<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.2.1" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Is this good for your brand?</title>
	<link>http://www.todsacerdoti.com/2007/08/08/is-this-good-for-your-brand/</link>
	<description>Video Advertising, Online Monetization &#038; Entrepreneurship</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 12 Oct 2008 08:17:08 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.1</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: Crackle, after dropping user-generated video, sees money roll in &#124; BlogForward : Money</title>
		<link>http://www.todsacerdoti.com/2007/08/08/is-this-good-for-your-brand/#comment-35</link>
		<author>Crackle, after dropping user-generated video, sees money roll in &#124; BlogForward : Money</author>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Sep 2007 20:27:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.todsacerdoti.com/2007/08/08/is-this-good-for-your-brand/#comment-35</guid>
		<description>[...] recently gave up on advertising on user-generated sites, because of the danger posed to brands by raucous images like the ones he blogs about here (scroll down, only if you can handle quasi [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] recently gave up on advertising on user-generated sites, because of the danger posed to brands by raucous images like the ones he blogs about here (scroll down, only if you can handle quasi [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Osvald</title>
		<link>http://www.todsacerdoti.com/2007/08/08/is-this-good-for-your-brand/#comment-17</link>
		<author>John Osvald</author>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Aug 2007 21:01:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.todsacerdoti.com/2007/08/08/is-this-good-for-your-brand/#comment-17</guid>
		<description>Not to say I totally disagree with your ultimate point, but your argument is idiotic. Do you attribute the 100MM dollars in sales to these advertisements on Heavy.com specifically, which are surely a tiny portion of the films' marketing mix? 

I think you might be confusing cause and effect, or at the very least grossly overstating it --- if you want to argue specifically on how having your product promoted alongside soft porn actually leads to more sales or brand value, go for it. We'd all like to hear.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not to say I totally disagree with your ultimate point, but your argument is idiotic. Do you attribute the 100MM dollars in sales to these advertisements on Heavy.com specifically, which are surely a tiny portion of the films&#8217; marketing mix? </p>
<p>I think you might be confusing cause and effect, or at the very least grossly overstating it &#8212; if you want to argue specifically on how having your product promoted alongside soft porn actually leads to more sales or brand value, go for it. We&#8217;d all like to hear.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave Martin</title>
		<link>http://www.todsacerdoti.com/2007/08/08/is-this-good-for-your-brand/#comment-14</link>
		<author>Dave Martin</author>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Aug 2007 01:15:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.todsacerdoti.com/2007/08/08/is-this-good-for-your-brand/#comment-14</guid>
		<description>Haven't both "Chuck and Larry" and "The Bourne Ultimatum" both already surpassed 100MM dollars in box office revenue?  I can only assume that success at the box office isn't considered "good for your brand" according to this author.  It is time to embrace consumer control and to understand contextual relevance without prejudice.  The smartest marketers know that the wall between advertisers and consumers needs to be torn down, not fortified with moral superiority.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Haven&#8217;t both &#8220;Chuck and Larry&#8221; and &#8220;The Bourne Ultimatum&#8221; both already surpassed 100MM dollars in box office revenue?  I can only assume that success at the box office isn&#8217;t considered &#8220;good for your brand&#8221; according to this author.  It is time to embrace consumer control and to understand contextual relevance without prejudice.  The smartest marketers know that the wall between advertisers and consumers needs to be torn down, not fortified with moral superiority.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: NewCo vs YouTube and other GigaNET Stories &#183; Kokorec</title>
		<link>http://www.todsacerdoti.com/2007/08/08/is-this-good-for-your-brand/#comment-10</link>
		<author>NewCo vs YouTube and other GigaNET Stories &#183; Kokorec</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Aug 2007 19:22:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.todsacerdoti.com/2007/08/08/is-this-good-for-your-brand/#comment-10</guid>
		<description>[...] Tod Sacerdoti: Ads next to porn-ish content on Heavy.com - this can&#8217;t be good for your brand advertisers. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] Tod Sacerdoti: Ads next to porn-ish content on Heavy.com - this can&#8217;t be good for your brand advertisers. [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: NewCo vs YouTube and other GigaNET Stories &#183; New York Articles</title>
		<link>http://www.todsacerdoti.com/2007/08/08/is-this-good-for-your-brand/#comment-9</link>
		<author>NewCo vs YouTube and other GigaNET Stories &#183; New York Articles</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Aug 2007 18:57:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.todsacerdoti.com/2007/08/08/is-this-good-for-your-brand/#comment-9</guid>
		<description>[...] Tod Sacerdoti: Ads next to porn-ish content on Heavy.com - this can&#8217;t be good for your brand advertisers. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] Tod Sacerdoti: Ads next to porn-ish content on Heavy.com - this can&#8217;t be good for your brand advertisers. [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: NewCo vs YouTube and other GigaNET Stories &#183; Articles</title>
		<link>http://www.todsacerdoti.com/2007/08/08/is-this-good-for-your-brand/#comment-8</link>
		<author>NewCo vs YouTube and other GigaNET Stories &#183; Articles</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Aug 2007 18:09:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.todsacerdoti.com/2007/08/08/is-this-good-for-your-brand/#comment-8</guid>
		<description>[...] Tod Sacerdoti: Ads against near-porn content on Heavy.com. This can&#8217;t be good for your brand advertisers. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] Tod Sacerdoti: Ads against near-porn content on Heavy.com. This can&#8217;t be good for your brand advertisers. [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: GigaOM NewCo vs YouTube and other GigaNET Stories &#171;</title>
		<link>http://www.todsacerdoti.com/2007/08/08/is-this-good-for-your-brand/#comment-7</link>
		<author>GigaOM NewCo vs YouTube and other GigaNET Stories &#171;</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Aug 2007 17:53:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.todsacerdoti.com/2007/08/08/is-this-good-for-your-brand/#comment-7</guid>
		<description>[...] Tod Sacerdoti: Ads against near-porn content on Heavy.com. This can&#8217;t be good for your brand advertisers.      Share This  &#124; Sphere &#124;  Print Posts &#124; Topic: Shorts &#124; [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] Tod Sacerdoti: Ads against near-porn content on Heavy.com. This can&#8217;t be good for your brand advertisers.      Share This  | Sphere |  Print Posts | Topic: Shorts | [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
