Clif High - clifs wujo March 26 2017 Advertising bites it on social.

All Episodes

Previous Next

March 26, 2017 - Clif High

16:20

clifs wujo March 26 2017 Advertising bites it on social.

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Okay.
	Yeah, we've had some comments on the videos about all of the, I don't know where the guy was watching, but he said a bunch of people providing hoodie videos.
	And I actually think he means these watch caps.
	It's cold as hell out here on the West Coast.
	Cold as hell out here on the West Coast.
	Let's hope I picked up some of that.
	Trying a throat mic here.
	We've had a bunch of issues with the rain and with this space and sound.
	So advertising.
	Advertising.
	Oh, advertising.
	Here's the issue for advertisers on social media and what's happening at the moment.
	You may or may not be aware of it, but there's developing boycott against Google and Twitter and Facebook and some of the other social media by advertisers because of various different issues that are arising stated in different ways for each different platform,
	but that are all nonetheless revolving around the same underlying phenomenon.
	The phenomenon, I'm going to go through this relatively quickly, in my opinion, stems from the exclusionary kind of censorship that's being practiced.
	And it's having a definitive impact on advertisers.
	It's actually causing their jobs to be a lot harder, a lot harder certainly than they need be, but much more difficult than they were, say, eight or nine months ago before the plans really started ratcheting down.
	A lot of people in the woo-woo world, a lot of people in the alt media, a lot of people on the conservative side of media, especially within the YouTube space and Twitter and Facebook and Google Plus, are all dealing at the moment with issues,
	let's say, with subscriber base, with views, with ad counts, with ad revenue, with page views, number of issues all relating to language, search engines, and the social media themselves.
	This comes down to a construct that we can, a paradigm we can put our thoughts in that frames what's actually happening.
	It seems the advertising business in general has an inbuilt bias that's very extreme left, 99% leftist, let's just say, or left of center.
	Social media ownership also is in that extreme category of being mostly, you know, nearly 100% owned by people with what we can think of as a progressive or leftist bent, at least insofar as their language is concerned.
	Now, the language in the media itself, the language on the platforms themselves basically is 50-50.
	There is no dominating bias.
	The advertisers have traditionally and consistently overlooked about 50% of the potential audience.
	Advertising companies in general do understand people need to be motivated.
	What motivates in order to create a sale, get their email registered for an email list, which maybe will lead to a sale or visit a web page or whatever.
	You know, what leads to the motivation is emotion.
	So in order to get someone to go to your web page or give you their email or any of this, you've got to get them whipped up.
	You got to get the emotion involved.
	Well, advertisers, if you'll notice, consistently over the last 40 years have been actually using fewer and fewer and fewer and fewer words in their repertoire and are attempting to manipulate emotion with a narrower paradigm, a narrower context each and every year.
	That context they think of is rather broad, but it's not.
	It's very narrow in terms of the language they've chosen.
	Now, because of this narrowing of focus and because of the inbuilt left-leaning bias of the advertising companies themselves and the people that do all the writing and etc., they've been dropping the conservative market from their advertising year after year after year after year after year.
	And ultimately, we see this expression of this backlash in basically the left not being able to sell their position in this last election.
	And so we have recognizable on the ground demonstrable developments, phenomenon, that tell us that language has changed and that advertisers are blowing it.
	They're missing the mark here.
	Now, let's note that, yeah, language is, or sales, ultimately that's the goal of all advertising.
	Sales are motivated by emotion.
	Either emotion of the moment or emotion built up over time and triggered of the moment.
	We also have to acknowledge that the language of the progressive left is becoming decreasingly or increasingly deprived of its emotional framework.
	There's very few emotive words, they have a narrower and narrower focus, and they're getting rather repetitious.
	This accounts, by the way, for why Alex Jones is so successful as a pitch man, as a salesperson for the products that he puts on his site, the small profit from which allows him to produce that site and put it out.
	And that's because he gets whipped up about it.
	He's emotional about it.
	It means something to him.
	He's, you know, in the parlance of the times, he's authentic about it.
	He doesn't try and screen out emotions and he doesn't try and hype up emotions that are not there.
	Basically, you know, he probably has to run with a throttle on all the time and kind of just lets it off periodically.
	Anyway, so advertisers here, you'll notice, as I said initially, advertisers are starting to boycott the social media.
	A lot of it has to do with how they think they're being treated.
	A lot of it has to do with the changes that social media is making.
	Now, the reason that they're making some of these changes that are impacting advertisers is directly related to the censorship issue, the whole fake news, the whole offensive websites issue.
	I can understand advertisers, you know, not wanting to have their ads put on particular kinds of sites relative to the kinds of products that they're selling.
	This makes a whole lot of sense.
	But it's relatively easily done with linguistics to screen out and alter and that kind of thing.
	The approach that they're using here with the media itself is very much built around this continuing idea of throttling down on the language and the censorship.
	And so here is their problem.
	It splits off.
	They have a dual problem.
	One problem is they're attempting to control the language and in so doing, they're removing an emotional bias from it, making it less easy to use that framework of language that they have left as a sales vehicle for advertisers.
	And then on the other side of that, and that's part of their censorship approach.
	And on the other side of that, they've got issues with language that develop around not being able to get their control over that part of the language they wish to ignore.
	So fundamentally what they're doing is in terms of language, if language were a giant field and these guys are out there with a shovel, what they're attempting to do is they're attempting to direct all of our attention to the narrow focus of the hole that they're digging and they're digging with these long, narrow shovels, but big, big shovels, just shoveling out the words like mad.
	And the words are piling up over here in a big pile of debris.
	And what they're doing is they're trying to get us to focus down on that.
	And they're totally ignoring this huge pile of words that they're not using and which are actually starting to sort of take on a life of their own.
	And this is the problem that the owners of the social media have.
	And that is that their attempt to control is destroying their own platform.
	Bear in mind that social media exists only because you have a liking for it, only because of an emotion.
	Once they start really screwing with the language and altering that, there it goes.
	Also, advertising only works because of emotion.
	So how are the advertisers supposed to get people whipped up enough to do the things that advertising needs to be done, needs to do on their sites if they're out there throttling back on the language?
	And I would argue, and you can demonstrate via history, if you go back to the continental period before the Revolutionary War, and if you go back to the period before the Civil War, and if you go back to the period just before 1909 and follow it through to World War I, you'll find that there's some interesting changes in language that occur.
	And coincident with that are huge bursts of entrepreneurial spirit and success here in the United States.
	I'm not saying that the language was the causal.
	I'm saying it was definitively connected and that those represented periods of time where we had contention and we had language within the United States that to a great degree was as we see it now.
	People don't understand that when the Revolutionary War came along, only 5% of the population that lived here in North America at that time wanted to tell the king to go sit on that and spin.
	Okay, only 5% wanted to be involved with it.
	95% of the people that were here at that time, they wanted to just, you know, go along to get along.
	They were hunters, fishers, you know, trying to grow things, trying to, you know, build a nation and all of that kind of sort of thing.
	And they just didn't need to get involved with this revolutionary war bullshit.
	But it only took that 5% to get us here where we are now.
	And but it was during that period of time that we had a shift of language that reflected this battle within the population before there was actually a battle with the British themselves.
	Same thing was true of the Revolutionary War period.
	Same thing is true of now, by the way.
	Same thing is true of the Civil War period.
	The battle in the language is going back and forth, back and forth.
	Now, at the moment, because of the way that the social media and the progressives are dealing with their language and their attempts to deal with control, they're stupidly following a strategy that is narrowing the language, narrowing their grasp of reality rather than being expansive.
	So you'll notice one of the magnificent things about the language within the new conservatism or whatever the hell they're going to call this is that it's very inclusive and very expansive without all of the prejudicial and judgment crap that you hear coming out of the progressive side.
	That again, tarot tends to narrow the language down.
	So here we are with social media throttling down on the very thing that powers advertising, which is to say emotion.
	And so advertisers are not happy.
	Advertisers are not able to sell the way the social media promised.
	And I'm here to tell the advertisers if social media owners would get off the backs of the technocrats and just let them administer a platform in which there could be, you know, let's just say fair and open fighting of language without any kind of censorship at all, then the advertisers would find a very fertile ground from which to extract emotions to attach to products in order to sell their wares.
	But in the current environment of political correctness, nice, nice, nice, you know, safe houses within the social media, there go down the emotions that the advertisers are able to hook on to in any way, shape, or form.
	You know, and I say this, by the way, both as a contrite advertiser, because I used to advertise with Google and Twitter and these other social media in order to promote my reports and also to promote my book on advertising with the social media.
	And so now they've changed it.
	You know, as of March of last year, I started seeing the first impacts on the Twitter feed and then it started ratcheting in really tightly in June and July.
	And here we are now.
	So, you know, with advertisers basically beginning their full-on revolt.
	So we at least now know that the social media is going to get butt-kicked here as their primary source of revenue just decides we've had it.
	We can't sell.
	You guys are just not doing a good job.
	And a lot of these owners of the large corporations are also the same kind of people as that own the social media and have this leftist bias.
	But they just don't grasp that the way in which the leftist bias is being applied algorithmically is very much like a high-speed trading.
	It's blocking everybody else out and narrowing down their audience to a point where effectively they don't have the ability to offer anything to advertisers.
	And a lot of the media buy or a lot of the medium by which they might try and induce an advertiser to continue with their media is through language that a lot of the advertisers are now starting to recognize does not hit at least 50% of their intended audience.
	Maybe even a much larger segment.
	So in other words, if you're screening out any kind of conservative thought in a prejudicial fashion with censorship, how much of the potential audience of the 383 million people that supposedly use Twitter in a week are actually going to be targets for the advertising that's framed in progressive speak.
	And then, even beyond that, I mean, we know, for instance, that there's so many millions of fake Twitter accounts, you can't count them really.
	But now we're in the situation of where Twitter is going to really have to start justifying their ad rates because, exactly because, of the revolt that's going to start going on now.
	And these people don't have a clue as to why they're charging what they're charging or how to do anything with it either.
	You know, I can say this with some authority.
	I got over 82% conversion rate on Twitter, you know, for pennies, for words that were worth pennies, two and three cents each, because these people don't understand language.
	In any event, though, so conservative voices are the passionate voices at the moment in the media.
	They're being overlooked, they're being chopped out.
	This reductionism is losing the resonance.
	That's why advertisers are losing revenue.
	Advertisers need to rethink how to sell to the USA pop going forward, USA populace, and all other populaces, because we're into the world of populism and globalism is dying.
	And thus, the language of globalism is going to die, has died, is dying.
	Politically correct language is throttling down on the entire ability of advertisers to get their message across.
	And it's now getting to the point where you've got to be really careful if you want to induce something like humor in advertising, lest someone mistake that for umbrage.
	Anyway, and I guess that's it.
	Not much of a wujo.
	It was entirely for advertisers.

▲