#ad Agencies in West Virginia

[guerilla-marketing]

Guerrilla Marketing Agencies in West Virginia

Unleashing Creativity: Top Guerrilla Marketing Agencies in West Virginia

In the fast-paced world of advertising, businesses are constantly on the lookout for innovative ways to capture attention and engage audiences. Traditional marketing methods often fall short in today’s dynamic landscape, leading brands to explore unconventional tactics that break through the clutter. One such tactic is guerrilla marketing, an approach that focuses on surprise, creativity, and high impact to promote products or services. In West Virginia, several guerrilla marketing agencies have emerged as leaders in this field, helping businesses create memorable and effective campaigns. This article delves into the concept of guerrilla marketing, its benefits, and highlights some of the top guerrilla marketing agencies in West Virginia.

What is Guerrilla Marketing?

Guerrilla marketing is an advertising strategy that focuses on low-cost, high-impact campaigns designed to attract attention and generate buzz. Unlike traditional advertising, which relies on large budgets and broad reach, guerrilla marketing aims to create memorable experiences through unconventional methods. This can include street art, flash mobs, viral videos, and other creative tactics that engage consumers in unexpected ways. The goal is to leave a lasting impression and encourage word-of-mouth promotion.

Benefits of Guerrilla Marketing

Guerrilla marketing offers several advantages that make it an appealing choice for businesses looking to stand out:

1. Cost-Effective

One of the primary benefits of guerrilla marketing is its cost-effectiveness. By leveraging creativity and strategic planning, businesses can execute impactful campaigns without the need for large budgets.

2. High Impact

Guerrilla marketing is designed to make a strong impression. The element of surprise and creativity involved in these campaigns captures attention and generates buzz, often leading to viral spread.

3. Increased Engagement

Engaging consumers in unique and memorable ways encourages interaction and participation. This can lead to higher levels of brand recall and loyalty.

4. Local Targeting

Guerrilla marketing campaigns can be highly localized, allowing businesses to target specific communities or demographics effectively.

5. Viral Potential

Creative and unexpected campaigns have the potential to go viral, reaching a much larger audience than initially targeted. This organic spread can significantly amplify the campaign’s impact.

Top Guerrilla Marketing Agencies in West Virginia

West Virginia is home to several innovative agencies that specialize in guerrilla marketing. Here are some of the leading agencies that can help your business leverage the power of guerrilla marketing:

1. Wildfire Creative

Location: Charleston, WV

Overview: Wildfire Creative is a premier guerrilla marketing agency known for its out-of-the-box thinking and creative campaigns. They offer a range of services, from concept development to execution, ensuring that every campaign makes a memorable impact.

Specialties:

Street Art and Murals

Flash Mobs and Live Performances

Interactive Installations

Viral Video Production

Event Marketing

Notable Clients: Wildfire Creative has worked with a diverse range of clients, including local businesses, nonprofit organizations, and national brands, delivering innovative and effective guerrilla marketing campaigns.

2. Impact Advertising

Location: Morgantown, WV

Overview: Impact Advertising combines creative strategy with practical execution to deliver high-impact guerrilla marketing campaigns. Their team focuses on creating memorable experiences that engage and excite audiences.

Specialties:

Pop-Up Events

Urban Advertising

Social Media Campaigns

Experiential Marketing

Creative Installations

Notable Clients: Impact Advertising has a strong portfolio of successful campaigns for clients in the entertainment, retail, and hospitality sectors, among others.

3. Mountain Guerrilla Marketing

Location: Huntington, WV

Overview: Mountain Guerrilla Marketing specializes in creating unique and engaging marketing experiences. Their team leverages local insights and creative expertise to design campaigns that resonate with West Virginia’s diverse communities.

Specialties:

Guerrilla Projections

Interactive Street Performances

Creative PR Stunts

Community Engagement Campaigns

Brand Activations

Notable Clients: Mountain Guerrilla Marketing has partnered with both local businesses and national brands, helping them create buzz and drive engagement through strategic guerrilla marketing.

4. Appalachian Innovators

Location: Wheeling, WV

Overview: Appalachian Innovators is dedicated to providing high-quality guerrilla marketing services that maximize brand exposure. They offer end-to-end solutions, ensuring that every campaign is executed flawlessly from start to finish.

Specialties:

Creative Campaign Design

High-Visibility Installations

Urban and Rural Targeting

Event-Based Marketing

Viral Content Creation

Notable Clients: Appalachian Innovators has successfully executed guerrilla marketing campaigns for a variety of clients, including tech companies, cultural institutions, and lifestyle brands.

5. Riverside Marketing Group

Location: Parkersburg, WV

Overview: Riverside Marketing Group is a boutique agency that specializes in guerrilla marketing and unconventional advertising. They pride themselves on their creative approach and deep understanding of the local market.

Specialties:

Pop-Up Marketing

Street-Level Campaigns

Artistic Collaborations

Creative Content Production

Local Market Insights

Notable Clients: Riverside Marketing Group has built a reputation for delivering unique and engaging guerrilla marketing campaigns for clients across different industries, from entertainment to consumer goods.

Tips for a Successful Guerrilla Marketing Campaign

Launching a successful guerrilla marketing campaign requires careful planning and execution. Here are some tips to ensure your campaign stands out:

1. Understand Your Audience

Know who your target audience is and what resonates with them. Choose tactics that will capture their attention and encourage engagement.

2. Be Creative

Creativity is at the heart of guerrilla marketing. Think outside the box and come up with unique ideas that will surprise and delight your audience.

3. Location Matters

Choose locations that are frequented by your target audience. High-traffic areas such as busy streets, popular events, and social hotspots can maximize visibility and impact.

4. Leverage Social Media

Encourage sharing and interaction on social media to amplify your campaign’s reach. Create hashtags, share behind-the-scenes content, and engage with your audience online.

5. Measure Results

Track the performance of your campaign through metrics such as increased foot traffic, social media engagement, and sales. This will help you understand the effectiveness of your guerrilla marketing efforts and make necessary adjustments for future campaigns.

Conclusion

Guerrilla marketing is a powerful and cost-effective advertising method that can help businesses in West Virginia stand out in a crowded market. By partnering with experienced guerrilla marketing agencies, you can leverage this creative approach to reach your audience in a memorable and impactful way. Whether you’re promoting an event, launching a new product, or simply looking to increase brand visibility, guerrilla marketing offers a unique opportunity to engage with consumers in their everyday environments.

As the advertising landscape continues to evolve, embracing unconventional methods like guerrilla marketing can give your business a competitive edge. With the right strategy, design, and execution, your guerrilla marketing campaign can create a lasting impression and drive meaningful results. So, if you’re ready to take your advertising efforts to the next level, consider working with a top guerrilla marketing agency in West Virginia and watch your brand make its mark in the vibrant urban landscape.

[politicalblade]

It's unsurprising that Biden wants Israel to be able to kill people in Rafah without consequences while simultaneously also wanting Gaza to be unable to hold their abusers accountable.

This is because the US is an abusive state.

THE U.S. GOVERNMENT will defund the United Nations agency that aids Palestinians through next year — even as 1.1 million people in Gaza face threats of famine in coming months — on the basis of flimsy allegations by Israel against a tiny minority of the agency’s staff that have yet to be proven.

Congress passed the defunding measure as part of a $1.2 trillion spending package to avert a partial government shutdown. In addition to stripping funding from the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees in the Near East, or UNRWA, through March 2025, the bill includes the $3.8 billion the U.S. sends to Israel every year.  The bill also contains a long-standing provision that would limit aid to the Palestinian Authority, which governs the occupied West Bank, if “the Palestinians initiate an International Criminal Court (ICC) judicially authorized investigation, or actively supports such an investigation, that subjects Israeli nationals to an investigation for alleged crimes against Palestinians.” After a late-night vote, the Senate sent the bill to President Joe Biden to sign it into law on Saturday. 

The U.S. first suspended aid to UNRWA in late January, when the Israeli government leveled allegations that 12 of the agency’s 30,000 employees — or 0.04 percent — were involved in Hamas’s attacks on October 7 (Israel later accused two additional employees of involvement, bringing the total number to 14). In response, Philippe Lazzarini, commissioner-general of UNRWA, immediately terminated the accused staff members and launched an investigation. The U.S. decision to cut aid to the 74-year-old aid agency, which was founded amid the creation of Israel and the ensuing Nakba — the mass displacement and dispossession of Palestinians from their homes — prompted much of the West to follow suit, including other top donors such as Germany, the European Union, and Sweden. While several of those donors have recently announced their intention to resume funding, the U.S. government, which has historically been a top donor to UNRWA, has instead doubled down. The spending bill passed the House on Friday afternoon with a 286-135 vote. Twenty-three House Democrats voted against the bill, with several issuing statements directly linking their “no” votes to the UNRWA provision. The Senate overwhelmingly approved the bill early on Saturday in a 74-24 vote.

Even in the lead-up to the Friday vote, several members of Congress slammed the idea of continuing to penalize UNRWA.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., told The Independent that members of Congress have intelligence assessments that suggest halting funding is “not grounded in solid facts.”  “We should not be restricting, we should be restoring, I’ve been saying that on public record,” Rep. Delia Ramirez, D-Ill., added. “The idea that people are literally starving to death and we are contributing to that is a problem.” Democratic Sens. Tim Kaine of Virginia, Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, and Dick Durbin of Illinois expressed similar concerns. UNRWA ANNOUNCED ISRAEL’S allegations against its employees on January 26, the same day the International Court of Justice ruled that Israel is plausibly committing genocide. It didn’t take very long for the allegations to start to fall apart. On January 30, Sky News reported that it had seen Israeli intelligence documents fielding the allegations and that they “make several claims that Sky News has not seen proof of and many of the claims, even if true, do not directly implicate UNRWA.”  That same day, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken told reporters that the allegations were “highly, highly credible,” while also admitting the U.S. hadn’t done its own investigation. On February 3, the Financial Times wrote that Israel’s intelligence assessment “provides no evidence for the claims.” Shortly thereafter, British outlet Channel 4 reported that a confidential Israeli document detailing the allegations “provides no evidence to support its explosive new claim.” Two days later, CBC reported that Canada — another top UNRWA donor — suspended its funding without seeing any evidence to substantiate the allegation against the UNRWA staff members. Within a few days, Lazzarini admitted that he followed “reverse due process” by firing staff members implicated in the allegations before conducting an investigation.  “Indeed, I have terminated without due process because I felt at the time that not only the reputation but the ability of the entire agency to continue to operate and deliver critical humanitarian assistance was at stake if I did not take such a decision,” he said, explaining that the agency was already subject to “fierce and ugly attacks.” “My judgment, based on this going public, true or untrue, was I need to take the swiftest and boldest decision to show that as an agency we take this allegation seriously.” Just last week, the European Union’s top humanitarian aid official saidhe has still not seen evidence from Israel to back its accusations — nearly two months after they were made. Even if the allegations were found to be true, many have argued cutting funding to UNRWA is tantamount to collective punishment. “We should investigate it,” Van Hollen said this week. “But for goodness’ sake, let’s not hold 2 million innocent Palestinian civilians who are dying of starvation … accountable for the bad acts of 14 people.” Meanwhile, UNRWA’s internal investigation turned out horrific reports that Israel tortured UNRWA staff in order to force false confessions that they were involved in the October 7 attack and are members of Hamas. Staffers were allegedly beaten, waterboarded, and had their family members threatened by Israeli soldiers. UNRWA also alleged that Israeli soldiers used a nail gun on Palestinians’ knees and sexually abused the prisoners, including through “the insertion of what appears to be an electrified metal stick into prisoners’ rectums.” Israel has denied the allegations.

[imfullysatisfied]

Google Ad business faces breakup after being charged with EU antitrust violations

Google may be forced to sell part of its ad business after being charged with violating the European Union’s antitrust laws. Following a lengthy investigation, the European Commission suggested that “mandatory divestment” is the only way the search engine can resolve the issue.

Why we care: If Google does sell part of its ad business, it could mark the start of a new digital marketing era with a more competitive market and fairer pricing. This could potentially lead to more transparency, greater campaign control for advertisers and increased innovation, which could prompt the creation of new ad tools.

What’s happening: The European Commission conducted a report into the operation of Google Ads and found that the search engine typically tends to favor its own ads, causing difficulties for competing providers.

When discussing potential solutions, the commission said that behavioral improvements would not be enough to rectify the matter. Instead, it has recommended that the search giant sells off part of its business.

What has Google said? Google released a statement today criticizing the commission’s findings. Dan Taylor, Vice President of Google Ads, wrote:

“The Statement of Objections from the European Commission sets out claims that are not new and relate to a narrow part of our advertising business. It fails to recognize how advanced advertising technology helps merchants reach customers and grow their businesses — while lowering costs and expanding choices for consumers.

“Ad tech is fiercely competitive and constantly evolving. We compete with hundreds of companies in this space, including household names like Amazon, Microsoft, and Meta as well as specialized advertising technology companies like Criteo, The Trade Desk, and many others. Even media companies and retailers now offer competing advertising technologies.

“The digital advertising market enjoys competitive pricing, lively innovation, and robust competition — helping advertisers, publishers, and consumers. We look forward to showing how our ad tech tools help make the internet open, and accessible — and how breaking them would diminish the availability of free, ad-supported content that benefits everyone.”

Has this happened before? Earlier this year, nine U.S. states (Michigan, Nebraska, Arizona, Illinois, Minnesota, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Washington, and West Virginia), joined forces to bring a similar lawsuit against Google.

The states accused the search engine’s ad business of violating antitrust regulations. To rectify the matter, they urged Google to break up its Ad Manager suite, claiming it was exploiting its online advertising dominance. Google denied the claims and asked for the case to be dismissed.

In 2020, Google was also accused of breaching antitrust laws again in order to sustain its position as the leading search engine. This case is set for trial in September.

Deeper dive: You can read Google’s full response to the European Commission announcement about its advertising technology.

Add Search Engine Land to your Google News feed.    

Related stories

New on Search Engine Land

<![CDATA[ @media screen and (min-width: 800px) #div-gpt-ad-3191538-7 display: flex !important; justify-content: center !important; align-items: center !important; min-width:770px; min-height:260px; @media screen and (min-width: 1279px) #div-gpt-ad-3191538-7 display: flex !important; justify-content: center !important; align-items: center !important; min-width:800px!important; min-height:440px!important; ]]>

About the author

Nicola Agius is Paid Media Editor of Search Engine Land after joining in 2023. She covers paid search, paid social, retail media and more. Prior to this, she was SEO Director at Jungle Creations (2020-2023), overseeing the company’s editorial strategy for multiple websites. She has over 15 years of experience in journalism and has previously worked at OK! Magazine (2010-2014), Mail Online (2014-2015), Mirror (2015-2017), Digital Spy (2017-2018) and The Sun (2018-2020). She also previously teamed up with SEO agency Blue Array to co-author Amazon bestselling book ‘Mastering In-House SEO’.

Read more here https://sites.google.com/view/jedi-digital-marketing/social-media-management

[leeanndicicco]

Google Ad business faces breakup after being charged with EU antitrust violations

Google may be forced to sell part of its ad business after being charged with violating the European Union’s antitrust laws. Following a lengthy investigation, the European Commission suggested that “mandatory divestment” is the only way the search engine can resolve the issue.

Why we care: If Google does sell part of its ad business, it could mark the start of a new digital marketing era with a more competitive market and fairer pricing. This could potentially lead to more transparency, greater campaign control for advertisers and increased innovation, which could prompt the creation of new ad tools.

What’s happening: The European Commission conducted a report into the operation of Google Ads and found that the search engine typically tends to favor its own ads, causing difficulties for competing providers.

When discussing potential solutions, the commission said that behavioral improvements would not be enough to rectify the matter. Instead, it has recommended that the search giant sells off part of its business.

What has Google said? Google released a statement today criticizing the commission’s findings. Dan Taylor, Vice President of Google Ads, wrote:

“The Statement of Objections from the European Commission sets out claims that are not new and relate to a narrow part of our advertising business. It fails to recognize how advanced advertising technology helps merchants reach customers and grow their businesses — while lowering costs and expanding choices for consumers.

“Ad tech is fiercely competitive and constantly evolving. We compete with hundreds of companies in this space, including household names like Amazon, Microsoft, and Meta as well as specialized advertising technology companies like Criteo, The Trade Desk, and many others. Even media companies and retailers now offer competing advertising technologies.

“The digital advertising market enjoys competitive pricing, lively innovation, and robust competition — helping advertisers, publishers, and consumers. We look forward to showing how our ad tech tools help make the internet open, and accessible — and how breaking them would diminish the availability of free, ad-supported content that benefits everyone.”

Has this happened before? Earlier this year, nine U.S. states (Michigan, Nebraska, Arizona, Illinois, Minnesota, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Washington, and West Virginia), joined forces to bring a similar lawsuit against Google.

The states accused the search engine’s ad business of violating antitrust regulations. To rectify the matter, they urged Google to break up its Ad Manager suite, claiming it was exploiting its online advertising dominance. Google denied the claims and asked for the case to be dismissed.

In 2020, Google was also accused of breaching antitrust laws again in order to sustain its position as the leading search engine. This case is set for trial in September.

Deeper dive: You can read Google’s full response to the European Commission announcement about its advertising technology.

Add Search Engine Land to your Google News feed.    

Related stories

New on Search Engine Land

<![CDATA[ @media screen and (min-width: 800px) #div-gpt-ad-3191538-7 display: flex !important; justify-content: center !important; align-items: center !important; min-width:770px; min-height:260px; @media screen and (min-width: 1279px) #div-gpt-ad-3191538-7 display: flex !important; justify-content: center !important; align-items: center !important; min-width:800px!important; min-height:440px!important; ]]>

About the author

Nicola Agius is Paid Media Editor of Search Engine Land after joining in 2023. She covers paid search, paid social, retail media and more. Prior to this, she was SEO Director at Jungle Creations (2020-2023), overseeing the company’s editorial strategy for multiple websites. She has over 15 years of experience in journalism and has previously worked at OK! Magazine (2010-2014), Mail Online (2014-2015), Mirror (2015-2017), Digital Spy (2017-2018) and The Sun (2018-2020). She also previously teamed up with SEO agency Blue Array to co-author Amazon bestselling book ‘Mastering In-House SEO’.

Read more here https://sites.google.com/view/jedi-digital-marketing/social-media-management

[txshelby]

Google Ad business faces breakup after being charged with EU antitrust violations

Google may be forced to sell part of its ad business after being charged with violating the European Union’s antitrust laws. Following a lengthy investigation, the European Commission suggested that “mandatory divestment” is the only way the search engine can resolve the issue.

Why we care: If Google does sell part of its ad business, it could mark the start of a new digital marketing era with a more competitive market and fairer pricing. This could potentially lead to more transparency, greater campaign control for advertisers and increased innovation, which could prompt the creation of new ad tools.

What’s happening: The European Commission conducted a report into the operation of Google Ads and found that the search engine typically tends to favor its own ads, causing difficulties for competing providers.

When discussing potential solutions, the commission said that behavioral improvements would not be enough to rectify the matter. Instead, it has recommended that the search giant sells off part of its business.

What has Google said? Google released a statement today criticizing the commission’s findings. Dan Taylor, Vice President of Google Ads, wrote:

“The Statement of Objections from the European Commission sets out claims that are not new and relate to a narrow part of our advertising business. It fails to recognize how advanced advertising technology helps merchants reach customers and grow their businesses — while lowering costs and expanding choices for consumers.

“Ad tech is fiercely competitive and constantly evolving. We compete with hundreds of companies in this space, including household names like Amazon, Microsoft, and Meta as well as specialized advertising technology companies like Criteo, The Trade Desk, and many others. Even media companies and retailers now offer competing advertising technologies.

“The digital advertising market enjoys competitive pricing, lively innovation, and robust competition — helping advertisers, publishers, and consumers. We look forward to showing how our ad tech tools help make the internet open, and accessible — and how breaking them would diminish the availability of free, ad-supported content that benefits everyone.”

Has this happened before? Earlier this year, nine U.S. states (Michigan, Nebraska, Arizona, Illinois, Minnesota, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Washington, and West Virginia), joined forces to bring a similar lawsuit against Google.

The states accused the search engine’s ad business of violating antitrust regulations. To rectify the matter, they urged Google to break up its Ad Manager suite, claiming it was exploiting its online advertising dominance. Google denied the claims and asked for the case to be dismissed.

In 2020, Google was also accused of breaching antitrust laws again in order to sustain its position as the leading search engine. This case is set for trial in September.

Deeper dive: You can read Google’s full response to the European Commission announcement about its advertising technology.

Add Search Engine Land to your Google News feed.    

Related stories

New on Search Engine Land

<![CDATA[ @media screen and (min-width: 800px) #div-gpt-ad-3191538-7 display: flex !important; justify-content: center !important; align-items: center !important; min-width:770px; min-height:260px; @media screen and (min-width: 1279px) #div-gpt-ad-3191538-7 display: flex !important; justify-content: center !important; align-items: center !important; min-width:800px!important; min-height:440px!important; ]]>

About the author

Nicola Agius is Paid Media Editor of Search Engine Land after joining in 2023. She covers paid search, paid social, retail media and more. Prior to this, she was SEO Director at Jungle Creations (2020-2023), overseeing the company’s editorial strategy for multiple websites. She has over 15 years of experience in journalism and has previously worked at OK! Magazine (2010-2014), Mail Online (2014-2015), Mirror (2015-2017), Digital Spy (2017-2018) and The Sun (2018-2020). She also previously teamed up with SEO agency Blue Array to co-author Amazon bestselling book ‘Mastering In-House SEO’.

Read more here https://sites.google.com/view/jedi-digital-marketing/social-media-management

[beardedmrbean]

FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. (AP) — Safe Haven Baby Boxes and A Safe Haven for Newborns are two charities with similar names and the same goal: providing distressed mothers with a safe place to surrender their unwanted newborns instead of dumping them in trash cans or along roadsides.

But a fight between the two is brewing in the Florida Senate. An existing state law, supported and promoted by the Miami-based A Safe Haven, allows parents to surrender newborns to firefighters and hospital workers without giving their names. A new bill, supported by the Indiana-based Safe Haven Baby Boxes, would give fire stations and hospitals the option to install the group’s ventilated and climate-controlled boxes, where parents could drop off their babies without interacting with fire or hospital employees.

The bill recently passed the Florida House unanimously, but there is a long-shot effort to block it in the Senate, where it might be considered this week. Opponents call the boxes costly, unnecessary and potentially dangerous for the babies, mothers, firefighters and hospital workers. Each side accuses the other of being financially driven.

The fight is getting extra attention because Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis and Florida's GOP-dominated Legislature are expected to soon ban abortions performed more than six weeks after conception, lowering the state's current limit of 15 weeks.

Similar baby-box bills have been approved recently by lawmakers in Kansas, Montana and Mississippi and sent to those states' governors for approval. West Virginia's legislature is also considering such a bill. The boxes are already allowed in nine states, mostly in the Midwest and South, with the largest numbers in Indiana, Arkansas, and Kentucky, respectively. About 145 boxes have been installed since the first in 2016, with 25 newborns surrendered through one, Safe Haven Baby Boxes says.

Just one baby has been left in Florida's only box, installed two years ago at a central Florida firehouse without state authorization. The boxes open from outside the building, allowing the parent to place the baby in a bassinet as a bag containing instructions and maternal medical advice drops out. The door locks when it is reclosed and the agency is notified electronically. Safe Haven Baby Boxes says the average response time is two minutes.

“Giving women an option of (total) anonymity is just that, an option. Why would (opponents) want to take that away from women?” said the group's founder, firefighter Monica Kelsey, who was abandoned as a newborn and is an outspoken abortion opponent. She accused A Safe Haven for Newborns of fearing a loss of grants if the boxes are installed, something the group denies.

Republican Rep. Jennifer Canady, the bill’s lead sponsor, declined an interview request. She said in a statement that her proposed law would be “an important next step to provide options to save lives and protect life at every stage.”

Joel Gordon, a spokesman for A Safe Haven for Newborns and deputy chief at a suburban Fort Lauderdale fire department, suggested that Kelsey possibly profits from the boxes. She denies that. Her group gets mixed reviews from organizations that monitor charities.

Gordon also contended that the bill's proponents have opposed all amendments that he says would make the boxes safer and the program more workable. A Safe Haven trains fire departments and hospitals on how to implement the current law.

“It is not an objection to giving the mother as many potentials as possible to help rescue and save these babies. It’s the box itself, and the way the box is administered, that gives us concern," Gordon said.

Senate Democratic leader Lauren Book, who heads the bill’s opposition, added, “We can do better than putting children in boxes. The safe haven law we have on the books currently is working.”

In 2000, Florida became one of the first states to allow babies to be anonymously surrendered for adoption at hospitals and firehouses. Under it, parents can hand over newborns up to 7 days old, no questions asked, assuming there is no evidence of neglect or abuse. Since its enactment, 370 newborns have been legally surrendered, Gordon said.

The new bill would allow but not require fire departments and hospitals to acquire the boxes, which would be leased from Kelsey's group. They cost about $16,000 installed and there is a $300 annual maintenance and inspection fee, paid to Kelsey's charity. Sometimes the installation and fees are paid by donors, she said.

“Was that baby (in central Florida) not worth the fight we have put up to keep that box?” she said. 'I think it was."

Gordon said only five Florida babies have been illegally abandoned since 2018, and in several recent years that number was zero. He argues that a surrendered baby's mother benefits more from direct interaction with a firefighter or hospital worker, who can assess if she needs medical or psychological care. Such contact also provides her with certainty that her baby is safe, he said.

Gordon said Kelsey's boxes also don't meet Florida public building safety standards and would allow those who have abused their newborn or kidnapped or trafficked the child a way to escape detection. Gordon and Book also say the boxes give terrorists a spot to place a bomb or toxic substance, endangering firefighters and hospital workers — something Kelsey says has never happened.

“Until it does,” Book responded. “I want to make sure that the people who are there to protect and serve our community are kept safe.”

Book, who was recently arrested for trespassing during a protest against the state's proposed abortion restrictions, said the box bill is part of broader effort by DeSantis and the legislative majority to impose conservative Christian morality on all Floridians, regardless of their personal beliefs.

“You can't just look at this one piece of policy. You have to look at the whole of what is going on, and I'm just not going to stand for it,” Book said.

Kelsey accused opponents of “grasping at straws.” She said while abusers should be identified and tracked down, it is best for the babies if their parents give them up before the abuse leads to serious injury or death.

If enacted, the bill would take effect July 1.

[yungmalta]

Google Ad business faces breakup after being charged with EU antitrust violations

Google may be forced to sell part of its ad business after being charged with violating the European Union’s antitrust laws. Following a lengthy investigation, the European Commission suggested that “mandatory divestment” is the only way the search engine can resolve the issue.

Why we care: If Google does sell part of its ad business, it could mark the start of a new digital marketing era with a more competitive market and fairer pricing. This could potentially lead to more transparency, greater campaign control for advertisers and increased innovation, which could prompt the creation of new ad tools.

What’s happening: The European Commission conducted a report into the operation of Google Ads and found that the search engine typically tends to favor its own ads, causing difficulties for competing providers.

When discussing potential solutions, the commission said that behavioral improvements would not be enough to rectify the matter. Instead, it has recommended that the search giant sells off part of its business.

What has Google said? Google released a statement today criticizing the commission’s findings. Dan Taylor, Vice President of Google Ads, wrote:

“The Statement of Objections from the European Commission sets out claims that are not new and relate to a narrow part of our advertising business. It fails to recognize how advanced advertising technology helps merchants reach customers and grow their businesses — while lowering costs and expanding choices for consumers.

“Ad tech is fiercely competitive and constantly evolving. We compete with hundreds of companies in this space, including household names like Amazon, Microsoft, and Meta as well as specialized advertising technology companies like Criteo, The Trade Desk, and many others. Even media companies and retailers now offer competing advertising technologies.

“The digital advertising market enjoys competitive pricing, lively innovation, and robust competition — helping advertisers, publishers, and consumers. We look forward to showing how our ad tech tools help make the internet open, and accessible — and how breaking them would diminish the availability of free, ad-supported content that benefits everyone.”

Has this happened before? Earlier this year, nine U.S. states (Michigan, Nebraska, Arizona, Illinois, Minnesota, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Washington, and West Virginia), joined forces to bring a similar lawsuit against Google.

The states accused the search engine’s ad business of violating antitrust regulations. To rectify the matter, they urged Google to break up its Ad Manager suite, claiming it was exploiting its online advertising dominance. Google denied the claims and asked for the case to be dismissed.

In 2020, Google was also accused of breaching antitrust laws again in order to sustain its position as the leading search engine. This case is set for trial in September.

Deeper dive: You can read Google’s full response to the European Commission announcement about its advertising technology.

Add Search Engine Land to your Google News feed.    

Related stories

New on Search Engine Land

<![CDATA[ @media screen and (min-width: 800px) #div-gpt-ad-3191538-7 display: flex !important; justify-content: center !important; align-items: center !important; min-width:770px; min-height:260px; @media screen and (min-width: 1279px) #div-gpt-ad-3191538-7 display: flex !important; justify-content: center !important; align-items: center !important; min-width:800px!important; min-height:440px!important; ]]>

About the author

Nicola Agius is Paid Media Editor of Search Engine Land after joining in 2023. She covers paid search, paid social, retail media and more. Prior to this, she was SEO Director at Jungle Creations (2020-2023), overseeing the company’s editorial strategy for multiple websites. She has over 15 years of experience in journalism and has previously worked at OK! Magazine (2010-2014), Mail Online (2014-2015), Mirror (2015-2017), Digital Spy (2017-2018) and The Sun (2018-2020). She also previously teamed up with SEO agency Blue Array to co-author Amazon bestselling book ‘Mastering In-House SEO’.

Read more here https://sites.google.com/view/jedi-digital-marketing/social-media-management

[welivezombiecarnival]

Everything You Ever Wanted To Know About Black Dog Otis | And Then Some

Stealing time between cow hides being wheeled in and out, Black Dog Otis banged through 11 songs in two days. Leather Factory is six guys tearing apart the blues and restitching them together with punk, garage and country threads.

Those six guys are former pawn shop employees, bar bouncers and hand models, current archeologists, creative directors, designers and satellite installers. Guys who used to play over 200 shows a year, been in dozens of bands from Seattle to Pittsburgh and recognized routinely on the CTA in Chicago as, “That one guy in that one loud country band.”

This is Black Dog Otis. A band that’s every bit Louisville. Not quite midwestern. Not quite southern. And of course, not quite sober.

Ideas at 3 a.m. rarely ever work. Ideas at 3 a.m. after a pint of bourbon, well, those are the ideas that should’ve been put to bed before the bottle came off the shelf. Black Dog Otis is one of those ideas – a band built almost backwards. Guitars? We have three of them, but every song was built from bass riffs. Play some gigs and then record? Why do that when you can send rough, out of time bass demos to five friends who’ve played in various bands for over 20 years.

Our album, Leather Factory was recorded in, you guessed it, a leather factory. Really. Between piles of cow hides, we hooked up guitars and mics and cables to a laptop that was “borrowed” from an out of business ad agency. In two days, we had 11 songs.

Members are: · Gene Brock – Lead guitarist and Kentucky institution. · Tony Feltner – Co-lead guitarist and the glue holding this all together. · Brian Crimmins – Co-co-lead guitarist and producer extraordinaire. · Brian Hughes – Vocals, harp and West Virginia’s second favorite son. · Ashleigh Bills – Bass and Casio PT1. · Keith Raines – Drums, air piano and bringer of thunder.

Listen to The We Live! Zombie Carnival podcast and hear who died to their killer track here:

For a full list of all the amazing artists from every episode of We Live! follow the Joe Deez Bandcamp page here to check out our Collection and Wishlist pages:

Thank you for being a valued member of The Skull and Brains Society! 

Viel Glück!

[n-orway]

Google Ad business faces breakup after being charged with EU antitrust violations

Google may be forced to sell part of its ad business after being charged with violating the European Union’s antitrust laws. Following a lengthy investigation, the European Commission suggested that “mandatory divestment” is the only way the search engine can resolve the issue.

Why we care: If Google does sell part of its ad business, it could mark the start of a new digital marketing era with a more competitive market and fairer pricing. This could potentially lead to more transparency, greater campaign control for advertisers and increased innovation, which could prompt the creation of new ad tools.

What’s happening: The European Commission conducted a report into the operation of Google Ads and found that the search engine typically tends to favor its own ads, causing difficulties for competing providers.

When discussing potential solutions, the commission said that behavioral improvements would not be enough to rectify the matter. Instead, it has recommended that the search giant sells off part of its business.

What has Google said? Google released a statement today criticizing the commission’s findings. Dan Taylor, Vice President of Google Ads, wrote:

“The Statement of Objections from the European Commission sets out claims that are not new and relate to a narrow part of our advertising business. It fails to recognize how advanced advertising technology helps merchants reach customers and grow their businesses — while lowering costs and expanding choices for consumers.

“Ad tech is fiercely competitive and constantly evolving. We compete with hundreds of companies in this space, including household names like Amazon, Microsoft, and Meta as well as specialized advertising technology companies like Criteo, The Trade Desk, and many others. Even media companies and retailers now offer competing advertising technologies.

“The digital advertising market enjoys competitive pricing, lively innovation, and robust competition — helping advertisers, publishers, and consumers. We look forward to showing how our ad tech tools help make the internet open, and accessible — and how breaking them would diminish the availability of free, ad-supported content that benefits everyone.”

Has this happened before? Earlier this year, nine U.S. states (Michigan, Nebraska, Arizona, Illinois, Minnesota, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Washington, and West Virginia), joined forces to bring a similar lawsuit against Google.

The states accused the search engine’s ad business of violating antitrust regulations. To rectify the matter, they urged Google to break up its Ad Manager suite, claiming it was exploiting its online advertising dominance. Google denied the claims and asked for the case to be dismissed.

In 2020, Google was also accused of breaching antitrust laws again in order to sustain its position as the leading search engine. This case is set for trial in September.

Deeper dive: You can read Google’s full response to the European Commission announcement about its advertising technology.

Add Search Engine Land to your Google News feed.    

Related stories

New on Search Engine Land

<![CDATA[ @media screen and (min-width: 800px) #div-gpt-ad-3191538-7 display: flex !important; justify-content: center !important; align-items: center !important; min-width:770px; min-height:260px; @media screen and (min-width: 1279px) #div-gpt-ad-3191538-7 display: flex !important; justify-content: center !important; align-items: center !important; min-width:800px!important; min-height:440px!important; ]]>

About the author

Nicola Agius is Paid Media Editor of Search Engine Land after joining in 2023. She covers paid search, paid social, retail media and more. Prior to this, she was SEO Director at Jungle Creations (2020-2023), overseeing the company’s editorial strategy for multiple websites. She has over 15 years of experience in journalism and has previously worked at OK! Magazine (2010-2014), Mail Online (2014-2015), Mirror (2015-2017), Digital Spy (2017-2018) and The Sun (2018-2020). She also previously teamed up with SEO agency Blue Array to co-author Amazon bestselling book ‘Mastering In-House SEO’.

Read more here https://sites.google.com/view/jedi-digital-marketing/social-media-management

[robotgirlservos]

okay I have to know: how is Titch legally a mouse

This ones gonna need a bit of context:

First, most worlds in Titch's universe are fairly small compared to our own and while there are a few worlds with multiple intelligent species on them, most only have one. Titch's world in particular is about the size of West Virginia or Switzerland and has only the cats. Worlds do still have a large variety of plant and animal life, and can even have the non-intelligent cousins of any intelligent species.

Secondly, from a mortal point of view, the cores of each world seem to be infinite in their power and longevity, but like the stars in our universe, they eventually have an end, too.  Most worlds lose their amethyst core first, but life can survive without magic.  Some then lose the amber, topaz, or sapphire cores, causing the world to freeze, lose their sunlight, or completely dry up.  Scientists can only speculate what would happen to a world without its ruby core, but a world without an emerald core would start to lose the dirt and stone that forms it, causing it to start falling apart and disintegrating into nothing. This is what was happening to Titch's world.

Two government agencies were created with the express purpose of restoring enough power to the core to stop the crumbling of the world.  One created huge advances in technology that, while helpful and life saving for many people, could never significantly affect the root of the problem. The other government agency technically doesn't exist.  They took their mission of "save the world" and added "by any means necessary."  They tried many different methods over their 130 years of existence and consider Titch to be the only "successful" result of all their pursuits. The world was crumbling away faster and faster, causing food to become more and more scarce.  The second government agency needed a way to justify all their food use without revealing themselves or the several dozen people they were testing on, who also technically didn't exist.  They used the first agency as a front and told the government that it was for lab mice, which were essential to their next project that promised to add many years to the life of their world. They technically were not wrong.

Eventually, Titch needed records of his existence in order to be let into the facility with the emerald core, but paperwork saying he was a mouse was already filed.  In most cases, the only documents someone would receive concerning him would be just the personal identification stuff the agency forged for him, but sometimes one document will get sent with the rest concerning a lab mouse that just so happens to share the same name.

[meer-kat]

Google Ad business faces breakup after being charged with EU antitrust violations

Google may be forced to sell part of its ad business after being charged with violating the European Union’s antitrust laws. Following a lengthy investigation, the European Commission suggested that “mandatory divestment” is the only way the search engine can resolve the issue.

Why we care: If Google does sell part of its ad business, it could mark the start of a new digital marketing era with a more competitive market and fairer pricing. This could potentially lead to more transparency, greater campaign control for advertisers and increased innovation, which could prompt the creation of new ad tools.

What’s happening: The European Commission conducted a report into the operation of Google Ads and found that the search engine typically tends to favor its own ads, causing difficulties for competing providers.

When discussing potential solutions, the commission said that behavioral improvements would not be enough to rectify the matter. Instead, it has recommended that the search giant sells off part of its business.

What has Google said? Google released a statement today criticizing the commission’s findings. Dan Taylor, Vice President of Google Ads, wrote:

“The Statement of Objections from the European Commission sets out claims that are not new and relate to a narrow part of our advertising business. It fails to recognize how advanced advertising technology helps merchants reach customers and grow their businesses — while lowering costs and expanding choices for consumers.

“Ad tech is fiercely competitive and constantly evolving. We compete with hundreds of companies in this space, including household names like Amazon, Microsoft, and Meta as well as specialized advertising technology companies like Criteo, The Trade Desk, and many others. Even media companies and retailers now offer competing advertising technologies.

“The digital advertising market enjoys competitive pricing, lively innovation, and robust competition — helping advertisers, publishers, and consumers. We look forward to showing how our ad tech tools help make the internet open, and accessible — and how breaking them would diminish the availability of free, ad-supported content that benefits everyone.”

Has this happened before? Earlier this year, nine U.S. states (Michigan, Nebraska, Arizona, Illinois, Minnesota, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Washington, and West Virginia), joined forces to bring a similar lawsuit against Google.

The states accused the search engine’s ad business of violating antitrust regulations. To rectify the matter, they urged Google to break up its Ad Manager suite, claiming it was exploiting its online advertising dominance. Google denied the claims and asked for the case to be dismissed.

In 2020, Google was also accused of breaching antitrust laws again in order to sustain its position as the leading search engine. This case is set for trial in September.

Deeper dive: You can read Google’s full response to the European Commission announcement about its advertising technology.

Add Search Engine Land to your Google News feed.    

Related stories

New on Search Engine Land

<![CDATA[ @media screen and (min-width: 800px) #div-gpt-ad-3191538-7 display: flex !important; justify-content: center !important; align-items: center !important; min-width:770px; min-height:260px; @media screen and (min-width: 1279px) #div-gpt-ad-3191538-7 display: flex !important; justify-content: center !important; align-items: center !important; min-width:800px!important; min-height:440px!important; ]]>

About the author

Nicola Agius is Paid Media Editor of Search Engine Land after joining in 2023. She covers paid search, paid social, retail media and more. Prior to this, she was SEO Director at Jungle Creations (2020-2023), overseeing the company’s editorial strategy for multiple websites. She has over 15 years of experience in journalism and has previously worked at OK! Magazine (2010-2014), Mail Online (2014-2015), Mirror (2015-2017), Digital Spy (2017-2018) and The Sun (2018-2020). She also previously teamed up with SEO agency Blue Array to co-author Amazon bestselling book ‘Mastering In-House SEO’.

Read more here https://sites.google.com/view/jedi-digital-marketing/social-media-management

[forever-eternal]

Jealousy

They shouldn’t be jealous, but they are.

———————————————————————

“You’re sure about this?”

“Why would we lie about it?”

“I dunno, Gigi. It just seems like he hates us..”

“Funny, Adam said the exact same thing about you.”

“W-what?! We could never hate Papa!”

“Well, you’ll have to tell him that yourself.”

Several groans throughout the room, emotional conversations with the Father you thought was dead for a century would be difficult.

“If you don’t want to talk to him, you could just act like nothing happened and call him ‘Papa’.”

That wasn’t viable either, too much had changed since the 1800’s.

There are 20 States unafraid to call Gov their father or treat him as such: Minnesota, Oregon Kansas, West Virginia, Nevada, Nebraska, Colorado, North and South Dakota, Montana, Washington, Idaho, Wyoming, Utah, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Arizona, Alaska, and Hawai’i. And not even to mention the Departments, Territories, and the Agencies– though the Agencies are more the mans grandchildren.

“Look, kids. I’m not gonna force ya, and neither are yer other Grandparents, but if yer gonna get jealous when he gives the others any affection, you have to talk to him.”

No one responded.

———————————————————————

Kansas was the last State to be inducted into the Union before the Civil War– 3 years in body and less than half-a-year- a State–, and the third oldest State to call Gov ‘Papa’ to his face. Nebraska was the seventh, both Midwestern States– pretty well surrounded on either side by States that watches them in jealousy whenever they called out…

“Papa! We’re out of ranch!”

“Evan, I bought 8 bottles three days ago.”

“There are 49 of us in this house and most of us in da Midwest eat it on everythin’, ya know that!”

“Hmmm…fine. I’ll buy another bottle on my way back from the meeting this evening– but I will not buy anymore until next week. Use it sparingly, all of you.”

“Papaaa…”

“No.”

They did it constantly, almost as if they were mocking the others.

“Papa! Come by mah house this weekend! I got another cow– and she’s just the sweetest thang!”

“Papa, lookit! The sunflowers are growin in, we’ll hafta keep an eye on ‘em!”

“Ey, Papa. Mama said ya haven’t been sleepin’ right lately, ya doin’ okay? Naw, naw– ya look like death warmed over! C’mon, we’re gonna take a nap.”

“Papa.”

“Papa…”

“Papa! Mama!” the Sunflower State beams from where he stands by the patio, the Cornhusker State perking up at the mention. It’s a summer day, the weather is warm and it was decided to be a perfect day for an outdoor grill-by-the-pool. It was still early afternoon, most of the South and a few of the Midwest setting up the backyard, “Thought ya were in Germany for the next bit!”

Gov, of course, looks out of place in his slacks, loafers, and pale blue polo, but at least he wasn’t wearing his usual turtleneck. At the very least, Assistant was wearing a romper in the same shade of blue and sandals.

They both immediately drop what they’re doing, settling the stacks of paper plates and silverware on one of the foldout tables, before running over to the other personifications. They both stood a few inches taller than the man and woman, like many States did, and a few inches broader. Most of the Midwest and South were similar, all larger than the Government personifications in some way. Nebraska and Kansas looked a lot alike in build, actually.

The man smiles– the bags under his eyes looked darker than normal, he’d been getting better sleep and they’d been fading. What happened– allowing his arms to fall open as Kansas skids to a stop in front of him, practically lifting the man off his feet in a hug. Assistant laughs from Nebraska’s grasp, though he didn’t quite lift her the same way, Gov letting out a quiet ‘oomf’ at the sudden shift.

Kansas grins, the gap in his upper front teeth adding to his boyish joy at seeing his parents. Nebraska’s smile more tame than the others, but still just as bright.

“Meeting got delayed,” Assistant chimes as they’re set back on their feet, “We’ll be leaving tomorrow, so we decided to come visit beforehand!”

The others watch in a mix of jealousy and grief.

They want that. To be able to call them Ma and Pa and receive the same type of hugs and hair ruffles and constant words of love and praise. They want that.

They just can’t have it.

———————————————————————

Nevada, Utah, and Colorado may not agree on much, but they did agree on one thing.

Utah’s human kids are the cutest.

Gov and Assistant agree as well.

“Really, dad?” Utah sighs, Colorado chuckling and Nevada snickering behind him as he pinches the bridge of his nose. “I only asked you to babysit.”

“I am babysitting.” Gov retorts, pulling up his sunglasses from where he reclines on one of the patio chairs, “Look at how much fun they’re having.” None of them notice the other Western State at the sliding glass door. California just behind the wall, listening and leaning over to watch.

“Dad.”

“I really don’t see the issue, Micah.”

The 7-year-old triplets, Kayden, Brayden, and Jayden, were in a circle with several large lego sets— lego sets Utah knew he and Ilithiya hadn’t bought for the children.

12-year-old Kingsley fiddled with a fresh-out-of-the-box nintendo switch, and 14-year-old Kayleigh seemed to be dancing with a VR headset over her face.

16-year-old Jaxon was sitting close by the triplets, reclining on one of the patio sofas as he flew an expensive looking drone around the backyard.

Even Paisley, Utah’s youngest at only a year old, strapped to the Gov’s chest via a baby carrier, with her own mini sunglasses on her chubby baby face, seemed to be enjoying herself. And, judging by the pastel yellow mini truck just a few feet away, even the baby wasn’t safe from the Grandparent urge to spoil.

“You bought my baby a car.”

“It’s a little car for baby people, Micah. It even has seatbelts, and Paisley’s such a smart girl,” Gov turns to coo down at the happily babbling toddler, “Aren’t you, sweetheart? Know all about road safety, yeah? You’ll be the best driver, won’t ya?”

“Dad.”

“How much did this cost, daddy?” Nevada asks, still snickering, holding up her phone to record the interaction, “I had to be a lot— I know those toddler cars alone go for $200.”

“Eh.” The man waves the question off, moving to stand from the patio chair with a grunt, “Doesn’t matter.”

“It does.” Utah stresses as the older man approaches, “It’s a lot of money, Dad—“

“Micah.” The man’s voice is softer, sunglasses held in his hand as he gently rests a hand on the Westerner’s shoulder, “It’s alright. I wanted to buy this stuff for the kids, I know they get a bit bored out there during the summer— you and Ilithiya have been complaining about how hard it is to keep them entertained. Consider this,” he gestures to the kids, “a Christmas present.”

“It’s June.” Utah says weakly, leaning into the touch.

“Early Christmas Present.” He corrects, “They can leave the stuff at your Mother and I’s house if you want. Don’t stress too hard, bumblebee.”

Utah sighs, smiling, “Thanks, Dad.”

“Awww,” Nevada coos as Colorado snorts, “How precious.”

California slips away, chests clenching painfully at the sounds of playful banter coming from the back patio.

———————————————————————

Alaska is one of the youngest States. He may be the largest State, the largest man in the house too, but he’s still younger than the others.

He’s not very good at written social cues, and even worse at unwritten social rules. He has no sense of direction, a habit of getting distracted and wandering off: this means that when they go out in public anywhere…

“Let’s go, Ivan.” Gov says calmly, tugging gently on the man’s wrist.

Someone usually has to hold onto him, either his wrist or his hand.

“Coming.” The younger mans’ voice is quiet and soft as usual.

They’re walking through one of the busier parts of the city, where all the stores and such are; it’s an unavoidable place when they need to stock up on necessities.

Other than Gov and Ivan, Oklahoma, Maine, Vermont, and Wisconsin had joined them on their shopping trip. To get everything they need, it takes a whole team.

Vermont is in charge of the cart and Maine in charge of the list, Wisconsin in charge of the second cart and Oklahoma sent to grab things across the store or to run back into previous isles if they forgot something. Gov is there purely to supervise and Alaska to lift anything the others can’t.

It’s going well, Oklahoma rambling about his university sports teams and tornados and such, Gov humming along and Alaska following dutifully behind. The other three watch from behind them, a scowl on Vermont’s face, a grimace on Maine’s and a simple frown on Wisconsin’s.

Each look away, Maine down at the list and the other two to opposite sides of the aisle.

But there’s a sudden presence looming over the Pine Tree State, a hand coming to carefully rest on his shoulder.

Despite the careful movement, he still flinches in surprise— not paying attention to his surroundings—, and the hand quickly retracts.

When he sees the purse of Gov’s mouth, he immediately regrets not paying more attention— cursing his subconscious reaction that lost the familiar, comforting touch.

“What else is there?” The man asks instead, scanning the list over Maine’s shoulder as the State clears his throat.

“We gotta get a few cases of watah bottles, Cal asked fo’ those kale chips they like, and, uh—“ Maine squints in an attempt to read the scribbled mess of words at the bottom of the paper, “I dunno what the hell they wrote down here.”

Gov hums, reaching out a hand. “Let me see?”

Maine hands the list over without a second thought, and watches the man’s grey eyes study the mess of pencil and ink at the bottom of the list.

He sighs, “Eugene, would you run and grab a few boxes of Hostess Sno Balls, Twinkies, and Coffee Cakes?” He closes his eyes tiredly as he hands the list back to Maine, “Just two boxes of each, they need to learn moderation.”

“Aight, Papa.” The ravenette says, vanishing around the corner after flashing the man a grin.

“We’ll head over to the water cases, and meet you there.” Gov said to the other three, referring to himself and Alaska, “Eugene shouldn’t be long.”

“Alright.” Vermont nods, “Meet ya there..”

Gov studies the three of them for a moment, brows furrowing in what looked like concern. He seems to fight himself, before he shakes his head.

“Alright. Be careful, then.”

He and Alaska vanish around the opposite corner of the aisle, Gov gently tugging the other along.

It was…it was so simple. They shouldn’t be feeling this way at Gov using the other’s human names in a public space as required, at him holding Alaska’s hand because the tall man would get lost if he didn’t.

They shouldn’t be jealous over it.

But they know he’d do the same in non-public spaces, preferring human names to anything else, and it stings.

———————————————————————

Gigi said their father thinks they hate him, but that can’t be true. They could never hate him, have never hated him. He…he just doesn’t want to be their Papa, anymore. Right?

…

Then why does he look at them so sadly, when he thinks they aren’t looking? Why do his hands twitch as if he wants to reach out but is stopping himself?

Why does he always sad when they call him ‘Gov’? Why does he always seem to hesitate before calling for them— by their State name in private and more-so their human names in public?

…

Could Gigi be right?

[mariacallous]

A BILL to amend the Code of West Virginia, 1931, as amended, by adding thereto a new section, designated §18-5-29; and to amend and reenact §61-8A-1 of said code, all relating to the prohibition of obscene materials in or within 2,500 feet of West Virginia schools; and defining criminal penalties for obscene materials in or within 2,500 feet of West Virginia schools.

(a) Obscene matter, as defined in §61-8A-1 of this code, is prohibited in, or within 2,500 feet of, any public school library, classroom, building or other facility under the general supervision of the state board, including any public school building containing any of grades prekindergarten through 12, any public charter school building, any multi-county career technical education center building, and any buildings of the West Virginia Schools for the Deaf and Blind. Any school officials or school personnel having knowledge of any obscene matter in a public school building under the general supervision of the state board shall ensure that the obscene matter is promptly removed. This prohibition does not apply to obscene material used in the presentation of local or state approved curriculum.

(b) Any school officials or school personnel while engaged in a professional capacity or activity any public school library, classroom, building or other facility under the general supervision of the state board shall be deemed a custodian of children under §61-8D-4 of the Code of West Virginia. If any such school officials or school personnel while engaged in a professional capacity or activity any public school library, classroom, building or other facility under the general supervision of the state board learns of facts that give reason to suspect that a child has been exposed to obscene matter while in any public school library, classroom, building or other facility and fails to make a timely report may be prosecuted for a misdemeanor under §61-8D-4(f) of the Code of West Virginia and upon conviction shall be fined not exceeding $500 or imprisoned not more than 1 year or both.

(c) The State Superintendent shall establish a procedure for any person to file a complaint alleging a violation of subsection (a) of this section and a procedure for investigating any complaint that is filed. The investigation shall include a determination of whether there is obscene matter in, or within 2,500 feet of, the public school library, classroom, building or facility and whether §61-8A-2 of this code, relating to distribution or display of obscene matter to a minor, is likely to have been violated. If it is determined that there is obscene matter in, or within 2,500 feet of, a public school library, classroom, building or facility, the state superintendent shall use his or her authority set forth in §18-3-4 of this code or any other reasonable means to ensure that the obscene matter is removed from the public school library, classroom, building or facility, or within 2,500 feet thereof. If it is determined that a violation of §61-8A-2 of this code is likely to have occurred, the state superintendent, investigator, or other person acting on behalf of the superintendent shall notify the appropriate law-enforcement agency or agencies.

(d) No funds authorized by the Legislature, including, but not limited to, funds sourced from the federal government, may be used by any school under the general supervision of the state board or any public charter school: (i) to develop or distribute materials, or operate programs or courses of instruction directed at youth, that are designed to promote or encourage sexual activity, whether homosexual or heterosexual; or (ii) to distribute or to aid in the distribution by any organization of legally obscene materials, as defined in §61-8A-1 of this code,  to minors on, or within 2,500 feet of, any school library, classroom, building or facility.  

(e) If an adult individual meets the criteria for an adult to have committed a felony under §61-8A-2 of this code, and no exemption set forth in §61-8A-3 of this code applies, the individual shall be subject to the penalty or penalties imposed pursuant to §61-8A-2 of this code.

(f) Any student or parent, guardian, or custodian on behalf of the student shall have a civil cause of action against a county board, a public charter school, the state board, or the administrative council of a multi-county career technical education center if the entity caused or was negligent in allowing a violation of this section. In any such cause of action, the student or parent, guardian, or custodian on behalf of the student may recover actual damages, punitive damages, reasonable attorney fees, and reasonable costs of litigation incurred.

And how are they defining "obscene matter"?

(k) "Matter" means any visual, audio, or physical item, article, production transmission, publication, display, exposure, exhibition, or live performance, or reproduction thereof, including any two- or three- dimensional visual or written material, stereopticon, moving picture, slide, film, picture, drawing, not exceeding $500 video, graphic, graphic novel, or computer generated or reproduced image; or any book, not exceeding $500 magazine, newspaper or other visual or written material; or any motion picture or other pictorial representation; or any statue or other figure; or any recording, transcription, or mechanical, chemical, or electrical reproduction; or any other articles, video laser disc, computer hardware and software, or computer generated images or message recording, transcription, or object, or any public or commercial live exhibition performed for consideration or before an audience of one or more.

...

(m) "Obscene matter" means matter that:

(1) An average person, applying contemporary adult community standards, would find, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest, is intended to appeal to the prurient interest, or is pandered to a prurient interest;

(2) An average person, applying community standards, would find depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexually explicit conduct; and

(3) A reasonable person would find, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.

(4) For the purposes of any prohibition, protection or requirement under any and all articles and sections of the Code of West Virginia protecting children from exposure to indecent displays of a sexually explicit nature, such prohibited displays shall include, but not be limited to, any transvestite and/or transgender exposure, performances or display to any minor.

[tysiaradz]

marlboro man/country notes

History of the Marlboro man

Before the ad campaign the company had 1% of the market share

1972 top product in the world, outselling coca cola

Marlboro woman

Encouragent for women to smoke in public which previously was only allowed at home with your husbands permission

Acceptable women avoided smoking altogether

Smoking in public could get you arrested

Smoking = feminist; its cool its new “you’ve come a long way, baby”

Lgbtq = valuable customers, spend more money on themselves

A woman wearing pants in the sixties in Poland meant you could be spat upon

Virginia slims

Glamour as a marketing strategy

Glamour = freedom

You had to be very feminine to make up for smoking

Red tips to keep lipstick intact and hide stains

Displaying younger women to showcase youth, beauty and glamour

Bridge party, limousine

Grease proof tips to prevent lipstick smudging

“Ivory tips protect the lips”

Cigarettes = “torches of freedom”

Woman want cigarette. Penis envy. Woman want be like man. Man have penis.

Lucky strikes campaign protest of women (debutantes) walking a parade while smoking

Marlboro = Philip morris = virginia slims

The women dressed in white for easter

The story was covered by every newspaper

Hollywood encouraged women smoking by showing actresses being cool, seductive by smoking

Using seductiveness and women’s attraction to sell cigarettes “anything for the boys”

“Smoke your boyfriends favourite cigarettes since he’s off at war”

Cancer finally reveals itself as a consequence

Scientists in the fifties discover much more about lung cancer and smokings influence on it

Filter = acc works

Making manly men smoke with filters to regain sales

90’s - men were less forced to be manly

Marlboro men die from

Myth - story that pre-exists in the minds of people, stories from childhood

The American west

Manifest destiny

Self-reliance

Good night and good luck

The canvas - YouTube

The age of innocence

Olympia - Loni Reifenstahl

weekend freedom

He's alone

No.1 selling cig

White hat

“Recognisable”

all-American hot guy

The myth of the hot American cowboy

westerns change the face of the cowboy

Cowboys go from smelly to righteous

We know nostalgia does not exist but the pain of losing that distant “memory” is too much

We are not looking at real cowboys we are looking at a nostalgic myth

AIDA is used mostly for marketing but can be used for dramatist pentad

Dramatist pentad used for reading and analysing books and dramas

5w’s and h fits into pentad

Marlboro man: act - invitation to the world of real man; agency - smoke it; agent - the real man of the free man; scene - wild west Marlboro country; purpose - participation in an authentic life with no family or responsibility and adventure (tough and manly)

Like Arthur got Excalibur and became a king, if you smoke Marlboro yo become a man

Smoking gives you liberty just as wars

Give me liberty or give me death

The Marlboro man seems lonely but he is not, he belongs `a group of manly men

Group identity

Why does the marlboro man not work?

Unrealistic

Removed from the truth

The reality of the cowboy was how hard it was to actually be one, living outside, starved, poor, most died at a young age.

The American cowboy was mostly black, native american or hispanic

The lone cowboy is a myth since cattle need more than one operative to behave

Barbed wire=end of cowboys

Whitewashed

Cowboys actually came from traditional Spanish roots

[pastyrobyn]

Google Ad business faces breakup after being charged with EU antitrust violations

Google may be forced to sell part of its ad business after being charged with violating the European Union’s antitrust laws. Following a lengthy investigation, the European Commission suggested that “mandatory divestment” is the only way the search engine can resolve the issue.

Why we care: If Google does sell part of its ad business, it could mark the start of a new digital marketing era with a more competitive market and fairer pricing. This could potentially lead to more transparency, greater campaign control for advertisers and increased innovation, which could prompt the creation of new ad tools.

What’s happening: The European Commission conducted a report into the operation of Google Ads and found that the search engine typically tends to favor its own ads, causing difficulties for competing providers.

When discussing potential solutions, the commission said that behavioral improvements would not be enough to rectify the matter. Instead, it has recommended that the search giant sells off part of its business.

What has Google said? Google released a statement today criticizing the commission’s findings. Dan Taylor, Vice President of Google Ads, wrote:

“The Statement of Objections from the European Commission sets out claims that are not new and relate to a narrow part of our advertising business. It fails to recognize how advanced advertising technology helps merchants reach customers and grow their businesses — while lowering costs and expanding choices for consumers.

“Ad tech is fiercely competitive and constantly evolving. We compete with hundreds of companies in this space, including household names like Amazon, Microsoft, and Meta as well as specialized advertising technology companies like Criteo, The Trade Desk, and many others. Even media companies and retailers now offer competing advertising technologies.

“The digital advertising market enjoys competitive pricing, lively innovation, and robust competition — helping advertisers, publishers, and consumers. We look forward to showing how our ad tech tools help make the internet open, and accessible — and how breaking them would diminish the availability of free, ad-supported content that benefits everyone.”

Has this happened before? Earlier this year, nine U.S. states (Michigan, Nebraska, Arizona, Illinois, Minnesota, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Washington, and West Virginia), joined forces to bring a similar lawsuit against Google.

The states accused the search engine’s ad business of violating antitrust regulations. To rectify the matter, they urged Google to break up its Ad Manager suite, claiming it was exploiting its online advertising dominance. Google denied the claims and asked for the case to be dismissed.

In 2020, Google was also accused of breaching antitrust laws again in order to sustain its position as the leading search engine. This case is set for trial in September.

Deeper dive: You can read Google’s full response to the European Commission announcement about its advertising technology.

Add Search Engine Land to your Google News feed.    

Related stories

New on Search Engine Land

<![CDATA[ @media screen and (min-width: 800px) #div-gpt-ad-3191538-7 display: flex !important; justify-content: center !important; align-items: center !important; min-width:770px; min-height:260px; @media screen and (min-width: 1279px) #div-gpt-ad-3191538-7 display: flex !important; justify-content: center !important; align-items: center !important; min-width:800px!important; min-height:440px!important; ]]>

About the author

Nicola Agius is Paid Media Editor of Search Engine Land after joining in 2023. She covers paid search, paid social, retail media and more. Prior to this, she was SEO Director at Jungle Creations (2020-2023), overseeing the company’s editorial strategy for multiple websites. She has over 15 years of experience in journalism and has previously worked at OK! Magazine (2010-2014), Mail Online (2014-2015), Mirror (2015-2017), Digital Spy (2017-2018) and The Sun (2018-2020). She also previously teamed up with SEO agency Blue Array to co-author Amazon bestselling book ‘Mastering In-House SEO’.

Read more here https://sites.google.com/view/jedi-digital-marketing/social-media-management