Business owners now days do anything within their power just to make sure that they are at the top of the chart. Sometimes, I believe, some crises over certain things are being caused by those business owners, but if this is all about the fight between the New Twitter CEO and that of Facebook CEO, those could just be sent and considered fun and nothing more than that.
Entrepreneurs know ways of giving each other shade, and we all know how the results are being announced, not by a real hand-to-hand fight; a winner is being graded based on the level of his achievement over what they are dragging.
Any strategy that works for a company in order for the company's goal to be achieved could be considered a good strategy; it doesn't matter how outsiders view it.
Topic: Is this a Strategy? Is it a good Strategy? - page 3. (Read 645 times)
That is a common occurrence for these people. We can see that the purpose of these controversies is to generate attention and increase engagement on social media. Besides creating attention and attracting a large number of followers, They take advantage of controversies and pique our curiosity to gain marketing or advertising campaign capabilities. Even if they are criticized by many people, they don't care because, for good or bad, they all contribute to popularity and interaction on social media platforms, and above all, they can make a lot of money from them.
Logically right, both good and bad publicity still create engagements with viewers and readers.
It can be used as a good channel to reach those people who show their intention to follow or to know what's going on,
giving those personalities more engagements and additional popularity. I agree that even in the event it created bad
impressions, they can still convert that to a money making tool to earn money.
Bad publicity is still publicity. Popilar individuals would gain more popularity if they'd do things likewise and what brings them money on such instances, is simply being more known by more people. Then views would follow then monotization. Quite of indirect effect on their chosen careers. There are even instances that these influencers are doing things in contrast with morality and decency. Whether it is a good strategy or not would be determined by those who trusted doing so. It would be off for use to link things with always the trend so therefore, anyone could be someone bigger in the future depending on what lifestyle he is showing perhaps. For sure there's more into this.
To seek fame of course, they billionaires or celebrities must have a serious problem so that their popularity is getting bigger and known to many public figures, but these problems are sometimes planned by some groups to bring down or other goals, not from their own side then you feel the conflict is deliberately made I think it is wrong, Because with their fame, many people take advantage of the opportunity for negative ideas.
That is a common occurrence for these people. We can see that the purpose of these controversies is to generate attention and increase engagement on social media. Besides creating attention and attracting a large number of followers, They take advantage of controversies and pique our curiosity to gain marketing or advertising campaign capabilities. Even if they are criticized by many people, they don't care because, for good or bad, they all contribute to popularity and interaction on social media platforms, and above all, they can make a lot of money from them.
My question arises as to whether you think some or most of these conflicts are genuine or intentionally crafted/orchestrated by the parties involved to maintain their prominence and financial gains.
Also, could this be considered as a strategic element of their business or career strategy? And If so, is this a good strategy?
You never can tell, but it vary from one individual to the other if the public beef or viral news was intentionally crated or genuine, but I have noticed that our celebrities are most likely to create this fake news reason being just to keep relevance in the society for some while as the main topic of discussion either positively or negatively. Secondly, I have also noticed that most of the online beef we hear could be done by bloggers without the knowledge of the person in question just to drive much traffic and earn lots of money through Google ads, which are always mostly published by unregulated online blogs, and a good reason why its not all the news you see on social media you should believe without proper research. Also, could this be considered as a strategic element of their business or career strategy? And If so, is this a good strategy?
Some of them are deliberately created or arranged by the parties involved to get what they want. At the same time, others can be a diversion of a hot issue and do not want to continue because it could involve many public officials who will be caught breaking the rules.
This often happens everywhere and can be considered something that normally happens so that conflicts like this will continue to develop in another form. But it could also be a strategy that will help him get something like advancement in his career or business.
We will not know what all of that means and can only guess but some people already know that most of what happens around them is an arrangement by certain parties. Hopefully, it doesn't affect us and we just let things like that continue to happen, especially since we don't know the reasons clearly and only get opinions from the media.
This often happens everywhere and can be considered something that normally happens so that conflicts like this will continue to develop in another form. But it could also be a strategy that will help him get something like advancement in his career or business.
We will not know what all of that means and can only guess but some people already know that most of what happens around them is an arrangement by certain parties. Hopefully, it doesn't affect us and we just let things like that continue to happen, especially since we don't know the reasons clearly and only get opinions from the media.
It all depends...
I doubt that either Zuckerberg or Elon Musk needs more exposure, because they are already very prominent business people. On the other hand you have Youtubers and Streamers that wants to stay relevant and they will fight in these exhibition fights to get maximum exposure for their social media presence.
I think these fights are orchestrated and planned and not worth my time and money to bet on. I watch the fights, but I will not pay to watch the fights.. if you understand what I am saying.
These celebrities and media's businessmen are constantly in need of new hypes and trends to maintain their exposure on the hot topics. You can see this by Elon Musk's actions, since he is constantly creating new polemics and giving unexpected statements to keep in evidence on news' portals.I doubt that either Zuckerberg or Elon Musk needs more exposure, because they are already very prominent business people. On the other hand you have Youtubers and Streamers that wants to stay relevant and they will fight in these exhibition fights to get maximum exposure for their social media presence.
I think these fights are orchestrated and planned and not worth my time and money to bet on. I watch the fights, but I will not pay to watch the fights.. if you understand what I am saying.
Probably Zuckerberg is just trying to reproduce the same effect right now by challenging his opponent for a fight, as this kind of marketing has been working nicely for Musk for years already.
And even though you don't put any cents of dollar on their events, they still profit huge money just with your view. The more views they have, more money is collected from sponsors. So it's totally profitable for these celebrities to engage on such fights, at least until the public gets bored. Then they will have to create another hype... Maybe gladiator's games next time?
No matter how rich or famous you are, you always want more. Over time, they begin to see the world as a playground. They don't like it when they're prevented from doing what they want. I think that's exactly what Elon and Mark are in. They always want to be on the agenda and be remembered for different things.
That's why sometimes I don't want that much money to be accumulated in one person. While there are many things they can do, they try to get the attention of others. Sometimes I wonder if these people are alone. Is all they do just to increase their sociability?
I don't think they care if you invest money in events. They just aim to have fun by creating an agenda. They don't care what other people do.
they've done a lot but it's not enough,
we as spectators can only see it, nothing more than that.
Public beef or fights involving billionaires, celebrities, or even top companies often puts them into the spotlight, attracting attention and generating increased traffic, hence, more income. My question arises as to whether you think some or most of these conflicts are genuine or intentionally crafted/orchestrated by the parties involved to maintain their prominence and financial gains.
Also, could this be considered as a strategic element of their business or career strategy? And If so, is this a good strategy?
Also, could this be considered as a strategic element of their business or career strategy? And If so, is this a good strategy?
There's nothing like bad publicity, marketing is done for the purpose of increasing awareness. Celebrities beefs intentionally because they know they'll be giving the media something to reports on and putting them in the spotlight. Mark Zuckerberg and Elon musk aren't beefing and from how things has played out it seems neither of them are trying to sell anything with this fight they're embarking on so we can ruin all that out.
It looks like this fight is just something the two billionaires wants to do. We all have dreams and maybe theirs is to have a main event when they fight in the rings and this is a good opportunity for them to fullfil their dreams of fighting also this will gain them more fans with the fighting lovers.
Public beef or fights involving billionaires, celebrities, or even top companies often puts them into the spotlight, attracting attention and generating increased traffic, hence, more income. My question arises as to whether you think some or most of these conflicts are genuine or intentionally crafted/orchestrated by the parties involved to maintain their prominence and financial gains.
Also, could this be considered as a strategic element of their business or career strategy? And If so, is this a good strategy?
Also, could this be considered as a strategic element of their business or career strategy? And If so, is this a good strategy?
These billionaires are humans which means they can also have conflicts that could result in public disagreement. Some businesses are competitors which means that they will always want to undo each other and this could lead to public outbursts or even lawsuits. But in this era of social media, most organizations arrange public stunts just to gain public attention. Since they understand that negative news gains more attention, they will always come up with negative stories to push their products or firm. There has been an increase in celebrity sex tapes because it gives them the right publicity and increases their social media followers.
Quote
Also, could this be considered as a strategic element of their business or career strategy? And If so, is this a good strategy?
I don't think that organized public fight is a good marketing strategy. This is because they are arranged to promote falsehood and deceive the people. A business or product should be promoted using genuine and truthful means. Even if the fight is genuine, it also has some negative effects on the people. Many young people see these billionaires as role models, so such immoral acts like fighting could influence these youths. Top business owners have the responsibility of acting in a manner worthy of emulation.
It all depends...
I doubt that either Zuckerberg or Elon Musk needs more exposure, because they are already very prominent business people. On the other hand you have Youtubers and Streamers that wants to stay relevant and they will fight in these exhibition fights to get maximum exposure for their social media presence.
I think these fights are orchestrated and planned and not worth my time and money to bet on. I watch the fights, but I will not pay to watch the fights.. if you understand what I am saying.
These celebrities and media's businessmen are constantly in need of new hypes and trends to maintain their exposure on the hot topics. You can see this by Elon Musk's actions, since he is constantly creating new polemics and giving unexpected statements to keep in evidence on news' portals.I doubt that either Zuckerberg or Elon Musk needs more exposure, because they are already very prominent business people. On the other hand you have Youtubers and Streamers that wants to stay relevant and they will fight in these exhibition fights to get maximum exposure for their social media presence.
I think these fights are orchestrated and planned and not worth my time and money to bet on. I watch the fights, but I will not pay to watch the fights.. if you understand what I am saying.
Probably Zuckerberg is just trying to reproduce the same effect right now by challenging his opponent for a fight, as this kind of marketing has been working nicely for Musk for years already.
And even though you don't put any cents of dollar on their events, they still profit huge money just with your view. The more views they have, more money is collected from sponsors. So it's totally profitable for these celebrities to engage on such fights, at least until the public gets bored. Then they will have to create another hype... Maybe gladiator's games next time?
No matter how rich or famous you are, you always want more. Over time, they begin to see the world as a playground. They don't like it when they're prevented from doing what they want. I think that's exactly what Elon and Mark are in. They always want to be on the agenda and be remembered for different things.
That's why sometimes I don't want that much money to be accumulated in one person. While there are many things they can do, they try to get the attention of others. Sometimes I wonder if these people are alone. Is all they do just to increase their sociability?
I don't think they care if you invest money in events. They just aim to have fun by creating an agenda. They don't care what other people do.
It all depends...
I doubt that either Zuckerberg or Elon Musk needs more exposure, because they are already very prominent business people. On the other hand you have Youtubers and Streamers that wants to stay relevant and they will fight in these exhibition fights to get maximum exposure for their social media presence.
I think these fights are orchestrated and planned and not worth my time and money to bet on. I watch the fights, but I will not pay to watch the fights.. if you understand what I am saying.
These celebrities and media's businessmen are constantly in need of new hypes and trends to maintain their exposure on the hot topics. You can see this by Elon Musk's actions, since he is constantly creating new polemics and giving unexpected statements to keep in evidence on news' portals.I doubt that either Zuckerberg or Elon Musk needs more exposure, because they are already very prominent business people. On the other hand you have Youtubers and Streamers that wants to stay relevant and they will fight in these exhibition fights to get maximum exposure for their social media presence.
I think these fights are orchestrated and planned and not worth my time and money to bet on. I watch the fights, but I will not pay to watch the fights.. if you understand what I am saying.
Probably Zuckerberg is just trying to reproduce the same effect right now by challenging his opponent for a fight, as this kind of marketing has been working nicely for Musk for years already.
And even though you don't put any cents of dollar on their events, they still profit huge money just with your view. The more views they have, more money is collected from sponsors. So it's totally profitable for these celebrities to engage on such fights, at least until the public gets bored. Then they will have to create another hype... Maybe gladiator's games next time?
In the world of the rich and famous, it's hard to say for sure which conflicts are genuine and which are orchestrated for attention. It's possible that some of these public beefs are carefully crafted to generate buzz and maintain their prominence. It could be seen as a strategic element of their business or career strategy, as it brings increased visibility and potentially more income. However, whether it's a good strategy or not depends on various factors, including public perception and long-term reputation. Some may find it entertaining, while others might see it as inauthentic.
Public beef or fights involving billionaires, celebrities, or even top companies often puts them into the spotlight, attracting attention and generating increased traffic, hence, more income. My question arises as to whether you think some or most of these conflicts are genuine or intentionally crafted/orchestrated by the parties involved to maintain their prominence and financial gains.
Also, could this be considered as a strategic element of their business or career strategy? And If so, is this a good strategy?
Also, could this be considered as a strategic element of their business or career strategy? And If so, is this a good strategy?
Yes. What gets the attention of the masses gets the money. Put an advertisement in that spotlight to whichever is fighting over one crisis and you will generate enough money. In today's media where one click is enough to put a promotion to where people is flocking. Be it zuckerberg vs. musk, tate vs bbc, or any. They make money after those. They got more exposure to the media. It's a strategy to make one's brand make known.
Even though we can judge which is the setting and which is real, usually the celebrity problems that have been planned will be full of emotional drama and no one will give in, and will continue to end without explanation. And this is just to provoke social media to expose them and become a hot topic which makes their name popular again.
but usually problems like this end up endlessly and just disappear and the goal is for them to continue to exist, and this will make a lot of invitations from several television shows that make them popular again and a lot of money.
but usually problems like this end up endlessly and just disappear and the goal is for them to continue to exist, and this will make a lot of invitations from several television shows that make them popular again and a lot of money.
We could say it is a good strategy because it makes it trending and gets a lot of people talking about it, even if it is really nonsense stuff. Just let's take an example of the recent trend in our country, where there are celebrity boxing matchups as well as a lot of trash talk happening online, which makes more noise on social media as it attracts more bashers and other people. Even though there are more bashers than fans, it is still successful because bashers make fun of it while still spreading the word about it. It is also a plus for them that they are celebrities and known people because the reason for it is really the fight and it makes them generate more profit.
That is exactly the goal. The more they make noise online, you know that they are bagging more profits. It doesn't really matter whether they have more fans or critics in the matter. What really matters is the level of engagement in their social media handles. Majority of the misunderstanding that happens among celebrities are all staged and planned. It is the ignorant fans who think that they are serious and make the matter go viral.
There is hardly anything that happens without any kind of conspiracy. This method will not be updated anytime soon in as much as there are people who are readily willing to react to the dramas. They will keep acting and they will keep succeeding.
Public beef or fights involving billionaires, celebrities, or even top companies often puts them into the spotlight, attracting attention and generating increased traffic, hence, more income. My question arises as to whether you think some or most of these conflicts are genuine or intentionally crafted/orchestrated by the parties involved to maintain their prominence and financial gains.
Also, could this be considered as a strategic element of their business or career strategy? And If so, is this a good strategy?
Also, could this be considered as a strategic element of their business or career strategy? And If so, is this a good strategy?
This isn't a good strategy I must correct you, but it's a best strategy. Public needs those kind of fight and the billionaires and other entertainers know the psychology of the humans. They do everything according to the plans and all those fights are mostly fake, and they do acting only to attract the attention of the public. You know because of such conflicts many news channels are running successfully and they earn their bread and butter from such fights. On the other hand there are thousands of social media channels, and only websites, which are earning quite substantial income by publishing such conflict stories on their channels and sites.
This thing will continue this way and nothing will be changed. Even though it is a truth that those billionaires might have some problems with each other in personal life, but the way they show it on social media and online is totally crafted one. That's why they say that "The show must go on," and the same applies here, if they want to be in limelight then they will have to do such acting. Although, it isn't necessary, but you should watch the TV series "The Boys," and you will know that how they fake those stories which aren't even real. The show is based on fictional characters, but still the concept is same.
We could say it is a good strategy because it makes it trending and gets a lot of people talking about it, even if it is really nonsense stuff. Just let's take an example of the recent trend in our country, where there are celebrity boxing matchups as well as a lot of trash talk happening online, which makes more noise on social media as it attracts more bashers and other people. Even though there are more bashers than fans, it is still successful because bashers make fun of it while still spreading the word about it. It is also a plus for them that they are celebrities and known people because the reason for it is really the fight and it makes them generate more profit.
In certain situations this dispute is deliberately set up to increase their popularity (especially celebrities). Many parties benefit from the drama they create, print and electronic media can broadcast the news almost every day through writing or television broadcasts. Believe it or not, the higher your popularity the more people are curious about the life you live. The money you have can be a weapon to seek sensation in any way, a strategy for public fights as a business that ordinary people in general cannot do. It is clear that this strategy can improve their careers due to the fact that they are often highlighted by cameras and their photos are displayed every day in the print media.
Public beef or fights involving billionaires, celebrities, or even top companies often puts them into the spotlight, attracting attention and generating increased traffic, hence, more income. My question arises as to whether you think some or most of these conflicts are genuine or intentionally crafted/orchestrated by the parties involved to maintain their prominence and financial gains.
Also, could this be considered as a strategic element of their business or career strategy? And If so, is this a good strategy?
Also, could this be considered as a strategic element of their business or career strategy? And If so, is this a good strategy?
At the end of the day, there's no such thing as bad marketing.
Marketing is marketing, if you are getting people's attention you are doing something right, I guess.
If you are referring to the Musk vs. Zuckerberg fight, this "beef" has nothing to do with a marketing strategy or building their personal brands.
Both Musk and Zuckerberg are extremely rich and famous. Maybe this is just them being narcissistic. Nobody knows how a multibillionaire thinks. I'm also wondering what's the point of this fight. Maybe they are trying to get the attention of the crowd while something important is done behind the scenes. I don't want to get into conspiracy theories here.
Jump to: