February 2008

Let's Rewrite the Rules for Kids' Media

LET'S REWRITE THE RULES FOR KIDS' MEDIA
[SOURCE: BusinessWeek, AUTHOR: Anastasia Goodstein, Ypulse.com]
[Commentary] The Joan Ganz Cooney Center is pushing for an overhaul of children's media legislation. The center's recent report, D is for Digital, analyzes the impact of digital media on kids and reaches some striking conclusions. "Federal regulatory bodies, such as the Federal Communications Commission, and voluntary industry, public interest advocacy and philanthropic organizations, should advance policies that protect children from commercialism," the center writes. "A revitalization of the Children's Television Act needs to be undertaken to modernize the child protections now called for in a digital age." We clearly need to develop standards when it comes to kids' digital media. One of the major goals of the Children's Television Act was to increase the quantity of educational broadcast TV programming for children. But it was enacted in 1990 and predates much of the digital era. And other than subsequent FCC rules on digital TV and the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act, which prevents personal data collection from children under 13 without parental consent, there's a dearth of rules and guidelines for kids' digital media. What's more, the standards for what constitutes "educational" content are weak at best. So how do we redefine the Children's Television Act for the Digital Age? 1) Reach out to industry. 2) Create research-based universal standards for what constitutes educational content. 3) Build new, ad-free business models for sites targeting children. 4) Build new, ad-free business models for sites targeting children. 5) Increase transparency and labeling of sponsored digital content.
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/feb2008/tc20080227_269559...

FCC Acts on Requests for Waiver of Hearing and Compatibility Rules

FCC ACTS ON REQUESTS FOR WAIVER OF HEARING AID COMPATIBILITY RULES
[SOURCE: Federal Communications Commission]
The Federal Communications Commission released a Memorandum Opinion and Order that addresses waiver requests filed by wireless service providers and a handset manufacturer seeking additional time to comply with a 2006 benchmark in the FCC’s hearing aid compatibility rules. The FCC’s hearing aid compatibility rules are designed to ensure that persons with hearing disabilities have full access to digital wireless services. The FCC granted or denied the individual waiver requests based on the respective showings made by each petitioner. The Order addresses 46 petitions filed by 98 facilities-based wireless carriers, one handset manufacturer, and one mobile virtual network operator (MVNO). In general, the petitions seek some limited additional time to comply with the requirement that at least two T3-rated handsets be offered. The FCC granted a petitioner’s waiver request to the extent it came into compliance no later than January 1, 2007, and demonstrated a reasonable basis for the limited extension of time. Those wireless carriers to which the FCC did not grant full waivers, and which appear to be currently in violation of the FCC’s hearing aid compatibility rules or to have been in violation in the past, have been referred to the Enforcement Bureau for further review.
http://www.fcc.gov/HAC022708.pdf

* FCC order
http://www.fcc.gov/HAC022708_1.pdf

Former FCC General Counsel Sam Feder Lands at Jenner & Block

FORMER FCC GENERAL COUNSEL SAM FEDER LANDS AT JENNER & BLOCK
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
Sam Feder, who had been the Federal Communications Commission's general counsel from 2005 until exiting that post in January, is joining law firm Jenner & Block as a partner. FCC Chairman Kevin Martin named Feder's replacement, Matthew Berry, in January, but Wednesday marked the official departure.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6536187.html?rssid=193

Benton's Communications-related Headlines For Thursday February 28, 2008

To view Benton's Headlines feed in your RSS=20
Aggregator, paste=20
http://www.benton.org/index.php?q=3Dtaxonomy/term/6/all/feed into your read=
er.

NEWS FROM CONGRESS
Senate Passes VoIP Enhanced 911 Bill
Lawmakers debate mobile consumer rights bill

ELECTIONS & MEDIA
NY Times' McCain Story Draws Public Interest -- And Disapproval
Campaign 'robocalls' catch Congress's ear
Clinton Outspent By Obama Online
Barack Obama Launches Local Web Campaign
Scripps Giving Free Airtime to Candidates

INTERNET/BROADBAND
Comcast Manipulating NAACP on Net Neutrality
FCC 'Do-Over' on Net Neutrality Hearing?
Internet Company Sued for Holding Names
` AT&T bill holds key to Internet future in TN

DIVERSITY
Nielsen Forms Hispanic/Latino Advisory Council

GOVERNMENT & COMMUNICATIONS
Nominees for Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board
GOP Uses Surveillance Bill to Bash Democrats

CHILDREN & MEDIA
Let's Rewrite the Rules for Kids' Media

QUICKLY -- FCC Acts on Requests for Waiver of=20
Hearing and Compatibility Rules; Former FCC=20
General Counsel Sam Feder Lands at Jenner & Block

NEWS FROM CONGRESS

SENATE PASSES VOIP ENHANCED 911 BILL
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
The Senate passed a bill to ensure that=20
voice-over-Internet-protocol phone-service=20
providers like cable companies can deliver 911=20
service to their customers. It must now be=20
squared with a similar bill already passed in the=20
House before it can be sent to the president for=20
his signature. The IP-Enabled Voice=20
Communications and Public Safety Act would give=20
cable companies and other VoIP providers the same=20
interconnection access on the same terms as=20
traditional carriers to ensure that 911 calls=20
reach a local operator and that the operator can=20
also determine the source of the emergency call=20
-- so-called enhanced 911 service.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6535947.html

LAWMAKERS DEBATE MOBILE CONSUMER RIGHTS BILL
[SOURCE: InfoWorld, AUTHOR: Grant Gross]
A proposed consumer rights bill for mobile=20
telephone service drew mixed reviews during a=20
hearing in Congress Wednesday with detractors=20
saying the legislation would place too much=20
regulation on a competitive industry. A draft=20
bill, proposed by House Telecom & Internet=20
Subcommittee Chairman Ed Markey (D-MA), calls for=20
the Federal Communications Commission to make=20
rules requiring mobile carriers to offer=20
unsubsidized handsets to customers, to offer=20
service with no early termination fees and to=20
detail charges like termination fees. Some=20
lawmakers complained about early termination fees=20
and the inability of customers to take their=20
phones from carrier to carrier. Two major=20
carriers, Verizon Wireless and AT&T, announced=20
mobile-phone portability plans in recent months.=20
Four witnesses at the hearing, including the head=20
of the CTIA, said that they like parts of the=20
bill. The bill moves toward pre-empting state=20
regulation of mobile carriers, said Steve=20
Largent, president and CEO of CTIA, the trade=20
group representing wireless carriers. But several=20
mobile carriers are already moving toward many of=20
the changes required in the bill, Largent said.
http://www.infoworld.com/article/08/02/27/Lawmakers-debate-mobile-consum...
rights-bill_1.html

ELECTIONS & MEDIA

NY TIMES' MCCAIN STORY DRAWS PUBLIC INTEREST -- AND DISAPPROVAL
[SOURCE: Pew Research Center for the People and the Press]
An overwhelming majority of Americans (81%) are=20
aware of news reports that John McCain may have=20
had an improper relationship with a female=20
lobbyist several years ago. About half (48%) of=20
the public has heard a lot about this story,=20
which first appeared in the New York Times late=20
last week. Another 33% has heard at least a=20
little about the story. By a nearly two-to-one=20
margin those who have heard about the McCain=20
story think the New York Times was wrong to=20
publish it =AD 57% say the Times did the wrong=20
thing in publishing the story, 33% say the paper=20
did the right thing. Republicans are only=20
slightly more likely than Democrats to have heard=20
about the McCain story (87% of Republicans have=20
heard at least a little compared with 80% of=20
Democrats). However, partisan views on the role=20
of the New York Times differ dramatically. By a=20
75% to 16% margin Republicans who are aware of=20
the story say the Times did the wrong thing by=20
publishing it. Democrats are evenly split on the=20
issue =AD 47% say the Times was wrong, 45% say the=20
paper was right. Independents have a more=20
negative view of the Times' decision (55% wrong, 33% right).
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6536015.html?rssid=3D193
* Public Broadcasting Activists Refute McCain Campaign 'Facts' on FCC Lette=
rs
A public broadcasting activist is accusing Sen.=20
John McCain's presidential campaign of lying in=20
its statements rebutting last week's New York=20
Times story about McCain's connections to=20
Washington lobbyist Vicki Iseman. After the story=20
broke, the McCain campaign distributed a lengthy=20
document stating that the senator's commerce=20
committee staff "met with public broadcasting=20
activists from the Pittsburgh area" who opposed a=20
controversial license swap involving Iseman's=20
client, Paxson Communications, before it sent two=20
letters to the Federal Communication Commission=20
urging the commissioners to vote on the issue.=20
"It never happened," said Jerold Starr, who led=20
the grassroots opposition to the deal as the=20
co-chairman of the Save Pittsburgh Public=20
Television Campaign. "Moreover, we had no idea=20
that McCain had any interest in our local matter."
http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2008/02/public-broadcas.html

CAMPAIGN 'ROBOCALLS' CATCH CONGRESS'S EAR
[SOURCE: The Christian Science Monitor 2/27, AUTHOR: Daniel B. Wood]
A bipartisan bill, introduced Tuesday by Sens.=20
Dianne Feinstein (D) of California, Daniel Inouye=20
(D) of Hawaii, and Arlen Specter (R) of=20
Pennsylvania, would keep Americans from being=20
flooded with automated political phone calls.=20
Known as the Robocall Privacy Act of 2008, the=20
bill would establish that anyone who makes or=20
sets up one-sided, computer-generated calls=20
without following certain rules would be subject=20
to fines of up to $1,000 per violation, and up to=20
$3,000 if such violations are deemed "willful."=20
New rules would ban calls after 9 p.m. and before=20
8 a.m. and prohibit more than two calls to the=20
same telephone number each day. They would also=20
prohibit the masking of the robocaller's phone=20
number or identity on caller-ID tools. All such=20
calls would need to disclose that the call is=20
recorded and who is behind it. The law would=20
apply only to robocalls related to candidates=20
running for federal office and would include=20
those placed by supporters and opponents alike.=20
The Federal Election Commission would be=20
empowered to fine violators, and individuals=20
could sue to stop the calls. Commercial calls are=20
already limited by the Federal Trade Commission's=20
"do not call list," subscribed to by millions.=20
But political calls have been specifically exempted from that list.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0227/p02s01-uspo.html

CLINTON OUTSPENT BY OBAMA ONLINE
[SOURCE: OnlineMediaDaily, AUTHOR: Mark Walsh walsh( at )mediapost.com]
Barack Obama has run the most effective online=20
campaign among the 2008 presidential candidates.=20
Of the $32 million he raised in January, for=20
example, $28 million came from online donors.=20
Even so, figures in the candidates' latest=20
spending reports covering January underscore the=20
gap in their online efforts. The Obama campaign=20
paid more than $89,000 to Google and $18,252 to=20
Microsoft for online advertising and a total of=20
$32,372 to Yahoo and Yahoo Search Marketing.=20
Obama paid another $23,564 to Yahoo subsidiary=20
Right Media, an online ad exchange which handles=20
mainly remnant advertising. A further $1,821 went=20
to Facebook, where Obama has attracted more=20
"friends" than any other candidate, and $88,540=20
went to political consulting firm Blue State=20
Digital. The Clinton campaign, by contrast,=20
reported only a $13,674 payment to Google during the same period.
http://publications.mediapost.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=3DArticles.san&s=...
7360&Nid=3D39790&p=3D368626

BARACK OBAMA LAUNCHES LOCAL WEB CAMPAIGN
[SOURCE: MediaWeek, AUTHOR: Mike Shields and Katy Bachman]
On Tuesday, Sen Barack Obama (D-IL) launched an=20
aggressive local Web campaign. The Obama Web=20
campaign, placed by Centro on 26 local TV, radio=20
and newspaper Web sites in Ohio and Texas,=20
features a Sliding Billboard at the top of the=20
Web page with a 30-second video embedded in the=20
expandable unit. Depending on the site, the ad=20
plays different video ads. Some of the media=20
sites that are carrying the ads include Belo's=20
The Dallas Morning News and its ABC affiliate,=20
WFAA-TV; Ohio.com; and The Houston Chronicle=20
(www.chron.com). The buy also includes radio and=20
TV stations that are part of the WorldNow Ohio=20
and Texas Networks. In addition, Sen Obama=20
initiated a buy earlier this week with online=20
video ad network Broadband Enterprises to run=20
30-second spots on various local TV, radio and=20
newspaper Web sites, including the Clear Channel=20
stations WKOI in San Antonio and WKRC in Cincinnati.
http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/recent_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=3D100...
6760

SCRIPPS GIVING FREE AIRTIME TO CANDIDATES
[SOURCE: tvnewsday]
The E.W. Scripps Co. is launching Democracy 2008,=20
a public discourse initiative that will make free=20
airtime available to political candidates on the=20
company=92s nine network-affiliated television=20
stations. They are: ABC affiliates WXYZ Detroit;=20
WCPO Cincinnati; WEWS Cleveland; WFTS Tampa,=20
Fla.; WMAR Baltimore; and KNXV Phoenix; and NBC=20
affiliates WPTV West Palm Beach, Fla.; KSHB=20
Kansas City, Mo.; and KJRH Tulsa, Okla. The=20
Scripps stations will provide five minutes of=20
free airtime to candidates nightly between 5 p.m.=20
and 11:35 p.m. in the 30 days preceding the=20
general elections. The stations also will provide=20
free airtime as needed during the 30 days=20
preceding primary elections. The Scripps=20
television station had a similar free airtime=20
policy during the national elections in 2000, 2002, 2004 and 2006.
http://www.tvnewsday.com/articles/2008/02/27/daily.6/

INTERNET/BROADBAND

COMCAST MANIPULATING NAACP ON NET NEUTRALITY
[SOURCE: OpenLeft, AUTHOR: Matt Stoller]
[Commentary] Do Comcast and the NAACP have a cozy=20
relationship? A flyer calling for a rally=20
protesting the FCC under the NAACP's name, put=20
out by a PR firm, and disavowed by the local=20
NAACP as simply a 'draft', was going around on=20
the same day as a net neutrality hearing that=20
Comcast packed with a crowd they hired to prevent=20
net neutrality advocates from attending. And on=20
that very same day, this letter to the editor in=20
the Washington Post attacking net neutrality=20
shows up, from Jose Marquez of the Latinos in=20
Information Sciences and Technology, an astroturf=20
group sponsored by Sprint, the cell phone carrier=20
most aligned with Comcast and the cable=20
industry. In addition, the founder of the=20
National Black Chamber of Commerce, a right-wing=20
group that pushed for the privatization of Social=20
Security in 2005, wrote this piece attacking FCC=20
Chair Kevin Martin for being a racist. A cynic=20
might say that Comcast, caught red-handed=20
blocking and manipulating the Internet traffic of=20
their users is trying to divert attention from=20
the FCC investigation and possible subpoena=20
threat by state AG's by doing a PR campaign=20
around cries of racism. I just think that the=20
NAACP should be a lot more careful in how and=20
when their name shows up when large conservative=20
corporations would want to use their name to distract from their lawbreakin=
g.
http://www.openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=3D4209

FCC 'DO-OVER' ON NET NEUTRALITY HEARING?
[SOURCE: Portfolio, AUTHOR: Sam Gustin]
Following Comcast's acknowledgement that it had=20
hired people to take up seats at an overcrowded=20
Federal Communications Commission hearing at=20
Harvard on Monday, the regulator agency is=20
mulling whether a hold another public hearing on=20
net neutrality. FCC spokesman Rob Kenny declined=20
to speak publicly about the possibility of=20
additional hearings, which were first reported on=20
the blog Valleywag. From the outset of the FCC's=20
investigation, the agency had held out the=20
possibility of further hearings on Comcast's=20
controversial "network management" practices.
http://www.portfolio.com/views/blogs/daily-brief/2008/02/27/fcc-do-over-...
net-neutrality-hearing

INTERNET COMPANY SUED FOR HOLDING NAMES
[SOURCE: Associated Press, AUTHOR: Anick Jesdanun]
A company that sells Internet addresses is being=20
sued for its controversial practice of holding a=20
domain name in reserve if someone checks for its=20
availability but does not buy it right away.=20
Although Network Solutions termed its new program=20
a consumer-protection measure, the moves make it=20
difficult for interested parties to shop around=20
for better prices. The company charges $35 a year=20
for a name - a few times more than what many of its rivals charge.
http://news.lp.findlaw.com/ap/high_tech/1700//02-27-2008/20080227100502_...
html

AT&T BILL HOLDS KEY TO FUTURE
[SOURCE: The Daily News Journal (Murfreesboro, TN), AUTHOR: Ed Kimbrell]
[Commentary] For the past few weeks, behind=20
closed doors at the state Capitol, American=20
Telephone and Telegraph, Comcast cable, the=20
Tennessee Municipal League, and selected=20
legislators have been trying to forge a tortured=20
compromise about the Internet's future in the=20
state. What's at stake here? Simply, the future.=20
There are billions of dollars of potential=20
revenue on the table. AT&T is the largest=20
wireless telephone provider in the nation, and if=20
it bundles TV, Internet and telephone service=20
into one package, it will be very difficult to=20
turn it down by the average consumer. Cable=20
argues AT&T will not provide universal service,=20
picking only the lucrative cities and towns and=20
leaving the rest unserved. AT&T already bundles=20
wireless and wired telephone service. So, simply=20
put, it could dominate the information and=20
entertainment environment in the state at a time=20
when the telephone is becoming the dominant=20
information technology in the world. Only fools=20
predict Oscar winners, Supreme Court decisions,=20
and what our Legislature will decide, but it's=20
obvious this is one of those times when law and=20
compromise are overwhelmed by new technology.=20
There's no Solomon able to make a decision about=20
the cable-telephone war. Don't be surprised if=20
the outcome this year isn't any different than=20
last year's stalemate, because no one at the table wants to lose.
http://dnj.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=3D/20080228/OPINION02/802280319...
14/OPINION

DIVERSITY

NIELSEN FORMS HISPANIC/LATINO ADVISORY COUNCIL
[SOURCE: MediaWeek, AUTHOR: Katy Bachman]
Nielsen announced Wednesday it had formed a=20
national Hispanic/Latino Advisory Council to help=20
the research company recruit, measure and=20
accurately report on Hispanic TV households. The=20
first meeting of the independent advisory group=20
is March 4 in New York. Members are: Ernest=20
Bromley, president and CEO of Bromley=20
Communications; Jenny Alonzo, executive vp,=20
marketing/brand of Mio.TV; Dr. Juan Andrade,=20
president and executive director of the United=20
States Hispanic Leadership Institute (USHLI); Dr.=20
David Hayes-Bautista, PhD, Professor of medicine=20
and director of the Center for the Study of=20
Latino Health and Culture at the School of=20
Medicine, UCLA; Jose del Cueto, CEO of Del Cueto=20
Media Group; Guarione M. Diaz, president and CEO,=20
Cuban American National Council, Inc.; Dr. Henry=20
Flores, senior policy analyst, William C.=20
Velasquez Institute; Lu=EDs A. Miranda, Jr.,=20
managing partner of The MirRam Group, Inc.;=20
Lillian Rodr=EDguez L=F3pez, president of the=20
Hispanic Federation; Catherine M. Pino,=20
co-founder & principal of D&P Creative=20
Strategies; and Susana Valdez, chief of staff to=20
Mayor Manny Diaz, City of Miami.
http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/recent_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=3D100...
6790

GOVERNMENT & COMMUNICATIONS

NOMINEES FOR PRIVACY AND CIVIL LIBERTIES OVERSIGHT BOARD
[SOURCE: The White House]
President George W. Bush announced his intention=20
to nominate the following individuals to serve in=20
his Administration. 1) The President intends to=20
nominate Daniel W. Sutherland, of Virginia, to be=20
Chairman of the Privacy and Civil Liberties=20
Oversight Board for an initial term of six years.=20
Mr. Sutherland currently serves as an Officer for=20
Civil Rights and Civil Liberties at the=20
Department of Homeland Security. Prior to this,=20
he served in the Office of Civil Rights at the=20
Department of Education. Earlier in his career,=20
he served at the Civil Rights Division of the=20
Department of Justice and on the Domestic Policy=20
Council at the White House. Mr. Sutherland=20
received his bachelor's degree from the=20
University of Louisville and his JD from the=20
University of Virginia School of Law. 2) The=20
President intends to nominate Ronald Daniel=20
Rotunda, of Virginia, to be a Member of the=20
Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board for=20
an initial four-year term. 3) The President=20
intends to nominate Francis X. Taylor, of=20
Maryland, to be a Member of the Privacy and Civil=20
Liberties Oversight Board for an initial two-year term.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2008/02/20080226-9.html
* Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board
The Board advises the President and other senior=20
executive branch officials to ensure that=20
concerns with respect to privacy and civil=20
liberties are appropriately considered in the=20
implementation of all laws, regulations, and=20
executive branch policies related to efforts to=20
protect the Nation against terrorism. This=20
includes advising on whether adequate guidelines,=20
supervision, and oversight exist to protect these=20
important legal rights of all Americans.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/privacyboard/
* Ronald D. Rotunda
http://www.law.gmu.edu/faculty/directory/rotunda_ronald
* Brig. Gen. Francis X. Taylor
http://www.af.mil/bios/bio.asp?bioID=3D7344

GOP USES SURVEILLANCE BILL TO BASH DEMOCRATS
[SOURCE: Washington Post, AUTHOR: Dan Eggen]
Republicans are convinced that highlighting their=20
counterterrorism policies will be a political=20
winner in this presidential election year, and=20
they have focused this week on Democratic=20
opposition to their version of a new surveillance=20
bill as a way to paint Democrats as soft on=20
national security. Democrats respond that they=20
are unfazed by the attacks, arguing that most=20
Americans doubt the credibility of President Bush=20
and Republicans when it comes to warning about=20
security threats. President Bush and GOP=20
lawmakers have been releasing a blizzard of=20
public statements and organizing multiple news=20
conferences to pressure the House to adopt a=20
Senate bill renewing and expanding a temporary=20
surveillance law called the Protect America Act.=20
The measure would grant legal immunity to=20
telecommunications companies over their=20
cooperation in warrantless wiretapping done after=20
the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. House Democratic=20
leaders oppose the immunity provision and=20
maneuvered to allow the temporary statute to=20
expire on Feb. 16. The administration has=20
repeatedly said that telecom firms need=20
protection from lawsuits in order to cooperate with the government.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/27/AR200802...
3316.html
(requires registration)

CHILDREN & MEDIA

LET'S REWRITE THE RULES FOR KIDS' MEDIA
[SOURCE: BusinessWeek, AUTHOR: Anastasia Goodstein, Ypulse.com]
[Commentary] The Joan Ganz Cooney Center is=20
pushing for an overhaul of children's media=20
legislation. The center's recent report, D is for=20
Digital, analyzes the impact of digital media on=20
kids and reaches some striking conclusions.=20
"Federal regulatory bodies, such as the Federal=20
Communications Commission, and voluntary=20
industry, public interest advocacy and=20
philanthropic organizations, should advance=20
policies that protect children from=20
commercialism," the center writes. "A=20
revitalization of the Children's Television Act=20
needs to be undertaken to modernize the child=20
protections now called for in a digital age." We=20
clearly need to develop standards when it comes=20
to kids' digital media. One of the major goals of=20
the Children's Television Act was to increase the=20
quantity of educational broadcast TV programming=20
for children. But it was enacted in 1990 and=20
predates much of the digital era. And other than=20
subsequent FCC rules on digital TV and the=20
Children's Online Privacy Protection Act, which=20
prevents personal data collection from children=20
under 13 without parental consent, there's a=20
dearth of rules and guidelines for kids' digital=20
media. What's more, the standards for what=20
constitutes "educational" content are weak at=20
best. So how do we redefine the Children's=20
Television Act for the Digital Age? 1) Reach out=20
to industry. 2) Create research-based universal=20
standards for what constitutes educational=20
content. 3) Build new, ad-free business models=20
for sites targeting children. 4) Build new,=20
ad-free business models for sites targeting=20
children. 5) Increase transparency and labeling of sponsored digital conten=
t.
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/feb2008/tc20080227_269559...
m?campaign_id=3Drss_tech

QUICKLY

FCC ACTS ON REQUESTS FOR WAIVER OF HEARING AID COMPATIBILITY RULES
[SOURCE: Federal Communications Commission]
The Federal Communications Commission released a=20
Memorandum Opinion and Order that addresses=20
waiver requests filed by wireless service=20
providers and a handset manufacturer seeking=20
additional time to comply with a 2006 benchmark=20
in the FCC=92s hearing aid compatibility rules. The=20
FCC=92s hearing aid compatibility rules are=20
designed to ensure that persons with hearing=20
disabilities have full access to digital wireless=20
services. The FCC granted or denied the=20
individual waiver requests based on the=20
respective showings made by each petitioner. The=20
Order addresses 46 petitions filed by 98=20
facilities-based wireless carriers, one handset=20
manufacturer, and one mobile virtual network=20
operator (MVNO). In general, the petitions seek=20
some limited additional time to comply with the=20
requirement that at least two T3-rated handsets=20
be offered. The FCC granted a petitioner=92s waiver=20
request to the extent it came into compliance no=20
later than January 1, 2007, and demonstrated a=20
reasonable basis for the limited extension of=20
time. Those wireless carriers to which the FCC=20
did not grant full waivers, and which appear to=20
be currently in violation of the FCC=92s hearing=20
aid compatibility rules or to have been in=20
violation in the past, have been referred to the=20
Enforcement Bureau for further review.
http://www.fcc.gov/HAC022708.pdf
* FCC order
http://www.fcc.gov/HAC022708_1.pdf

FORMER FCC GENERAL COUNSEL SAM FEDER LANDS AT JENNER & BLOCK
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
Sam Feder, who had been the Federal=20
Communications Commission's general counsel from=20
2005 until exiting that post in January, is=20
joining law firm Jenner & Block as a partner. FCC=20
Chairman Kevin Martin named Feder's replacement,=20
Matthew Berry, in January, but Wednesday marked the official departure.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6536187.html?rssid=3D193
* Chairman Martin's statement
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-280505A1.doc
--------------------------------------------------------------
Communications-related Headlines is a free online=20
news summary service provided by the Benton=20
Foundation (www.benton.org). Posted Monday=20
through Friday, this service provides updates on=20
important industry developments, policy issues,=20
and other related news events. While the=20
summaries are factually accurate, their often=20
informal tone does not always represent the tone=20
of the original articles. Headlines are compiled=20
by Kevin Taglang headlines( at )benton.org -- we welcome your comments.
--------------------------------------------------------------

Exploring Public Interest Regulation of Media in Commemoration of the Fortieth Anniversary of Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. FCC

04/18/08

09:00AM - 05:00PM
4801 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
6tth Floor
Washington, D.C. 20016
(202) 274-4000

Contact Information:
secle@wcl.american.edu
Office of Special Events & Continuing Legal Education
202.274.4075 - Phone
202.274.4079 - Fax

On June 9, 1969, the Supreme Court in Red Lion v. FCC upheld the Fairness Doctrine and related regulations, which required broadcasters to cover controversial issues of local importance, to provide reasonable opportunities for contrasting and dissenting viewpoints in doing so, and to observe rights of reply.

More generally, Red Lion reaffirmed the Federal Communications Commission's authority and duty to enforce the public interest programming obligations of broadcasters as trustees of the nation's scarce and publicly owned airwaves.

Although the FCC subsequently repealed the Fairness Doctrine together with a wide array of broadcast regulations during the Reagan Era’s deregulatory purge of the 1980s, Congress and the FCC continue to refer to broadcasters as public trustees subject to specific and unique public interest programming duties.

In the forty years since Red Lion was decided, constant technological and economic developments in the media domain require us to reassess that “moving target” of the public interest and the proper role of the government in guaranteeing the viability of that interest.

Recently, media ownership controversies and the thirteen-year fight to establish new public interest guidelines for broadcasters transitioning into the digital realm continue to bring public interest obligations and their applicability to the forefront of debate.

Prominent regulators, legislators and scholars have called for the revival of the Fairness Doctrine and other public interest duties. Others have argued that public interest rules were violative of the First Amendment in their heyday and would constitute an even more serious violation today given the diversity and scope of the modern converging media landscape. Still others advocate an expansion of affirmative public interest regulation of nonbroadcast media platforms.

The Administrative Law Review and the Washington College of Law’s Media Law Society sponsor this one-day symposium, in the hopes of advancing general understanding by eliciting discussion and elucidating the evolution of and outlook for the scholarly, industry and public views on these issues.

The symposium edition of the Administrative Law Review, which will be published later in the year, will continue this dialogue through several of the panelists’ written submissions.

9:00 – 9:45 Registration and breakfast/coffee mixer

9:45 – 10:15 Welcome/Introduction
 Claudio M. Grossman, Dean, Washington College of Law
 Sarah K. Brown, Editor-in-Chief, Administrative Law Review

10:15 – 10:45 Opening Keynote Address
 Cass Sunstein, University of Chicago Law School

11:00 – 12:30 Panel 1: Red Lion’s Legacy: effects on today’s broadcast regulation landscape in media diversity, fairness, localism, and democratic deliberation
 Leonard M. Baynes, Saint John’s University School of Law
 Lili Levi, University of Miami School of Law
 Jim Chen, Louisville Brandeis School of Law
 Catherine J. K. Sandoval, Santa Clara University Law School
 Angela J. Campbell, Georgetown University Law Center
 Dr. Philip M. Napoli, Fordham University

12:45 – 1:20 Luncheon and Keynote Speaker
 C. Edwin Baker, University of Pennsylvania

1:30 – 3:30 Panel 2: Red Lion’s Relevancy: Industry and Public Interest Advocates Discuss
the Role for and Effectiveness of Public Interest Media Regulation Today
 Helgi C. Walker, Wiley Rein, LLP
 Susan Fox, The Walt Disney Company
 Howard J. Symons, Mintz Levin, PC
 Mark Lloyd, Leadership Conference on Civil Rights
 Marvin Ammori, Free Press
 Andrew Jay Schwartzman, Media Access Project

3:40 – 5:15 Panel 3: New Frontiers: Public Interest Regulation in a Converging 21st Century
Media Marketplace
 Randolph J. May, Free State Foundation
 Frank Pasquale, Seton Hall Law School
 Anthony E. Varona, Washington College of Law
 Gigi B. Sohn, Public Knowledge
 Tara Malloy, Campaign Legal Center

5:15 – 5:30 Closing Remarks
 Jamin B. Raskin, Washington College of Law



Agenda 02.27.08

Three telecom events in the coming days: 1) today's House hearing on wireless consumer protection (see story below), 2) a FCC DTV transition workshop focusing on issues for people with disabilities, and 3) the Texas Community Media Summit. For these and other upcoming media policy events see http://www.benton.org/event/2008/02/27/month/all/all

Prometheus Asks Court to Vacate Ownership-Rule Change

PROMETHEUS ASKS COURT TO VACATE OWNERSHIP-RULE CHANGE
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
On Tuesday, the Media Access Project filed a petition with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit on behalf of Prometheus Radio Project and in opposition to loosening the newspaper-broadcast cross-ownership rules, which the Federal Communications Commission did Dec. 18. MAP was instrumental in getting the FCC's 2003 ownership-rule rewrite remanded to that court in the first place when it represented Prometheus in a filing to block that deregualtory effort. The result of that, after years of legal maneuvers and rule reviews, was eventually that December 2007 decision to loosen, but not lift, the newspaper-broadcast cross-ownership rules. But there is more for MAP to like in the rule rewrite this time around. The group supported the FCC majority's decision not to loosen the local TV or radio ownership caps. "We are going to be very supportive of some of the things the commission did," MAP president Andrew J. Schwartzman said. But loosening newspaper-broadcast cross-ownership was not one of them and it made that clear in no uncertain terms. In its petition, the group called the decision "contrary to law" and "otherwise arbitrary and capricious, an abuse of discretion and in excess of statutory authority." MAP asked the court to "vacate, enjoin and set aside the report and order and order such other relief as may be just and proper." MAP expects broadcasters to take the decision to court, too. They will likely argue that the FCC was wrong in not deregulating the TV and radio ownership caps while it was at it.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6535600.html?rssid=193

Justice Clears Liberty-DirecTV

JUSTICE CLEARS LIBERTY-DIRECTV
[SOURCE: Multichannel News, AUTHOR: Ted Hearn]
A day after the deal won the Federal Communications Commission's blessing, the Justice Department said Tuesday it would not try to block Liberty Media’s plan to take effective control of DirecTV, the satellite TV provider with 16.8 million subscribers run by News Corp. since late 2003. The DOJ’s antitrust division clashed with Malone’s lawyers over the deal impact on pay-TV competition in Puerto Rico, dragging out the merger review for many months. The dispute centered on Malone’s joint interest in a small Puerto Rico cable system that competes with a DirecTV affiliate. The FCC gave Liberty one-year to divest one of the properties or to ensure that Malone does not have an attributable ownership stake in both the cable and satellite TV entities. The FCC’s condition evidently resolved Liberty's dispute with Justice's competition lawyers.
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6535638.html?nid=4262

Sirius Says It Could Do Without XM

SIRIUS SAYS IT COULD DO WITHOUT XM
[SOURCE: Washington Post, AUTHOR: Cecilia Kang]
Sirius Satellite Radio said yesterday that it gained subscribers in the fourth quarter and lost less money, signs that its business is improving even as the company's merger with XM Satellite Radio Holdings remains stuck in a regulatory limbo more than a year after it was proposed. Though Sirius remains hopeful that the merger will be approved by the Justice Department and the Federal Communications Commission, chief executive Mel Karmazin said yesterday that the company could survive without it. "In the unlikely scenario of a merger not being approved, we believe we are fully funded. We believe we are going to become a profitable company on a stand-alone basis," Karmazin said during a conference call with analysts.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/26/AR200802...
(requires registration)

Markey bill could force Apple, AT&T to unlock iPhone

MARKEY BILL COULD FORCE APPLE, AT&T TO UNLOCK PHONE
[SOURCE: C-Net|News.com, AUTHOR: Anne Broache]
House Telecom and Internet Subcommittee Chairman Ed Markey (D-MA) is sponsoring a bill, the Wireless Consumer Protection and Community Broadband Empowerment Act, that would direct the Federal Communications Commission to establish a number of new rules for wireless carriers. Among other things, those companies would have to give abundant disclosure to their customers about their rate plans in a "clear, plain, and conspicuous manner," breaking out the cost of everything from early termination fees to state and local taxes for the customer. Carriers would also be obligated to devise more detailed maps of their network coverage areas. And they'd have to permit customers to cancel a contract for any reason without penalty within the first 30 days and to prorate any fees associated with leaving a contract early. There will be a hearing on the bill this morning.
http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9879554-7.html?tag=nefd.top