關於 where is leonardo dicaprio from ，我們在網路上蒐集到這些相關的討論、資訊與評價

[Is My Startup Leveraging Sales or Marketing to Attract Customers?]

When founders find out that I developed and managed Microsoft's global social media marketing for startups, many of them ask me if they can run a few ideas by me and see where they are doing the right thing in their marketing.

I have noticed after talking to founders for the past two months that sometimes there is a little confusion about sales language / sales pitches and marketing. So, I want to be helpful to founders at any stage of their growth by briefly offering my point of view on which is which.

Marketing is the language that you craft, and the story that you permeate through all of your branding and media engagement that clarifies and directs the tone and message of your mission.

Sales is the language and the toolkit of techniques that one or a group of people leverage to close deals with customers.

They both use many techniques and deploy many types of messaging, but they are very different things.

Marketing builds trust.
Sales makes use of that trust to ensure purchase activity.

Sometimes I have seen people use web properties like a site, or a blog, to talk about offers and offers seem to be the only language that gives insight into the product and what it does.

Truthfully, this isn't typically enough to build trust. Yes, if your product is what they want, price may be a feature of the marketing, but using this alone isn't marketing. It's just sales language using up very lucrative and precious space that could be used for marketing.

With some exceptions, marketing is a long game. It's the intelligence that you use to prep for the sales battle. It's the method that from far away and from up close, gains you and the brand attention and trust.

It is your company's WHY.

Examples of marketing:

Nike's Just Do It campaign

Apple's Think Different campaign

Starbucks' Meet Me at Starbucks global media narrative

Sales is the hand-to-hand combat that you engage in when the target is close, lured in by your marketing.

Example of a sales technique:

Watch the scene from Wolf of Wall Street, when Jordan Belfort, played by Leonardo DiCaprio, cold calls a man and asks him to invest in penny stocks.

Founders need to think about how marketing is a very long game. It may take years to build that story. It may take countless trials and errors. But the focus on that mission is building trust. Trust is what enables sales to happen.

If you would like to sit down with other founders and experts in the fields of marketing, communications, legal issues, human resources and hiring, as well as mentors who have built up their own companies in Taiwan and in Greater Southeast Asia, you are welcome to apply to our 20th cohort, which will begin next year.

Deadline is December 16: http://bit.ly/2NF5RL8

Doug Crets
English Communications Master, AppWorks

Image courtesy: Paramount Pictures

Watch: Lions, Africa’s iconic predator, have returned to the plains of Liwonde National Park in Malawi for the first time in 20 years! A total of nine lions have just been reintroduced to Liwonde (from South Africa and from Majete Wildlife Reserve also in Malawi), through a series of translocations to return the species to the park. Five additional lions were also translocated to Majete Wildlife Reserve from South Africa to increase the genetic diversity of the reserve’s pride. Lion populations have declined by over 90% over the last 100 years as a result of habitat loss and fragmentation, lack of prey, human-wildlife conflict and poaching for the illegal wildlife trade. Now, fewer than 20,000 lions remain across Africa, and have gone extinct in 26 African countries. But through initiatives such as these, Malawi is providing sanctuary for wild lions and is bringing them home. This extraordinary initiative was made possible with support from the Dutch Government, the Lion Recovery Fund, the Leonardo DiCaprio Foundation and Leonardo DiCaprio. The return of these lions is part of a larger predator restoration initiative for Liwonde, where cheetahs were also reintroduced last year. Since 2015, African Parks along with the DNPW Malawi have drastically reduced illegal activity; almost 31,000 wire snares have been removed, wildlife conflict has been reduced and now tourism is on the rise, positively impacting local people. Projects like these show that with determination, political will and community and donor support – we can create a better future where nature’s return benefits both people and wildlife. Click here to read the full story: https://www.africanparks.org/lions-return-liwonde

Another great response to Shrey Bhargava's self righteous pity party. Every minority is invited to join! Come, let's blame the majority race for everything that's wrong in our lives, it is never our fault, it is because we are oppressed! Wow, so convenient!

Shrey has written another post boohooing about how racism (yawn), how minorities don't get roles easily in singapore, and how the Chinese are blind because we have privileged.

Cut your crap. If a Chinese director wants to make a movie about Chinese NS men, that's his fucking prerogative. If it features Indians or Malays as token characters, that's also his freedom and right. Why? You think every local movie needs to have an Indian main character then it's not considered racist is it?

In that case I ask... why are Bollywood movies full of only Indians? Why aren't one of the leads in 3 Idiots any race other than Indian?!!! Such an atrocity and blatant racism. Sure, Bollywood shows are in Tamil, but hey I don't care, this is as racist as The Voice asking for Chinese speakers! I don't care, include a Chinese mute character please, and he must not be a token role! Otherwise the director is racist! 🙄

Obviously like Donovan said there are privileges to being a majority race, a majority anything. That much is undeniable. While the Chinese in singapore should be mindful of consideration for all the other ethnic groups and always be respectful, but the automatic assumption that jobs be not only handed to you, but CREATED FOR you purely for the sake of your race isn't one of them.

Singapore is built on meritocracy.

Keep up your self victimizing charade and keep blaming society for your failures in life - you will find that soon nobody respects you.

And unlike the white liberals who have been indoctrinated with white guilt since their school days and think they have to pay for their ancestors' crime, you will find Singaporeans way less susceptible to your guilt tripping. Asians, including Indians and Chinese alike, don't subscribe to victim-playing. We work hard and succeed despite the odds - I suggest you get on with the program. Nobody owes you or your race a level playing field. Your whining rings hollow, since you exist in one of the most racially harmonious countries in the world, where the govt has taken careful steps to ensure equality for all the 4 main races.

Dear Shrey Bhargava,

As far as I can tell from your post, there was nothing racist about your Ah Boys to Men audition and I'll be kind enough to tell you and the 3000-odd people whom have shared your post why.

You were tasked to perform the role of a 'full blown Indian' and you have interpreted that as having to 'portray a caricature of my race' and being 'reduced to my accent'.

The casters were not racist and the element of racism here is non-existent because that was the role that is being demanded of you here, whether it was that of a Singaporean Indian, North Indian, British Indian or Red Indian.

Suppose Samuel L. Jackson had tried to audition for the role of Jack Dawson in Titanic, a part that really went to Leonardo DiCaprio. It is obvious that he would have been turned down because he was black. Now, is this not a clear-cut case of racial discrimination? Surely no one (maybe except that crazy Sangeetha) would be absurd enough to claim that the directors or scriptwriters of Titanic were racist and had "reduced" Jackson down to his skin colour?

That is because the role of Jack Dawson (may he rest in peace at the bottom of the Atlantic) is one of a white man.

Why is it somehow more 'wrong' for you to portray the role of a stereotypical Indian from India, than for Wang Wei Liang to portray the stereotypical Chinese gangster, or for Maxi Lim to portray the role of a stereotypical bootlicking yes-man recruit, or for Tosh Zhang to portray a stereotypical authoritative army Sergeant?

If Wang Wei Liang were to drop out of the Lobang King role right now and I be in line to audition for the role, I'd be similarly asked by the casting director to play the role of a 'full blown ah beng'.

That would mean me summoning out to the best of my abilities the most vicious, stereotypical characteristics of a Chinese 'ah beng'. I'd have to speak in subpar broken English, exercise a liberal use of dialect profanities and demonstrate an aptitude for violence in the face of problems.

I have no doubt in my mind that a lot of the ones whom are throwing support behind you right now would not similarly rally and call to arms in the same righteous manner for me because I had to depict a caricature of the stereotypical Chinese hooligan.

Yet what is the difference? Certainly not all Chinese 'ah bengs' are characterised with the same rebellious, malingering characteristics like that of Wang Wei Liang's character. I have done my National Service alongside some of them (in a god-forsaken rifleman unit no less), and most of them in fact are some of the most patriotic men I have ever seen.

Why is a racial stereotype anymore of a grievous injustice than the stereotype of an occupation, a cultural identity or any other form of stereotype? It is not.

If your objection is with being pigeonholed into a simplified, hackneyed image of a particular person, then you must similarly condemn all forms of stereotypes in film - not just stereotypes that are played along racial lines. And it is unnecessary for me to point out that stereotypes in the arts are ubiquitous in any and all forms.

In your follow-up post, you ramp up your distinct brand of illogic. You claim that it is wrong for the minority character to be of insignificance because this is a film that is a "SINGAPOREAN story".

But this begs the question. What defines being 'Singaporean'? Given that 40% of our population are comprised of foreigners and non-residents, isn't it just as wrong that these Filipinos, Indonesians, Japanese and Koreans are utterly unrepresented in Ah Boys to Men? Is it fair to stick to the 'Chinese, Malay, Indian' categorisation that in the first place, is a categorisation formulated on arbitrary standards by our government?

Is there any reason why your standard of what is 'Singaporean' should take priority over mine, or over the casting director's?

Yes, actors need jobs and it is certainly true that a racial minority would not enjoy the luxury of roles to pick from in comparison to one in the racial majority. But it is not clear WHY this is unfair, which is what you seem to me implying by "Minority actors do not have the privilege to pick and choose what to audition for".

Of course majorities benefit. The same can be said for people whom are right-handed, whom are tall, whom are lucky enough to be born with our five senses. When you lament that "Minority actors do not have the privilege to pick and choose what to audition for", you are no longer making an argument against racism, rather, you are making an argument against reality i.e., the racial proportion of our population.

I have observed this for some time among the young Singaporeans who are most active on social media. One of the most troubling cultural trends as of late is this idiotic penchant to leap at every slightest opportunity they get to call out racism, from the Toggle blackface issue and the Kiss92 incident to a Smartlocal video from last year.

Of course racism exists in Singapore (or anywhere else in the world for that matter), but reducing any and all issues down to race is not very helpful. There are far more productive ways to tackle discrimination. And that begins with changing the institutional framework of our society, such as the freedom of our press and media, so racial minorities are empowered to best represent their own unique cultures. Nit-picking on little details in the media is not one of them.

Like the Nobel Laureate Milton Friedman said: “One of the great mistakes is to judge policies and programs by their intentions rather than their results.” I commend your well-intentioned attempt to speak out against what you have perceived is 'racism', but your analysis is incorrect and your methods are in fact entirely retrogressive.

P.S. It was quite interesting to see how that Vimeo video on your wall provided a most comical caricature of Arabs being equated with bombs/terrorism. It appears that it is just your own racial identity that is most fragile, and that the rest of us must tread precariously around. I wonder if it was only I who cringed so hard?