1. Monthly archive
  2. May 2017

May 2017

May 3, 2017 (How President Trump is undermining press freedom)

June LeBell, Pioneering Radio Announcer

BENTON'S COMMUNICATIONS-RELATED HEADLINES for WEDNESDAY, MAY 3, 2017

Today's Events:


COMMUNICATIONS & DEMOCRACY
   How President Trump is undermining press freedom around the world - WaPo op-ed
   Trump campaign accuses CNN of rejecting ad
   Technology is Changing Democracy As We Know It - The Atlantic [links to Benton summary]
   Lessons From Isaac Asimov's Multivac [links to Atlantic, The]
   Legal thinking around First Amendment must evolve in digital age - op-ed [links to Benton summary]

INTERNET/BROADBAND
   Sen Schatz: FCC Chairman Pai may have violated law in network neutrality rollout
   Giving the Behemoths a Leg Up on the Little Guy - analysis
   America’s failure on internet competition - editorial
   Beyond Net Neutrality: The Importance of Title II for Broadband - PK analysis
   Sens Schatz and Booker to FCC: We're Ready to Fight for Net Neutrality - op-ed
   What Republican Lawmakers Are Saying About FCC Chairman Pai's Proposal to Restore Internet Freedom - press release [links to Benton summary]
   100 Days Later: Net Neutrality and Resistance - press release [links to Benton summary]
   Public Knowledge Responds to Senate Republican Attack on Net Neutrality Rules [links to Public Knowledge]
   Radio: Craig Aaron and Malkia Cyril on Net Neutrality, Kyle Wiens on Copyright Overreaching [links to FAIR]
   It’s Time for Co-ops To Stand Up and Embrace Broadband - Craig Settles op-ed [links to Benton summary]
   Net neutrality changes would 'kneecap' Massachusetts entrepreneurs, say tech execs [links to Boston Business Journal]

SURVEILLANCE
   Reined-In NSA Still Collected 151 Million Phone Records in ’16 [links to New York Times]
   Surveillance, visa reforms top House Judiciary Chairman Goodlatte's tech agenda
   Open Technology Institute's Reform Priorities for Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act - press release [links to Benton summary]

PRIVACY
   Why We’re So Hypocritical About Online Privacy - research

ADVERTISING
   Zenith: Google Remains Top-Ranked Media Company By Ad Revenue [links to MediaPost]

OWNERSHIP
   Appropriations Bill Protects TV Joint Sales Agreements [links to Broadcasting&Cable]

WIRELESS/SPECTRUM
   T-Mobile says it will be first in nation to offer nationwide mobile 5G [links to Benton summary]

BUDGET
   NEA budget poised to get a $2 million boost, leaving arts organizations hopeful [links to Benton summary]

EDUCATION
   Why Microsoft wants to get its products into your kids’ classrooms [links to Washington Post]

DIVERSITY
   Facebook’s Female Engineers Claim Gender Bias [links to Wall Street Journal]

JOURNALISM
   Endowment to support Philadelphia media on track to exceed $100 million [links to Columbia Journalism Review]

ELECTION 2016
   Hillary Clinton blames Russian hackers and FBI’s Comey for 2016 election loss

LOBBYING
   Where are they now? Lucrative lobbying gigs, other jobs landed by newly-former lawmakers [links to Open Secrets]

STORIES FROM ABROAD
   New rules for Chinese internet operations require top editor be a Chinese citizen, cooperation with a foreign entity be submitted to security review [links to Wall Street Journal]
   New Zealand blocks media merger to defend diversity [links to Financial Times]

back to top

COMMUNICATIONS & DEMOCRACY

HOW TRUMP IS UNDERMINING PRESS FREEDOM AROUND THE WORLD
[SOURCE: Washington Post, AUTHOR: Michael Abramowitz, Arch Puddington]
[Commentary] Global press freedom has long been in decline and is now at its lowest point in the past 13 years, according to Freedom House’s latest assessment. What is new, and especially disquieting, are the mounting pressures on the media in the United States, including sharp attacks on reporters by the Trump administration. This raises the question of whether America will continue to serve as a model for other countries. The United States remains an oasis, one of the few places in the world where aggressive journalistic investigation can be practiced with few legal restrictions and little physical danger to reporters. But even here, press freedom has been weakening for some time, well before the inauguration of Donald Trump. Since Trump’s rise to the presidency, however, matters have taken a turn for the worse. The new White House derides and belittles journalists and media organizations in the hope of undermining the credibility of the press. In so doing, the administration is aggressively promoting the notion that nuance and facts are irrelevant — a staple concept of Russian information warfare.
[Michael Arbramowitz is the president of Freedom House. Arch Puddington is a distinguished fellow for democracy studies at Freedom House.]
benton.org/headlines/how-president-trump-undermining-press-freedom-around-world | Washington Post
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top


TRUMP CAMPAIGN ACCUSES CNN OF REJECTING AD
[SOURCE: The Hill, AUTHOR: Ben Kamisar]
President Donald Trump's campaign is accusing CNN of refusing to air its new television ad marking Trump's first 100 days in office. A May 2 press release from the Trump campaign chides the news network, which is a familiar target for the president's ire, arguing CNN is trying to stifle free speech and any positive news about the administration's successes in office. “It is absolutely shameful to see the media blocking the positive message that President Trump is trying to share with the country. It's clear that CNN is trying to silence our voice and censor our free speech because it doesn't fit their narrative," said Michael Glassner, the Trump campaign's executive director. CNN said that it asked the campaign to remove a “false graphic that says the mainstream media is ‘fake news.’” “The mainstream media is not fake news, and therefore the ad is false,” CNN added in explaining its decision to reject the ad.
benton.org/headlines/trump-campaign-accuses-cnn-rejecting-ad | Hill, The
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

INTERNET/BROADBAND

DID PAI BREAK THE LAW?
[SOURCE: The Hill, AUTHOR: Ali Breland]
Sen Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) said the way that Federal Communications Chairman Ajit Pai introduced his plan to roll back network neutrality may have skirted the law. “He sounded more like a political person taking a political position than someone who was going to really inquiry into the best path forward,” said Sen Schatz. “I think it is legally consequential.” Sen Schatz said the FCC chairman may have violated a “Notice of Proposed Rulemaking” (NPRM) statute by appearing to take a clear position on a proposal that hasn't even been considered. The statute states that the FCC must first consider public comment before taking a specific position on a policy. “They are supposed to receive public comment. They are supposed to establish a public record,” Sen Schatz said. “You would never have anybody in judiciary announcing their position, declaring that they will ‘win in the end,’ that ‘this is a fight and they intend to win it.’" “It’s for others in the litigation space to figure out whether there’s something there or not. But the fact that he is announcing the outcome in advance seems contrary to the statute.”
benton.org/headlines/sen-schatz-fcc-chairman-pai-may-have-violated-law-network-neutrality-rollout | Hill, The
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top


GIVING BEHEMOTHS A LEG UP
[SOURCE: New York Times, AUTHOR: Farhad Manjoo]
[Commentary] Every year, the internet gets a little less fair. The corporations that run it get a little bigger, their power grows more concentrated, and a bit of their idealism gives way to ruthless pragmatism. And if Ajit Pai, the new chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, gets his way, the hegemons are likely to grow only larger and more powerful. At the moment, the internet isn’t in a good place. The Frightful Five — Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Microsoft and Alphabet, Google’s parent company — control nearly everything of value in the digital world, including operating systems, app stores, browsers, cloud storage infrastructure, and oceans of data from which to spin new products. A handful of others — Comcast, AT&T, Verizon — control the wired and wireless connections through which all your data flows. People used to talk about the internet as a wonderland for innovative upstarts, but lately the upstarts keep getting clobbered. Today the internet is gigantic corporations, all the way down. Which brings us to net neutrality. The rule basically prevents broadband providers from offering preferential treatment to some content online — it blocks Comcast from giving, say, a speed boost to a streaming video company that can afford to pay over one that cannot. Amid many legal battles, neutrality rules in some form have governed the internet for years. Does ending network neutrality help the big fish or the little fish? Will scrapping the rules make the internet fairer, more dynamic and more innovative? Will it create a more favorable atmosphere for potential challengers of the Frightful Five? Probably not. In fact, it could entrench their power even further.
benton.org/headlines/giving-behemoths-leg-little-guy | New York Times
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top


AMERICA’S FAILURE ON INTERNET COMPETITION
[SOURCE: Financial Times, AUTHOR: Editorial staff]
[Commentary] With a speed many American internet users can only envy, the Trump administration is re-writing the rules for US internet providers. The administration is quite right that the industry has a serious problem: lack of competition. But a regulatory rollback, paired with the administration’s apparently sanguine attitude towards industry consolidation, will do nothing to solve it, and could make matters worse. The root problem is lack of competition in network construction and improvement. If consumers had more options, fewer rules would be required. President Donald Trump likes to talk about infrastructure investment. Encouraging investment in digital infrastructure — a natural area for private-public partnership — should be part of that agenda. That would do much more good than rolling back sensible if imperfect rules and waving through deals in an industry that already has the upper hand on the consumer.
benton.org/headlines/americas-failure-internet-competition | Financial Times
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top


IMPORTANCE OF TITLE II FOR BROADBAND
[SOURCE: Public Knowledge, AUTHOR: Yosef Getachew]
Open internet principles were not the only value in classifying broadband under Title II. Like our telephone networks used to be, access to broadband has become necessary for full participation in society. Therefore, Title II classification is critical in protecting our fundamental values of universal service and consumer protection when accessing broadband networks. While the Federal Communications Commission forebore from applying the majority of Title II to broadband networks, the agency kept a number of provisions in place to ensure consumers have ubiquitous and affordable connectivity, privacy, and other consumer protections when online.
benton.org/headlines/beyond-net-neutrality-importance-title-ii-broadband-2 | Public Knowledge
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top


SENS SCHATZ AND BOOKER OP-ED
[SOURCE: Daily Kos, AUTHOR: Sen Brain Schatz (D-HI), Sen Cory Booker (D-NJ)
[Commentary] Dear Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai,
We are writing to express our opposition to your effort to repeal network neutrality protections. Our committee and the American public are again paying close attention. The public does not accept Republicans taking away their rights online in the name of corporate profit. Just a few weeks ago, Republicans underestimated the public’s outrage at the successful repeal of privacy protections for users online. Like with the Republican repeal of the FCC’s online privacy rules, there is little public support for your actions. Following an onslaught of public furor, congressional Republicans regretted voting to repeal online privacy protection for the public. We believe that public uproar was just a preview of what you can expect as you initiate a proceeding to eliminate net neutrality protections. In your speech to announce the end of net neutrality, you said “this is a fight that we intend to wage and it is a fight that we are going to win.” We commit to opposing you and fighting for strong rules that protect users and access to a free and open internet.
benton.org/headlines/sens-schatz-and-booker-fcc-were-ready-fight-net-neutrality | Daily Kos | The Hill
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

SURVEILLANCE

GOODLATTES TECH AGENDA
[SOURCE: The Hill, AUTHOR: Ali Breland]
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) unveiled his committee’s agenda on technology and innovation. Under his "blueprint," Chairman Goodlatte hopes to see his committee tackle top tech issues, including changes to surveillance and encryption laws, and on high-skilled immigration. On immigration, he told reporters the committee was working to “find a balanced solution to increase the high-skilled talent pool to promote job growth through visa and green card reforms,” while also “protecting job opportunities for similarly qualified Americans.” He also focused much of his remarks on surveillance issues, including proposed reforms to Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, a controversial provision authorizing US intelligence to surveil noncitizens. Chairman Goodlatte also said he hopes to hold a committee hearing in about how the US accesses communications data in other countries.
benton.org/headlines/surveillance-visa-reforms-top-house-judiciary-chairman-goodlattes-tech-agenda | Hill, The | House Judiciary Committee
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

ELECTIONS 2016

CLINTON ON ELECTION LOSS
[SOURCE: Washington Post, AUTHOR: Philip Rucker]
Hillary Clinton attributed her defeat in the 2016 presidential election to interference by Russian hackers and FBI Director James B. Comey, and declared herself to be “part of the resistance” to Donald Trump’s presidency. “If the election had been on October 27, I would be your president,” Clinton told moderator Christiane Amanpour, the CNN anchor, at a Women for Women event in New York. “I was on the way to winning until a combination of Jim Comey’s letter on October 28 and Russian WikiLeaks raised doubts in the minds of people who were inclined to vote for me and got scared off,” Clinton said. Clinton talked about “the unprecedented interference” by a foreign leader “who is not a member of my fan club” — a reference to Russian President Vladi¬mir Putin, with whom she tangled as secretary of state.
benton.org/headlines/hillary-clinton-blames-russian-hackers-and-fbis-comey-2016-election-loss | Washington Post | The Hill
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

SECURITY/PRIVACY

WHY WERE SO HYPOCRITICAL ABOUT ONLINE PRIVACY
[SOURCE: Harvard Business Review, AUTHOR: Thomas Chamorro-Premuzic, Nathalie Nahai]
A recent meta-analysis of 166 studies, including 75,269 participants of 34 countries, explored the so-called “privacy paradox,” that is, the puzzling fact that people’s concerns about privacy rarely appear to translate into protective behaviors. Contrary to previous studies, the findings of the meta-analysis revealed that individuals who are more concerned with and informed about privacy tend to use fewer online services, set stronger security settings, and disclose less personal information. However, when it comes to social media use, there is indeed a privacy paradox, as even individuals who express concerns behave quite carelessly, engaging in uncensored or inappropriate self-disclosure, making a great deal of their digital footprint public, and allowing a wide range of external apps to access their data. It has been estimated that nearly 40% of Facebook content is shared according to the (rather unsafe) default settings, and that privacy settings match users’ expectations only 37% of the time. Thus, it appears that no amount of privacy concerns will make social media users more cautious.
benton.org/headlines/why-were-so-hypocritical-about-online-privacy | Harvard Business Review
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

Sen Schatz: FCC Chairman Pai may have violated law in network neutrality rollout

Sen Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) said the way that Federal Communications Chairman Ajit Pai introduced his plan to roll back network neutrality may have skirted the law.

“He sounded more like a political person taking a political position than someone who was going to really inquiry into the best path forward,” said Sen Schatz. “I think it is legally consequential.” Sen Schatz said the FCC chairman may have violated a “Notice of Proposed Rulemaking” (NPRM) statute by appearing to take a clear position on a proposal that hasn't even been considered. The statute states that the FCC must first consider public comment before taking a specific position on a policy. “They are supposed to receive public comment. They are supposed to establish a public record,” Sen Schatz said. “You would never have anybody in judiciary announcing their position, declaring that they will ‘win in the end,’ that ‘this is a fight and they intend to win it.’"

“It’s for others in the litigation space to figure out whether there’s something there or not. But the fact that he is announcing the outcome in advance seems contrary to the statute.”

Giving the Behemoths a Leg Up on the Little Guy

[Commentary] Every year, the internet gets a little less fair. The corporations that run it get a little bigger, their power grows more concentrated, and a bit of their idealism gives way to ruthless pragmatism. And if Ajit Pai, the new chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, gets his way, the hegemons are likely to grow only larger and more powerful.

At the moment, the internet isn’t in a good place. The Frightful Five — Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Microsoft and Alphabet, Google’s parent company — control nearly everything of value in the digital world, including operating systems, app stores, browsers, cloud storage infrastructure, and oceans of data from which to spin new products. A handful of others — Comcast, AT&T, Verizon — control the wired and wireless connections through which all your data flows. People used to talk about the internet as a wonderland for innovative upstarts, but lately the upstarts keep getting clobbered. Today the internet is gigantic corporations, all the way down. Which brings us to net neutrality. The rule basically prevents broadband providers from offering preferential treatment to some content online — it blocks Comcast from giving, say, a speed boost to a streaming video company that can afford to pay over one that cannot.

Amid many legal battles, neutrality rules in some form have governed the internet for years. Does ending network neutrality help the big fish or the little fish? Will scrapping the rules make the internet fairer, more dynamic and more innovative? Will it create a more favorable atmosphere for potential challengers of the Frightful Five? Probably not. In fact, it could entrench their power even further.

America’s failure on internet competition

[Commentary] With a speed many American internet users can only envy, the Trump administration is re-writing the rules for US internet providers. The administration is quite right that the industry has a serious problem: lack of competition. But a regulatory rollback, paired with the administration’s apparently sanguine attitude towards industry consolidation, will do nothing to solve it, and could make matters worse. The root problem is lack of competition in network construction and improvement. If consumers had more options, fewer rules would be required. President Donald Trump likes to talk about infrastructure investment. Encouraging investment in digital infrastructure — a natural area for private-public partnership — should be part of that agenda. That would do much more good than rolling back sensible if imperfect rules and waving through deals in an industry that already has the upper hand on the consumer.

Surveillance, visa reforms top House Judiciary Chairman Goodlatte's tech agenda

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) unveiled his committee’s agenda on technology and innovation. Under his "blueprint," Chairman Goodlatte hopes to see his committee tackle top tech issues, including changes to surveillance and encryption laws, and on high-skilled immigration.

On immigration, he told reporters the committee was working to “find a balanced solution to increase the high-skilled talent pool to promote job growth through visa and green card reforms,” while also “protecting job opportunities for similarly qualified Americans.” He also focused much of his remarks on surveillance issues, including proposed reforms to Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, a controversial provision authorizing US intelligence to surveil noncitizens. Chairman Goodlatte also said he hopes to hold a committee hearing in about how the US accesses communications data in other countries.

© 1994-2026 Benton Institute for Broadband & Society. All Rights Reserved.