March 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.

GOVERNMENT & COMMUNICATIONS
News of Protests Is Hard to Find In China -- in Media or Online
'State secrets' privilege fuels surveillance bill battle

MEDIA & ELECTIONS
Media Policy and the Next Presidency: The Time is Now
Putting Candidates to Test on Media
Democrats=92 Media Narrative Roiled By Racial Tensions
Granite Broadcasting Giving Candidates Free Airtime

INTERNET/BROADBAND
Does Big Media's One-Two Punch Knock Out the Internet?
Cable Modem Chasm: Broadband's Reach Still Not Getting to Many Californians

BROADCASTING
Saving public airwaves
Top Court weighs broadcast indecency

QUICKLY -- YouTube accounts for one-third of all=20
videos viewed online; The wireless trap;=20
ValueClick to pay $2.9 million to settle spam=20
complaint; Blethen Family to Sell Maine Properties

GOVERNMENT & COMMUNICATIONS

NEWS OF PROTESTS IS HARD TO FIND IN CHINA -- IN MEDIA OR ONLINE
[SOURCE: Wall Street Journal, AUTHOR: Loretta Chao loretta.chao( at )wsj.com]
From people stranded by snowstorms to the=20
extramarital affairs of television anchors, news=20
travels quickly in China, although that hasn't=20
been the case for the recent Tibetan=20
antigovernment protests. State-run coverage of=20
the protests has been sparse. While China Central=20
Television, China's national broadcaster, has run=20
footage from the riots of people taking to the=20
streets and overturning cars, it only showed=20
Tibetans attacking ethnic Han-Chinese interests.=20
It didn't show the armed police who have stopped=20
the protests in Lhasa. Aside from the state-run=20
Xinhua news agency, other media have largely been=20
silent on the issue. Media haven't covered news=20
that the protests spread beyond Lhasa to other=20
Chinese provinces. Despite the dominance of the=20
Internet in everyday life, this is one of the=20
rare cases when the government's filtering=20
technology, in addition to self-censorship among=20
Internet media companies and media consumers,=20
seemingly has been successful in stifling a big news item.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120577947315842573.html?mod=3Dtodays_us_...
e_one
(requires subscription)
* VOA and RFA Increase Broadcasts to Tibet
"The violent crackdown by Chinese authorities in=20
Tibet compels us to increase our broadcasts,"=20
said James K. Glassman, Chairman of the BBG,=20
which oversees all non-military U.S.=20
international broadcasting including the Voice of=20
America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA). "Our=20
audience clearly will benefit from these=20
trustworthy sources of news and information,=20
which differ sharply from Chinese government sanctioned broadcasts."
http://www.bbg.gov/_bbg_news.cfm?articleID=3D161&mode=3Dgeneral
* Cellphone Pictures In Lhasa
[Commentary] Cellphone photographs and videos=20
from Tibet, blurry and amateurish, are=20
circulating on the Internet. Some show clouds of=20
tear gas; others, burning buildings and shops;=20
still others, monks in purple robes, riot police=20
and confusion. Watching them, it is impossible=20
not to remember the cellphone videos and=20
photographs sent out from burning Rangoon only six months ago.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/17/AR200803...
2151.html

'STATE SECRETS' PRIVILEGE FUELS SURVEILLANCE BILL BATTLE
[SOURCE: The Christian Science Monitor, AUTHOR: Gail Russell Chaddock]
House Democrats are hunkering down for a long=20
siege with President Bush over his=20
administration's terrorist surveillance program.=20
Democrats are aiming to rein in the White House's=20
power to wiretap without a warrant and assert=20
"state secrecy" in key court battles. As Congress=20
broke for a two-week recess last Friday,=20
President Bush warned that the latest House=20
version of the surveillance bill would "undermine=20
America's security." At the heart of the dispute=20
now is whether to grant retroactive immunity to=20
telecommunications companies now facing lawsuits=20
over their cooperation in warrantless=20
surveillance. Until recently, Democrats had=20
assumed that a vote against the White House on an=20
issue that Mr. Bush said was essential to=20
national security could hurt freshmen Democrats=20
in marginal districts. But at a recent House=20
Democratic caucus meeting, several freshmen said=20
they could explain this vote to their=20
constituents, and cited recent polls backing that=20
view. "We can protect civil liberties and protect=20
the country," says freshman Rep. Paul Hodes (D)=20
of New Hampshire. "What we did with telecoms was sound policy."
http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0318/p02s03-usju.html

MEDIA & ELECTIONS

MEDIA POLICY AND THE NEXT PRESIDENCY: THE TIME IS NOW
[SOURCE: Grantmakers in Film & Electronic Media,=20
AUTHOR: Laura Efurd, ZeroDivide]
[Commentary] With technology and new media=20
playing the most significant role in an election=20
to date, one wonders what kind of impact this=20
will have on the next Administration=92s media and=20
technology policies. Efurd asked several media=20
advocates for their suggestions on how to prepare=20
for advancing a media/technology agenda in the=20
new administration. Here's highlights: 1) Success=20
with the next administration requires laying the=20
groundwork now by engaging in the electoral=20
process; 2) Having the hard data and strong=20
research on hand is necessary to support=20
pro-active policy proposals; 3) Thousands of jobs=20
in federal agencies will change hands in the=20
transition to a new administration; 4) Net=20
Neutrality, broadband access, and media diversity=20
and fairness should be made a part of a 100-day=20
policy agenda of any new administration; and 5)=20
Foster infrastructure to increase ties between=20
national, regional and local actors. Here's what=20
funders can do: Support educational and=20
informational activities related to media and=20
technology policy issues throughout the electoral=20
process, such as education forums; Fund research=20
to gather more robust data on broadband access,=20
media ownership, and the digital divide. Also,=20
make foundation-supported research available to=20
the new administration; Support efforts to place=20
educational materials, policy experts, and lists=20
of potential appointment candidates in front of=20
key people in the new administration; Help build=20
an infrastructure between national, regional and=20
local advocates to work together to advance an=20
agenda. This could include activities such as a=20
national media policy institute in D.C. for local=20
advocates to learn about and participate in=20
advocacy at the federal level; Invest in social=20
media technology so that policy advocates can=20
take full advantage of the innovative new ways to=20
engage and mobilize supporters; and Provide=20
operating support for the day-to-day work of=20
local, regional and national media and technology=20
non-profits. This support must take place both in=20
preparation for, and throughout the course of, a new administration.
http://gfem.org/node/288

PUTTING CANDIDATES TO TEST ON MEDIA
[SOURCE: TVWeek, AUTHOR: Ira Teinowitz]
Sen. McCain (R-AZ) has the most extensive record=20
on media issues of the presidential=20
candidates. He was chairman of the Senate=20
Commerce Committee from 1997 to 2001 and again=20
from 2003 to 2005, putting him at the forefront=20
of media regulation. The committee oversees the=20
Federal Communications Commission, and for eight=20
years he played a major role in any FCC-related=20
legislation the committee considered. He also was=20
co-sponsor of the McCain-Feingold campaign=20
finance reform measure, which included a limit on=20
how much TV stations could charge for commercial=20
spots close to an election. Sen. McCain often has=20
complained, sometimes bitterly, about the=20
lobbying power of broadcasters, but generally has=20
sided with them on major votes. He has shown=20
mixed support for cable, repeatedly criticizing=20
price hikes. Sen. McCain voted against=20
overturning former FCC Chairman Michael Powell=92s=20
2003 bid to dramatically loosen media ownership=20
rules. He=92s generally supported the push to ease=20
limits on how many TV stations and newspapers a=20
single company can own in a given market. Sen.=20
McCain was one of three Senate sponsors last year=20
of legislation that would bar the Federal=20
Communications Commission from reintroducing the=20
Fairness Doctrine, the policy requiring=20
broadcasters to offer competing viewpoints in a=20
balanced manner when presenting controversial issues.
http://www.tvweek.com/news/2008/03/putting_candidates_to_test_on.php
(requires free registration)

DEMOCRATS' MEDIA NARRATIVE ROILED BY RACIAL TENSIONS
[SOURCE: Project for Excellence in Journalism, AUTHOR: Mark Jurkowitz]
Last week, when the media covered the=20
presidential race -- that is, when it wasn't=20
covering Eliot Spitzer -- the story for Democrats=20
was ugly. It was dominated by the candidates=20
disavowing inflammatory remarks from supporters,=20
by lingering resentments in both camps, and by=20
festering divisions along racial and gender=20
lines. For the first time since the primaries=20
began in January, some other story besides the=20
election seriously competed for the media=92s=20
attention last week. From March 10-16, the=20
campaign filled 27% of the newshole, as measured=20
in PEJ=92s News Coverage Index, the lowest level so=20
far this year (well below the previous 2008 low=20
of 38%). The disclosure that New York Governor=20
Spitzer patronized prostitutes and his March 12=20
resignation was a close second, filling 23% of=20
the newshole. Online and on the front pages of=20
newspapers, the sordid demise of Spitzer, known=20
by his prostitution ring nickname as =93Client 9,=94=20
got more attention than the campaign. In a week=20
of reduced campaign coverage, presumptive=20
Republican nominee John McCain continued his=20
disappearing act, registering as a significant or=20
dominant factor in only 15% of the campaign=20
stories=97down from 26% the week before. Overall,=20
stories about Democrats outnumbered those about=20
the Republicans by almost 10 to one.
http://www.journalism.org/node/10210

GRANITE BROADCASTING GIVING CANDIDATES FREE AIRTIME
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: Alex Weprin]
Granite Broadcasting will continue its tradition=20
of granting free airtime to qualified candidates=20
for public office in the six weeks leading up to=20
the presidential election. The program -- first=20
established in 1998 for that year=92s congressional=20
elections -- is designed to =93serve the public=20
interest by facilitating an open and vigorous=20
exchange of ideas.=94 Participating stations will=20
give the candidates two minutes to respond to an=20
issue of local or national importance and will=20
make their production facilities available to=20
them. The responses will be highly publicized on=20
local news programs and will be available in full online.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6541682.html?rssid=3D193

INTERNET/BROADBAND

DOES BIG MEDIA'S ONE-TWO PUNCH KNOCK OUT THE INTERNET?
[SOURCE: Huffington Post, AUTHOR: Jonathan Rintels]
[Commentary] Last week saw Big Media deliver a=20
powerful one-two combination of punches that may=20
knock out today's wide open Internet. First, in a=20
speech delivered by Motion Picture Association of=20
America President Dan Glickman, the nation's=20
media conglomerates vowed to fight increasingly=20
vocal calls from policymakers and the public for=20
"network neutrality." Second, Hulu.com went=20
"live" after months in beta, streaming video of=20
film and television produced by most of the media=20
congloms that make up the MPAA. Allowing Comcast,=20
ATT, and other broadband gatekeepers to=20
discriminate against video content delivered by=20
the BitTorrents of the Internet world vastly=20
strengthens Hulu's competitive position as the=20
leading and "safe" web distribution method for=20
video. And can there be any doubt that as a=20
condition of Big Media's allying with the=20
broadband providers to fight net neutrality that=20
there is a clear understanding between them that=20
Hulu will never be discriminated against in the=20
way BitTorrent was? To prevent this Big Media=20
alliance with Big Cable/Telco from cornering and=20
controlling the Internet, it is time for the=20
government to implement reasonable network=20
neutrality oversight that protects consumers and=20
content creators, and preserves the open Internet we enjoy today.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jonathan-rintels/does-big-medias-onetwo-_b...
777.html

CABLE MODEM CHASM: BROADBAND'S REACH STILL NOT GETTING TO MANY CALIFORNIANS
[SOURCE: The Record (Stockton, CA), AUTHOR: Dana M. Nichols]
California, once a global leader in providing=20
Internet access to its residents, is now falling=20
behind some other countries and even some U.S.=20
regions, according to a state report. Mountain=20
Ranch, Rail Road Flat, Mossdale, Vernalis,=20
Thornton and hundreds of other rural communities=20
are blank dead spots on a recently released state=20
map showing broadband Internet access. About one=20
in every 25 Californians lives in one of those=20
blank spots. That all may change in the next two=20
years as the state government spends $100 million=20
collected from utility bill surcharges to=20
leverage $250 million in private-firm investment=20
to expand broadband access. The state Public=20
Utilities Commission established the California=20
Advanced Services fund in December. Over the next=20
two years, that fund will match 40 percent of the=20
cost when a private company pays 60 percent of the cost to extend service.
http://www.redorbit.com/news/technology/1299387/cable_modem_chasm_broadb...
s_reach_still_not_getting_to_many/index.html?source=3Dr_technology

BROADCASTING

SAVING PUBLIC AIRWAVES
[SOURCE: Las Vegas Sun, AUTHOR: Editorial staff]
[Commentary] Federal funding for public=20
television and radio would be cut in half in 2009=20
and 2010 under a budget proposal President Bush=20
issued last month. Officials from the Office of=20
Management and Budget said that the proposed cuts=20
are =93consistent with the evolving role of public=20
broadcasting in a market that has benefited from=20
tremendous growth and diversity of programming.=94=20
Granted, cable TV and satellite radio offer a=20
wide variety of educational, cultural and other=20
types of programming that previously were=20
available only on public broadcasting channels.=20
The advent of cable TV has helped to make the=20
quality of programming much better than it used=20
to be. Nevertheless, commercial TV is driven by=20
advertising and ratings, and stations are=20
beholden to shareholders and the bottom line. As=20
a result, quality programming is not necessarily=20
their top priority. As a publicly funded entity,=20
public television has more freedom to focus on=20
content and program quality. So public television=20
and radio still offer programs not found anywhere=20
else. Even if most Americans have access to cable=20
television, many still do not. For them, public=20
stations offer the only alternatives. But the=20
larger issue, beyond viewing choice, is that the=20
Corporation for Public Broadcasting=92s airwaves=20
are owned by the public. As such, they should be supported with public fund=
ing.
http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2008/mar/17/saving-public-airwaves/

TOP COURT WEIGHS BROADCAST INDECENCY
[SOURCE: Associated Press, AUTHOR: ]
The Supreme Court on Monday stepped into a legal=20
fight over the use of curse words on the=20
airwaves, the high court's first major case on=20
broadcast indecency in 30 years. The case=20
concerns a Federal Communications Commission=20
policy that allows for fines against broadcasters=20
for so-called "fleeting expletives," one-time=20
uses of the 'F-word' or its close cousins. Fox=20
Broadcasting -- along with ABC, CBS and NBC --=20
challenged the new policy after the commission=20
said broadcasts of entertainment awards shows in=20
2002 and 2003 were indecent because of profanity=20
uttered by Bono, Cher and Nicole Richie. A=20
federal appeals court said the new policy was=20
invalid and could violate the First Amendment.
http://money.cnn.com/2008/03/17/technology/bc.us.supremecourt.broad.ap/i...
x.htm?section=3Dmoney_technology
* Top court to review FCC indecency rule case
http://www.reuters.com/article/industryNews/idUSWAT00914320080317
* High Court Takes FCC=92s F-Word Case
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6541004.html?nid=3D4262
* FCC Commissioner Tate: "I am pleased that the=20
U.S. Supreme Court has granted the petition for=20
certiorari filed by the Solicitor=20
General. Protecting children from inappropriate=20
programming continues to be one of my top=20
priorities. I hope that the Court's decision=20
will give broadcasters clarity regarding the use=20
of profanity, even fleeting profanity, on the=20
public airwaves, at times when children are most likely to be in the audien=
ce."
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-280843A1.doc
* FCC Commissioner Adelstein: "I'm pleased that=20
the Supreme Court agreed to review the Fox=20
decision. While the FCC has a statutory duty to=20
enforce the indecency laws, I continue to believe=20
that all of us-government, industry, and=20
parents-have a role to play in protecting our=20
children from inappropriate material. The=20
Court's review will hopefully bring additional=20
clarity to concerned citizens and broadcasters alike."
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-280835A1.doc
* Court Takes Up On-Air Vulgarity Again
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/18/washington/18scotus.html?ref=3Dtodaysp...
* Supreme Court to Review FCC Ban on Profanity
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/17/AR200803...
0842.html
* Supreme Court to hear case stemming from celebrities who swore on live TV
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20080318/a_court18.art.htm
* Supreme Court to rule on broadcast indecency
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-na-scotus18mar18,1,...
5059.story
* FCC's obscenity rule to get Supreme Court's ear
http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0318/p02s01-usju.html

QUICKLY

YOUTUBE ACCOUNTS FOR ONE-THIRD OF ALL VIDEOS VIEWED ONLINE
[SOURCE: InfoWorld, AUTHOR: Jim Dalrymple, Macworld.com]
It may come as no surprise to many who spend a=20
lot of time on Google's popular video Web site=20
YouTube, but the service accounts for one out of=20
every three videos viewed online. Market research=20
form comScore said that YouTube accounted for=20
more than 3 billion of the 9-billion-plus videos=20
viewed in January 2008. While 9 billion videos is=20
certainly a lot of viewing, that number is=20
actually down from December. In a record-breaking=20
month December 2007 saw more than 10.1 billion=20
videos viewed online. However, Google sites=20
gained 1.7 percent market share to 34.3 percent=20
or 3.4 billion videos viewed -- YouTube account=20
for 96 percent of Google's videos. Fox=20
Interactive Media ranked second with 584 million=20
(6 percent), followed by Yahoo sites with 315=20
million (3.2 percent) and Microsoft sites with 199 million (2 percent).
http://www.infoworld.com/article/08/03/17/YouTube-accounts-for-one-third...
-online-videos_1.html

THE WIRELESS TRAP
[SOURCE: Los Angeles Times 3/16, AUTHOR: Jim Puzzanghera]
Cellphone bill larger than you expected?=20
Regulation is urged to increase disclosure and curb added charges.
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-cover16mar16,1,103604,full.story
(requires registration)

VALUECLICK TO PAY $2.9 MILLION TO SETTLE SPAM COMPLAINT
[SOURCE: InfoWorld, AUTHOR: Grant Gross]
Online advertiser ValueClick has agreed to pay a=20
record $2.9 million to settle a U.S. Federal=20
Trade Commission complaint that it sent deceptive=20
advertising claims in spam e-mail and failed to=20
secure consumers' sensitive financial=20
information. ValueClick subsidiary Hi-Speed Media=20
used deceptive e-mails, banner ads and pop-ups to=20
drive Internet users to its Web sites, the FTC said Monday.
http://www.infoworld.com/cgi-bin/redirect?source=3Drss&url=3Dhttp://www....
oworld.com/article/08/03/17/ValueClick-to-pay-to-settle-spam-complaint_1.ht=
ml
* ValueClick to Pay $2.9 Million to Settle FTC Charges
http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2008/03/vc.shtm

BLETHEN FAMILY TO SELL MAINE PROPERTIES
[SOURCE: Editor&Publisher]
The Seattle Times Co. is putting its properties=20
in Maine on the block. The Blethen family, which=20
controls the Seattle Times Co., is seeking buyers=20
for the Portland Press Herald/Maine Sunday=20
Telegram, the Kennebec Journal, the Morning Sentinel, and MaineToday.com.
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_con...
t_id=3D1003726658
--------------------------------------------------------------
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.
--------------------------------------------------------------