January 2010

Privacy Groups Question Beacon Settlement, Facebook's Control Over Foundation

A coalition of privacy organizations are criticizing the proposed $9.5 million settlement of a class-action lawsuit stemming from Facebook's Beacon on the ground that the deal could benefit the social networking site more than its members.

The Electronic Privacy Information Center and five other advocacy groups take issue with the portion of the proposed settlement that calls on Facebook to fund a new privacy foundation with approximately $6 million. The remaining portion of the settlement would go towards attorneys' fees.

"The foundation as proposed is likely to become a public relations organization for Facebook," the groups state in a recent letter to U.S. Magistrate Judge Richard Seeborg in San Jose.

Joining EPIC as signatories are the Center for Digital Democracy, Consumer Action, Consumer Federation of America, Privacy Rights Clearinghouse and Patient Privacy Rights.

Public satisfaction with federal Web sites increased in 2009

Citizen satisfaction with federal Web sites increased significantly in 2009, indicating that efforts by the Obama administration to increase transparency in government are getting noticed, according to a new report.

For the last quarter of 2009, more than 250,000 citizens surveyed gave federal Web sites a satisfaction rating of 75.2 out of 100 points, according to a report released by ForeSee Results, a market research firm that issues quarterly reports on public opinion about federal Web sites in conjunction with the American Customer Satisfaction Index. Survey respondents also awarded federal Web sites a satisfaction rating of 75.2 for the third quarter of 2009. This is a slight increase from the 73.6 satisfaction rating federal Web sites earned in the first and second quarters of 2009.

US Cellular puts in call for big slice of federal stimulus funds

US Cellular, struggling to hold onto wireless subscribers and profits in the face of pressure from larger rivals, is seeking federal grant money in a bid to expand its network. Chicago-based U.S.

Cellular has applied for $23.5 million from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act's $7.2-billion Broadband USA program designed to bring high-speed 3G Internet service to rural and underserved communities. The company is seeking to enhance cellular networks in remote parts of California, Nebraska, Missouri and Kansas. The grants are viewed as crucial to U.S. Cellular's campaign to bring state-of-the-art 3G service — necessary to transmit large volumes of data — to the 25% of its 6.1 million customers in 26 states who don't yet have it. "It's expensive for us to bring broadband into some of these rural markets on our own," says John Gockley, U.S. Cellular's vice-president of legal and regulatory affairs, who is overseeing the grant applications. "The usage of smartphones and wireless modems would grow from any expansion in our 3G network."

3 Ways Television Makes the World a Better Place

[Commentary] Love it or hate it, TV is still the most influential cultural force. Some say TV is evil; TV hating may seem simple and satisfying, a way to wash our hands of responsibility for things like low literacy rates, laziness, or lack-luster economic performance, but it's too simplistic. Some comedies, dramas and soaps can bust prejudices better than any type of earnest educational campaign, they can raise awareness and create discussion about hard-hitting social issues better than most other attempts, and they even actually improve people's lives here and in developing countries. Why? Because they're entertaining. A spoonful of sugar makes the medicine popular.

E-prescribing tools raise reliability concerns

E-prescribing technologies are gaining ground in doctors' offices and hospitals, but are hampered by gaps in the systems and worries about reliability, industry experts told the Information Exchange workgroup.

E-prescribing is included as a component of electronic health record (EHR) systems in recent regulations from the Health and Human Services Department. HHS is distributing at least $17 billion in incentive payments to doctors and hospitals who buy and meaningfully use such systems. Benefits include more legible prescriptions, helpful reminder systems and better documentation of medications. However, e-prescribing currently has many limitations, including gaps in reliability when hub networks are down that temporarily prohibit electronic transfer of the prescriptions

New Physician Adoption Statistics

[Commentary] The CDC recently released its latest report on the adoption of electronic health records/electronic medical records (EHR/EMR) amongst office-based physicians from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey.

As a physician who trained and initially practiced in a time where nearly every order, record, and prescription was paper-based, the results are striking to me. The final results for 2008 show about 16.7 percent of physicians reported having systems that met the criteria of a basic EHR/EMR system, and about 4.4 percent reported that of a fully functional system. Preliminary results for 2009 show about 20.5 percent reported having systems that met the criteria of a basic system, and 6.3 percent reported that of a fully functional system. Combined basic and fully functional statistics for the last 3 years are as follows: 2007 - 17%, 2008 - 21%, Preliminary 2009 - 27% The latest figures, especially the preliminary 2009 numbers, suggest that the pace of adoption of HIT is quickening.

The National Broadband Plan: Let's Focus on Main Street First

[Commentary] It remains unclear whether the national broadband plan will deliver on the promise of being a 21st century version of the historic 1950s plan our nation developed successfully for the interstate highway system.

Unfortunately, too much focus so far has been on increasing the speed of broadband in the U.S. so that our rankings in the world on this measure move closer to the top.

In order for the national broadband plan to capture the public's attention and interest, along with garnering necessary bipartisan support in Washington, we need to abandon a "race to the moon" mindset for broadband immediately. The next two months will be critical for bringing the conversation about the national broadband plan back to Main Street and into our homes. With overall unemployment continuing to hover around 10 percent, the best connection that the FCC and other government policymakers can make is with broadband's relationship to new private sector investment, job creation, entrepreneurial activity and economic growth.

If this refocusing is not done soon, we may find that the expansive conversation about broadband availability, access and impact that is needed does not take place. Broadband needs to be more than a side conversation in our country's vital agenda, but this can be accomplished only if technological capabilities and performance are linked with how they actually improve the ways we work and live.

How will SCOTUS decision affect corporate media?

[Commentary] In 2004, the United Church of Christ produced a television commercial promoting its inclusive approach to organized faith. The ad showed two nightclub-style bouncers guarding the rope line of a church as they denied entry to a gay male couple, several people of color, and a man in a wheelchair. By contrast, a white family of four had no problems getting through. "Jesus didn't turn people away" was the ad's tagline, but CBS did, turning down the commercial which was intended for broadcast during that year's Super Bowl. The 30-second spot apparently violated the network's policy of "prohibiting advocacy ads, even ones that carry an 'implicit' endorsement for a side in a public debate." Now, six years later, CBS has agreed to run an ad by the notoriously anti-reproductive rights, anti-gay organization Focus on the Family, featuring college football star and anti-choice crusader Tim Tebow.

The network's blatantly hypocritical decision has sparked intense controversy and brought new light to the shadowy world of corporate media policy governing political or issue-advocacy commercials. These cable and broadcast outlets seem to make the argument that only certain entities can make certain political arguments against certain figures on certain issues during certain programs. It's difficult to follow -- and perhaps that is the point. Lack of specificity provides ample wiggle room.

Court Ruling to Deliver $300M Boost to Media

Last week's Supreme Court decision on campaign financing will be good for the media business.

Media companies and agencies were digesting the impacts -- more direct spending by corporations, unions and wealthy individuals, as well as more issue-oriented money pouring into the system. And much of that additional money -- $300 million, according to a Needham & Co. estimate, on top of the predicted $2.8 billion -- will flow to local TV stations. Couple the Supreme Court's decision with the Scott Brown Senate win in Massachusetts, which has "Republicans smelling blood in the water" and we'll see 10% more political ad dollars, said Laura Martin, a Needham analyst. "These two factors work together to create an arms race between corporations and unions, and the only weapons dealers are the local TV stations," she said.

With an abundance of stations in what look to be hotly-contested political markets, station groups such as Meredith, McGraw-Hill and the network-owned groups look best poised to grab political advertising this year, according to investment bank M.C. Alcamo & Co. 75% of McGraw-Hill's four stations are in markets featuring "toss-up" races, followed by 64% at Meredith, 62% at CBS and 60% at both the ABC and NBC owned station groups. Gannett's "toss-up" rate is 58%, and the Fox-owned group comes in at 52%.

Sizing Up Stations' Campaign Ad Windfall

A Q&A with Evan Tracey of Kantar Media (formerly TNS Media) about the Supreme Court's campaign financing decision that corporations and unions, as a matter of constitutional right, may spend their own money on advertising to influence the outcome of elections. According to Tracey, the ruling will likely have a swift and profound impact on campaigns and political spending, pushing spending on TV stations to the high side of his previously forecast $2.6 billion-$2.8 billion range and turning campaigns into "three-dimensional games of chess" in which the candidates themselves may not be in full control.

Benton

Search