July 2016

Donald Trump Calls on Russia to Find Hillary Clinton’s Missing Emails

Donald Trump said that he hoped Russia had hacked Hillary Clinton’s e-mail, essentially encouraging an adversarial foreign power to cyberspy on a secretary of state’s correspondence. “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 e-mails that are missing,” Trump said, staring directly into the cameras during a news conference. “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”

Trump’s call was an extraordinary moment at a time when Russia is being accused of meddling in the United States’ presidential election. His comments came amid questions about the hacking of the Democratic National Committee’s computer servers, which American intelligence agencies have told the White House they have “high confidence” was the work of the Russian government. Later in the news conference, when asked if he was really urging a foreign nation to hack into the private e-mail server of Clinton, or at least meddle in the nation’s elections, he dismissed the question. “That’s up to the president,” Trump said, before finally saying “be quiet” to the female questioner. “Let the president talk to them.” The Clinton campaign immediately accused Trump of both encouraging Russian espionage against the United States and meddling in domestic politics.

The Democrats’ well-deserved WikiLeaks blowback

[Commentary] Over at the CIA and the National Security Agency headquarters, they must be really enjoying watching Democrats in Philadelphia (PA) squirm over WikiLeaks’s exposure of tens of thousands of internal Democratic Party e-mails. There’s a word for what is happening in the intelligence community: Blowback.

Throughout the entirety of the Obama Administration, nothing was done as WikiLeaks damaged our national security with its serial leaks of highly classified intelligence documents. Now Democrats are paying the price for President Barack Obama’s inaction. Apparently, exposing intelligence sources and methods has not mattered enough for the Obama Administration to do something about WikiLeaks. Maybe saving Hillary Clinton from further embarrassment, or worse, will finally spur them to action.

5 facts about how people view Hillary Clinton’s candidacy

How do Americans view Hillary Clinton – a fixture in national politics for more than 25 years – as the race between her and Donald Trump for the White House begins in earnest? Here’s a roundup of key Pew Research Center findings on views of Hillary Clinton, her politics and the impact she would have on Washington.

1) More voters say they know a lot about where Clinton stands on important issues than say the same about Trump.
2) Few voters think gender will hurt Clinton this fall.
3) Supporters and opponents see Clinton’s political views differently.
4) Many voters – including many of her supporters – doubt Clinton will change Washington much. Overall, about half (53%) of voters in our June survey say Clinton won’t change the way things work in Washington much. Those who think she will change Washington are divided on whether it will be for the better (20%) or the worse (25%).
5) Democrats feel warmly toward Clinton, while Republican views of her are very cold.

Did Sanders have the right priorities on social media before Clinton clinched?

[Commentary] Sen Bernie Sanders (I-VT) rode a wave of populist support that nearly upended former shoo-in Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination for president. Are there lessons to learn from his campaign’s social-media strategy that explain why the Bernie movement gained so much traction but ultimately came up short?

A review of hundreds of the candidates’ messages on Twitter and Facebook—using data* from Illuminating 2016, a project supported by the Tow Center for Digital Journalism and Syracuse University’s Center for Computational and Data Sciences—suggests the candidates took very different approaches to the digital medium in the month before Clinton clinched the nomination. Sen Sanders’s feed had fewer negative messages, relying more on calls to action than Clinton’s feed. And despite his success with small donations, Sen Sanders was more focused on getting out the vote than urging supporters to donate money on social media. Clinton’s strategic use of calls to action was focused on digital engagement—and attempts to create an open and collaborative campaign environment by inviting supporters to engage with policy discussions online.

[Patricia Rossini is a PhD Candidate in Communication Studies at the Federal University of Minas Gerais (Brazil), and a research assistant at the Center for Computational and Data Sciences at Syracuse University.]

Verizon talking to cities about fiber expansion after years of stagnation

As Verizon plans a fiber expansion in Boston (MA), CEO Lowell McAdam said the company is talking to other cities about potentially building fiber networks. Verizon stopped expanding its FiOS fiber-to-the-home Internet, TV, and phone service several years ago, making it a surprise when in April the company announced plans to replace its copper network in Boston with fiber.

McAdam said, "We are talking to other cities about similar partnerships." Verizon's fiber expansion plans are as much about improving backhaul to its more profitable mobile network as they are about bringing wired Internet to people's homes. "We will create a single fiber-optic network platform capable of supporting wireless and wireline technologies and multiple products," McAdam said. When asked which cities Verizon might build fiber in, McAdam said, "We have a stronger position in the Washington to Boston corridor" and "can move to market more quickly" there. But the geographical footprint isn't a "boundary," McAdam said, pointing to San Francisco (CA), where Verizon doesn't offer fiber-to-the-home service but deployed fiber and small cells to boost its wireless coverage for the Super Bowl.

CTIA Seeking Full Court Review of Title II Decision

CTIA: The Wireless Association, which represents wireless Internet service providers, will seek an en banc (full court) rehearing of the three-judge panel decision upholding the Federal Communications Commission's Open Internet order reclassifying fixed and mobile broadband as telecommunications services subject to Title II common carrier regulations, apparently. The deadline for seeking that hearing from the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia is July 28, 45 days after the initial decision June 14. CTIA will, not surprisingly, focus on the wireless portion of that decision—the FCC for the first time said its network neutrality rules applied to wireless as well as wired broadband.

Much to CTIA's dismay, the three-judge panel said the FCC had the statutory authority to make that call. “The Commission permissibly found that mobile broadband like all broadband—is a telecommunications service subject to common carrier regulation under Title II of the Communications Act,” the three-judge panel said. The FCC initially classified mobile broadband as a private radio service back in 2007, the court pointed out, considering it a “nascent” service rather than one reaching a substantial portion of the public, which would make it a commercial mobile service subject to common carrier regulations. But this time around the FCC said that with hundreds of millions now using mobile to access the Internet, it was a commercial service and should be classified as such. The court agreed. CTIA argues that mobile is qualitatively different from fixed, something the FCC has previously acknowledge, and requires "far more complex and aggressive network management than fixed broadband requires," which is why it says the FCC was wrong to apply the same regulations to both.