With the number of people using their mobile device to browse the Internet growing by the day, many experts believe that it is imperative for brands to amp up their mobile marketing strategies. This article from Mashable suggests some of the ways companies can improve the returns on their mobile marketing tactics.


Image Source:Mashable.com

A catchy Facebook ad has sucked you in yet again — you’re just a couple clicks away from owning another completely impractical pair of stilettos.

Except you’re on the go during this particular shopping spree; you’re navigating the site on your smartphone — and it just isn’t displaying correctly. Faced with the annoyance and inconvenience of having to zoom in and click on tiny links, and the difficulty of filling out a credit card form, you close the page in frustration — and likely forget about its existence.

This scenario is the stuff of nightmares for businesses seeking to fully optimize their websites for all screen sizes.

In today’s society of instant gratification, people have short attention spans. They want the news in 140-character snippets, they want to shop with the click of a button — and they want infinite information accessible at their fingertips via smartphones and tablets. It’s easy for businesses to lose potential customers with a complicated, slow or inefficient mobile website. After all, if your business doesn’t have a viable mobile strategy, chances are that one of your competitors does, and that stiletto-hunting customer will go to them.

Throughout our Metrics that Matter series, we’re talking to marketers about the metrics they pay the most attention to and why. In addition to who is looking at your site, and howthey’re navigating through it, it’s also important to take into account where they’re viewing your content — and mobile traffic, in particular, is a biggie.

In an increasingly mobile world, there’s more than one reason why it’s crucial to keep an eye on your website’s mobile traffic. Below, we take a look at some of the most common reasons why this metric is an important piece of your overall analytics efforts — and what you can do to optimize your marketing with this knowledge.

Find out more about maximizing your mobile marketing strategies by reading the rest of the article here.

Mitch Berman, a principal at Blend Digital, is a veteran in the fields of consumer and enterprise marketing, operations, and sales. To read more about his decades-long career in the consumer entertainment industry, visit this blog.

Advertisements

TechCrunch.com dishes on Twitter’s bid to go mainstream as it moves closer to its highly anticipated initial public offering (IPO) next week.

Image
Image Source: techcrunch.com

And so it begins. Twitter, now firmly on the road to IPO, has equally firmly turned its attention to monetisation — which means it’s turning on new features that are designed, first and foremost, with advertisers in mind. And with the goal of attracting a more mainstream user base.

Exhibit A: in-stream photo and video previews on the Twitter web client and Android and iOS apps.

(This being timed to coincide with Halloween is probably not at all coincidental. The disproportionate pull of people dressing up for Halloween on apps and services would make a fascinating study — see also Frontback recently tweaking its offering so you can compose a shot with two images from the rear camera — thereby enabling users to take lots of shots of other people’s costumes).

Returning to Twitter, what that means in practice is the densely packed wall of 140-character tweets which allowed Twitter to be an exceptional information delivery mechanism is now being interrupted by visual media.

Pictures, as countless photo-sharing apps prove, draw the eye and the attention. They crowd out words. Which means that the Twitter timeline has become less functional, and more trivial.

Image

Image Source: techcrunch.com

Pictures are distracting. That’s why advertisers love them. The big bold image can grab you, even if the product itself isn’t something you’d go looking for yourself. Images by their nature are arresting.

But if your primary product is an information network, then injecting visual media necessarily dilutes the offering.

Literally in the physical space sense. These visual media tweets take up more room than a typical text tweet (unless it’s stuffed with line breaks) — so users’ screen real estate is getting disproportionately hogged by anyone choosing to tweet out Twitter photos or Vine videos.

Image

Image Source: techcrunch.com

Obviously, Twitter users should expect vast amounts of visual media to be spewed out by advertisers all too soon — giving them a neat workaround to make an advert stand out in a sea of 140 characters.

Twitter’s core product is also now being diluted. The density of the information conveyed by the timeline is being watered down by whatever random visual imagery your followers are tweeting at any given moment (real-time events like popular TV broadcasts and big sports matches could easily end up overwhelming Twitter, more so than they already do).

It’s not that images and videos can’t be interesting; of course they can. But by forcing users to view media before deciding whether it is worth viewing (i.e. by reading the context provided by the accompanying text tweet before they click on the media link), Twitter is removing a vital content filter from its own network.

Now, if you’re using Twitter’s web client, there is no opt-out of this visual clutter. And that makes Twitter step a little closer to the kind of content you’re forced to eyeball on Google+ or Facebook. So basically:

Image

Image Source: techcrunch.com

You can turn off the new media injection ‘feature’ in Twitter’s mobile apps (perhaps for download speed/data conservation reasons), but Twitter has confirmed to TechCrunch there is no off switch in its web client.

At the time of writing Twitter had not responded to a question asking why it is not offering an opt out to users of its web client.

What this means is that if you value Twitter as a fast information resource on your desktop device then the only option is to use an alternative Twitter client such as Tweetbot (which costs £14 on the Mac App Store vs Twitter’s free web client).

(On that point, Twitter has previously limited its API, thereby throttling the growth potential of third party clients, so opt-out options are being limited too.)

In my view, Twitter forcibly injecting media previews is not cool and makes the service less useful to me. But on the flip side — and there is a flip-side — pictures are very accessible, and are more likely to appeal to a mainstream user vs a dense wall of text that needs to be filtered and unpicked on the fly. So it’s easy to see their rational here.

A wall of tweets is great for busy journalists, but likely somewhat alienating for a first time user trying to figure out what Twitter is for. And attracting more users, and more mainstream users, is a key challenge for Twitter — being as it has a growth problem.

Injecting visual media is not the only recent change Twitter has made that tweaks its product to do a bit more hand-holding for newbies and less techie folk, either.

Back in August, for instance, it flipped the format of the timeline by adding a new conversation view that displays @replies in sequence to the tweets that generated them. For seasoned Twitter who knew how to follow the @reply trail, this change was an irritation — because it also dilutes the density of and interrupts the flow of the timeline.

But for newbies it probably helps to generate context on the fly, and also signposts how the service works. In other words: two Twitter birds, one stone.

Image

Image Source: techcrunch.com

I recently went through the process of setting my mum up on Twitter, and when you revisit the process of starting again from scratch with zero followers it’s easy to see how hard it is for a newcomer to hook into the service.

A lot of effort is required to ‘get’ Twitter, in terms of finding other users who are tweeting about things you’re interested in. And, unlike Facebook, none of my mum’s peer group is using Twitter. It become evident that a big portion of Twitter’s efforts at the new user sign-up stage are focused on pushing newcomers to follow celebrity accounts, as a way to offer a mainstream way into its service.

As Twitter prepares to IPO, and becomes answerable to a new influx of investors, it’s inevitable that it’s going to have to find more and more ways to make its service more mainstream. And that’s going to change its core product — in ways that long-time users are going to struggle with.

Image

Image Source: techcrunch.com

Add to that, with so much energy and attention still being sucked into photo-sharing services/visual social networks like Instagram, Twitter is evidently feeling a need to diversify beyond text.

Prettying up the timeline with pictures is therefore an obvious next step — it’s just a shame Twitter can’t throw a bone to the subsection of long-time users that value its service as an information resource and give us an opt-out of these mainstream changes.

By all means bury that off switch deep in settings where mainstream users will never find it. But give us an out so we can keep on using the Twitter we know and love.

After all, if we wanted to spend our time idly eyeballing a stream of random eye candy, we’d have long since migrated to Google+…

Image

Image Source: techcrunch.com

Mitch Berman of Zen Digital Fund has decades of experience in consumer and enterprise marketing, operations, and sales. See this blog for more information about his work on consumer entertainment.

In today’s world, the marketing industry seems to change almost daily and marketing organizations should stay in the game.  Forbes draws the speed of changes in the industry and how players should keep up.

2020 isn’t the future; the future is now. Every day, the look and feel and function of marketing is transforming radically—and so the means to keep up must be transforming too. Marketing organizations that aren’t restructuring to meet the demands of 2020—of today, for that matter—will be left by the wayside.

But what must that restructured organization look like? To answer that question, the Association of National Advertisers, together with the World Federation of Advertisers and EffectiveBrands, a global marketing strategy consulting firm, has been conducting an ongoing global study—including a quantitative and qualitative survey—of senior marketing leaders over the past several months that’s unprecedented in size and scope. Marc deSwaan Arons, executive chairman of EffectiveBrands, will, with a panel of CMOs, present some of the initial findings from the research project to attendees at the annual ANA Masters of Marketing conference this weekend in Phoenix. Forbes is a partner in the project, in addition to the ANA and the WFA, along with Spencer Stuart, Adobe and MetrixLab.

And according to the project, called Marketing2020, the winning companies will have highly integrated organizations—that is, hub-and-spoke structures whereby the CMO is in the middle, with roles akin to product manager, marketing strategies manager, advertising director, PR manager, market-research director and promotion director creating the spokes and rim of the wheel. Silos are finally nonexistent; the integration and interconnectedness of this new model enables full coordination of all constituents.

So where the organizational structure had looked like this:

Image Source: www.forbes.com

It will now look like this:

Image Source: www.forbes.com

Non-negotiable characteristics of the 2020 marketing organization: a goal of business growth; a clear purpose; complete internal alignment of functional areas; clearly defined roles and responsibilities of each individual; research centers and data-informed efforts; an amalgam of agency partners as well as an in-house agency-like team; cross-platform social-media engagement; a strong CMO-CEO connection.

The research also concludes that a chief experience officer will be necessary at all successful organizations. This can be the CMO, or the CEO, or another individual charged with overseeing marketing staff grouped as “Think” (analytics marketers), “Feel” (engagement marketers) and “Do” (production/content marketers).

Image Source: www.forbes.com

The most successful CMOs, meanwhile, will take on additional responsibilities, like IT—as evidenced by Motorola Solutions’ MSI +0.96%Eduardo Conrado—or HR—as evidenced by Visa V +0.97%’s Antonio Lucio.

As the research is ongoing, additional findings will gel. Stay tuned for more updates on the ANA/EffectiveBrands Marketing2020 project as it continues.

Mitch Berman, a principal at Blend Digital, has over 30 years of domestic and international experience in consumer and enterprise marketing, operations, and sales.  He currently provides strategic advice for global privately held and public companies in the entertainment industry.  Follow this Twitter page for more information on Mitch Berman.

Image

Image Source: theandroidsite.com

Nowadays, almost everything is available at the touch of a fingertip. The race is set towards portability and functionality as gadgets and machines get smaller, thinner, and lighter but more powerful. Mobile is the symbol of today’s fast-paced world. It is no wonder that television, the largest chip off the block of traditional media, would seek portability, and be squeezed into smartphones.

Image

Image Source: engadget.com

The reality of TV in mobile phones was largely aided by developments in cell phone graphics. Over the years, cellphone screens have evolved to accommodate an increasingly greater number of pixels. This, along with progress in data connections and other technologies, allowed videos to move as fluidly as they do in TV screens. These changes did not only allow phones to play videos, they also practically transformed them into miniature TVs.

The concept of mobile TV has existed for some time. The project did not always fly due to the price of the service and the number of TV shows available to the public. But the development of iOS and Android became an opportunity to bring television to mobile phones. Today, apps like Yahoo’s IntoNow and Xfinity TV Player allow users TV on the go, at lower prices, too.

Image

Image Source: iclarified.com

TV apps present the latest step in the television’s bid to become mobile. With the benefits they offer, only time will tell whether the trend will last or fade out.

Mitch Berman is one of the visionaries behind ZillionTV and is currently affiliated with Zen Digital Fund. Follow this Twitter page for links regarding ZillionTV and the television industry.

Arrested Development is coming back to television.  Learn what business insights you can get from the rerun of this sitcom which, despite garnering much critical acclaim, gained a not-so-promising viewership, all from this Forbes article.

 

Arrested Development, that short-lived but beloved comic portrait of the Bluth family, returns from the beyond this weekend. On May 26, 15 newly produced episodes of the show (which began its three-season run on Fox in 2003) become available in bulk on Netflix. The binge-launch follows the company’s new original-content model that began in February with House of Cards.

The show’s comeback has electrified its cultish-yet-sizable fanbase, but inside the TV business it has elicited more angst than celebration. Network executives evince great admiration for the show, its creators and its talent, all of whom have commercial bona fides. But they reflexively say, “We could never do that with our business model.”

Netflix is well aware of that fact, so earlier this month it poked the networks by setting up Bluth’s Frozen Banana stands outside many of the networks’ annual New York upfront presentations to advertisers. Inside, seemingly undeterred, networks touted their 2013-14 shows, which feature plenty of TV comebacks of their own — Michael J. Fox, Robin Williams and, in new episodes of 24, Keifer Sutherland. Unlike Arrested, those shows will largely follow the traditional path of advertising-supported shows, rolling out gradually with heavy promotion driving appointment viewing in certain timeslots. Les Moonves, head of front-running CBS, famously dismissed rivals’ talk of streaming apps and time-shifting last week by saying, “Anyone who spends 20 minutes of their upfront talking about multiplatform doesn’t have much else to sell.”

Networks and Netflix are clearly in different businesses, of course. Netflix, like fellow digital players Amazon and Hulu, is solely focused on driving subscriptions and can therefore spend lavishly on content (either original or licensed) without fretting about ratings. Nevertheless, the unlikely return of Arrested Development offers several valuable lessons for the broader TV business. Here are five:

1. Listen to fans.

As with Family Guy, Futurama and a lucky handful of other shows brought back after cancellation, old-fashioned word of mouth worked in the case of Arrested Development. But it shouldn’t have to require a petition drive and a Miracle on 34th Street-style mail dump to change networks’ minds. Social media is a powerful force and through partnerships with GetGlue, Twitter and others, TV networks undoubtedly recognize that. But it’s more than just having drones sweep the desert – real intelligence-gathering means listening to the conversation in pop culture and making smart decisions based on that. Some of the most satisfying TV of the last decade has involved not only a high degree of risk – ABC’s Lost, AMC’s Mad Men, the list goes on – but a gut sense that viewers would come along for the ride.

2. Consider new salary structures.

Newly revealed numbers show that Netflix paid talent based on how much they appeared on the show. Citing sources, the Hollywood Reporter says the entire cast, which includes Will Arnett, Jason Bateman, Michael Cera and Portia de Rossi, gets paid according to the same sliding scale. Based on screen time, compensation ranges from $1,000 (for a clip of the actor in a previous episode) up to $125,000 for a starring role in an episode. That setup allowed the ensemble cast to integrate shooting into their schedules, which are far busier now than they were 10 years ago.

Talent agencies, networks, and traditional show-runners may again offer reflexive “we could never get away with that” responses, but the fact is that new pay models need to be considered. They allow content producers to be more nimble and resourceful and, in the case of Arrested, the packages were actually more talent-friendly than traditional deals. With the days of Friends or Everybody Loves Raymond sitcom talent deals increasingly outmoded (due to the transformed syndication and home entertainment sectors), new alternatives have never looked more attractive.

3. Embrace on-demand models.

Ted Sarandos, head of content for Netflix, says Arrested is “built to be watched over and over again” in bulk. “It’s way too dense.” That makes it perfectly tailored to Netflix. But networks and distributors of all kinds have started dabbling in binge offerings, as well they should. Fox, during its upfront presentation, touted the success of its new show The Following by noting that in some weeks up to 80% of its viewing occurred outside of its linear timeslot. There is value in having content so sought after. The demand that resuscitated the Bluths can work in countless other shows’ favor.

4. Empower and mobilize talent.

Along with the approach to salary, Netflix has been crafty about deploying talent and putting them front and center in the revival of the show. It started with a cast appearance at the New Yorker Festival in 2011 where they announced the return and continued through a global series of premieres where they hawked frozen bananas and amused the press. Creator Mitchell Hurwitz has also gotten his due, and by all accounts the cast’s loyalty to Hurwitz goes a long way toward explaining the show’s comeback. But there are takeaways for networks trying to leverage talent, which is tweeting and interacting with viewers in a host of new ways. That billboard on Sunset Boulevard and late-night TV booking are no longer enough.

5. Accept mortality.

Comebacks are exhilarating but all good things eventually come to an end. Netflix CEO Reed Hastings said earlier this year that while the company is proud of reviving Arrested, this season would likely be its last. But that’s not a tragedy – in fact, in the TV cult-comedy world less is often more, even though most hit shows are forced to outstay their welcomes by sheer force of financial lure. The British Office ran for just two seasons, Da Ali G Show for two. And one of the best was an HBO show that starred Lisa Kudrow as a self-defeating yet unsinkable actress named Valerie Cherish. The series, which left the air after one great season, was called The Comeback.

 

Mitch Berman is a veteran in the television industry, having spearheaded the wildly popular ZillionTV.  Get business insights about the silver screen by following this Twitter page.

Slate reporter Farhad Manjoo writes that the Boston Marathon bombings reflect the need for more surveillance cameras.

130418_TECH_suspects1and2.jpg.CROP.rectangle3-large
Image Source: slate.com

On Thursday afternoon, the FBI released photos and video of two persons of interest in the Boston Marathon bombing. According to FBI special agent Richard DesLauriers, authorities are looking for two men, whom he labeled Suspect No. 1 (who was wearing a dark hat) and Suspect No. 2 (who was wearing a white hat). DesLauriers also said that Suspect No. 2 was seen planting a device just before Monday’s explosions before heading west on Boylston Street.

What’s notable about the images the FBI released is how clear they are. Though DesLauriers did not indicate the source of the images, the Boston Globe reported earlier that authorities were focusing on video “from surveillance cameras on the same side of Boylston Street as the explosions.” If it turns out that the people in the FBI’s photos are the guys who did it, they shouldn’t be surprised that surveillance cameras turned out to be their undoing. Neither should you. We should see this potential break in the case as a sign of the virtues of video surveillance. More than that, we should think about how cameras could help prevent crimes, not just solve them once they’ve already happened.

Cities under the threat of terrorist attack should install networks of cameras to monitor everything that happens at vulnerable urban installations. Yes, you don’t like to be watched. Neither do I. But of all the measures we might consider to improve security in an age of terrorism, installing surveillance cameras everywhere may be the best choice. They’re cheap, less intrusive than many physical security systems, and—as will hopefully be the case with the Boston bombing—they can be extremely effective at solving crimes.

Surveillance cameras aren’t just the bane of hardcore civil libertarians. The idea of submitting to constant monitoring feels wrong, nearly un-American, to most of us. Cameras in the sky are the ultimate manifestation of Big Brother—a way for the government to watch you all the time, everywhere. In addition to normalizing surveillance—turning every public place into a venue for criminal investigation—there’s also the potential for abuse. Once a city is routinely surveilled, the government can turn every indiscretion into a criminal matter. You used to be able to speed down the street when you were in a hurry. Now, in many places around the world, a speed camera will record your behavior and send you a ticket in the mail. Combine cameras with facial-recognition technology and you’ve got a recipe for governmental intrusion. Did you just roll a joint or jaywalk or spray-paint a bus stop? Do you owe taxes or child support? Well, prepare to be investigated—if not hassled, fined, or arrested.

These aren’t trivial fears. The costs of ubiquitous surveillance are real. But these are not intractable problems. Such abuses and slippery-slope fears could be contained by regulations that circumscribe how the government can use footage obtained from security cameras. In general, we need to be thinking about ways to make cameras work for us, not reasons to abolish them. When you weigh cameras against other security measures, they emerge as the least costly and most effective choice. In the aftermath of 9/11, we’ve turned most public spaces into fortresses—now, it’s impossible for you to get into tall buildings, airports, many museums, concerts, and even public celebrations without being subjected to pat-downs and metal detectors. When combined with competent law enforcement, surveillance cameras are more effective, less intrusive, less psychologically draining, and much more pleasant than these alternatives. As several studies have found, a network of well-monitored cameras can help investigators solve crimes quickly, and there’s even evidence that cameras can help deter and predict criminal acts, too.

If the guys in the photos turn out to be the Boston bombers, it won’t be the first time we’ve caught terrorists with surveillance cameras. It happened in London, the world’s most-surveilled city, almost a decade ago. When a team of suicide bombers attacked the city’s transportation systems on July 7, 2005, officials relied primarily on closed-circuit television cameras to identify the attackers. Thanks to CCTV cameras, the identities of the bombers and their co-conspirators were determined in a few days’ time. Two weeks later, another team of bombers attempted to attack London’s subway and bus system. Their bombs failed. The suspects fled. But the cops had them on camera. Within a day, police had isolated images of the attackers and released pictures to the media. Tips from the public poured in—and within a week, the police had arrested the attackers and their accomplices. (During the course of the stakeout, the cops also shot and killed an innocent man.)

There’s ample evidence that CCTVs combat more routine crime. According to a study by the Department of Justice’s Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, when surveillance networks are installed and competently manned by trained personnel, they reduce many types of criminal activity by a significant margin, and they do so cost-effectively. After cameras were installed in downtown Baltimore in 2005, the study says, violent crime fell by 23 percent and all crime fell by 25 percent. In one area of Chicago, crime fell by 38 percent after CCTVs were installed. The study showed a smaller impact in other places—in Washington, D.C., for instance, researchers found that a surveillance system had no discernable impact on crime. But the reason for D.C.’s surveillance failure won’t please civil libertarians: Researchers argued that the cameras likely didn’t work because their use was too tightly regulated as a result of privacy fears. After getting input from the ACLU, D.C. instituted rules that severely limit who can look at the cameras and whom they can follow. The rules also prevent operators from saving surveillance footage routinely. In practice, the regulations mean that few people are monitoring D.C.’s cameras and responding to crimes that are caught on tape. The report suggests that if the rules were relaxed, the cameras might prove far more effective.

The next step in surveillance technology involves artificial intelligence. Several companies are working on software that monitors security-camera images in an effort to spot criminal activity before it happens. One company, BRS Labs, has built technology for the San Francisco public transportation system that will monitor scenes and alert officials when it spots “unusual or abnormal behavior.” What’s that, exactly? According the company’s proposal and its other promotional material, the software looks for any statistically unusual occurrences. By monitoring a scene for a long time, it determines what’s “normal” for that environment. It then alerts officials when something strays from normalcy. For instance, as BRS’ president told the Daily last year, the software sent out an alert when it noticed a truck entering a San Francisco tunnel that’s supposed to be used only by subway trains. Other occurrences that might set the software on high alert include people who are loitering instead of getting about their business, people who are jumping turnstiles, and folks who drop a package and then walk away.

The best reason to welcome a government network of surveillance cameras is that we’re already being watched—just not systematically, in a way that aids law enforcement. Private security cameras dot every busy street, and people’s personal cameras are everywhere. It might have been valuable, at some point, for us to have a discussion about whether we wanted to go down the road of having cameras everywhere. But we missed that moment—instead, you and I and everyone we know went out and bought smartphones and began snapping photos incessantly. Nowadays, when anything big goes down, we all willingly cede our right to privacy—we all take it for granted that photos provide valuable insight into news events, and we flood the Web with pictures and clips of the scene of big news.

Documents obtained by the ACLU of Massachusetts show that the city of Boston does have security cameras in place. There are only around 55 law enforcement cameras monitoring the city, with an additional 92 in surrounding towns and about 600 in the subway system. (There are many more run by private entities.) This sounds like a lot, but compared to other cities, Boston’s system is small. New York’s security camera plan, dubbed the “Ring of Steel,” uses 3,000 cameras in Lower Manhattan alone; that plan is based on London’s own “Ring of Steel,” which includes as many as a half-million cameras.

Of course, Boston is far smaller than New York or London, but the problem isn’t just the number of cameras, it’s that Boston—like most other American cities—hasn’t put security cameras at the forefront of its security plan. Boston has no ring of steel. Neither does Los Angeles, Chicago, San Francisco, or Atlanta.

Cameras helped the FBI find persons of interest in the marathon bombing. But could they have done more? I can’t tell you if the marathon bombing would have been prevented if Boston had a larger network of cameras being monitored by software or human operators. It’s certainly possible that if the cops were watching the scene in real time from 100 different angles, they might have missed something. But at least they would have had a chance to see something. That’s better than staying in the dark.

Mitch Berman, a specialist in enterprise marketing and consumer technologies, believes that technology plays a critical role in the war against terrorism. Learn how future technology can help prevent terrorist attacks by visiting this Facebook page.

With the expansion of bandwidth, availability of free hosting sites, and the increased affordability of filming and editing tools, the Internet has become a place for average Joes to steal more than 10 seconds of fame.

Video Source: youtube.com/user/kennethaakonsen

Viral videos are a timeless fad, with one coming up just as another is forgotten. 2012’s Gangnam craze topped YouTube viewing records in noteworthy swiftness, but the language barrier alienated its fans just as quickly. Aiming to top the Korean sensation, the latest entry in the contest allows a wider base of willing participants to contribute to the madness.

The Harlem Shake is a viral dance meme in which a group of people perform a sketch with a song of the same title in the background. The song itself was released by an artist named Baauer, but the meme was originally created by a group of five teenagers in Australia. The concept was popularized by other groups who mimicked the video, helping the meme go viral. As of today, over 400,000 Harlem Shake videos have been uploaded to YouTube so far.

Video Source: youtube.com/user/ATXCoop

Amidst the enjoyment and chaos, users seem to have forgotten one essential legal setback: using the Harlem Shake song without permission could actually get them sued.

Traditionally, companies wishing to use a song for any reason whatsoever should acquire the rights from the owner of the sheet music and the label that produced it. Most videos that have been uploaded for the Harlem Shake meme have not secured these rights. This is, of course, not common knowledge. Usually, only executives and professionals involved in the industry, such as Mitch Berman, the founder of ZillionTV, would be privy to this information.

Video Source: youtube.com/user/iNiLeX

More information about the digital media industry is available on this website.