Saturday, July 4, 2009

Making Money With Articles : Banner Advertisements

When you are trying to make money off of the articles on your website, it is important to effectively promote your site so that you will attract customers and they can see just what a good, quality site you have. There are several ways so market and promote your website, one of them being though banner advertisements.

What Banner Ads Can Do For You

Banner ads can help bring visitors from others sites to your own. Although monthly fees can be expensive to advertise on high traffic sites, in the end it may be cheaper and/or a faster way to start seeing significant revenue from your website efforts, rather than waiting for SEO techniques to bring your own site to the top of search engine results. Aside from paying to advertise on someone else’s site, there are also free banner exchanges to choose from. We will look at the pros and cons of each banner advertising method below.

Free Banner Exchanges

Free banner exchanges are when you and other sites exchange each others banners. Their banner will go on your site and your banner will go one their site. Although this option is free, there are two main problems with it. First, if you want your banner on a significant number of sites, it will mean cluttering your own site up with these banners. This could even shot you in the foot if you run an affiliate website because, instead of clicking on your affiliate links, your visitors may be clicking on your banner exchange links. Secondly, you have to be really careful about the types of sites that you exchange banners with. Some sites like to gather a lot of banners so that they can be a directory or portal site and not have to have any real content. These “banner farms” or “link farms” will do nothing positive for your site and, in the meantime, you will be bringing them potential traffic.

Paid Banner Ads

As we saw above, paid banner ads cost money, but they will eventually pay off if you choose the right ones. You need to ensure that the site produces the amount of traffic that they say and that they have your ad placed in a way that invites visitors to click without being too pushy. You also want to choose a site that does not house too many other banners on the same page as yours or that there are no competitor links on the same page.

All in all, banner ads can end up being profitable for you site if you go about it the right way. If you do decide to check out banner advertisement as a marketing avenue, be sure to keep the above tips in mind.

SKorea says North fires 7 missiles off east coast



SEOUL, South Korea – North Korea fired seven ballistic missiles off its eastern coast Saturday, South Korea said, a violation of U.N. resolutions and an apparent message of defiance to the United States on its Independence Day.
The launches, which came two days after North Korea fired what were believed to be four short-range cruise missiles, will likely further escalate tensions in the region as the U.S. tries to muster support for tough enforcement of the latest U.N. Security Council resolution imposed on the communist regime for its May nuclear test.
South Korea's Joint Chiefs of Staff said three missiles were fired early Saturday, a fourth around noon and three more in the afternoon. The Defense Ministry said that the missiles were ballistic and are believed to have flown more than 250 miles (400 kilometers).
"Our military is fully ready to counter any North Korean threats and provocations based on strong South Korea-U.S. combined defense posture," the Joint Chiefs of Staff said in a statement.
South Korea's Yonhap news agency quoted military officials as saying the missiles appeared to be a type of Scud missile. North Korea's Scuds are considered short-range, the South's military said.
But Yonhap also said it is possible they could have been longer-range Rodong missiles fired a shorter distance.
Scud missiles have a range of up to 300 miles (500 kilometers), which could hit most of South Korea. The Rodong has a range of up to 800 miles (1,300 kilometers), putting most parts of Japan within striking distance.
North Korea is not allowed to fire Scuds, medium-range missiles or long-range missiles. They are banned under U.N. resolutions, including Resolution 1874 passed after North Korea's May 25 nuclear test, that prohibit any launch using ballistic missile technology.
Thursday's launches, on the other hand, did not violate the resolution, according to South Korea's Foreign Ministry. Kim Tae-woo, vice president of the Korea Institute for Defense Analyses, said it was believed North Korea launched cruise missiles Thursday.
Ballistic missiles are guided during their ascent out of the atmosphere but fall freely when they descend. Cruise missiles fly low and straight to their target.
The North has a record of timing missile tests for the U.S. national day, which fell on Saturday.
"The missiles were seen as part of military exercises, but North Korea also appeared to have sent a message to the U.S. through the missile launches," a senior official in South Korea's presidential office said, without elaborating.
The official told The Associated Press that North Korea could fire more missiles in coming days, but said there was little possibility it could fire an intercontinental ballistic missile, as it threatened in April.
He spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to media.
Daniel Pinkston, a Seoul-based analyst for the International Crisis Group think tank, said both political and military reasons were behind the launches.
"I think it's a demonstration of their defiance and rejection of the U.N. Security Council Resolution 1874, for one thing, and to demonstrate their military power capabilities to any potential adversaries," Pinkston said.
He also pointed out that July 4 is not only U.S. Independence Day but also the anniversary of a 1972 joint communique in which the two Koreas agreed to work toward peacefully reunifying their divided peninsula.
During the U.S. Independence Day holiday in 2006, Pyongyang fired a barrage of missiles, including a long-range Taepodong-2 that broke apart and fell into the ocean less than a minute after liftoff. Those launches, which occurred on July 5 in North Korea, also came amid tensions with the U.S. over North Korea's nuclear program.
North Korea's state news agency carried no reports on the launches. But the North had warned ships to stay away from its east coast through July 10 for military exercises — an indication it was planning launches.
The chief of U.S. Naval operations, Adm. Gary Roughead, said Saturday the American military was ready for any North Korean missile tests.
"Our ships and forces here are prepared for the tracking of the missiles and observing the activities that are going on," Roughead said after meeting Japanese military officials in Tokyo before news of the launches.
South Korea and Japan, which are within easy range of North Korean missiles, condemned the launches as a "provocative" act that violates the U.N. resolution.
South Korea "expressed deep regret over the North's continuous behavior that escalates tensions in Northeast Asia by repeatedly defying" the resolution, the Foreign Ministry said in a statement.
In Tokyo, Chief Cabinet Secretary Takeo Kawamura said in a statement that the launch of missiles "is a serious act of provocation against the security of neighboring countries, including Japan, and is against the resolution of the U.N Security Council." In Beijing, a Foreign Ministry spokesman said he had no immediate comment. China is the North's closest ally.
(Yahoonews)

Tool Talk: All about internet marketing tools


Who doesn't want inexpensive internet marketing tools? In this day and age when advertising your business online is the way to go, it's a must that you avail of internet marketing tools at the lowest cost possible. How can you avail of them? How can you make the most out of these low cost internet marketing tools?
These low cost internet marketing tools aim to better your website and promote them thoroughly. Read on to know more about them:

1. Software
There is software specializing in internet marketing. These programs are affordable internet marketing tools. They attract traffic, communicate your site to anyone online, harness and trim down your keywords, track your site visitors and create links to other sites. Of course, the phrase "low cost" emphasizes that you must not spend exorbitantly. Watch out for internet marketing tools that do nothing but suck your budget.
2. Website packages
Take note of low cost internet marketing tools that do the following: hosting and designing your site, getting your domain, offering technical help, configure and upload your files, campaigning for your traffic. These are available in website packages that you can avail of anytime. Choose a package caters to your site's needs.
3. Mailing lists
Notice that when you visit the Bulk Mail folder of your email, you read nothing but website promotions. That's email marketing? It boosts your business like no other. Don't worry about spamming. There's such a thing as "safe lists" that make your mails spam-free. This is so easy to obtain. Look for mailing lists for sale and let the fun of emailing begin.
4. Data Submitters
This is a money-saving internet marketing tool that works like magic. Have a data submitter of your own and amass tremendously huge hits!
5. E-books
Integrate an e-book in your site for people to download. At such a cheap price, you keep people clamoring for more and visiting your site in the process. That's one affordable internet marketing tool for you.
6. SEO tools
Internet marketing is not complete without the standard SEO tools. Search engines remain as the major powerhouse in marketing so never leave this part out. Generate traffic through this effective low cost internet marketing tool!
Here's a reminder: when you see the low cost internet marketing tool banners online, never get persuaded easily. Study the package deals; analyze the contents and benefits before deciding if you want one.

Thursday, July 2, 2009

Stars Dying in Threes: What Are the Chances?



Every time celebrities die in threes, your humble media inform you that, no, actually, they don't.
If you won't listen to us, then maybe you'll listen to the celebrity death month generator.
In the wake of the passings of
Ed McMahon, Farrah Fawcett and Michael Jackson, we tracked down two writers who ran the numbers on celebrities dying in threes.
And here's what they say...
The Celebrity Death Month Generator Doesn't Lie
In 2005, Rob Cockerham, the Web provocateur of
Cockeyed.com, put together a timeline of celebrity deaths for that August. As to what defined a celebrity, Cockerham settled on a person who's passing warranted a front-page mention on Google News.
In the end, Cockerham charted 11 deaths, five of which occurred in a three-day span. Three times, two celebrities died on the same day. At no time did three Google-worthy names die on the same day. (Even the McMahon, Fawcett and Jackson deaths, which spurred the latest "dying in threes" talk, occurred over three days.)
Cockerham decided any triples that could be found were "convenient triples," as he wrote. Or, to put it another way, if a computer program were to spit out a bunch of dates, it too might randomly hit a trifecta.
And that's exactly what the computer program that Cockerham wrote did: In six trial runs, the so-dubbed
celebrity death month generator spit out nine calendar days each. Sometimes the numbers were clustered, sometimes they were spread out.
At no time did the fates seem to have it "in" for a particular date.
"It proved that if you look at events happening randomly on a timeline you will be able to find groups of three," Cockerham said this week. "But if you really look at what you're doing, you won't be able to put all the dots in groups of three."
The Billy Mays Conundrum
In a 2004
piece for his now-defunct column, Stupid Question, John the Obscure's John Ruch broke out the World Almanac, and examined its 105 Almanac-designated notable deaths for the previous year (up through October, when the book went to press).
Amid the various death dates, some bunched together, some not, Ruch even found one, May 14, 2003, in which three celebrities died on the same day. But he still found himself unmoved by the "superstition," as he puts it, that celebrities are destined to die in threes.
"It's classic garbage-in, garbage-out," Ruch told E! News.
While 2003 produced one of those classic "celebrities die in threes" stretches that gets everybody talking—the week in which
John Ritter, Johnny Cash and Warren Zevon all passed away—it also produced others that got nobody talking, Ruch observed. For instance, the aforementioned May 14 saw the passings of Dave DeBusschere, Wendy Hiller and Robert Stack.
"And anybody who can identify all three of those 'celebrities' deserves the grand prize on Jeopardy!," Ruch wrote in his column. (For the record, DeBusschere was a basketball star; Hiller, an Academy Award-winning actress; Stack, the star of TV's The Untouchables.)
How to define a celebrity, an issue Cockerham would later confront, is just one of the problems with the "celebrities dying in threes" hypothesis, Ruch said. Another is when does a sequence of three begin. Or end.
When TV pitchman Billy Mays
died three days after Fawcett and Jackson, Ruch asked, "So is this starting a new series?"
The question could be asked anew with Wednesday's
passing of Oscar and Emmy winner Karl Malden. Does he get grouped with Mays? Or was Mays already taken, having been grouped with 1950s TV star Gale Storm and impressionist Fred Travalina, both recently deceased, if not Fawcett and Jackson. And if Mays was grouped with Fawcett and Jackson, where did that leave McMahon? Grouped with character actor Hal Riddle, who died June 17, and 1960s rocker Sky Saxon, who died June 25, along with Fawcett and Jackson?
And then there's the matter of what to make of a celebrity the caliber of Jackson.
"My question is should Michael Jackson count for three all by himself," Ruch said. "He was pretty darn famous."
It's all enough to make your head hurt. Or your celebrity death month generator explode.
"This is why it's an irrational thing," Ruch said. "You keep defining the definitions."
http://www.eonline.com/

A Michael Jackson-Honoring Event of Some Kind Headed to Staples?

As Neverland Ranch was crossed off the list, the question remained: Where the heck will Michael Jackson's memorial be held?
Considering thousands of fans will want in on any public event, the Jackson family appears to be zeroing in on Los Angeles' Staples Center to hold some type of tribute to the King of Pop on Tuesday morning.
A spokesman for AEG Live, which owns the venue, tells E! News, "At this time, nothing is scheduled, nothing is planned" and a LAPD spokesman says they're still waiting to hear from the family as far as mobilizing officers for peace-keeping and motorcade purposes goes.
But sources say that July 7 at Staples—for an event that will not include a viewing of the body or a traditional funeral service—is the goal.
The news comes as Neverland Ranch was officially checked off the list, both as a spot for a public viewing and as a burial site. California law requires that humans be buried in established cemeteries and it's up to local officials (and a gob of paperwork) to obtain permission to bury someone on private property.
Although a rep for the cemetery said it's impossible for them to comment on a family's burial plans, L.A.'s famed Forest Lawn is where Jackson's body is said to be now, awaiting interment.
But his family has yet to file a death certificate, which is required to bury the King of Pop anywhere, E! News learned Wednesday.
A burial permit specifying the "disposition" of a body (i.e. cremation, burial, donation to science) cannot be obtained until there's a death certificate, according to the California Department of Health.
Families have eight days from the time of a relative's death to file a death certificate, but as of Wednesday afternoon, the vital records office had not yet received the Jackson paperwork. "Maybe the family has not made final arrangements," suggested a health department official.

467K jobs cut in June; jobless rate at 9.5 percent


WASHINGTON – Employers cut a larger-than-expected 467,000 jobs in June, driving the unemployment rate up to a 26-year high of 9.5 percent, suggesting that the economy's road to recovery will be bumpy.
The Labor Department report, released Thursday, showed that even as the recession flashes signs of easing, companies likely will want to keep a lid on costs and be wary of hiring until they feel certain the economy is on a solid ground.
June's payroll reductions were deeper than the 363,000 that economists expected.
However, the rise in the unemployment rate from 9.4 percent in May wasn't as sharp as the expected 9.6 percent. Still, many economists predict the jobless rate will hit 10 percent this year, and keep rising into next year, before falling back.
All told, 14.7 million people were unemployed in June.
If laid-off workers who have given up looking for new jobs or have settled for part-time work are included, the unemployment rate would have been 16.5 percent in June, the highest on records dating to 1994.
Since the recession began in December 2007, the economy has lost a net total of 6.5 million jobs.
As the downturn bites into sales and profits, companies have turned to layoffs and other cost-cutting measures to survive. Those include holding down workers' hours and freezing or cutting pay.
The average work week in June fell to 33 hours, the lowest on records dating to 1964.
Layoffs in May turned out to smaller, 322,000, versus the 345,000 first reported. But job cuts in April were a big deeper — 519,000 versus 504,000, according to government data.
Even with higher pace of job cuts in June, the report indicates that the worst of the layoffs have passed. The deepest job cuts of the recession came in January, when 741,000 jobs vanished, the most in any month since 1949.
And there was some other encouraging job news Thursday.
In a separate report, the department said the number of newly laid-off workers filing applications for unemployment benefits fell last week to 614,000, in line with economists' predictions. The number of people continuing to draw benefits unexpectedly dropped to 6.7 million.
Still, job losses last month were widespread.
Professional and business services slashed 118,000 jobs, more than double the 48,000 cut in May. Manufacturers cut 136,000, down from 156,000. Construction companies got rid of 79,000 jobs, up from 48,000 the previous month. Retailers eliminated 21,000, up from 17,600. Financial activities cut 27,000, following 30,000 in May. The government cut 52,000 jobs, up from 10,000 the previous month. Leisure and hospitality cut 18,000 jobs, erasing a gain of the same size in May.
One of the few industries adding jobs: education and health services.
With the weakness in the job market, workers didn't see any wage gains in June. Average hourly earnings were flat at $18.53.
The worst crises in the housing, credit and financial markets since the 1930s have plunged the country into the longest recession since World War II.
Many think the jobless rate could rise as high as 10.7 percent by the second quarter of next year before it starts to make a slow descent. Some think the rate will top out at 11 percent. The post-World War II high was 10.8 percent at the end of 1982, when the country had suffered through a severe recession.
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke predicts the recession will end this year, with many economists forecasting that the economy will start to grow again as soon as the current July-September quarter.
But recoveries after financial crises tend to be slow, which is why economists predict it will take years for the job market to return to normal. Some predict the nation's unemployment rate won't drop to 5 percent until 2013.
An elevated unemployment rate could become a political liability for President Barack Obama when congressional elections are held next year. The last time the unemployment rate topped 10 percent, the party of the president — then Ronald Reagan's GOP — lost 26 House seats in midterm elections in 1982.
So far, many people are saving — rather than spending — the extra money in their paychecks from Obama's tax cut, blunting its help in bracing the economy. Much of the economic benefit of Obama's increased government spending on big public works projects won't kick in until 2010, analysts say.
The White House last week said federal money is being shoveled out of Washington quickly, but states aren't steering the cash to counties that need jobs the most.
Large job cuts have continued this week. Newspaper publisher Gannett Co. said it plans to cut 1,400 jobs in the next few weeks, about 3 percent of the work force, as it faces a prolonged slump in advertising revenue. Farm machinery company Deere & Co. said 800 salaried employees, or 3 percent of its salaried work force, took a voluntary buyout offer.(Yahoonews)

Incorporate Your Online Business - Correcting Myths About Incorporating Your Website


Below are five common myths about incorporating a website. I base this list on feedback I have received from feedback from hundreds of thousands of visitor to my website about forming limited liability companies.

1. You have to form a separate limited liability company (LLC) or corporation for each domain name.

This is entirely untrue. You absolutely do not have to form separate entities for each and every domain name your business operates under.

A business entity serves two purposes. One is to limit, or contain, all liability within the entity and prevent liability from "spilling" out to affect your personal assets or the assets of other businesses you own. The second is to create separate accounting.

2. A corporation or LLC can't own a domain name.

Of course a corporation or LLC can own a domain name. In fact, it's probably a good idea to have your corporation or LLC own your domain names, as it protects you from personal liability in case the domain name is misused.

For example, you might innocently register a domain name that infringes on a company's trademark. If the company is particularly nasty, it might accuse you of cyber-squatting and sue you. By having the domain registered in the name of an LLC or corporation, the only assets this vindictive plaintiff could go after would be the LLC's or corporation's, and not your personal house, car, bank account, etc.

3. I have to form my corporation/LLC in the same state in which my website is hosted.

Not at all. Your LLC should be formed in the state in which you do business. For a home-based internet business, that means forming your company in your home state.
The location of your website's server is basically irrelevant.

4. If I ship goods as part of my internet business, I have to form a corporation/LLC or register to do business in every state where I ship product.

No no no. You only have to register as a foreign corporation/LLC (by "foreign", they mean formed in another state, not corporations from outside the US) in states where you transact business. Transaction of business is a technical, legal term, and it does not include mere advertisement or shipping of goods into the state.

5. I won't be able to sell my domain name or business if it is owned by a corporation or LLC.

Many people purchase domain names and start internet businesses with the intent to sell them at a profit on website marketplaces like Sitepoint.com or Digitalpoint.
I have been asked before if it's true that a corporation (or LLC) that owns a domain can't sell that domain. That's absolutely not so.

A corporation or LLC can sell any asset, just like an individual can. A domain name is an asset. So is the content contained on that domain, along with customer lists, software, etc. Any and all of those assets can be sold by an LLC or corporation.
I hope this list has been helpful.

Criminal Background Checks - Do You Ever Really Know Someone?


Have you ever met someone that you just don't trust and you wanted to conduct your own criminal background check on them? Maybe they're acting a little suspicious and you want to find out what they've been doing in the past? You can always ask but anybody that's ever been in trouble probably won't be telling the truth or you're never going to a get real honest answer. It's too expensive to hire a private investigator and the police probably aren't going to get involved because they're too busy working on other things.

It's times like these when you can perform your own criminal background check. There're thousands of websites on the Internet nowadays that allow you to conduct your own free criminal background checks with little or no money. Most free websites will only allow you to find the most basic information about someone so if you really want to dig deep you're probably going to have to pay. Most everything you'll find is public record. Some of the most common types of records you will find are criminal records, conviction records, or arrest records.

You can never be too careful about who you associate with. It's not uncommon for some average looking Joe to have some kind of criminal past. Fortunately access to public criminal records is easier than ever.

When it comes to protecting yourself and your family you can never be too careful. If someone is acting suspicious perhaps they're trying to hide something. You can find out more about them by using a criminal background check.

You can visit our web site for more information on a free background check or to get the details on other free background check resources.
Article Source:
http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Shawn_Stephenson

Iran's Crisis in the Western Media

It seems that the battle lines and areas of the current confrontation with Iran are being drawn up by the media. In the virtual word of media hype and opinion, it is obvious that the recent Iranian elections are deliberately being manipulated and distorted by the Western media. This exploitation has also extended to the online world, taking advantage of sites like Facebook and Twitter for propaganda purposes.

While the ostensible subject of the present media attention is the legitimacy or otherwise of the elections and the always dominant question of democracy and human rights, the media interpretation and presentation of the Iranian situation is in reality not concerned with issues of fairness and legitimacy.Even a cursory analysis of mainstream Western media reveals that what is of significance is the creation of a certain stereotypical image or a view of government of that country.One can see this even in small but significant details - for example, the Iranian government is constantly referred to on news channels like CNN as the regime in Iran. This term implies a host of negative connotations that, with repetition, tends to create a stereotypical impression of the Iranian government and its rulers. This attempt at shifting public perception of Iran’s government principles is yet another form of exploitation by Western media.
Political Motives?
The need to convey the image of a corrupt leadership in Iran suits many Western objectives in the region. The reason for this media frenzy to present Iran as an inhumane dictatorship is simple – it conforms to and supports the present policy directives from the United States and other countries.The need to convey the image of a corrupt and fanatical leadership in Iran suits many Western objectives in the region. This is a story that we have become well acquainted with in the last few years – a pattern in which Western media sources support and even generate biased views about certain governments in the regions that are in line with Western propaganda.

One need only refer to recent reports on the attitude generated about Iran to find sufficient reason for the present media stance. For instance, Western support for Iranian "dissidents" speaks volumes about the intention of the West in the region. As one recent article states, the Obama administration is going ahead with plans to fund groups that support Iranian dissidents, which is in essence the continuing of a program that became controversial under president Bush. This also relates to the question of interference in the affairs of the internal politics of other counties.There is certainly more to these elections than meets the eye. As many pundits point out, the elections are more about internal power politics than about purely democratic principles. It is clear that there is a power struggle underway in the internal political echelons of the country.Recent reports indicate that Rafsanjani has been lobbying fellow members of the powerful Assembly of Experts, with the intention of possibly replacing Khamenei. The fact taht this may mean a dramatic shift in power within the theocratic system once again provides insight into the reasons for the intense perssure from the media to demonize the current "regime."Iran, like every other democratic country, has its own internal political strife and it would be naïve to expect the democratic process in this country to be unblemished and without controversy.This is the nature of democracy and politics.America is certainly the last country in the word to cast stones as it too has been mired in allegations of questionable electoral process in the past. The reality is that democracy is never a clean black or white process and power always plays a role. This raises the obvious question as to why the recent Iranian elections has been dramatized and distorted by Western media to the extent that it has.Simplistic View of Elections
The moral accusations being leveled at Iran come from a country that overthrew a democratically elected government in 1953. The fact that a simplistic view of the elections has been promoted in the media is evidence enough that the intention is to create propaganda and to avoid a clear and analytical interpretation of recent events.

An article by Bill Van Auken entitled “
The Propaganda War Against Iran ”succinctly summarizes the present situation with regard to the role of the Western media.He suggests that, “The US media, led by the New York Times, is continuing its concerted propaganda campaign against Iran over charges that the government stole the June 12 presidential election”. The author goes on to analyze the recent media distortions and states that, “There is not even a semblance of objectivity in the media coverage, which parrots the charges of the opposition headed by defeated presidential candidate Mir-Hossein Mousavi.”

Van Auken also notes that the media presentation of the recent events has been almost totally one-sided with all blame for the violence being placed at the door of the Iranian government, and not an ounce of blame directed at the opposition.Furthermore, the point is also made that very few of the Western news outlets draw the necessary connections with the larger regional issues. The media has conveniently forgotten to remind their viewers and readership that “the US is waging two wars, on Iran’s eastern and western borders, both aimed at establishing American hegemony over the oil-rich territory.”

Once again, it seems, we are in a strange, virtual landscape that we encountered prior to the Iraqi war, where facts are distorted and edited to suit certain political agendas of certain countries.The irony of the media allegations against Iran should also not be forgotten. We should remember that the moral accusations that are being leveled at Iran come from a country which “overthrew a democratically elected government in 1953, propped up a brutal dictator, the Shah, for more than a quarter of a century, and has carried out covert CIA operations in the recent period involving the use of special operations troops on Iranian soil,” says Van Auken.The Internet's Role
As a result of the increased activity in response to the election, Twitter rescheduled its maintenance period. The media and propaganda war has als
o taken a new turn in the Internet; in particular with regard to affecting viewers’ perceptions through social and networking sites. The extent of possible media cover now includes making use of networking sites such as Facebook , YouTube and Twitter. These sites are also being used to generate a stereotypical image, albeit derogatory, of the Iranian government and society.
It is perhaps more than coincidence that Twitter decided to change its scheduled maintenance services as a result of the elections in Iran. Twitter has become a very active source of views, mostly opposed to the election results.As a result of the increased activity in response to the election, Twitter rescheduled its maintenance period. This is interesting in terms of the role that alternative media sources play in conveying news and information. But what is perhaps even more interesting in relation to the way that news is being manipulated is the claim by the US State Department that is was responsible for Twitter’s decision to stay online.The Australian Broadcast Company reported that the US State Department claimed that the US government had requested Twitter to delay maintenance plans because of the site's use as a communications tool by Iranians following their disputed election.Was this an attempt to increase the negative perception of the elections via networking?
It is difficult to determine the impact that sites like Twitter have had on the negative or positive perceptions of Iran during the elections. However, while there are allegations of interference and manipulation of this media from both sides what is clear is that social sites have been used to a certain extent to create a negative perception of the Iranian government and that this had added to the media-generated groundswell of negative response to that country in the West.

A site with visual impact like YouTube certainly has been successful in promoting a very biased and negative view of the elections. The impact of this site is underlined by the news exposure that hundreds of videos of the riots have been posted online.In an interview with CBS, the head of news and politics of YouTube, Steve Grove, provided some insight into the way that YouTube was being used as conduit of anti-Iranian sentient. He refers to the courage of those Iranians who were prepared to “take a risk and to upload this footage” and to “raise pressure internationally”. This is a very laudable sentiment but should we not also be asking whether it is possible that, under the guise of well-intentioned heroism, there might be those who would exploit this medium to augment and exacerbate the already negative image of Iran to Western audiences?

There are also two sides to
this storyand the propaganda war from both sides seems to have moved onto the networking sites. While there are reports that the Iranian authorities banned access to sites like Facebook, implying a denial of free speech, this is countered by Iranian assertions that the FBI ordered the disruption of Internet servers that host Iranian Web sites in the wake of Iran's election fallout.

The point that is ebbing made is not the Iranians elections were without fault and possible illegal intervention, but rather that Western media has used the elections to stimulate and generate increased hostility and resentment towards that country and its government, which can only result in a decrease in harmonious relationships and an increase of suspicion and hostility.By
Gary Smith ,Journalist - South Africa