August 2009

Access and the Internet

[Commentary] On the Internet today, a Web site run by a solo blogger can load as quickly as any corporate home page. Internet service providers, including leading cable and phone companies, want to be able to change that so they can give priority to businesses that pay, or make deals with, them. A good bill that would guarantee so-called Network Neutrality has been introduced in the House. Congress should pass it, and the Obama administration should use its considerable power to make net neutrality the law. If Internet service providers are allowed to choose among content, it would be bad for everyone but the service providers. Businesses could slow down or block their competitors' Web content. A cable company whose leaders disapprove of a particular political or social cause could block sites supporting that cause.

Supreme Court to Revisit 'Hillary' Documentary

The Supreme Court will cut short its summer break in early September to hear a new argument in a momentous case that could transform the way political campaigns are conducted. The case, which arises from a minor political documentary called "Hillary: The Movie," seemed an oddity when it was first argued in March. Just six months later, it has turned into a juggernaut with the potential to shatter a century-long understanding about the government's ability to bar corporations from spending money to support political candidates. The case has also deepened a profound split among liberals, dividing those who view government regulation of political speech as an affront to the First Amendment from those who believe that unlimited corporate campaign spending is a threat to democracy. At issue is whether the court should overrule a 1990 decision, Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce, which upheld restrictions on corporate spending to support or oppose political candidates.

The TV Press That Covers Public Policy Today Is Failing Us

[Commentary] News organizations need to be profitable, but they also need to be responsible and to report the news in a factual, unbiased manner. The media has failed when polls reveal that millions of Americans who voted for George W. Bush in 2004, for example, believed erroneously that weapons of mass destruction had been discovered in Iraq or that so many voters in 2008 believed the myth that Barack Obama was a Muslim or that so many people today believe the falsehood that the health care bill will set up "death panels." In addition to spreading disinformation, the partisans on television news and radio talk shows continually question the motives or patriotism of those with whom they disagree. Let's hope for some introspection among those who run our electronic news organizations today. Let us hope they can present more accurate news accounts that will produce a better informed public. Let us hope they can tone down the rhetoric a notch so we can have a better, more civil public. And let us hope we can move toward a society in which even the most partisan among us can acknowledge that their opponents are not enemies, but simply fellow Americans with a different view. A democracy cannot function otherwise.

Broadcasters Must Push Hard For Deregulation

[Commentary] Should broadcast journalists get involved with the government's efforts to save journalism? On the one hand, it may be a good idea for broadcasters to participate. It's a perfect opportunity for them to make the case that consolidation isn't necessarily a bad thing when it comes to journalism, and that outdated ownership restrictions must go. In fact, and somewhat paradoxically, they can argue that consolidation is good for journalism. Newspapers have done their best journalistic work since becoming monopolies or near monopolies. Flush owners are willing to trade dollars for the power and prestige that comes from operating first-rate journalistic enterprises. What's wrecking such papers is the uncontrollable invasion of competition from the Internet. They've lost their local news and classified advertising franchises and they can't get them back. By contrast, excessive competition seems to bring out the worse in journalism. In broadcasting, it leads to rundowns filled with the lowest-common-denominator reporting on crimes and fires. In cable, among the news networks, it has produced a mad race to the bottom in search of the most viewers. On the other hand, the proceedings could be a trap. Whatever benefits the government grants the legacy media are likely to come with strings. For every break the Federal Communications Commission grants TV stations it will want something in return. A larger principle is at stake here too. Journalistic organizations simply shouldn't be involved in what will surely lead to some quid pro quo or put them on an economic footing that depends on the continued beneficence of the government.

George Steinbrenner sued over Yankees' TV network

George Steinbrenner, the longtime principal owner of the New York Yankees baseball team, was sued on Friday for allegedly breaching an agreement over the creation and operation a $3 billion cable TV network. In a lawsuit filed in Manhattan federal court, Robert Gutkowski, a former president of Madison Square Garden Corp and the MSG Network, said Steinbrenner "knowingly lied" when he promised him a chance to build and have a major role in running what would become the Yankees Entertainment and Sports Network, or YES. Instead, he said Steinbrenner retained him as only an occasional outside consultant, and did not and never intended to properly compensate him.

A&E cable network buys out Lifetime

Walt Disney, Hearst and NBC Universal said on Thursday that their jointly owned A&E Television Networks group will buy Lifetime Entertainment Services for an undisclosed sum. Lifetime is a joint venture of Disney and Hearst. NBC Universal owns other women-oriented cable channels, such as Bravo and Oxygen. The companies said the move was a bid to consolidate three of the leading cable networks under the single management of AETN Chief Executive Abbe Raven. The deal, expected to close this year, includes provisions by which NBC may choose or be forced to divest its stake in the new company, leaving Disney and Hearst as equal partners.

Nielsen: Number of TV Households Up By 400,000

Nielsen says the number of TV households has increased by 400,000 to 114.9 million, the smallest increase in the last decade. Nielsen announced the bump as it prepares to start rating the new TV season for 2090-2010.

Apple, AT&T face yet another iPhone MMS lawsuit

For at least the third time this month, Apple and AT&T are being sued by a consumer complaining of being duped into believing that multimedia messaging, or MMS, was already available on the iPhone. Filed in the Northern District of Ohio on Wednesday, plaintiff Deborah Carr says Apple and AT&T misled the public into believing that the iPhone 3GS was capable of sending and receiving MMS messages on the device. The lawsuit claims that Apple's "print and video advertisements...on television, the Internet, the radio, newspapers, and direct mailers" all mention the availability of MMS on the device. Two similar cases--one in Illinois and another in Louisiana--were also filed against the companies in August. According to the latest lawsuit, first reported by InformationWeek, customers were told that MMS would be enabled on June 17, 2009, when iPhone OS 3.0 was released.

Army used profiles to reject reporters

The secret profiles commissioned by the Pentagon to rate the work of journalists reporting from Afghanistan were used by military officials to deny disfavored reporters access to American fighting units or otherwise influence their coverage as recently as 2008, an Army official acknowledged Friday. What's more, the official said, Army public affairs officers used the analyses of reporters' work to decide how to steer them away from potentially negative stories. "If a reporter has been focused on nothing but negative topics, you're not going to send him into a unit that's not your best," Maj. Patrick Seiber, spokesman for the Army's 101st Airborne Division, told Stars and Stripes. "There's no win-win there for us. We're not trying to control what they report, but we are trying to put our best foot forward."

Despite Web 2.0 Tools, Government Collaboration Is Still Slow to Catch On

Collaboration is a hot topic with the rise of Web 2.0 tools, but public-sector success stories are rare. Collaboration among government agencies remains difficult at best. The reasons it doesn't work are many. When government officials discuss collaboration's benefits, seldom does the "everyone hold hands and sing Kumbaya" approach work. Historically collaboration has been stymied by one-size-fits-all approaches that fail to recognize each organization's needs and perspectives. Elected and appointed officials' egos and agendas can get in the way. Finally the proliferation of control freaks prevent collaboration from occurring.