Friday Box Office: Will Ferrell, Kevin Hart"s "Get Hard" Nabs $12M, "It ...

Mark Kermode reviews Get Hard

And now the rest of the Friday box box office news

Homewasnt the only big opener this weekend. The Will Ferrell/Kevin Hart comedyGet Hardscored a strong $12.91 million Friday, including $1.8m worth of Thursday previews. The $40m R-rated comedy, which earned negative reviews and would-be controversy over its vulgar humor, is looking at a $36m weekend, which is near the top for both comedic actors. If that $36m debut comes to pass, it will be Kevin Harts second-biggest star vehicle opening behind the $41m debut ofRide Alongand it will be Will Ferrells fourth-biggest opening behindThe LEGO Movie($69m),Talladega Nights($47m), andMegamind($46m) while just ahead of the $35.5m debut ofThe Other Guys.

ThatGet Hard, an R-rated comedy, will approach the career highs of both performers is impressive and frankly shows that their combined star power actively boosting the results beyond a mere one-man show. FerrellsBlades of Glorydebuted with $33m on this weekend in 2007 and ended up with $118.5m domestic. IfGet Hardfollows suit, then expect asolid $129m domestic finish. Of course, the explicitly bro-centric comedy could get slaughtered byFurious 7next next weekend, but the Warner Bros./Time Warner Time Warner Inc. film is cheap enough to quality as a win pretty much by the end of Sunday.

The high profile expansion this weekend wasIt Follows. The acclaimed festival darling horror film had a smashing four-screen debut two weeks ago, which caused distributor Radius-TWCto change course and go for a semi-wide theatrical release instead of a VOD debut yesterday. I wish I could say they made the right call, and Im glad that horror fans will get to see this one in theaters (my wife and I are checking it out tonight), but a $1.4 million opening on 1,218 screens does not bode well for the film or whatever hopes horror fans were pinning on it in terms of resurrecting original multiplex horror. Were talkingThe Quiet Onenumbers here, and itll end up with an opening weekend of around half ofYoure Next.

Frankly I think this is less of a horror is doomed situation and more of a studio matters situation (along with arthouse interest does not equal mainstream interest). A major studio, be it Universal/Comcast Comcast Corp. or Sonys Screen Gems may-well have treated this like a standard teens go to a horror movie on Friday night and get scared release and had the muscle to just release it as a mainstream horror title and not care about its artier inclinations (its not like horror generally has strong legs and/or gets good audience ratings anyway). But anyway, I will hopefully have seen the film by the time we do the weekend estimates tomorrow, so Ill leave it at that.

The Jennifer Lawrence/Bradley Cooper period-piece dramaSerenaarrived in 60 theaters this weekend courtesy of Magnolia. For the record, the film has been on VOD for a month and has been written about in a negative context profusely for the last year. So dont let anyone get away with writing Jennifer Lawrence movie BOMBS! type headlines. This was doomed to be a low-level title the minute it wasnt picked up for mainstream theatrical distribution, which was mostly because it was neither a franchise film nor a piece of Oscar-bait. Anyway, the film earned around $38k yesterday and should have $126k by tomorrow.

Noah BaumbachsWhile Youre Youngdebuted courtesy of A24 on four screens and earned around $60k yesterday. TheBen Stiller/Naomi Watts/Adam Driver/Amanda Seyfried/Charles Grodin film should earn around $200k for the weekend and hopefully will expand accordingly as a bit of adult counter-programming. In holdover news,Lions Gate EntertainmentsThe Divergent Series: Insurgentearned $6.85mon Friday, dropping 67% from last Friday to bring its cume to $77m. That sets the the stage for a $23m second weekend (-55%) and a $88m ten-day domestic cume. Thats slightly worse on all counts compared toDivergentlast year.

Walt DisneysCinderellaearned another $4.73m on its third Friday (-49%) to bring its cume to a strong $137.24m. Expect a $17.5m third weekend and a domestic total just over $150m.Run All Nightearned another $630k (-55%) to bring its cume to $22.2m whileFocuscrossed the $50m mark with a $385k Friday. 29th Century FoxsKingsman: The Secret Serviceshould have around $3m for the weekend and a $119m cume, whileThe Second Best Exotic Marigold Hotelshould earn around $2.3m for the weekend for a $28m cume. Finally,Do You Believeearned $0.65k on Friday (-43%) for a new cume of $5.55m.

And thats it for today. Join me tomorrow for weekend estimates and more holdover news.

If you like what youre reading, follow @ScottMendelson on Twitter, and like The Ticket Booth on Facebook. Also, check out my archives for older work HERE.

Source: http://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2015/03/28/friday-box-office-get-hard-nabs-12m-it-follows-flops/

Continue Reading ..

Who was Andreas Lubitz, Germanwings co-pilot blamed for crash?

Andreas Lubitz named as Germanwings co-pilot
Story highlights

• Police search co-pilot Andreas Lubitz"s apartment for clues
• A pilot who knew Lubitz calls him a "very normal young person"
• Investigators say they believe he deliberately crashed Germanwings Flight 9525

But investigators say he was the one at the controls inside the cockpit, deliberately locking out the plane"s captain and setting the plane on a crash course for the French Alps.

Andreas Lubitz had medical note for day of crash, hid illness, officials say

The only sound the recorder picked up from Lubitz as the Airbus A320 went down, Marseille prosecutor Brice Robin said, was the co-pilot"s steady breathing.

Authorities didn"t mince words Thursday as they blamed Lubitz for the crash, but questions are still swirling over the 27-year-old"s past.

Officials say Lubitz passed a psychological test when he was hired, had no known ties to terrorism and showed no sign of medical distress during the flight.

It seems, Robin said, that Lubitz "wanted to destroy the aircraft."

But why?

Lufthansa CEO "speechless"

Police search apartment

It"s a question police were trying to answer as they searched Lubitz"s apartment in Dusseldorf.

Police spokesman Markus Niesczery said a team of five investigators went "through the apartment looking for clues as to what the co-pilot"s motivation might have been, if he did indeed bring the plane down."

About 85 miles (136 km) away in the town of Montabaur, the house where Lubitz"s parents live was shuttered and guarded by police.

A group of men, perhaps investigators, were the only ones granted access.

"This is just inconceivable"

This town in western Germany is where Lubitz pursued his love of flying from a young age.

At a club on the outskirts of Montabaur, pilots who knew Lubitz said they were shocked to hear what investigators said.

They said the man they know never would have deliberately crashed a plane.

Between the ages of 14 and 20, Lubitz was a regular fixture at the gliding club.

"(He was) a very normal young person, full of energy," Klaus Radke said. "What can I say? He had a bright future. He made his hobby into his job. What more can you hope to achieve?"

The authorities" explanation doesn"t ring true for Peter Ruecker, another pilot who knew him from the flight club.

"Knowing Andreas, this is just inconceivable for me," Ruecker told the Reuters news agency.

"He was a lot of fun, even though he was perhaps sometimes a bit quiet," Ruecker said. "He was just another boy, like so many others here."

A neighbor told Reuters that Lubitz "was very interested in things which are going on around him."

"It"s a very good family," the neighbor said. "They have a good connection within the family and they are engaged in the community."

An 8-minute descent to death

"Interrupted" training

Lubitz had been with Germanwings, a budget airline owned by Lufthansa, since September 2013 and had completed 630 hours of flight time, the airline"s media office said.

Lufthansa CEO Carsten Spohr told reporters that Lubitz "interrupted" his training, which he began in 2008. That break lasted several months, he said, but added that such an interruption isn"t uncommon.

Spohr said he couldn"t give any information about why the co-pilot had stopped and then restarted his training.

If it was for medical reasons, he said, then that information would have been private before the crash, he said, but it will be part of information gathered during the investigation.

Most of Lubitz"s training took place at the Lufthansa flight training center in Bremen.

He also trained in the United States, spending six months at facility in Arizona as part of a required program to get his license, a Lufthansa spokesperson said.

Spohr said Lufthansa pilots get medical testing but do not undergo regular or routine psychological testing once they are flying. However, the airline does consider an applicant"s psychological state, along with other factors, when hiring pilots, he said.

Lubitz and the captain passed a psychological test when they were hired, he said.

"We don"t only look at competence but we also give a lot of room to psychological capabilities," Spohr said.

"He was 100% set to fly without restrictions," he added. "His flight performance was perfect. There was nothing to worry about."

Students, singers among the victims

5 cases of pilots intentionally crashing

Diana Magnay reported from Montabaur. Catherine E. Shoichet and Ashley Fantz reported from Atlanta. CNN"s Fred Pleitgen contributed to this report from Cologne, Germany. CNN"s Mark Thompson, Eliott C. McLaughlin Laura Smith-Spark, Bharati Naik and Sara Sidner also contributed to this report.

Source: http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/26/europe/germanwings-plane-crash-pilots/

Continue Reading ..

Former TSA Head: "We Should Take the Germanwings Tragedy as a Warning"

BREAKING: Germanwings flight 4U2595 crashes in southern France
Imago/Zumapress People stand in front of candles and flowers placed in front of the Joseph-Koenig-Gymnasium in Haltern, Germany, March 24, 2015.

Kip Hawley is the former administrator of the TSA and the author of "Permanent Emergency: Inside the TSA and the Fight for the Future of American Security."

Finding meaning or solace in the Germanwings tragedy may prove elusive. We should, however, use this horrifying moment to reflect on whether there are lessons here that could enable us to make corrections in our security strategy. I think that there are at least three points highlighted by this tragedy that are worthy of consideration:

Detecting evil intent before the evil action begins is extremely difficult

Counter-measures designed to stop an attack in progress are less effective than those aimed at disrupting a plot before it is operational

Independent, overlapping layers of security are essential in stopping attacks from unexpected directions

It is not clear yet where the Germanwings crash fits in the taxonomy of safety versus security incidents; the pilots motives are simply not known. But we can imagine the same scenario one person at the controls, locking everyone else out playing out with a terrorist in the cockpit and a major city as the crash site. The safety mitigation measures here are robust and long-standing. Pilots are carefully vetted and assessed by civil aviation authorities, their airlines, and co-workers. In this case, that was not enough. The security measures didnt do any better in stopping this incident, as the reinforced cockpit door, of the type adopted after 9/11, worked as an unintended hindrance.

Obviously, we all want to trust our pilots; and, of course, in the vast majority of circumstances we can. But we also know that is exactly those trusted nodes in our security systems that make us most vulnerable when they dont act the way we expect them to. The Germanwings tragedy puts this fact directly in front of us.

It is not enough to scale-up background checks to combat insider threats. Pre-9/11 security clearances and law enforcement checks were heavily based on the idea of prior performance predicting future activity. Todays terrorist or mass murderer knows full well that we still hold to that premise. We can pretty much assume that attacks today will be delivered by people who can and have passed background checks. We do not understand ahead of time what drives people to commit acts of mass violence or terrorism, therefore we cannot isolate the traits that reliably predict them.

What do we do against an enemy whose intent remains invisible until its too late? Layers of security that act independently from each other are where we need to concentrate. We must continue our investment in intelligence and all the systems that work together ahead of time that might highlight an anomaly whether it be psychological screening of pilots and crew or behavioral detection at the airport and on the plane. Teamwork among employees, companies, families, authorities, and passengers is the key. The answers involve people, not more hardware or technology.

One layer of security now under pressure at home is the Federal Air Marshal (FAM) program. Misbehavior by some in the FAM program and a buzz about various personnel grievances do not take away from the fact that FAMs represent the most effective and flexible weapon in TSAs toolkit. If the equivalent of a FAM team was aboard the Germanwings plane, would the result have been different? Maybe. The point is that FAMs, working undercover in airports, boarding areas, and on flights provide a layer of security that is unmatched as far as stopping unexpected attacks while they are unfolding. VIPR teams, where FAMs are very visible, operate thousands of missions a year throughout the transportation system again, disrupting a planner who thinks that any part of the network is uncovered. Fix the program, but lets stop talking about diminishing the role of Federal Air Marshals.

Our security risk environment is at an all-time high. Just because the Germanwings tragedy may not be a classic terrorist attack, we should not dismiss it when it comes to evaluating our security framework. We can, and should, take it as a warning and heed its lessons.

0

TIME Ideas hosts the world"s leading voices, providing commentary and expertise on the most compelling events in news, society, and culture. We welcome outside contributions. To submit a piece, email ideas@time.com.

Source: http://time.com/3760496/germanwings-plane-crash-tragedy-tsa-head-terrorism/

Continue Reading ..

Ronda Rousey: "I"m the biggest draw in the sport"

Ronda Rousey Highlight 2014

Ronda Rousey needed 96 seconds to beat all her last three opponents combined, but believes her role in the sport is much bigger that people might think.

The UFC bantamweight champion went on "Good Morning America" on Thursday morning to discuss the legalization of the sport in New York, movies and career, and made quite a big statement on how important she is to the UFC.

"So many ridiculous arguments that MMA is somehow anti-woman. Fighting is not a mans thing, its a humans thing," Rousey said. "To say its an anti-woman I think its an anti-feminist statement, and the UFC... Im the biggest draw in the sport and Im a woman. How is that anti-woman?"

Rousey, who "really feels optimistic this year" about MMA being legalized in New York, returns to the Octagon against undefeated Bethe Correia at Rio de Janeiros UFC 190 on Aug. 1.

Source: http://www.mmafighting.com/2015/3/26/8295067/ronda-rousey-i-m-the-biggest-draw-in-the-sport

Continue Reading ..

That time Michelle Obama looked TOTALLY bald on "Jeopardy!" and we freaked ...

Michelle Obama Appears Bald On "Jeopardy!" Raising Eyebrows
That time Michelle Obama looked TOTALLY bald on "Jeopardy!" and we freaked out

1

Share This Story!

Let friends in your social network know what you are reading about

That time Michelle Obama looked TOTALLY bald on "Jeopardy!" and we freaked out

It"s OK you can say it. Don"t be shy. We"re thinking it, too. Yep, Michelle Obama looks TOTALLY BALD, right?!

Try Another

Audio CAPTCHA

Image CAPTCHA

Help

{# #}

CancelSend

Sent!

A link has been sent to your friend"s email address.

Posted!

A link has been posted to your Facebook feed.

Michelle Obama on "Jeopardy!"(Photo: Jeopardy/YouTube)

Please look closely at the photo above. Does something look, um, off to you?

It"s OK you can say it. Don"t be shy. We"re thinking it, too.

Yep, Michelle Obama looks TOTALLY BALD, right?!

When we got a note from the fine folks over at Diane von Furstenberg alerting us that the first lady was wearing one of their chic dresses, we opened the e-mail expecting only to be wowed by Obama"s frock.

Little did we know we"d be gasping at the Jeopardy! screenshot that appears to show her fully shorn on top.

Of course, we know that it"s just a matter of her hair being pulled back tightly and perhaps some lighting issues, but OMG that was scary!

Fortunately, we feel pretty confident in confirming that Mrs. O does, indeed, still have a full head of hair, if this photo from four days ago can be believed

RELAX, Y"ALL. MY HAIR IS STILL SAFELY ATTACHED TO MY HEAD!

US First Lady Michelle Obama gestures as she speaks to Peace Corps volunteers at a hotel in Siem Reap province on March 21, 2015. Michelle Obama called on schoolgirls to stay in school to push for equality and hold their leaders accountable on March 21, during the first trip by a sitting US president"s wife to Cambodia.(Photo: TANG CHHIN SOTHY, AFP/Getty Images)

Read or Share this story: http://usat.ly/1CeuJMD

USA NOWCo-pilot "deliberately" crashed Germanwings planeMar 26, 2015 0) { %>

0) { %>

0) { %>

Source: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2015/03/26/michelle-obama-bald-jeopardy/70499040/

Continue Reading ..

How Jeremy Clarkson lost his job as "Top Gear" host

Jeremy Clarkson Suspended By BBC Over "Fracas"

Jeremy Clarkson, hugely famous in the United Kingdom for his job as a presenter on the BBCs Top Gear, is now a former presenter on the BBCs Top Gear. The BBC sacked him Wednesday after wrapping up its investigation into an unprovoked physical and verbal attack by Clarkson on a member of the car shows production staff.

Clarkson and Top Gear are familiar enough to many Americans; but across the pond, the anticipated announcement of Clarksons fate was live-blog material.

That was due, in part, to Top Gears massive importance to the British broadcaster: The magazine show is one of the BBCs biggest properties, with overseas sales worth an estimated 50m a year for the corporations commercial arm, BBC Worldwide, according to the BBC.The show, which Clarkson hosted with Richard Hammond and James May, hasan estimated 350 million viewers around the world, and the premiere episode of its 22nd season was simulcast in more than 50 countries.

But theres another reason so much attention was paid to Clarksons fate: his history of being, well Jeremy Clarkson. That is to say, controversial.

Here is a guide to what led to Clarksons firing and some background on the now-former Top Gear hosts previous tussles with management.

Why was Jeremy Clarkson fired?

On Wednesday, theBBC released quite a few details about what led to the dismissal.

The BBC is ending its contract with Top Gear host Jeremy Clarkson after he reportedly physically and verbally assaulted a producer from the popular TV series. (AP)

It began on March 4, when Clarkson was in a North Yorkshire hotel with, among other people, show producer Oisin Tymon. Clarkson and Tymon had a fracas. Per BBCs news division: The row was said to have occurred because no hot food was provided following a days filming.

The BBC investigation found that the attack lasted about 30 seconds, during which Tymon did not retaliate. Clarkson continued directing verbal abuse at Tymon after a witness intervened in the physical assault. Clarksons verbal abuse included the strongest expletives and threats to sack him, and was at such volume as to be heard in the dining room. Clarkson continued using derogatory and abusive language towards Tymon and other members of the production team for a sustained period of time.

Tymon believed he had lost his job following the altercation. He went to the hospital for examination.

However, the report says, Tymon did not file a complaint against Clarkson. Instead, after Clarkson made a number of attempts to apologise to Oisin Tymon by way of text, email and in person over the next several days, the star presenter reported himself to BBC management.

As a result, he was suspended on March 10.

In announcing the decision not to renew Clarksons contract, which expired this month,BBC Director General Tony Hall said that a line has been crossed. There cannot be one rule for one and one rule for another dictated by either rank, or public relations and commercial considerations.

Okay, but yousaid Clarkson was already controversial. Why?

Clarkson has a habit of saying things, often intended as a joke, that prompt outrage. There are enough examples for entire listicles, but lets take a look at a few:

In 2008, while driving a truck on Top Gear, Clarkson made a joke implying thatmurder[ing] a prostitute is a common pastime for professional truck drivers. The joke prompted at least one elected official to call for his firing.

In 2009, Clarkson apologized after calling then-Prime Minister Gordon Brown aone-eyed Scottish idiot. Brown is blind in his left eye.

In 2011, the BBC received more than 20,000 complaints from viewers after Clarkson responded to a question on The One Show by making a joke about executing striking workers in front of their families.

In May 2014, Clarkson announced that he was on final warning from the BBC, saying he would lose his job if he makes one more offensive remark, anywhere, at any time. That was shortly after British media accused Clarkson of saying the N-word in an unaired clip from a 2012 Top Gear episode. Clarkson also apologized for that controversy:

Oh, and one time he punched Piers Morgan, who was,until recently, his public nemesis.

ButClarkson is popular?

Yes! In fact, his history of cracking offensive jokes is, for some fans around the world, part of his enormous appeal. A change.org petition asking the BBC to reinstate Clarkson took in more than 1 million signatures. That petition was delivered to the BBC in a tank:

Although Clarksons suspension and eventual termination stemmed from a physical altercation off air, many of his supporters saw it as a culmination of the BBCs past handling of the hosts many controversies. Im signing because the far bigger evil is censorship via political correctness which the BBC have been indulging in for far too long, petition-signer Edward Prince wrote.

Daniel Harter wrote: Jeremy Clarkson represents the view of the majority of the licence paying public. We are sick of paying our license fee to be spoon fed your political correct left wing c**p. Let people speak their mind and exercise their right to offend. At the end of the day, if you are offended by something on TV/radio, turn it off?

David Chandler simply wrote:I hate the BBC lefties.

Clarkson is generally considered to be conservative, and hes friends with current Prime Minister David Cameron, who has called Clarksona huge talent. But as the BBC explains,the personality rarely weighs in on party-political issues. Instead, the BBC notes, his role is seen by some as more of a tribune of disgruntled middle England. But, as The Posts Adam Taylor explained, Clarksons popularity doesnt stop in the United Kingdom. Top Gear has a broad international appeal in some pretty improbable places:

Yet for all of Clarkson and companys old-school entitlement, its largely their personalities that drive the shows internationalpopularity. His humor is so inappropriate and not at all what you hear on state TV that must account for some of its appeal, theBBCs Darius Bazargansaid of Clarksons popularity in Iran in 2013, adding that Clarkson was about as opposite to [now former] President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad as you can get.

So what happens to Top Gear now?

The BBC is going to try to keep the show on the air. But it will be difficult, as the broadcasters own statement on Clarksons firing makes clear:

The BBC must now look to renew Top Gear for 2016. This will be a big challenge and there is no point in pretending otherwise, the statement reads, noting that the company still has to decide what to do with the rest of the current season.

It is difficult to overstate the role that Clarkson, Hammond and May have played in making Top Gear successful. Sure, gearheads might watch the show for the cars. But a lot of its audience stays for the teams antics. And it looks like neither Hammond nor May is completely on boardin continuing to do Top Gear without Clarkson.

May has already changed his Twitter bio to Former TV presenter. He told Sky News that the three hosts were a package, and that his future involvement with the show would require more thought.

Hammond and May both have expiring contracts.

What will happen to Clarkson?

A better question might be: Where will Clarkson, Hammond and May try to migrate? Theres already some speculation that competitor ITV could pick up a version of the trios show, although its not clear whether the name Top Gear would stay with the BBC.

In any case, it appears that the North Yorkshire police were interested enough in the BBCs investigation to ask for a copy, meaning that Clarkson could potentially face a police investigation as well.

We have asked the BBC for the report which details the findings of their internal investigation into the matter, the police said in a statement. The information will be assessed appropriately and action will be taken by North Yorkshire police where necessary. It would not be appropriate for North Yorkshire police to comment further at this time, a statement from the police reads.

MORE READING:Phil Robertson slammed for imagined tale of an atheist familys rape and murder

Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/03/25/how-jeremy-clarkson-lost-his-job-as-top-gear-host/

Continue Reading ..

Can Comcast Use Twitter and Facebook to Fix Its Customer Service Problems?

Comcast put me on hold until they closed

Comcast (NASDAQ: CMCSA) seems to be following through on promises made by its CEO Neil Smit to make fixing its customer service woes a priority for 2015.

"The way we interact with our customers -- on the phone, online, in their homes -- is as important to our success as the technology we provide," Smit wrote on a company blog. "Put simply, customer service should be our best product."

The company has already put a respected company veteran, Charlie Herrin, in charge of repairing its broken method of interacting with customers. It has also created an app which lets people know when a technician is en route to their home, ending the previous practice of subscribers having to wait around during a four hour appointment window.

Now Comcast is taking its efforts to fix its customer relations a step further by hiring 40 workers for its social media team. These new hires will join an existing 20 person group in providing "help with everything from scheduling appointments to troubleshooting Internet problems and setting up DVRs, CNN Money reported.

Why is Comcast doing this?"We have thousands of people answering service calls on the phone, and for many customers that"s great. But some people would rather go online, and we want to make sure to give them that choice," Comcast spokeswoman Jennifer Khoury told CNN Money.

The company explained in a press announcement about the hiring effort that it has been using social media since 2007, but the use of platforms including Twitter (NYSE: TWTR) and Facebook (NASDAQ: FB) has increased over the years. This has shifted some customer support needs from traditional call centers to the social media team.

With a much bigger team, we"llbe able to support customers across more platforms. And we"ll be able to get to them faster. A larger team also means that we"ll beable to increase bicoastal and bilingual coverage to make sure we are available 24/7 to customers who speak either English or Spanish.

The social care team has access to all the same advanced tools and training as our call center agents do, which means they can quickly jump in to solve problems. They also have a direct line to our tech teams so they can schedule appointments.

While this effort won"t solve all of Comcast"s problems, it will bring some customers immediate help. It"s not a complete solution to a customer service culture which has been built around retention at any cost, but it"s a solid incremental step that should take pressure off the system.

@sgnl24Just doing a courtesy check to make sure your Comcast services are working properly? ~DB

ComcastCares (@comcastcares) March 22, 2015

This is an example of the type of individual service provided by the @comcastcares account. Source: Twitter

Adding 40 people to the @comcastcares social media team shows that Smit"s vows to revamp customer service have actual money behind them. This isn"t a token hire or a PR move; it"s likely a multimillion dollar commitment to delivering actual improvement.

Comcast deserves creditThe media, myself included, has spent the past year shining light on Comcast"s customer service failures. Those woes went viral when a recording made by former Engadget editor Ryan Block where a "retention specialist" essentially refused to allow him to cancel his service. That debacle led to a flood of embarrassing customer service issues being made public -- everything from bad service to names on bills being changed to derogatory terms.

Comcast probably deserved the scorn it got from the legitimate media and on social media. Now, however, the company deserves praise for not just saying it"s going to fix the problem but actually doing the hard work to turn around its culture, while backing those efforts with financial resources.

This is good business for the cable and Internet giant. A company can"t treat its customers poorly when they can easily leave for other alternatives. But, aside from the long-term business gains the company should make, Comcast deserves credit for publicly tackling what is a thankless problem.

Bringing the customer service battle to social media is a smart move. Twitter and Facebook allow for quick problem resolution. That should result in happy customers and less stress on traditional phone-based customer service.

There are almost certain to be more problems and humiliating gaffes before Herrin and Smit completely change the company"s culture. Still, adding 40 social media customer care reps is a win for customers which is ultimately a win for the company"s bottom line.

This $19 trillion industry could destroy the InternetOne bleeding-edge technology is about to put the World Wide Web to bed. And if you act right away, it could make you wildly rich. Experts are calling it the single largest business opportunity in the history of capitalism... The Economist is calling it "transformative"... But you"ll probably just call it "how I made my millions." Don"t be too late to the party -- click herefor one stock to own when the Web goes dark.

Source: http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2015/03/25/can-comcast-use-twitter-and-facebook-to-fix-its-cu.aspx

Continue Reading ..