Mediaboss Marketing

2019 has been a good year for creative music-marketing campaigns, as youll know if you read our end-of-year Sandbox report earlier this month. If you havent, you can find it here: its our pick of the best campaigns of the year.

Anyone looking for more inspiration for their music marketing in 2020 would do well to check out the winners of the 2019 Clio Music awards. The event aims to spotlight content and campaigns that push boundaries, permeate pop culture and establish a new precedent for artist self-promotion, music marketing, brand collaborations and the use of music in advertising.

There were two Grand winners this year. The first was a project called The Uncensored Playlist, entered for Reporters Without Borders by agency DDB Group Germany. It won its Grand award in the Innovation medium, while also bagging Gold awards for Social Good and Use of Music.

It was launched as the worlds first playlist that fights censorship, turning articles from five journalists in countries with repressive censorship into songs uploaded to streaming services, and gathered in a playlist that launched on World Day Against Cyber Censorship.

The second Grand winner was Share Your Gifts, entered by Kobalt Music Group. It was the Christmas advertisement for Apple in 2018: an animated commercial using Billie Eilishs track Come Out And Play for which Kobalt is the publisher. The ad won its Grand award in the Use of Music medium.

The Clio Music awards also gave out 29 Gold awards, including the two for The Uncensored Playlist. The directory of winners (which also includes Silver and Bronze gongs) is well worth a browse.

Some of Music Allys favourites within the Gold winners include: another project involving Billie Eilish, Spotifys pop-up Billie Eilish Experience, entered by the streaming service and getting its Gold award in the Design medium.

Theres also BMGs 30th anniversary deluxe box-set of Keith Richards Talk Is Cheap album, which won a Gold in Design; Microsofts Muse Simulation Theory VR Experience (Digital/Mobile); YouTubes artist spotlight story for Burna Boy (Film/Video); and RocNations A New Set Of Rights, a film for the New York Times featuring Meek Mill which focused on the problems of the US criminal justice system.

You can see the full list of winnersat the Clio Music site. Entries for the 2020 edition of the awards will open in the first quarter of next year.

Music Ally

Processing...

You might have left one of the fields blank, or be posting too quickly

Thanks for your comment. We appreciate your response.

Please wait a while before posting your next comment

View original post here:
Read More Clio Music awards winners offer music-marketing inspiration 2019 has been a good year - Music Ally

Today is International Day to End Violence Against Sex Workers, an annual observation supported by and dedicated to those that participate in the sex trade. Its also nearly the end of 2019the first full calendar year since Congress passed the Internet censorship law SESTA/FOSTA. EFF fought the bill in Congress, concerned that its vague, ambiguous language and stiff criminal and civil penalties would drive constitutionally protected content off the Internet. And we represent organizations and individuals that are challenging the law in federal court. Activists and organizers from within the sex working community made it clear from the beginning as well: though this bill was intended to curb violence that occurs in the sex trade, its result would be just the opposite because it deprived a community of many of the online tools they used to stay safe and to organize. 2019 has brought us the unfortunate statistics to prove that they were right.

In a recent study of sex workers completed by the grassroots sex worker advocacy organization Hacking//Hustling, in collaboration with Whose Corner Is It Anyway, 40% of participants reported experiencing increased violence after FOSTA became law. Additionally, an overwhelming 99% of participants said they do not feel safer because of FOSTA. The details of this study were recently reviewed at a conference hosted by Harvards Berkman Klein Law Center, and the full results will soon be available. But these grim statistics arent an outlier: last year the San Francisco Police Department reported that human trafficking and street-based sex work offenses had spiked 170% since FOSTAs passage.

These numbers affirm what those who participate in the sex industry warned would happen. FOSTA has ensnared a wide array of platforms and online marketplaces whose operators, fearing that comments, posts, or ads that are sexual in nature will result in new liability, have censored users speech or shut down entirely. The absence of these sites have prevented sex workers from organizing and utilizing tools that have kept them safe. Taking away client-screening capabilities, bad date lists, and other intra-community safety tips leads to putting more workers on the street, which leads to increased violence and trafficking. The consequences of this censorship are most devastating for trans women of color, who are disproportionately affected by this violence. In NYC, the unfair targeting of trans women by local ordinances are so prevalent, loitering laws are colloquially known as "Walking While Trans" laws.

After SESTA/FOSTAs passage, plaintiffs Woodhull Freedom Foundation, Human Rights Watch, Alex Andrews, the Internet Archive, and Eric Koszyk filed suit to invalidate the law. EFF is part of the legal team representing the plaintiffs, who are asking a court to declare the law unconstitutional and prevent it from being enforced. On this International Day to End Violence Against Sex Workers, it's clear that the first step to actually ending such violence is to repeal SESTA/FOSTA, and to listen more closely to the communities affected by such laws. Destigmatization and full decriminalization is the battle cry of many sex work advocacy groups;but under FOSTA, this advocacy may be illegal. Its time for us to start taking these risks, and the real-world implications of FOSTA's censorship, seriously.

Excerpt from:
On International Day to End Violence Against Sex Workers, We Must Look Closely at the Results of FOSTA - EFF

Facebook has blocked independent journalist and Filmmaker Ford Fischer of News2Share from posting links for 60 hours after he attempted to share a Reclaim The Net article about YouTube censorship. Fischer wasnt given any warning and was automatically and instantly blocked as soon as he attempted to share the link.

The article that Fischer attempted to share, 2019 was a low point for YouTube and demoralizing for creators, documents YouTube censorship, leaks that have exposed YouTube bias, and the controversial policies YouTube has introduced in 2019. Fischer's News2Share channel being demonetized on YouTube after it introduced its controversial hate speech rules is one of the stories featured in the article.

Fischer added that this is the first time Facebook has ever suspended any feature for him.

Facebook hasnt explained why the link was automatically blocked or why attempting to share it is punished with a 60 hour suspension. However, the company has increasingly restricted what users are allowed to share on the platform in 2019.

Here is the original post:
Facebook bans journalist Ford Fischer from posting links as he attempted to share YouTube censorship article - Reclaim The Net

(Photo: Getty Images)

Nicki Minaj may have made the term anaconda anatomically infamous, but Jason Derulos anaconda is breaking the internetor at least Instagram. The Talk Dirty singer shared a serious thirst trap with his fans on November 21, posting a #TBT photo of himself on a 2018 vacay in Bali. In the now-infamous image, Derulo walks through a stream in nothing but his little undies, with his *ahem* admiral *ahem* on full display. Theres no smooth way to describe it. Folks, Jason Derulo is carrying a Costco-sized eggplant in his briefs.

The snap was super steamy and left many fans seriously parched. Someone who wasnt parched though? Instagram. On December 4, the social media app removed Derulos post, stating that it went against community guidelines the app has around nudity or sexual activity. And folks, Derulo is *pissed.* Like, anaconda-sized pissed. The singer took to Insta to share the tragic news, sharing a screenshot of the message alongside the offensive photo in question, writing: Fuk u mean? I have underwear onI cant help my size..

A follow-up comment from the Cats star said #bringbackAnaconda. Which, similar to Kanye calling himself the greatest artist of all time, if youre giving your own D a nickname, you need to stop. While Derulos tantrum over the censorship of his bulge is almost as cringey as Drakes court-side antics during the Raptors play-off series, we do feel for the singerbecause censorship, especially bodily censorship over something you legit cant control, is never good. But also, we have to laugh. Because women have been dealing with this issue for a long timeand it seriously has to stop.

While Derulo may be new to this whole censorship thing, chances are that a majority of women and transgender folks arent.

Since the dawn of time (or at least the last decade), women have been dealing with the repercussions of pretty much just existing online; in a time when the female body is super offensive (unless its serving someones desires sexually, that is). Over the past few years, women online have been chastised for posting everything from bikini photos to natural hair selfies to gorge images of childbirth and even editorial photo shoots. In 2014, singer Rihanna was in a months-long spat with Insta when they removed a topless photo of her shot for the cover of Lui magazine. Insta obvi didnt disable her account (its Rihanna, after all), but the Barbadian songstress offish left the app for six months after the tiff.

Read this next: Women Are Calling Out Instagram for Censoring Photos of Fat Bodies

Just a year later, in March 2015, Insta poet Rupi Kaurhad her photo, depicting herself lying in bed with a period stain on her clothing and sheets,deleted twiceby Instagram.

And more recently, women have been censored for posting images of themselves breastfeeding their children.

The big offender in those photos? Nipples.

Because God forbid a woman actually try and feed her child and think its a beautiful thing.

But not only do women often have to deal with having their literal life-giving organs monitored, but essentially their existence as well. Because the app doesnt just censor nipples and boobs, but entire bodies. Several plus-size people have reported having their bikini photos (or even fully-clothed) pictures removed by Instagram for violating community guidelines a.k.a being plus-sized. Which is horrific.

While Instagram currently says that they censor images deemed sexually suggestive, the thing is, they leave a lot of room for interpretation. Examples of images that are sexually suggestive obtained by TechCrunch show a varied and unequal interpretation of what the term means when applied to men and women. One image showed a woman sitting in her underwear while the other featured a close-up of a faceless man clutching his cross. As USA Today writerErika Hallqvist pointed out in a June article, this suggests thatmen are deemed sexually suggestive by their actions, whereas women are deemed to be by just showing their body.

Read this next: I Tried It: Free Bleeding

Because of this, images that *could* be viewed as empowering or body positive (like the aforementioned images of natural body hair or plus-size women) can instead be seen as suggestive when viewed from a male perspective, and means that what *is* considered censorship-worthy is pretty subjective.

Which is infuriating AF. But the idea of censorship guidelines being informed by the way in which people and their bodies are viewed by others rather than their actual behaviour or the images themselves, isnt all that surprising. Because weve been dealing with that backwards thinking forever.

At the heart of the issue is the fact that, typically, womens bodies have long been over-sexualizedand seen purely as objects of desire by those who really should have no say in them *ahem* men *ahem.* This is especially pertinent to Black women and a horrendous history of ownership over their bodies. According to author Amy Bentley, with the introduction of processed baby food in the 19th century, womens bodies began toseem less and less functional and more like objects of desire, and its a mentality thats never really stopped.

Its the reason Janet Jackson was skewered for (accidentally) baring her breast onstage at the Super Bowl in 2004 while Adam Levine was considered a hunk for doing the samein 2019. And its the same reason we tell young women not to wear tank tops in elementary school. Its not the spaghetti straps themselves that are offensive, but how the presence of any skin on a womanno matter their ageis interpreted as provocative or sexual by others. Seriously, its a collar bone Tommy, settle down. But this type of thinking is seriously limiting; it means that almost anything women do: eating, exercising, sunbathing, attending school in a tank top, can be seen as suggestive. And in many cases, it affects the women themselves; with young women being sent home from school to change, ultimately impacting their education.

And one of the most infuriating aspects of this sexualization is the fact that it honestly makes no sense. In an August 2015 interview with Jimmy Kimmel, singer Miley Cyrus highlighted the seriously murky waters around what *exactly* makes the female breast so titillating and offensive. Humans arent afraid of the human breast, Cyrus said, referring to her own outfit in which she donned heart-shaped pasties that showed the skin of her boob, its the nipple thats the issue.

Which begs the question, why wasnt Derulo (or let alone any mans shirtless photo) removed for very blatantly showing nips? What does a little bit of fat behind said nip do to make a breast sexual?

Read this next: Dana Suchow on Learning to Love Her Leg Hair

While Instagram may think that their censorship doesnt have repercussions, it does. With so much disinformation and shame surrounding womens bodies, censorship online can convey censorship IRL as the norm, and lead young women to believe that they should be ashamed of their bodies and the natural way they function. As Hallqvist notes, online censorship reflects a societal fear of the female body and, in turn, promotes the power dynamics that keep the female body sexualized and commodified by men, rather than understood or celebrated by women.

And all together, its just not coolin either gender. Sure, Derulo is being pretty extra with his initial thirst trap; but regardless of whether or not his post was sexual in nature (as is any thirst trap, tbh), censoring anyones body is never OK.

So while we may not be thirsty for Derulos anaconda, we are thirsty for his freedom to post his body how he wants and when he wants. So yeah, #bringbackAnaconda

Visit link:
Hey Jason Derulo, Welcome to Being a Woman on the Internet - FLARE

To the TikTok, ya don't stop...

TIKTOK is having one of those "worst weeks" we quite often see in the tech industry.

Fresh from being revealed as a potential security risk by the FBI, after a Senate-led investigation, there's now double-trouble for the Chinese-based social-network-come-reality-show.

First up, there's the small matter of a lawsuit which claims that TikTok has been collecting data on child users, back when it was called Musical.ly. It had different owners then, but hey - you buy the company, you buy the lawsuit.

Under the US COPPA laws, social media companies are explicitly barred from storing data of children under the age of 13, without express parental consent.

Whilst TikTok's owner, Bytedance, isn't the only company to have been found wanting in the COPPA department, the fact that it's Chinese just adds to that slightly cringing-through-your-cupped-hands element to the story.

Meanwhile, a German website has uncovered a policy that has seen TikTok taking down videos posted by disabled people. It said the measures were introduced to reduce cyberbullying but has since acknowledged that its process was flawed.

The leaked internal documents show that staff were instructed to suppress videos from minorities including those with facial disfigurements or features such as birthmarks, users with autism, downs syndrome or the more generalised "disabled people".

Critics, including the leakers at Netzpolitik, have remarked that these users can be left feeling "victimised", and that the responsible thing to do is to go after the bullies, rather than further marginalise the victims.

TikTok says it now uses more "nuanced" policies.

Earlier this Summer, TikTok was criticised after it was revealed that young users were paying workshy fops or influencers' for vague promises of shout-outs or personal access to them, in a completely unregulated and often fraudulent environment.

Link:
TikTok clocked for child data collection and censoring the disabled - The INQUIRER