Essena O’Neill is a blogger who has a growing 612,000 followers and 30,000 daily hits clearly indicate she is a source of information to users of the site. “Over the past several years, O’Neill has built a social media empire… and soon became consumed by it”. Essena O’Neill was an Instagram sensation. However, one day O’Neill took to the media stating how unhappy she was.

O’Neill took her stance and caused controversy when she said, “Social Media is NOT real life”. Her actions went viral; comments from famous beauty bloggers to YouTube vloggers, swept the Internet. O’Neill received both positive support and negative backlash on this subject. She responded with: “If you find yourself looking at ‘Instagram Girls’ and wishing your life was their, you need to realize you only see what they want”. O’Neill is now currently investing her time campaigning against social networks, particularly Instagram.

To add on, Soosie, a lifestyle blogger, author of “Sweet & Soosie”, shares similar opinions towards social media. Last year, Soosie wrote a blog post about the infamous Instagram powerhouse couple, Alexis Ren and Jay Alvarrez. Ren and Alvarrez have a growing number of 9 million followers.

However, through various social media portals, many users have expressed their feelings towards the couple, saying things like: “relationship goals”, “my life sucks”, and “I hate being ugly and fat”. Mainly commented by young users, the ideal of their ‘perfect life’ has been created through social media. Young girls and boys want what is not real, a stream of photos pinned together, creating what looks to be #goals.

With more than 9 million followers, Alvarrez and Ren are two of many Instagram users that hold great amount of responsibility; their extravagant lifestyle has drawn in many youth users, digital natives that live on the Internet, making Instagramers such as Alvarrez and Ren, their role models. What is most distressing, perhaps, is that the ‘picture perfect’ lifestyle portrayed is completely staged – Ren and Alvarrez have a professional photographer directing and capturing manufactured experiences, the exact opposite of the candid, real-life, spontaneous selfies.

This is the social culture Instagram has contributed to; by allowing individuals to add filters and edit their life online. Instagram is partially liable for the large amount of self-disrespect, and low confidence in young adults, based on the activities that happen on the app. Ethically, this should be an issue Instagram, a large and influential corporation, should try to solve. Ultimately, this app has spiraled out of control over the past few years – a step in the wrong direction to what the app was originally created for.

word count: 428

Work Cited

McNeal, Stephanie. “An 18-Year-Old Instagram Star Says Her “Perfect Life” Was Actually Making Her Miserable.” BuzzFeed. BuzzFeed, 04 Nov. 2015.Web. 25 Feb. 2016.

O’Neill, Essena. “Essena O’Neill (@essenaoneill) • Instagram Photos and Videos.” Essena O’Neill (@essenaoneill) • Instagram Photos and Videos. Instagram, n.d. Web. 23 Feb. 2016.

Soosie. “Alexis Ren and Jay Alvarrez: SO OVER IT!” Sweet & Soosie. Sweet & Soosie, 7 July 2015. Web. 30 May 2016.

Image Source: Entrepreneur,2nix Studio/Shutterstock

A picture might be worth a thousand words, but in the case of Instagram, your pictures are worth somewhere between 19 and 35 billion dollars. At least, that is the price Citigroup valued the online photo sharing site, while individual users with 1000+ followers, could earn themselves upwards of $8000 CAD a year.

Image Source: Growing Social Media

Instagram, an online photo-sharing app with a community of more than 300 million members, allows users to share their lives through a series of images with people around the world. When co-founders Kevin Systrom, then aged 26, and Mike Krieger’s, then 23, launched Instagram on October 6th, 2010, they could not have imagined that in a span of two months, this online community would grow to 1 million users. As of today, there are more than 400 million users on Instagram, a staggering figure when you compare that to the total population of Canada, a mere 35 million. There are more citizens of Instagram than there are in our country. According to Craig Smith, the publisher of DMR, a digital marketing statistics website, reports indicate that 90% of Instagram users are younger than 35. Back in spring 2015, 52% of active U.S Internet users on Instagram were between the ages of 13 and 17. These numbers are significant, because adolescents of the current generation are constantly checking their phones and are heavily influenced by the images they see. As a result, these young adults often feel pressured to fulfill unrealistic expectations of not only their physical selves but also the elevated lifestyle set by famous celebrity Instagramers followed by millions of teenagers.

Image Source: Digital Resource

Now, Instagram has evolved into something much crafted, it is about trying to depict your life as being more exciting and glamorous than it actually is. Instagram has now evolved into a popular social networking site, in which users are able to feed their self-worth with the amount of followers, likes, and reposts they receive. The original purpose of a like – to acknowledge genuinely the image – has been lost. Now it is seeking approval from society, that you are good looking or popular. It isn’t just behaviour, it is a language. Clearly, Instagram has had an impact on individuals and on society.

Should we blame sites such as Instagram for creating an app that allows young users to become overwhelmed with the idea of a ‘perfect life’? Should there be an age restriction to site that can potentially affect one’s mental health? Clearly apps such as Instagram and Snapchat are not going anywhere in the immediate future. These multi-billion dollar industries may have their critics, but as long as they are generating massive profits it is unlikely that they will cease to exist. Instagram should recognize the mental impact it has on teenagers and take social responsibility. Ultimately, questions remain, is it ethical for the corporation to continue destroying and deteriorating one’s self worth? We will have to wait and see if the popularity of these apps will eventually cause users to self-destruct.

word count: 481

Work Cited

Berkowitz, Ben. “Wait a Second, Instagram Is worth What Now?” CNBC. CNBC, 19 Dec. 2014. Web. 26 May 2016.

“Home Page — Statistics Canada.” Government of Canada, Statistics Canada. Statistics Canada, Oct. 2015. Web. 25 Feb. 2016.

Leading Global Social Networks 2016 | Statistic.” Statista. Statista, 2016.Web. 25 Feb. 2016.

MailOnline, Bianca London for. “How Much Are YOUR Instagram Posts Worth? Users with 1,000 Followers Could Net £4,160 a Year by Promoting Brands (and Anyone with 100,000 Can Earn More than a Lawyer).” Mail Online. Associated Newspapers, 12 Nov. 2015. Web. 27 May 2016.

Image Source: Google Images

Goal setting and motivation is key to any well functioning corporation. The setting of goals is necessary and important to map out a company’s ultimate defined objective. “Clear goals and objectives allow employees to monitor their own progress…If employees know what they need to accomplish, they can look at their results as they go and identify barriers to achieving those goals.” However, in order to guide a goal in the right direction, companies also need motivation. Motivation is a psychological catalyst in which determines workers mental and physical reactions. Highly motivated employees are bound to get the job done efficiently as well as effectively. Without motivation, a goal cannot be reached.

How can we generate motivation within workers?

Image Source: Google Images

A prime institution that comes to mind is Disney. Forbes published an article called “Disney’s Best Ever Example of Motivating Employees” and the moral of the story illustrated within the text, highlights every aspect of what a motivated group of individuals can do for a company.

However, despite Disneyland being the happiest place on earth, how does one motivate its staff to be able to produce so much revenue that their employer gifts “100 shares of Disney stock, 25 $1,000 bills” as well as a hand written note

Image Source: Google Images

What Walt did in this case was he provided extrinsic rewards that made sure his staff knew they were well recognized for their efforts in further fostering their business. In doing so, the group of seven individuals who were involved in generating large revenue the first time, went straight back into work the second time, brainstorming and working hard to come up with another idea that would make push their company to into unforeseen, exceptional boundaries.

word count: 279 words  

Image Source: Google Images

Companies’ incentive programs extend beyond monetary bonuses and commissions. After analyzing companies such as Procter & Gamble, I was able to relate topics learned in my organization behavior class and apply this knowledge towards measuring the positive effects of reward systems, whether it is intrinsic or extrinsic. Similarly, ‘Benefit Programs’ tend to attract potential employees and to encourage workers to have a strong performance in order to gain certain benefits.

Image Source: Google Images

To start, P&G provides retirement plans, FlexComp, and multiple insurance programs to employees. FlexComp and retirement plans are prime examples of how companies use incentives to keep their valued employees at their companies. P&G contributes a certain percentage of the workers’ salaries to these programs; this percentage increases as the number of years one has worked at the company increases. FlexComp at P&G allows employees to buy additional vacation time, different insurances, and other perks. Other than additional time off and healthcare benefits, workers who are continuing education would also be incentivized by tuition benefits. ‘Tuition Reimbursement’ at P&G is a plan for employees who pursue education related to their work projects.

Image Source: Google Images

Moreover, P&G has a ‘Work-Life Balance’ program in which the company encourages. This program is an understanding between employers’ expectations and the employees’ personal schedules. All employees have different personal schedules and productivity levels during the day and the traditional schedule from 9-5 is outdated. Nowadays, companies offer some deviation from the traditional schedules. P&G promotes flexible scheduling because they believe that it would improve workers’ productivity and deliver results. Furthermore, employees with contributive work and strong performances may get to work certain hours from home. From an organization behavior standpoint, P&G has the right idea when it comes to supporting and motivating their employees, which ultimately contributes to their success and sets them apart from other companies.

word count: 300 words

Now introducing, Coke Life – the newest addition to a long line of products created by soft drink giant, Coca Cola. Unlike other Coca Cola products, Coke Life wears a bright green label, advertising itself to be a healthier alternative. According to Coca Cola, “Coke Life is a reduced-calorie cola sweetened with a blend of sugar and stevia leaf extract. It contains 35% fewer calories per fl oz compared to other leading colas.”

Although Coke Life strikes to be a ‘better’ alternative than regular coke, it is still a fundamentally unhealthy product and should be consumed in moderation. In my opinion, Coca Cola did a great job with marketing their Coke Life through the use of their strengths and product uniqueness, and my classmate Cameron Lee would agree. In Cameron’s words:”Coca-Cola has done an excellent job of using brand positioning to reach target customers in a crowded marketplace.” Coca Cola did an amazing job propelling their brand forward by coming up with points of differences that would help isolate their product from their leading competitor, Pepsi. As mentioned in Cameron’s blog, Coke Life is one of few soft drinks that contain ‘natural’ ingredients. “Coca Cola now hold a unique position in the mind of consumers.”

Nevertheless, Coke Life is simply a gimmick.

Stats show that even though there is a slight difference in sugar levels, the drink still contains high levels of sweeter and caffeine. A regular 250mL can of Coke contains 27g of sugar, compared to 250mL of Coke Life, which contains 17g of sugar. However, consumers are always on the hunt for foods and beverages that are marketed as healthy. This voids their conscience from feeling guilty about consuming bad chemicals, heavy sugar and sodium in their diet. Coca Cola was clever to associate Coke Life with the colour green. In doing so, this clouds an individuals judgement because not only is the can/bottle green, but the word ‘life’ is well integrated with the name of the drink as well.

Therefore, I think Coke Life is well marketed to consumers and is positioned for success. Coke Life will be very profitable through it being a “healthier alternative” compared to other leading soft drink brands. Ultimately, Coke Life will provide the company with a unique opportunity to target a different segment of consumers in the market, individuals who are easily influenced by products that are labelled ‘natural’ or ‘healthy’.

word count: 400

Greed has taken its toll on the pharmaceutical industry. Once again, the prices of EpiPens are on the rise. With low competition and monopolizing the industry, Mylan Pharmaceuticals took this opportunity to maximize their profits by increasing the price on their product, EpiPen – an epinephrine auto injector that is used to treat individuals who have a history of serious anaphylactic reactions.

Nevertheless, EpiPens are in for some competition. Last year Auvi-Q, an alternative to EpiPens, was taken off the market due to suspicions that their product was delivering inaccurate doses of epinephrine. Nonetheless, miraculously, Auvi-Q is making a return to the market in 2017. Auvi-Q holds a unique point of difference compared to the EpiPen. Slim, rectangular, pocket friendly design and voice instructions that guides users through the instruction process. Because of all the external factors to this product, before Auvi-Q was taken off the market, it was priced higher than the EpiPen. However, the price of Auvi-Q has not been determined yet.

According to CBC, the price of the Epipen has spiked dramatically. Prices have gone up about 400 percent. U.S politicians, doctors, and individuals with allergic reactions are outraged by the price increase. No human being chooses to be diagnosed with, or let alone be born with life threatening allerg(ies). With this price increase, I believe it is time for the government implement a price ceiling, to help regulate these businesses. It is absolutely unjustifiable for individuals to risk their lives simply because they cannot afford products containing epinephrine – a basic necessity for their health condition.

My classmate Kitty recently wrote a blog post in regards to the increase of prices of EpiPens. She made a good point that every individual should be able to afford the same standard of healthcare. No one should have to face fatality just because they cannot afford to spend $600 on only two EpiPens. As Auvi-Q is re-entering the market, I strongly suggest their company to take advantage of the increased prices in EpiPens. The return of Auvi-Q will face an uphill battle to recapture patient trust and loyalty after the recall on their product. Therefore, Auvi-Q should lower their prices to meet consumer demands. After a year of dictating the market, Mylan Pharmaceuticals being the giant in the industry, patients are outraged with what they have done – taking advantage of individual’s needs.

Ultimately, Mylan Pharmaceuticals had the upper hand in the market, however, by drastically increasing the price of the EpiPen, now lowers the barriers to entry for competition. Auvi-Q should recognize the situation and cautiously decide their next move on the playing field.

word count: 430

Image Source: Google Images

Having launched the company just under two years ago, the collaboration between Shaw and Rogers successfully came up with a new startup; a Canadian-made video streaming service called Shomi. Sadly, this online video service announced to the public, starting on November 30^th, 2016, they will be retiring their services and will no longer be made available to users.

Notably, Netflix has been “investing more heavily in original productions” while Crave TV “focused more on television, including a library of content from HBO.” According to the Globe and Mail, Shomi’s point of difference was to bet “on movies and collections curated by humans rather than algorithms.

Image Source: Google Images

This gave Shomi the opportunity to create a value proposition that would help differentiate themselves from other leading competitors.

Over the past few years, many active Netflix users have complained how Netflix in Canada does not contain content that is nearly as entertaining as what is offered to those in the United States. Netflix Canada is made up of out dated TV shows and movies. Shomi on the other hand took this opportunity to listen to their customers. Most recently, Shomi hosted highly rated TV shows such as “The Americans,” “Transparent” and “Mr. Robot.”

In my opinion, Shomi did not have potential to expand and grow in the industry as a Canadian video streaming company.  However, I do agree that Shomi gave up too early; having only operated for less than two years. But on the other hand, I did not see the company thriving due to the highly competitive market.

Kaija Zeilstra wrote a blog in regards to Shomi when it was first made available. She argued how Shomi had “shr[ank] [their] customer segment… in contrast to Netflix.” This is a perfect example of how the company has grown since the early stages of entering the market but not advancing in the industry. Shomi was first made available to Shaw and Rogers customers as part of their cable package. However, even though Shomi later expanded to non-subscribers, a bulk of their customers used Shomi because this service was made available through their cable package – fully taking advantage of the resources provided, and not just because users enjoy Shomi over streaming giant Netflix.

word count: 368

https://blogs.ubc.ca/kaijanz/2014/11/05/shomi-the-new-netflix/

http://www.marketingmag.ca/brands/marketer-of-the-year-2015-shomi-167243

http://www.fool.ca/2014/08/28/unbundling-shomi-how-rogers-communications-inc-and-shaw-communications-inc-are-positioning-their-new-streaming-service-3/

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2016/09/26/shomi-shut-down_n_12202070.html

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/video-streaming-service-shomi-to-shut-down-at-end-of-november/article32064096/

https://www.thestar.com/business/2016/09/26/shomi-is-shutting-down.html

Image source: Google Images

Formally known as Snapchat, Snap Inc. has announced that they will be releasing a pair of groovy spectacles. The twist, there is a built-in wireless video camera that enables users to capture memories from “the human perspective” with a single tap. These spectacles allow users to take videos up to 30 seconds long. The videos captured through the 115-degree wide scope lens can later be viewed on a mobile device – to post on your snapstory, or the save in your memories (camera roll).

Image source: Google Images

The real question is, what pushed Snap Inc. to move forward on this expansion after Google glass had many negative reviews on their product? How ideal are these spectacles? I would assume users of snapchat already own a “remarkably powerful camera in their pocket.” (Constine, 2016) Whether it is their cell phone, or iPad, what would make consumers want a second camera?

Back in 2012, Google publically announced their brand new and innovative, product of the future – Google Glass. However, this wearable device had failed spectacularly. Snap Inc. might be “the only company cool enough to possibly dismantle the Google Glass stigma. Awkward, useless, and a threat o privacy are how many think of computers you wear on your face.” (Constine, 2016) Many would also agree that the spectacles aren’t the most appealing accessories. These retro cat eyed spectacles will be offered in black, blue and coral.

Image source: Google Images

Rather than being just a social media app, Snap Inc. has now expanded their company and market group – targeting young, enthusiastic teens that have money in their pockets to burn, all to stay in trend and be a part of the “hype”. Through the release of the spectacles, Snap Inc. will now have to rethink their business model. There are many external factors that may halt the success of the spectacles. In order for the company to thrive, Snap Inc, must make adjustments and address any problems that come to surface: Are the spectacles more ideal than cell phones? How “fashion forward” are they? Do the spectacles intrude on ones privacy?

I think Snap Inc. was brave to take a step outside their box. However, I do not see the spectacles doing very well when released into the market. The only consumers that will demand this product are tech companies, or individuals that are fascinated with the idea of the software and technology. Nonetheless, if Snap Inc. is able to market and advertise the spectacles through style-icons, and famous celebrities, there is no doubt the spectacles will become a short-term fad.

Word count: 421

http://money.cnn.com/2016/09/24/technology/snapchat-spectacles/

http://www.forbes.com/sites/howardhyu/2016/10/01/snapchat-moves-in-where-google-glass-gave-up/#5bd3aeb01274

https://techcrunch.com/2016/09/24/more-than-just-specs/

http://glassalmanac.com/history-google-glass/2/

In today’s world, there are many organizations and charities whose main focuses are to help children in developing or third world countries. A notable example is World Vision. As one of the most recognized institutions in Canada, it describes itself as “a non-profit charitable organization dedicated to working with children, families, and communities through child sponsorship”. However, the notion of giving without the expectation of receiving is not a highly favorable concept.

Back in 2006, TOMS Shoes thrived in the fashion industry as a for-profit company. Their “one-for-one” slogan had consumers indulged with the idea of there being a positive impact behind buying a pair of shoes. There was a feeling of satisfaction; knowing what TOMS Shoes stood for, that helped the company flourish. TOMS Shoes “capture[d] the hearts of that young idealistic demographic quite well, satisfying its two greatest cravings simultaneously – one, the desire to [be] part of a change…and two, the desire… to look cool.”

Nonetheless, what is the real impact behind buy-one-give-one? According to Claire Gorden of TIME magazine, TOMS donated 10 million pairs of shoes in the time span of 7 years since their establishment, however, how effective was this really?

There were good intentions behind one-for-one, however, the unfortunate negative outcomes went unseen. The stakeholders in this situation were  the shoe businesses of every country TOMS donated to. An alarming study in 2008 discovered “that used clothing donations to Africa were responsible for a 50 percent reduction in employment in [the] sector between 1981 and 2000 on the continent”. Similarly, TOMS put many shoemakers and local businesses out of business, which inevitably took a toll on the economy. I doubt this was intentional, however, I believe consumers should have been educated further than the catchy “one-for-one” slogan, or should stop purchasing TOMS shoes altogether. As Matheson Miller, producer of Poverty Inc. puts it: “poor people aren’t poor because they lack stuff; they’re poor because they lack the infrastructure to create wealth.” Ultimately, there are better solutions to help those in need, without the long term economic repercussions that TOMS inflicted upon third world countries, as the need for mankind to contribute and make a change will always exist.

word count: 356

Welcome to UBC Blogs. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start blogging!