July 2014

E-RATE/CONNECTED

OFFICE OF FCC COMMISSIONER AJIT PAI RELEASES FINANCIAL PROJECTIONS FOR FCC’S E-RATE PROPOSAL
[SOURCE: Federal Communications Commission, AUTHOR: FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai]
The Federal Communications Commission is scheduled to vote on a proposal to change E-Rate, a program designed to help schools and libraries connect to the Internet. That proposal promises over $5 billion for Wi-Fi but doesn’t identify where the money will come from to fund this new program. After crunching the numbers provided by FCC staff, the Office of Commissioner Ajit Pai has developed financial projections that validate the concerns of congressional leaders of both parties that the proposal’s promises would come out of funding available today for Internet connectivity. Here are the results:
Over the next five years, the FCC’s Wi-Fi proposal would cut over $2.7 billion ($2,716,652,262) in funding available for Internet connectivity for schools and libraries.
In Year 3, the proposal would cut over $645 million ($645,658,643) or 27% of funds available for Internet connectivity.
In Year 4, the proposal would cut over $985 million ($985,937,579) or 39% of funds available for Internet connectivity.
In Year 5, the proposal would cut over $1.085 billion ($1,085,056,039) or 41% of funds available for Internet connectivity.
Because of these spending cuts, many rural schools would lose all of their funding for Internet connectivity in Years 3 through 5.
The FCC’s Washington-knows-best approach would deprive local school districts of the flexibility to meet local needs. By slashing funds available for Internet connectivity, the program will likely provide many American students with “Wi-Fi to nowhere.”
benton.org/node/194025 | Federal Communications Commission | B&C
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

HOUSE COMMERCE COMMITTEE REPUBLICANS PAN E-RATE PROPOSAL
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
House Commerce Committee leaders have told Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler that any effort to expand the size of the E-Rate subsidy is a non-starter. The FCC is planning to vote on a Wheeler-led revamp of the E-Rate program. The program, subsidized by telecom companies -- and ultimately rate-payers -- provides advanced telecommunications to schools and libraries. In this case, Chairman Wheeler wants to boost investment in wireless broadband in an effort to migrate it from traditional service. In a letter to Chairman Wheeler, House Commerce Committee chairman Fred Upton (R-MI) and Communications Subcommittee chairman Greg Walden (R-OR), said they were concerned by reports the FCC planned to grow the Universal Service Fund E-Rate subsidy beyond its current $9 billion "on the back of rate-payers."
benton.org/node/194022 | Broadcasting&Cable | The Hill
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

INTERNET/BROADBAND

IT'S NOT ABOUT "CAN WE?" IT'S ABOUT "WILL WE?"
[SOURCE: Benton Foundation, AUTHOR: Michael Copps]
[Commentary] Public comments are due regarding the Federal Communication Commission’s (FCC) proposed rules for network neutrality. Much of the focus will be on arcane legalisms, the particulars of various court decisions, and the confounding twists and turns of FCC regulatory oversight (or lack thereof). This is all well and good, and based on more than a decade tracking such minutiae as a member of the FCC, I am confident that those of us favoring a real Open Internet will have much the better detailed arguments to put forward. But it’s more -- much more -- than that.
[Copps served as a commissioner on the Federal Communications Commission from May 2001 to December 2011 and was the FCC's Acting Chairman from January to June 2009]
http://benton.org/node/193964
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

A CLOSER LOOK AT NET NEUTRALITY
[SOURCE: National Review, AUTHOR: Rep Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), FCC Commissioner Michael O'Rielly]
[Commentary] The Federal Communications Commission has become famous -- or infamous -- for its recent proposal to adopt network neutrality rules. Lost in the debate is the lack of a demonstrable need for such rules, as validated by a rigorous and factually sound cost-benefit analysis. The Internet has flourished because of the government’s hands-off approach. All regulations carry costs, which are inevitably passed on to consumers in one form or another. We should therefore be very concerned when an agency plans to enact new rules, especially unnecessary ones. In Executive Order 13563, President Barack Obama reaffirmed that executive agencies should “propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned determination that its benefits justify its cost” and must “use the best available techniques to quantify anticipated present and future benefits and costs as accurately as possible.” He also called upon independent agencies like the FCC to follow the same principles. If the Commission fully adheres to this directive, it should refrain from imposing net-neutrality regulations unless there’s evidence of an actual problem it would address, and unless the benefits of the regulations would clearly outweigh the costs.
benton.org/node/194013 | National Review | ars technica
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

NET NEUTRALITY GETTING DIS-CONNECTED
[SOURCE: GigaOm, AUTHOR: Paul Sweeting]
[Commentary] While Google has gone quiet on network neutrality it’s making plenty of waves on other aspects of network management. I don’t think the shift in tactics is mere coincidence. Rather, I think Google, Facebook and other large bandwidth users have decided, like Netflix, that their real fight is not over the treatment of their content over the last mile but over how it gets to the last mile. For all the sturm und drang over fast lanes and slow lanes, from the point of view of Netflix, YouTube and other video streaming services, it’s a bit of a red herring, as is much of the rest of the substantive debate over net neutrality as it has been defined by the FCC. Nobody’s going to pay for a fast lane on the last mile if they also have to pay a toll just to get their bits onto the last mile. So long as ISPs are able to erect those toll booths and manipulate the traffic around them, fast lanes and slow lanes are irrelevant in terms of their potential impact on a video provider’s business. There’s another, longer-term consideration, however, that I suspect is also behind the shift in emphasis from net neutrality to peering. Charging for peering doesn’t actually make a lot of short-term economic sense for ISPs, since peering reduces costs for everyone. By establishing the precedent now that major bandwidth hogs, which for the most part just happen to be major video streaming services, should pay for access to their networks they’re hoping to forestall the day when Netflix can demand payment for its content. [Sweeting is Principal, Concurrent Media Strategies]
benton.org/node/194084 | GigaOm
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

WHY IS NETFLIX BUFFERING? DISPELLING THE CONGESTION MYTH
[SOURCE: Verizon, AUTHOR: David Young]
After receiving the letter from a customer in Los Angeles asking why he was not getting a good experience watching Netflix on his 75 Mbps FiOS connection, claiming Verizon was “throttling” Netflix traffic, our network operations team studied the network connection for this customer for the week preceding the date that he emailed us. They measured the utilization -- or the percentage of total capacity used -- at every link in the Verizon network -- from the customer to the edge of our network, where we receive Netflix traffic -- to determine where, if at all, congestion was occurring. This review confirmed again what I’ve explained before: there was no congestion anywhere within the Verizon network. There was, however, congestion at the interconnection link to the edge of our network (the border router) used by the transit providers chosen by Netflix to deliver video traffic to Verizon’s network. While the links chosen by Netflix were congested (congestion occurs when use approaches or reaches 100% capacity during peak usage periods), the links from other transit providers (carrying non-Netflix traffic) to Verizon’s network did not experience congestion and were performing fine. The maximum amount of capacity used (or peak utilization) over the links between these other networks and Verizon’s network ranged from 10% to 80% (with an average peak utilization of 44%). One might wonder why Netflix and its transit providers were the only ones that ran into congestion issues. What it boils down to is this: these other transit and content providers took steps to ensure that there was adequate capacity for their traffic to enter our network.
benton.org/node/194081 | Verizon | The Verge
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

COMMUNICATIONS POLICY IN TRANSITION: MERGERS, NET NEUTRALITY, AND THE DIGITAL DIVIDE
[SOURCE: New America Foundation, AUTHOR: Nick Russo]
[Commentary] The Federal Communications Commission announced the team that will be reviewing the proposed Comcast-Time Warner Cable merger, signifying the agency’s readiness to begin the formal review process of the merger. There is a lot going on at the FCC these days, and this merger is but one point in an array of important policy decisions before the Commission. Communications policy is at a moment of transition in the United States. A successful merger between Comcast and TWC would give one company nearly half the national market of truly high-speed broadband connections, threatening to move us away from the broadband ecosystem we need. As part of the merger review process, the companies must demonstrate that the transaction will not produce competitive harms and will affirmatively be in the public interest. The first question with which the FCC must contend is the potential for competitive harms evident in the transaction. Competition in the broadband marketplace is notably limited. The merger may also have effects on the issue of network neutrality, the idea that ISPs should not be able to block or discriminate based on the content or type of traffic online. These potential harms to competition and the open Internet lead us in the wrong direction for the communications policy we need. In front of the FCC right now are two momentous decisions that will have a significant effect on the future of the Internet. The FCC should do the right thing for the public’s interest and reject the merger between Comcast and Time Warner Cable. The FCC must also enact strong net neutrality rules to encourage innovation in the broadband market and ensure a robust, free, and open Internet.
benton.org/node/193995 | New America Foundation
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

WHAT COUNTRIES WILL SHAPE THE FUTURE OF THE INTERNET?
[SOURCE: New America Foundation, AUTHOR: Tim Maurer, Robert Morgus]
[Commentary] In the future, who -- or what -- will govern the Internet? The answer to that question could also shed light on one of the biggest foreign policy questions of the decade: As power is shifting among states and diffusing, what is the future of the world order? That first question was in the spotlight in 2012, right around the World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT) in Dubai. It was the first time in nearly a decade that the topic of Internet governance attracted major international media attention. The conference became the latest showdown of the ongoing struggle over the future of the Internet with some countries led by Russia and China seeking greater governmental control and others supporting an Internet governance model driven by civil society, the private sector, and governments. Caught in the middle are the “swing states”-- countries that have not decided which vision for the future of the Internet they will support. Yet, the outcome of this debate ultimately depends on these states -- the ones that have not yet firmly staked out a position and who represent a significant share of the world’s population and economy. While it is not surprising to find India, Brazil, and South Africa among the key 30 swing states, some of our findings raise interesting questions. Ultimately, this Internet governance debate is embedded in the larger systemic shift -- the reshuffling of the world order. Take Brazil and India, two of the countries that have attracted greater attention during this debate not only with regard to the future of the Internet but the future of the international order. Mexico, Indonesia, Turkey, Ghana, and Malaysia also are on our list and deserve more attention. Their behavior shapes what norms and institutions will govern our lives in the future, including finance, post-2015 development goals, international security -- and the future of the Internet.
benton.org/node/193993 | New America Foundation
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

CHATTANOOGA WANTS FEDS TO PRE-EMPT BROADBAND BAN
[SOURCE: Center for Public Integrity, AUTHOR: Allan Holmes]
Chattanooga (TN) officials plan to ask the federal government to allow it to expand the super-fast Internet service it offers city residents, a move that will likely unleash a torrent of lobbying and lawsuits by telecommunications companies that have spent years convincing states to curb city-run networks. The city’s Electric Power Board, which operates a fiber-optic Internet service that competes with companies such as Comcast and Charter Communications, will petition the Federal Communications Commission in the next couple of months to pre-empt the Tennessee law that prohibits the city from expanding the network, Danna Bailey, vice president of corporate communications for the EPB, said. “We continue to receive requests for broadband service from nearby communities to serve them,” Bailey said. “We believe cities and counties should have the right to choose the infrastructure they need to support their economies.” The move by Chattanooga will be a first salvo in an effort by municipalities and the FCC to reverse the laws in 20 states that ban or severely restrict local governments from offering Internet service to residents.
benton.org/node/194001 | Center for Public Integrity
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

OWNERSHIP

COMPLAINTS ABOUT COMCAST-TIME WARNER CABLE DEAL NOW BEING ACCEPTED
[SOURCE: Revere Digital, AUTHOR: Amy Schatz]
Don’t like the idea of Comcast, the nation’s largest cable and Internet provider, getting larger by purchasing Time Warner Cable? You can now officially let regulators know, after the Federal Communications Commission formally launched its review of the deal. The agency is asking for comments about the proposed $45 billion transaction (including Comcast’s spin-off deal with Charter Communications). Initial comments are due August 25, with final comments due October 8. The action will be mostly administrative. The FCC has already received more than 10,000 comments about the deal since it was announced in February. The FCC notice also starts an informal 180-day shot-clock for completing its review, although that doesn’t really mean much because the agency routinely blows those deadlines. Comcast reiterated its position that the acquisition is in the public’s interest, but suggested that it knows others may not agree.
benton.org/node/194086 | Revere Digital | FCC | B&C
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

WIRELESS/SPECTRUM

THE SENATE HAS ADVANCED A BILL TO LEGALIZE CELL PHONE UNLOCKING
[SOURCE: Washington Post, AUTHOR: Brian Fung]
We're one step closer to a world where it's no longer a huge chore to take your existing cell phone to another network. The Senate Judiciary Committee just unanimously approved a bill that'd make it easier for you to "unlock" your cell phone so that you can port it to a different carrier -- much in the way you can bring your phone number with you. "With today’s strong bipartisan vote in the Judiciary Committee, I hope the full Senate can soon take up this important legislation that supports consumer rights," said Sen Patrick Leahy (D-VT), the committee chairman. The House has already passed a similar bill -- but unlike the House version the Senate's, notably, doesn't forbid people from unlocking lots of cell phones. That language is important when it comes to businesses that trade in second-hand devices; currently, you can only unlock your phone if you ask for your carrier's permission (and only at the end of your contract).
benton.org/node/194009 | Washington Post | National Journal | The Hill | Public Knowledge
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS

CALLING 911 FROM YOUR CELL PHONE IN DC? GOOD LUCK GETTING FIRST-RESPONDERS TO FIND YOU.
[SOURCE: Washington Post, AUTHOR: Brian Fung]
Over a six-month period in 2013, Washington (DC) data show, calls to 911 were easily narrowed down to a general geographic area covered by a single cell tower. But a startling proportion of those calls lacked the latitude-longitude data required by federal regulations for pinpointing people in distress. The more specific data was missing for as many as 90 percent of such calls over a six-month period in 2013, according to data from the DC government that was provided to the FCC and obtained by the Washington Post. Of the 385,341 wireless calls to 911 made during that time, technological systems were able to provide accurate location data for only 39,805. Dispatchers in some cases may have been able to get an address from the caller. But in other cases -- for instance, where the caller was unable to speak due to danger or injury -- dispatchers would have had little to go on aside from a search area the size of a few city blocks. Other data the DC government provided to the Federal Communications Commission -- covering a three-month period last summer and breaking the calls down by wireless carrier -- showed that some carriers did a better job than others at providing the latitude-longitude data. But rates of compliance were still no better than a coin toss, according to the research.
benton.org/node/193987 | Washington Post
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

CONTENT

CAN NETFLIX SURVIVE FIGHT WITH CABLE?
[SOURCE: Washington Post, AUTHOR: Cecilia Kang]
Reed Hastings, the chief executive of Netflix, is on a mission: to turn his company into the Internet’s first television network. Hastings sees the future of video entertainment as being largely written by HBO and Netflix, companies that offer must-see series on mobile apps that are highly personalized and constantly recommend more entertainment from vast libraries of content. But there’s one major threat to its long-term survival. Netflix, which makes up nearly one-third of all Internet traffic, relies on the Internet pipes ruled by such companies as Comcast and Verizon. Stream to viewers a “House of Cards” episode whose connection fades in and out, and watch subscribers walk out the door. The world of television is dominated by big, entrenched players: broadcasters and cable companies that run the piping of the Internet and hope to get even bigger. Standing in the middle is Netflix, which has begun to flex its muscles in Washington, challenging the same cable companies that control those pipes that the company needs to survive, waging a high-stakes bet on government regulators to act as a referee over the fast-evolving tech and telecom industries. Whether Netflix can survive will help determine how consumers watch television for years to come. Do they continue to pay Comcast for a big package of channels? Or do they abandon the bundle and subscribe to a mix of streaming video services such as Netflix and Amazon Prime, streamed through their Apple TV or Google’s Android TV?
benton.org/node/194121 | Washington Post | Netflix CEO Q&A
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

TELEVISION/RADIO

HOUSE PANEL MOVES ‘CLEAN’ SATELLITE TV BILL
[SOURCE: The Hill, AUTHOR: Julian Hattem]
The House Judiciary Committee easily passed a critical satellite television law on a unanimous voice vote. The panel avoided making any controversial changes to the existing marketplace for retransmitting broadcast programs on cable and satellite with the “clean” extension of the Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act (STELA), which came as a victory for broadcasters. “I realize that current licenses are not perfect for everyone, but on balance I would say that they do a good job,” intellectual property subcommittee Chairman Howard Coble (R-NC) said. “Not unlike many other bills, this legislation will not satisfy all stakeholders, but it should satisfy enough and most importantly, it serves the interests of our satellite-viewing constituents.” The bill ensures that more than 1 million people living in rural areas who would not otherwise be able to pick up broadcast signals with a roof antenna can have channels beamed to them through satellite TV service. The existing law is set to run out at the end of 2014 but would be renewed until 2019 under the committee’s bill. “This helps ensure that consumers in rural areas like my congressional district have the same access to news and entertainment that consumers in urban areas enjoy,” Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) said.
benton.org/node/194020 | Hill, The | B&C
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

CHILDREN AND MEDIA

FTC SUES AMAZON OVER CHILDREN’S IN-APP PURCHASES
[SOURCE: Washington Post, AUTHOR: Cecilia Kang]
Federal regulators announced it has filed a lawsuit against Amazon.com for allegedly making it too easy for children to make purchases when using mobile apps without a parent's permission. The Federal Trade Commission said Amazon charged parents millions of dollars of unauthorized payments for what's known as "in-app purchases," typically make-believe items popularly offered within mobile games such as Candy Crush Saga that enhance a game or allow a user to advance levels. The FTC said in its suit that it seeks a court order for the company to refund families affected by the unauthorized charges that began in 2011. It also wants the court to permanently ban Amazon from charging parents for in-app purchases without their consent. Amazon, whose chief executive Jeffrey Bezos owns The Washington Post, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The FTC alleges that beginning in November 2011, Amazon violated the FTC Act by billing parents for charges incurred by their children without permission. Amazon's Kindle Fire tablet was used by children to play games and spend "unlimited amounts of money" to pay for virtual items within the apps such as “coins,” “stars,” and “acorns” without parental involvement, the agency wrote. The FTC said that at first, no password requirements were put in place to stop children from making the purchases.
benton.org/node/194017 | Washington Post | Federal Trade Commission | Revere Digital | USAToday | ars technica | GigaOm | The Hill | The Verge | B&C
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

LABOR

PUBLICLY SHAME COMPANIES THAT WON’T TELL US HOW UN-DIVERSE THEY ARE
[SOURCE: Fast Company, AUTHOR: Sydney Brownstone]
Google does it. So does Intel. But a significant number of major tech companies--including Apple, Twitter, and IBM--still haven't published information about how many women or minorities they hire. A new project from feminist coders aims to put pressure on them until they do. The Open Diversity Data project, launched this past June by the feminist hacker space Double Union, keeps tabs on companies that do and don’t make their workforce demographics available to the public. Anyone can submit a request for ODD to add a company to the list. Once a company’s listed on the site, viewers can click to tweet thanks at the organization for being transparent, remind it to update its information, or ask that it publish employment diversity data for the first time. Diversity data is much more difficult to come by than you might think. Organizations collect it regardless of external requests; those with more than 100 employees are required to report that information (in something called an EEO-1 form) to the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission every year. But those reports stay guarded in filing systems far away from the public eye. If companies don’t make diversity data open, curious souls have to go through the arduous process of filing a Freedom of Information Act request with the Department of Labor. The aim of ODD is two-fold: Double Union hopes that ODD will not only put pressure on companies to become more transparent, but also encourage legislators to free up EEOC reports to the public.
benton.org/node/193981 | Fast Company
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

BIG DATA

TECH LEADERS UNPACK 'BIG DATA' LABEL
[SOURCE: Politico, AUTHOR: Kendall Breitman]
Imaging Advantage CEO Naseer Hashim explained that educating the public on what “big data” actually means could help solve America’s hesitation toward the subject. “I think one of the problems is that most people don’t actually know what big data is or what it means, so I think it’s become more of a popular catch-all phrase to refer to data analytics or data mining,” Hashim said. “I think one thing that’s very important is we don’t get caught up in the jargon where people don’t understand what it is, but really to explain the essence of what the objective is, which is to be able to aggregate large amounts of data in order to bring specific solutions to people,” Hashim said. “When they understand that, whether it’s in health care or other sectors, I think that’s one step as part of the overall education process.” Burfield added that startups, in particular, are important to understand when learning about big data, as they are beginning to play a larger role in collection and analytics than local governments. “What we see more of than startups making a bunch of money off of government data is the exact opposite,” Burfield said. “The startups are starting to generate so much data about the cities than the cities themselves have that where we’re seeing the interesting returns is the cities buying the data so that they can actually figure out what’s happening in their city.” In the future, Burfield expects this to change and for the focus to shift to the public sector.
benton.org/node/193983 | Politico
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

BIG DATA BIGWIGS CASH IN
[SOURCE: Politico, AUTHOR: Darren Samuelsohn, Byron Tau, Joseph Marks]
Many of the biggest players tasked with protecting the country after Sept. 11 have a new mission, and one that pays: securing all of the data the corporate world collects on its customers. Ex-Cabinet chiefs Tom Ridge and Michael Chertoff count Fortune 500 companies among their clients anxious to secure computer systems and avoid the fate of Target, the victim of an epic data breach last fall. Former Capitol Hill lawmakers and senior staff central to the last decade’s battles over privacy and security have traded their top-secret government clearances for lucrative jobs as consultants and lobbyists. Retired Gen Keith Alexander, the former National Security Agency director tarred by Edward Snowden’s leaks, launched his own firm this spring, just weeks after leaving government. Lobbying on cybersecurity, privacy and other data issues has skyrocketed over the past decade, with a more recent hiring spree driven by the Snowden scandal and major security breaches at some of the country’s largest companies. Dozens of boutique firms and established K Street players are entering the red-hot market and touting their top recruits from the executive and legislative branches.
benton.org/node/193985 | Politico
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

JOURNALISM

AMERICA’S SHIFTING STATEHOUSE PRESS
[SOURCE: Pew Research Center’s Journalism Project, AUTHOR: Jodi Enda, Katerina Eva Matsa, Jan Lauren Boyles]
Within America’s 50 state capitol buildings, 1,592 journalists inform the public about the actions and issues of state government. Of those statehouse reporters, nearly half (741) are assigned there full time. While that averages out to 15 full-time reporters per state, the actual number varies widely -- from a high of 53 in Texas to just two in South Dakota. The remaining 851 statehouse reporters cover the beat less than full time. Newspaper reporters constitute the largest segment of both the total statehouse news corps (38%) and the full-time group (43%). But the data indicate that their full-time numbers have fallen considerably in recent years, raising concerns about the depth and quality of news coverage about state government. As newspapers have withdrawn reporters from statehouses, others have attempted to fill the gap. For-profit and nonprofit digital news organizations, ideological outlets and high-priced publications aimed at insiders have popped up all over the country, often staffed by veteran reporters with experience covering state government. These nontraditional outlets employ 126 full-time statehouse reporters (17% of all full-time reporters). But that does not make up for the 164 newspaper statehouse jobs lost since 2003.
benton.org/node/193988 | Pew Research Center’s Journalism Project | New York Times
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

GOVERNMENT & COMMUNICATIONS

JUSTICE DECLINES TO PURSUE ALLEGATIONS THAT CIA MONITORED SENATE INTEL STAFF
[SOURCE: McClatchy, AUTHOR: Ali Watkins]
The Justice Department has decided not to pursue accusations that the Central Intelligence Agency spied on the Senate Intelligence Committee and allegations that committee staff slipped classified documents from a secure agency facility, McClatchy has confirmed. "The department carefully reviewed the matters referred to us and did not find sufficient evidence to warrant a criminal investigation," said Justice Department spokesman Peter Carr. The news marks an apparent end to an extraordinary feud that spilled into the public forum in early March over the committee’s report on the agency’s post-9/11 enhanced interrogation program. The dispute included competing Justice Department referrals, with both the CIA and the Senate Intelligence Committee accusing the other side of criminal conduct throughout the course of the interrogation study. But, it seems that the details of both sides’ accusations will never be publicly aired, leaving simmering tensions and a battered relationship.
benton.org/node/194011 | McClatchy | The Verge
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

LOBBYING

OPEN INTERNET PANELISTS’ TIES TO INDUSTRY EXPOSED
[SOURCE: National Hispanic Media Coalition, AUTHOR: Alex Nogales]
In response to the Capitol Hill briefing on network neutrality hosted by the Congressional Hispanic Leadership Institute and sponsored by Verizon, AT&T and Comcast on July 10: “Some of the panelists have well-documented ties to the Internet Service Providers (ISPs) that stand to gain the most if the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) proceeds with its proposed rules for a paid fast lane. Indeed, one panelist, my friend, Martin Chavez, who spoke on the panel on behalf of the Hispanic Telecommunications and Technology Partnership (HTTP), is both a Senior Advisor to HTTP and a Consultant at the Ibarra Strategy Group, a lobbying firm that counts Verizon amongst its clientele. Let me be very clear – HTTP is nothing more than an industry front-group that is at best misinformed and at worst intentionally distorting facts as it actively opposes efforts to better serve the communications needs of Latinos.”
benton.org/node/193997 | National Hispanic Media Coalition
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

STORIES FROM ABROAD

UK DATA PROPOSALS
[SOURCE: Financial Times, AUTHOR: Murad Ahmed, Beth Rigby]
Mobile phone networks and internet service providers have been warning the UK government that they were unsure about their legal right to hold on to customer data following a European Court of Justice ruling that the practice is illegal. One telecoms figure said the UK Home Office had told companies to carry on collecting data after the April 2014 decision and had signalled that it was in the process of setting down a new legal framework. “If they hadn’t done this, it would have been difficult to carry on holding data,” said the source. People in the telecoms industry said that, although company lawyers were still studying the proposals, they were satisfied they were unlikely to add further burdens to current data collection practices.
benton.org/node/194106 | Financial Times | European Court of Justice ruling
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

THE RIGHT TO BE FORGOTTEN
[SOURCE: The Guardian, AUTHOR: David Drummond]
[Commentary] When you search online there's an unwritten assumption that you'll get an instant answer, as well as additional information if you need to dig deeper. This is all possible because of two decades' worth of investment and innovation by many different companies. Today, however, search engines across Europe face a new challenge -- figuring out what information we must deliberately omit from our results, following a ruling from the European Union's court of justice. The court found that people have the right to ask for information to be removed from search results that include their names if it is "inadequate, irrelevant or no longer relevant, or excessive". In deciding what to remove search engines must also have regard to the public interest. When it comes to determining what's in the public interest, we're taking into account a number of factors. These include whether the information relates to a politician, celebrity or other public figure; if the material comes from a reputable news source, and how recent it is; whether it involves political speech; questions of professional conduct that might be relevant to consumers; the involvement of criminal convictions that are not yet "spent"; and if the information is being published by a government. But these will always be difficult and debatable judgments. It's a complex issue, with no easy answers. So a robust debate is both welcome and necessary as, on this issue at least, no search engine has an instant or perfect answer.
[Drummond is Google's senior vice-president for corporate development and chief legal officer]
benton.org/node/194104 | Guardian, The
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

Benton

Search

Benton

Daily Digest

Analysis

July 2014

July 11, 2014 (It's Not About "Can We?" It's About "Will We?")

Netflix has hits, Emmys and subscribers. But can it survive its fight with cable?

Aereo's Bid for Comeback Hinges on Cable License

HarperCollins looks to bypass Amazon

Fraud lurks in shadows of changing digital advertising landscape

Forget Sun Valley, Media Moguls Should Take Latin Road Trip

Despite a Pledge by Samsung, Child Labor Proves Resilient

China Aims to Justify New Media Restrictions

Sec Kerry Discusses Cybersecurity With Chinese Counterparts

UK Telecoms industry welcomes data proposals