December 2016

In a twist on the peddling of fake news to real people, researchers say that a Russian cyberforgery ring has created more than half a million fake internet users and 250,000 fake websites to trick advertisers into collectively paying as much as $5 million a day for video ads that are never watched.

The fraud, which began in September and is still going on, represents a new level of sophistication among criminals who seek to profit by using bots — computer programs that pretend to be people — to cheat advertisers. “We think that nothing has approached this operation in terms of profitability,” said Michael Tiffany, a co-founder and the chief executive of White Ops, the ad-focused computer security firm that publicly disclosed the fraud in a report. “Our adversaries are bringing whole new levels of innovation to ad fraud.” The thieves impersonated more than 6,100 news and content publishers, stealing advertising revenue that marketers intended to run on those sites, White Ops said. The spoofed outlets include a who’s who of the web: video-laden sites like Fox News and CBS Sports, large news organizations like The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal, major content platforms like Facebook and Yahoo and niche sites like Allrecipes.com and AccuWeather. Although the main targets were in the United States, news organizations in other countries were also affected. “It will be a big shock to all of these publishers that someone was selling inventory supposedly on their sites,” Tiffany said.

In the "no news is not good news for either Nexstar or Media General" department, the Federal Communications Commission's Media Bureau has yet to act on the waiver request by the two broadcasters that the commission make a decision on their proposed $4.6 billion merger, apparently.

The FCC's informal shot clock on the deal—it shoots for 180 days—was at day 306 at press time. As the days wind down to the holidays, it looks unlikely the waiver will be ruled on before the end of 2016. The companies extended some deadlines for the deal completion a couple of weeks ago amidst buzz that the FCC might be ready to both rule on the waiver and decide on the deal, which could come simultaneously. But that did not materialize. The FCC signaled early on that it would not make decisions on station license transfers that could implicate spectrum auction participants—this deal qualifies—while the auction was still going on.

[Commentary] President-elect Donald Trump operates his Twitter feed as a virtual Statler and Waldorf, reigning judgment on the media and individual journalists like a Muppet in the rafters. Trumpian tweets often appear soon after a negative story has run about him or his business, especially in the case of cable news, hinting at the president-elect’s viewing habits (lots of CNN). Occasionally, Trump dispenses plaudits for a piece, but he is more likely to hiss and boo, heckling journalists from his perch. American presidents have long made their media preferences known. Richard Nixon spent Sunday afternoons watching the NFL; Barack Obama snagged advanced screeners of HBO’s Game of Thrones. But never have we had a leader so interested—some might say obsessed—with journalistic critiques. At CJR, we’ve combed through Trump’s 189 (and counting…) tweets since the election, focusing on those that highlight his touchy takes on the press.

[Commentary] Only two of the 20-plus reporters who covered the presidential campaign for The New York Times were black. None were Latino or Asian. That’s less diversity than you’ll find in Donald Trump’s cabinet thus far. Of The Times’s newly named White House team, all six are white, as is most everyone in the Washington bureau. I can tell diversity isn’t a priority here by looking at what is. Think digital transition or global expansion or subscriber growth or visual innovation. Those are mandates that really power up the engines. Diversity is not at that level, at least yet. This issue has challenged most every newsroom manager, myself included. The newsroom I came from, The Washington Post, is quite diverse, but its leadership is heavily white and male. At The Times, on the other hand, people of color seem shut out of all sorts of coveted jobs: the top digital strategists, the top managers, the precious ranks of cultural critics, the White House press corps, the opinion columnists, the national politics jobs — all are overwhelmingly white.