Mediaboss Marketing

This could have a significant impact on Twitter usage, and the way you build Twitter audiences moving forward.

Among its various experiments and tests, which are part of its accelerated development process after years of relative stagnation, Twitter is working on a new optionwhich would enable users to share their tweets with selected audiences, as opposed to all of their followers with every tweet. The idea is that this would help users get more out of their Twitter experience, and avoid them having to create separate accounts for different audiences and interests.

Twitter first revealed that it was working on the functionality at its Analyst Day briefingback in February, where it previewed a groups-like option called 'Communities', which would enable Twitter users to share their tweets within selected sub-groups of users, as opposed to sharing with everybody.

Now, Twitter has shared some new previews of exactly how the option could work.

One of the new processes Twitter is testing would be a variable audience control toggle within the tweet composer, which would also include a note on relevant tweets, signifying who can see them.

As you can see here, tweets shared with a specific audience, like 'Trusted Friends', would have a special marker, while users would also be able to have their timeline display tweets from their chosen lists first.

This specific option is very similar to Instagram's 'Close Friends' option for Stories (even down to the color selection),which enables users to maintain more enclosed conversations with selected users, as opposed to sharing everything with all of their followers.

Which could be a big bonus. There's been no shortage of controversies caused by re-surfaced tweets from times past, but then again, many of these discussions, you would think, are now being conducted in private DMs, so the practical value, for this specific application, may not be significant.

Another option could be something Twitter's calling 'Facets', which would enable users to create different personas under a single profile.

That would mean that users would be able to post in different topic areas, without having to share all of their thoughts on all of their interests on one, while as you can see in the second screenshot,followers would also have the option to follow different elements of your profile, based on their interests (or they could follow all of your tweets as normal).

So if you want to tweet about, say, 'digital marketing' and 'NFL', you could create two separate elements of your profile to share tweets about each topic with - so rather than boring your NFL fan connections with your work tweets, or creating a separate fan account in addition to your main profile, you could maintain all of your discussions and engagement in one, and keep them isolated from each other.

Which would make it easier - but would it help Twitter to boost or improve engagement?

I mean, surely Twitter gleans some usage reporting benefit from users having multiple active accounts. If everyone with a secondary profile (note: this is a lot of people) only needed one, wouldn't that reduce Twitter's overall user count?

And given that Twitter's looking to increase its active user number by 123 million more userswithin the next three years, that seems like it may not be the best way forward, at least from this perspective.

In a practical sense, for users, there is some logic to enabling people to conduct more, different types of discussion in the app, and leaning into common usage behaviors - but I'm not entirely convinced that this will be hugely beneficial. Instead, it could just end up fragmenting the Twitter experience, and making it more complex, something that Twitter has been working hard to avoid for years.

But if Twitter does push ahead with it, it could change the way you use your Twitter profile, and how you build specific, targeted audiences in the app. A brand, for example, could create a separate 'Help' feed, a 'Customer Service' handle within their main profile, and another stream for 'Sales and Specials' to limit ad intrusion in regular user feeds.

There's a range of options to consider, and while it would take some time and testing to see how this actually works, and how users align with it, it could spark a significant shift in user behavior.

Or, it might prove too problematic. We'll have to wait and see where Twitter goes with it.

Twitter has specifically noted that it's not building these mock-ups as yet.

Read this article:
Twitter is Testing New Audience Controls on Tweets, Making it Easier to Engage Around Various Topics - Social Media Today

The Man Who Hated Women by Amy Sohn // Macmillan

In 1873, Congress passed a law outlawing the distribution, sale, mailing and possession of "obscene" materials including contraception.

The Comstock Act, as it became known, was named after Anthony Comstock, an anti-vice crusader who later became a special agent to the U.S. Post Office, giving him the power to enforce the law. In her new book, The Man Who Hated Women, author Amy Sohn writes about Comstock as well as eight women charged with violating the Comstock Act.

While working for the post office, Sohn says, Comstock "decoyed people" by using the mail to solicit obscenity and contraception.

"[Comstock] was given that [post office] title so that he could have the power to inspect the mail and over time it was expanded to be able to come into people's houses and seize items," she says. "It was a very broad, broad definition of what someone affiliated with the post office could do with regards to individual civil liberties."

Over time, the scope of the Comstock law expanded: "Its heart was in the mail, but ... it became much broader than that," Sohn says. "Even oral information, which reasonable people believed was constitutionally protected, turned out that it wasn't."

In 1916, feminist activist Emma Goldman was arrested in New York City just before giving a lecture on family planning. One year earlier, birth control advocate Margaret Sanger had been charged with violating the law. Goldman and Sanger are just two of the eight women profiled in Sohn's book. Others include nurses and health practitioners, spiritualists and women in the so-called free love movement.

The Comstock Act lasted until 1965 when the Supreme Court ruled it violated the right to marital privacy. "It was in Griswold v. Connecticut that married women could finally have the right to receive contraception from their doctors," Sohn says.

As for single women? They didn't get the same rights until the 1972 Eisenstadt v. Baird ruling 99 years after the passage of the Comstock Act.

On the forms of birth control that were available in the 1870s

They had sponges. A very common form of birth control that many women used was vaginal douching, which were these syringes. And you could use them for health and hygienic purposes, but they would also put various substances in them, acidic substances that were said to have spermicidal qualities. Also [the rhythm method] although they did not understand the rhythm method, and so the times that they were abstaining were actually the worst possible times to abstain. And withdrawal, which was sometimes successful and sometimes not successful.

On how Comstock became obsessed what he considered "smut"

Well, he was born in a small, rural area called New Canaan, Conn. And it was the kind of town where you knew everybody and you knew everybody's business. And his parents were very religious; he was raised Congregationalist. And after the Civil War ... he moved to New York ... [and he] lived in a house with other young men called a boardinghouse. And New York at the time was dominated by what was called "sporting culture," where all of entertainment was tailored toward these young single men ... most of whom were living apart from their families for the first time. So there were billiards and boxing and pretty waiter girl saloons. And he was exposed to all of this and [was] just absolutely disgusted. He had trouble finding men of similar religious thinking. And so that was when he decided to do something about it.

But the real precipitant to his becoming an anti-smut, anti-vice activist was he had a co-worker at his dry goods store who told him that he had visited a prostitute and become diseased and corrupted. [Comstock] became convinced that the reason this guy had gone to a prostitute was because he read dirty books. So he went to the store where the books were sold and called the police. And that was the beginning of his career as a vice hunter.

On the Comstock Act and the penalties for sending contraception or information about it through the mail

They could be up to $5,000, which would be in the hundreds of thousands of dollars today and either five or 10 years of hard labor. ... So these fines, when they were able to get convictions, and these sentences, absolutely ruined people's lives and didn't just cut off their ability to make a living, but frequently sent them into poverty and completely out of the business [and sometimes to prison]. ...

One of the fascinating things about Comstock and the women that he went after I focus on eight women he pursued is many of them were middle-aged and older, some as old as their late 60s. And so given what life spans were at that time, to be a 67-year-old woman facing a 10-year prison sentence, you were almost certain you were going to die in prison. And that is why some of the women he went after and was able to prosecute took their own lives.

On what the "free love" movement was like back in the late 1800s

The free love movement was this idea that there should be equality in romantic relationships. A lot of people hear free love, and they think of like, Woodstock and the summer of love. It was not about having sex with as many partners as you could. Most free lovers were monogamous. The heart of it was better equality, better division of domestic tasks, and the idea of abolishing marriage laws that two people should be able to enter into their own romantic contracts, which should not be legal. Most free lovers were opposed to abortion, except in extreme cases. ...

But what's interesting about the free lovers is they were civil libertarians, and many of them were also extremely leftist in their ideas about economics. So, for example, they felt that too many men and women were marrying for economic reasons. Women needed money, and then they would marry men that they didn't love. They wanted all relationships to be based on love and mutual respect. The most radical thing that they believed is that if a man and a woman really loved each other, they would give birth to superior children.

On how the Comstock story relates to our current reproductive issues, including challenges to Roe v. Wade

Certainly now that we see these [reproductive] rights already being chipped away and I'm lucky to live in a state like New York, which is trying to protect abortion access no matter what happens with Roe. But, yes, I think the biggest thing, though, is that I have a teenage daughter, and so I think about the generations into the future and what is a post-Roe landscape going to look like? And from what I understand, we're going to have, even more so than we already do today, a real two-tiered system where your access to abortion is going to rely heavily on where you happen to live. And the reason that saddens me is Roe was decided precisely to stop that from happening. And the other reason it fills me with dread is that was essentially what Anthony Comstock created, a two-tiered system, which was that even after the passage of the Comstock law, you could get what was called a "medical exemption" or a "therapeutic exemption" if you were wealthy and you could find your way to having abortions. But women who didn't have that kind of access couldn't.

Sam Briger and Kayla Lattimore produced and edited the audio of this interview. Bridget Bentz, Molly Seavy-Nesper and Meghan Sullivan adapted it for the web.

Read the original here:
How An Anti-Vice Crusader Sabotaged The Early Birth Control Movement | NPR - Houston Public Media

The month-long Euro Cup final ends Sunday, or wee hours of Monday Nepal time. Copa America final sees footballing giants Brazil and Argentina early Sunday morning Nepal time.

These have been opportunities for betting for Nepali gamblers although it is considered illegal by the Nepali law.

On Wednesday, Lalitpur Metropolitan Police Range busted a football betting network, run by five men.

According to Senior Superintendent Kiran Bajracharya, chief of Lalitpur Metropolitan Police Range, they used to run betting from social media platforms like Whatsapp and Facebook.

They used to collect cash from digital platforms like e-sewa and Khalti or the amount was directly deposited to a bank account, Bajracharya told the Post.

With tournaments like the Euro Cup and Copa America going on, police have increased vigilance in restaurants and clubs where most of such events take place, Bajracharya said.

On Monday, Metropolitan Crime Division had arrested eight individuals, including three Indian nationals, from different parts of Kathmandu for organising illegal online betting over the ongoing Euro Cup 2020.

Police also seized over Rs3.4 million from them.

We acted on a tip-off about ongoing illegal betting in Nepal and India and raided various places and arrested the persons, said Senior Superintendent Chandra Kuber Thakur, chief of Metropolitan Crime Division.

Section 125 of the National Penal (Code) Act, 2017 prohibits gambling and betting in Nepal.

Every year, Nepal Police busts several betting rackets, however, they are only able to arrest agents as the main people involved in operating such illegal rackets are mostly abroad.

SSP Thakur and Bajracharya also agree with the point.

According to them, since betting is now running online, it has become difficult to track people involved in betting.

Most of the arrests are made after police are tipped-off mostly by those people who themselves have lost the money in betting, said Thakur.

Thakur is aware that betting through websites have also thrived in Nepal. However, police are helpless as such activities are difficult to monitor.

I have heard about betting through websites, but as such websites are not operated from Nepal. So, there is nothing we can do, said SSP Thakur.

Many Nepalis, especially youngsters, are using websites like 1XBet and Stake for sports betting.

According to R, who wished to be identified by only his initial letter, betting on websites is easy, so many of his friends including him have been betting in games for fun.

You can bet even Rs 20 in the game, said R.

According to him, they have to first create a profile in such websites after which they top up to Nepali agent number through Khalti which later sends the amount to profiles in betting websites.

The reward depends upon the risk you take, if you guess the winner you get less profit but if you guess goals by player or goal difference, you could get double or even triple the amount you bet, said R. If you win the bet, then you can transfer the money to an agent account who will later send the amount to your account.

According to Senior Superintendent Ashok Singh, chief of Kathmandu Metropolitan Police Range, they have found many instances where people were cheated by bet organisers as many people involved in such illegal betting business are out of the country.

SSP Singh has urged the general public to file a complaint in Nepal Police as soon as they hear about the ongoing illegal betting.

Visit link:
Authorities struggle to control illegal sports betting - The Kathmandu Post

The 2021 ESPYS Media Kit: https://bit.ly/3hmSXAh

This Saturday, some of the worlds best athletes and biggest stars will join host Anthony Mackie for The 2021 ESPYS presented by Capital One. The star-studded evening celebrates the best moments from the year in sports and will air live on ABC July 10 from 8 p.m. ET 11 p.m. ET from The Rooftop at Pier 17 at the Seaport in New York City. Spencer Ludwig will be the musical director for the ESPYS, providing live music throughout the show. Former NFL star and emerging actor Vernon Davis serves as the voice of the ESPYS, introducing presenters and keeping the fun going throughout the night. Peloton superstar instructor Ally Love will be the behind-the-scenes host, bringing viewers a unique look at the ESPYS, with celebrity and athlete interviews, reactions from winners as they come off stage, and amazing content throughout the show.

This years scheduled presenters include: Kane Brown (Multi-Platinum Artist), DaBaby (Multi-Platinum Recording Artist), Charli DAmelio (Social Media Star), Dixie DAmelio (Social Media Star), Alexandra Daddario (The White Lotus and Die in a Gunfight), Taye Diggs (Actor), Desus Nice and The Kid Mero (Desus & Mero), Nina Dobrev (Actress, Writer, Producer), Dude Perfect (YouTube Stars), Rob Gronkowski (Tampa Bay Buccaneers), Sabrina Ionescu (New York Liberty), Chloe Kim (Olympic Gold Medalist), Zachary Levi (American Underdog), Tracy Morgan (Actor/Comedian), Joe Namath (New York Jets Legend), Julius Randle (New York Knicks), Robin Roberts (ABCs Good Morning America), Mikaela Shiffrin (Two-Time Olympic Gold Medalist), Iliza Shlesinger (Actress/Comedian), Kurt Warner (American Underdog), Roy Williams (Retired UNC Basketball Coach) and more.

In addition, top athletes and celebrities scheduled to attend include: Jocelyn Alo (Oklahoma Softball), Sasha Banks (WWE Superstar), Bianca Belair (WWE Superstar), Paige Bueckers (UConn Womens Basketball), Jared Butler (Baylor Mens Basketball), Tyler Campbell (UCLA Mens Basketball), Mike Evans (Tampa Bay Buccaneers), Sarah Fuller (Vanderbilt Football/University of North Texas Soccer), Chris Godwin (Tampa Bay Buccaneers), Derrick Henry (Tennessee Titans), Justin Herbert (Los Angeles Chargers), DeAndre Hopkins (Arizona Cardinals), Matt James (The Bachelor Season 25), Jaime Jaquez Jr. (UCLA Mens Basketball), Ronald Jones II (Tampa Bay Buccaneers), Giselle Juarez (Oklahoma Softball), Johnny Juzang (UCLA Mens Basketball), Rachael Kirkconnell (The Bachelor Season 25), Betnijah Laney (New York Liberty), LeSean McCoy (Tampa Bay Buccaneers), Maya Moore (WNBA Star/Activist), Chris Nikic (Endurance Athlete), Amanda Nunes (UFC fighter), Naomi Osaka (Tennis player), Jason Pierre-Paul (Tampa Bay Buccaneers), DiDi Richards (New York Liberty), Shannon Saile (Oklahoma Softball), DeVonta Smith (Alabama Football/Philadelphia Eagles Rookie), Jalen Suggs (Gonzaga Mens Basketball), Nigel Sylvester (BMX), Drew Timme (Gonzaga Mens Basketball), Tara VanDerveer (Stanford Womens Basketball Coach), Chase Young (The Washington Football Team) and more.

Previously announced honorees scheduled to attend include: Chris Nikic (Jimmy V Award for Perseverance Recipient) and Maya Moore (Arthur Ashe Award for Courage Recipient).

A new element of The 2021 ESPYS, fans now have total control of the ESPYS (virtual) Control Room! This interactive and immersive experience puts fans behind the desk inside the Control Room, then lets them explore a 180 virtual world with games, exclusive content and more. Plus, fans can enter to win a grand prize trip to the 2022 ESPYSalong with other prizes like an ESPYS gift bag and subscriptions to ESPN+ and Disney+. Gain entries for each visit, and bonus entries for interacting on the site. http://www.espn.com/espys/controlroom

About The 2021 ESPYS

The 2021 ESPYS Presented by Capital One will be hosted by acclaimed actor and producer Anthony Mackie. Mackie will be joined by top celebrities from sports and entertainment to commemorate the past year in sports by recognizing major sports achievements, reliving unforgettable moments, and saluting the leading performers and performances. The ESPYS will be broadcast live on ABC Saturday, July 10, at 8 p.m. ET from The Rooftop at Pier 17 at the Seaport in New York City. The ESPYS honor ESPNs commitment to The V Foundation for Cancer Research, a partnership launched with the late Jim Valvano at the inaugural ESPYS in 1993. Follow The 2021 ESPYS on Twitter @ESPYS.

-30-

Read more:
Presenters and Attendees Announced for The 2021 ESPYS Hosted by Anthony Mackie this Saturday on ABC - ESPN Press Room

Alf Ramsey was not a man much given to drama, but when he read out the team for Englands final warm-up friendly before the 1966 World Cup, away to Poland in Chorzow, the players noted a distinct pause before he delivered the 11th name.

Alan Ball was in on the right, so everybody assumed that meant a conventional winger on the left, probably Terry Paine. But Ramseys grand reveal was a genuine surprise: Martin Peters. As he had against Spain the previous December, Ramsey was going without wingers. For only the second time in history, England would play 4-4-2.

Less than a month later, that same 4-4-2 carried England to victory against West Germany in the World Cup final. Ramsey was a cautious and reserved man and, perhaps because he never saw the need to explain his thinking to the media, his tactical radicalism was undervalued. But he was also clever and cunning. He had seen how football was going. He knew that the advent of the back four was diminishing the impact of wingers and saw the greater value in having a numerical advantage in midfield.

After the 2-0 win in Madrid in December 1965, he put his new system away and only brought it out again six days before Englands first game at the World Cup. He was confident nobody would be watching; what happened in Silesia stayed in Silesia. And then he hid the 4-4-2 again.

England in 1966 were widely criticised for their performances in the group stage: a 0-0 with Uruguay and workaday 2-0 wins over France and Mexico. It was negative, negative, negative, England bereft of ideas as if playing a game they had never attempted before, moaned Peter Wilson in the Mirror after the opening game. If the competition continues like this, I suggest they change the design of the Cup into an urn a funeral urn.

Ramsey didnt care. The group was about progressing. Nobody remembered how you did it. He played a 4-3-3 in each group game, using a different winger in each John Connelly, Terry Paine and Ian Callaghan. But that was the phoney war. The real tournament only began with the quarter-final against Argentina, when he unveiled the 4-4-2.

That was a brutal game that hinged on the (bewildering) dismissal of Argentinas captain, Antonio Rattn, 10 minutes before half-time. The crowd at Wembley was frustrated. It wanted England to go for the kill. Journalists the following day seemed baffled England had not finished the game off sooner. But Ramsey was patient: he believed his plan would work against 11, so it was certainly going to work against 10. Sure enough, with 11 minutes remaining, Geoff Hurst glanced in the winner.

Fifty-five years later, as England prepare, at last, for another major final, there are parallels. That was a different world, of course. There was far less discussion of tactics. Even many coaches were wary of over-intellectualising the game. Ramsey, the first England manager allowed to do the job alone, without committee, could have brought a blackboard out and explained exactly what he was intending to do and the story would not have been the intricacies of the midfield but the eccentricity of the England manager.

Thank you for your feedback.

This, too, is an England that won two and drew one game in the group and went through without conceding. This too is an England that didnt concede until their semi-final. This too is an England founded on control with a stubbornly determined manager who has ignored criticism from those who have urged him to be bold.

And this too is an England with a tactical plan they didnt unveil until after the group stage. Southgate had used a back three at the World Cup before switching to a 4-3-3. At the time that seemed a logical progression, moving to a more attacking, more sophisticated style as the team matured. It brought the 3-2 win in Spain that, until this tournament, probably represented the high-water mark of Southgates reign.

But it also looked vulnerable defensively, as seen in the 5-3 win over Kosovo and the defeats to the Czech Republic and the Netherlands. So Southgate last year went back to the back three. Results were mixed, although they might have looked rather better had it not been for Harry Maguires red card against Denmark at Wembley. And then, abruptly, the back three vanished in March. Perhaps that made sense in the context of the World Cup qualifier against San Marino, but it seemed a risk against Poland (and only a late winner prevented England dropping points after a soft concession).

Theres no suggestion Southgate was performing the same subterfuge as Ramsey. It seems not to be in his nature and probably wouldnt work anyway in the modern media landscape. But the back three remained in the background, ready to be deployed when required against Germany. Its possible it will come out on Sunday against Italy.

But whether Southgate goes back to that or sticks with the back four, he has, like Ramsey, recognised a basic truth of tournaments that the utopian demands of fans and media often ignore: there are the games you have to get through, and the games you have to win if youre to progress deep in them. There are no arbitrary abstract demands for a particular style or type of player, no sense of knowing his first XI, no picking his best players and letting them get on with it, no pandering to egos: there are just, within a general tactical framework, a series of games, each one to be approached in its merits in turn.

It sounds simple, but then, as Johan Cruyff observed, football is a simple game; its the making it look simple thats difficult. By the end in 1966, even Peter Wilson was won over, hailing the English Valkyries and saluting a triumph that had his heart pounding: But in the hurricane there was one quiet Englishman Alf Ramsey. No doubt he was remembering his finest hour but remembering theres nothing so becomes a man as modest stillness and humility.

There are parallels.

Original post:
Stubborn, controlled, deaf to critics: theres plenty of Alf Ramsey in Gareth Southgate - The Guardian