and the final 10 seconds a full gallop. “The aim is to cover as much distance as possible in those 10 seconds,” Dr. Bangsbo said.

Do five of the 10-20-30 intervals in a row without pause, then rest for two minutes by standing or very slowly walking about. Repeat the five consecutive intervals one more time, cool down, and you are done. The whole session, minus warm-up and cool-down, will have lasted 12 minutes.

If you are already in fine shape, Dr. Bangsbo said, add another set of the five uninterrupted intervals.

Rest the next day, he said, or very lightly exercise; don’t do two of the intense interval sessions in a row. Although a smaller percentage of runners in the 10-20-30 group sustained injuries than did runners in the control group in his study, “we recommend very slow progress.”

Original POST

Author: Gretchen Reynolds

3 advantages to being an ‘Intrapreneur’

Intrapreneur – Perhaps that entrepreneurial drive can be used to help established companies, and in return, earn you a regular paycheck. Read on…

NEW YORK (TheStreet) — Starting a company isn’t for everyone. I should know: I founded one and failed.

After licking my wounds, I realized that I could still be a self-starter. While working at an investment bank, I traveled the world helping the firm to grow its revenue in new markets.

With all the time on the road, I found time to write a book on money, and my paycheck helped me to finance my other interests. Instead of being a classic “entrepreneur,” I was an “intrapreneur,” someone who builds within an established organization, or uses his or her paycheck to finance other interests. Here are three advantages to being an intrapreneur.

1. You Get a Paycheck

Intrapreneurs get paid. You’ll receive a biweekly influx of capital to spend as you choose: buying groceries, donating to charities, or investing in your (or your friend’s) start-up company.

Behind every successful start-up company is a group of angel investors also known as intrapreneurs. They work traditional jobs at investment banks, law firms and fax machine companies. Usually they’re top performers, making enough discretionary income that they can invest in other ventures.

Sara Blakely, the founder of SPANX, was an intrapreneur before she was an entrepreneur. She worked as a fax machine salesperson in Florida and noticed that traditional pantyhose didn’t work well with her open-toe sandals. This gave her the idea for SPANX, a hosiery and slimming undergarment company. But she didn’t quit her job — at least, not at first. Her job helped her cover some of the initial costs of her company. This went on for years until she resigned two weeks before SPANX was featured on The Oprah Winfrey Show.

Starting a company isn’t for the faint of heart. Not everyone can raise millions of dollars in seed capital, so you will likely be on your own. An intrapreneur knows that he or she doesn’t have to leave a steady-paying job to invest in a company or start one.

2. You Have Better Odds of Succeeding

Intrapreneurs have better odds at becoming successful: making enough money to live comfortably. They can afford to go on vacations while also building their retirement savings.

On the other hand, most entrepreneurs fail. In her provocative and well-argued book The Entrepreneur Equation, Carol Roth, a former investment banker, exposes the stark reality: Ninety percent of those who start their own companies fail within a few years.

“Nobody has been telling you and the other aspiring entrepreneurs that there is a chance that owning your own business isn’t the right path at all,” Roth writes. “Just because you are passionate about something … you might not be so excellent at having it manufactured, finding customers for it, or managing the cash flow in between.”

She bluntly deconstructs the myth of Bill Gates’s success, summarizing facts from Rick Smith’s book The Leap.

Many people know that Gates dropped out of college to found Microsoft (MSFT). What they may not know, Roth writes, is that he came from wealthy family with very useful connections and had amassed years of experience with computers while still young.

“So, Gates had around a decade of experience, limited downside risk, awareness of the huge potential of the upside, the right connections, and many other items that balanced his risks and rewards and stacked the odds in his favor,” she writes.

Roth has done us all a favor in pointing out the oh-so-forgotten parts of the legendary Microsoft co-founder’s story.

“I tell people all the time — don’t quit your day job,” Roth said in an interview. “People don’t do the math about what it takes to be an entrepreneur. They work from the wrong assumptions.”

Roth said that an acquaintance asked for advice on a business plan. Even if everything went according to plan, the business would have generated only $22,000 in revenue, she said.

“People need to get educated about entrepreneurship,” said Roth.

That’s why she says she wrote her book, which is one of the most realistic and forthright takes on the hard-knock life of an entrepreneur.

After you read it, you might realize that you should be happy where you are: being an intrapreneur, with a higher probability of “success” over the long term.

3. You Can Make a Greater Impact

Intrapreneurs can make a greater impact on the world than entrepreneurs. Let’s say you are passionate about creating clothes that are made in an environmentally responsible manner. You could start your own clothing line, hire designers, build out a marketing team — and maybe you will be successful.

Or, you could be an intrapreneur and work at Levi Strauss & Co. Social intrapreneurs launched Levi’s Water<Less jeans initiative, which has already saved 172 million liters of water. In fact, Levi has made more than 13 million products with its Water<Less finishing.

If you want to have a global impact, help reform a multinational corporation. A small change at a large company can ripple throughout the world. Of course, working at a large company presents its own challenges, such as change-resistant bureaucracy and strict compliance policies. But you don’t have to leave your company to challenge it.

As an intrapreneur, you know that it pays to keep your day job.