Benton RSS Feed

March 14, 2013
Source 
Atlantic, The
Author 
Alexis Madrigal
Coverage Type 
Lauren Frayer

Evgeny Morozov’s ultimate goal is to destroy the ideology of technology, so that particular technologies can be used in specific situations without the baggage of other people's nonsense.

Morozov's second book, To Save Everything, Click Here: The Folly of Technological Solutionism, is the most wide-ranging and generative critique of digital technology I've ever read. There's so much substance to argue about between its covers. At the center of it all, there's a brilliant, idiosyncratic mind at work. Describing and destroying two concepts -- "Internet-centrism" and "solutionism" -- form the core of his book, and both are fascinating frames for the discourse surrounding our network technologies. Internet-centrism is the idea that our society, and particularly its public intellectuals, have become fascinated by the notion that the Internet is a stable and coherent force in our lives. Morozov's "solutionism" is something else altogether. Recasting all complex social situations either as neat problems with definite, computable solutions or as transparent and self-evident processes that can be easily optimized -- if only the right algorithms are in place!--this quest is likely to have unexpected consequences that could eventually cause more damage than the problems they seek to address.

Toward a Complex, Realistic, and Moral Tech Criticism

Topics

Related Headlines

March 14, 2013
Source 
Hill, The
Author 
Jennifer Martinez
Coverage Type 
Lauren Frayer

Mark Weatherford, deputy under secretary for cybersecurity at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), is leaving the department after a little over a year to serve as a principal at The Chertoff Group.

Weatherford joined the DHS in November 2011 after serving as the chief security officer at North American Electric Reliability Corporation. In his role at the DHS, Weatherford oversaw the department's cybersecurity operations, including its partnership with the private sector and security of the federal government's computer network. Weatherford will start as a principal at the security advisory firm The Chertoff Group, which was co-founded by former Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, on May 1. In his new role, Weatherford will consult with clients on their cybersecurity practices and help them take action following a cyber incident, according to The Chertoff Group. Bruce McConnell, who serves as senior counselor and director of strategy and policy for the national protections and program directorate, will step into Weatherford's role in the interim while the DHS searches for a permanent replacement, Beers said.

DHS cybersecurity chief to head to The Chertoff Group

Topics

Related Headlines

March 14, 2013
Source 
National Association of Broadcasters
Author 
press release
Coverage Type 
Lauren Frayer

Shawn Donilon will join the National Association of Broadcasters as Director of Government Relations, the association announced today. Donilon will join NAB on Monday, March 18 and will report to NAB Executive Vice President of Government Relations Kelly Cole.

Donilon previously served as Legislative Director and Counsel to Rep. Charles F. Bass (R-NH), a member of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, advising the Congressman on incentive auction legislation and communications and technology law and policy issues. Prior to joining Rep. Bass's staff, he consulted on a major media transaction reviewed by the Federal Communications Commission. Donilon holds an undergraduate degree in economics from Duke University and a J.D. from the University of Southern California Law School.

NAB Names Director of Government Relations

Topics

Related Headlines

Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations
House Commerce Committee
March 21, 2013
9:00 am
http://energycommerce.house.gov/hearing/health-information-technologies-...

The Subcommittee will hear directly from FDA and HHS to obtain more information on the Obama administration’s perspective and future plans.

March 14, 2013
Source 
National Journal
Author 
Brian Fung
Coverage Type 
Lauren Frayer

The Obama Administration will now have to weigh in sooner rather than later on a highly contentious cybersecurity bill moving through the House. A We The People petition for President Barack Obama to stop the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA) has crossed the 100,000-signature threshold required for an official response.

Critics of the bill -- which is meant to facilitate the sharing of cyber information between the public and private sectors -- believe its definitions are far too broad. Vast amounts of user information could fall into the category of “cyber threat information” and wind up in the wrong hands, the legislation’s opponents have argued. Last year, the White House threatened to veto CISPA. Sponsors reintroduced CISPA this year with no changes in the language, so the White House likely still has objections to it. That puts the House on a collision course with President Obama. Either he will have to give up the veto threat, or the bill will have to be modified somehow before it reaches his desk.

Who’s Going to Blink First on Cyber – Obama, or the House? Stop CISPA (see the petition)

Topics

Related Headlines

March 14, 2013
Source 
Government Technology
Author 
Noelle Knell
Coverage Type 
Lauren Frayer

The White House’s We the People website encourages visitors to submit and support petitions on policy issues they’re interested in -- and once a petition reaches a certain threshold of digital signatures, Administration officials get involved and issue a response. To discuss the website in more detail, White House Digital Strategy Director Macon Phillips participated in a Yahoo News chat on Wednesday, March 13, with Yahoo Columnist Chris Wilson.

Similar in format to a TweetChat, participants sent in questions, which were moderated by Wilson and answered by Phillips. Several questions were asked regarding the magic number a petition must reach before it prompts a response or action from the White House. While the number 100,000 was bandied about, Phillips pointed out that some issues still get attention, short of that number. "We are really excited to dig below the threshold and look for themes and individual petitions that have new ideas -- petitions shouldn't have to cross the threshold to have an impact necessarily,” he said. Phillips added that when issuing a response to a petition, staffers look for similar petitions so they can pass on the response to their creators too. According to Phillips, when people create a petition using the We the People system, they will be notified if a similar petition already exists so that duplicate efforts can be avoided.

White House 'We the People' Site, Explained

Topics

Related Headlines

March 14, 2013
Source 
House Judiciary Committee
Author 
press release
Coverage Type 
Lauren Frayer

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) and Ranking Member John Conyers (D-MI) -- along with Rep Howard Coble (R-NC), Chairman of the Courts, Intellectual Property and the Internet Subcommittee and Rep Mel Watt (D-NC), Ranking Member of the Courts, Intellectual Property and the Internet Subcommittee -- introduced legislation to restore consumers’ ability to unlock their mobile phones, in order to switch from one wireless carrier to another.

This bill also directs the Copyright Office to determine whether similar treatment should be given to other wireless devices. The Unlocking Consumer Choice and Wireless Competition Act (H.R. 1123) restores the exemption to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) that permits consumers, once they have fulfilled their contractual obligation, to unlock their cell phones without the approval of their wireless provider. The DMCA rulemaking was announced in October and continued the exemption for cell phones purchased on or before January 26, 2013. The exemption was allowed to expire for cell phones purchased after that date.

House Judiciary Members Introduce Legislation to Restore Consumers’ Ability to Unlock Cell Phones

Topics

Related Headlines

March 14, 2013
Source 
AdWeek
Author 
Katy Bachman
Coverage Type 
Lauren Frayer

For nutritionists, when it comes to advertising junk food to kids, Nickelodeon is public enemy No. 1. Or, as the Center for Science in the Public Interest put it in a full-page ad, "Wanted."

The ad is running in The Hollywood Reporter, (Adweek's sister publication) and was timed to run just days before Viacom holds its annual shareholders meeting March 21 in Hollywood (CA). It pictures SpongeBob as an outlaw, complete with face stubble. "SpongeBob may be armed with nutritionally dangerous foods," the ad says. Food ads that CSPI has monitored on Nick programming, websites and apps, include Cocoa Puffs, Air Heads candies, Chuck E. Cheese's restaurants. Nick characters have been associated with brands like Kraft Macaroni & Cheese, Pez candy, and Fruit Roll-Ups. Unilever's Popsicles are even made in the shape of SpongeBob SquarePants and Dora the Explorer.

Ad Blasts Nickelodeon for Airing Junk Food Ads

Topics

Related Headlines

Submitted on March 14, 2013

Just a month ago, we focused on a new executive order aimed at strengthening U.S. cyber defenses, increasing information sharing, and developing standards to protect national security, jobs, and privacy. Before the ink was dry on President Barack Obama’s signature, the White House was calling on Congress to act as well to give our government a greater capacity to secure our networks and deter attacks. In the past week or so, we’ve seen a great deal of discussion in Washington about cybersecurity -- most aimed at getting Congress to act on the issue.

How big a problem are we talking about? In a word, gigantic. A January 2013 report from the Department of Defense found that “a few smart people, in a few days, using tools available to everyone” can significantly disrupt military operations. The report prompted the Washington Post editorial board to call for “an informed, robust debate about policy in this expanding realm.” “We ought not wait until a disaster has arrived to address the policy implications of cyberwar,” the Post concludes.

The Office of Management and Budget released a report to Congress on federal cybersecurity efforts and compliance with the 2002 Federal Information Security Management Act. Computer security costs have increased by more than $1 billion. The Department of Homeland Security(DHS) runs a national clearinghouse of cyberthreat information known as the U.S. Computer Emergency Readiness Team (US-CERT). Part of its job is to track cyberincidents, which DHS defines as violations of an organization’s security policy. That could include unauthorized attempts to access a network, denial of service attacks, or other unwanted behavior. In 2007, US-CERT received almost 12,000 cyberincident reports. That number had more than doubled by 2009 and quadrupled by 2012.

Although how organizations count cyberincidents varies greatly, here’s some numbers reported recently:

The executive order calls for a review of existing cybersecurity regulation and establishes a voluntary program to promote the adoption of a Cybersecurity Framework developed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, an agency of the U.S. Department of Commerce, in collaboration with critical infrastructure stakeholders. NIST, we know, has started visiting businesses to rally support for the framework. But what the order really amounts to is a starting gun on the renewed push by the White House to get a new cybersecurity bill through Congress this year.

On March 7, the Senate Commerce Committee and Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee held a joint hearing to examine the development and implementation of the order and explore the need for comprehensive legislation to strengthen our nation’s cybersecurity. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano testified that a "suite" of legislation was needed that would 1) incorporate privacy and civil liberties; 2) create information sharing standards; 3) provide additional tools to fight cybercrime; 4) create a data breach reporting requirement; and 5) give DHS hiring authority equivalent to the National Security Agency. She also said the Administration is considering offering a "seal of approval" to companies who join the Homeland Security-led program and a "procurement preferences acquisition" process as possible incentives.

This week, Tom Donilon, the President's national security adviser, urged China to stop hackers from breaking into U.S. computer systems and stealing business secrets. Donilon left no doubt the White House is shifting to a more aggressive stance – including demands for the investigation of cyberespionage cases conducted against U.S. business. Donilon for the first time laid out specific expectations that, if not met, could result in the unspecified U.S. action – which in the past has been interpreted as leaving open the options not only for an offensive cyberattack, but for sanctions or even a military response – depending on the severity of the cyberintrusions. “We seek three things from the Chinese side,” Donilon said. “First, we need a recognition of the urgency and scope of this problem and the risk it poses – to international trade, to the reputation of Chinese industry, and to our overall relations. Second, Beijing should take serious steps to investigate and put a stop to these activities. Finally, we need China to engage with us in a constructive direct dialogue to establish acceptable norms of behavior in cyberspace.” He said cybersecurity is becoming a "growing challenge" to the economic relationship between the United States and China. Later in the week, President Obama promised that the U.S. would have “tough talk” with China over cyber espionage. China, on March 12, said it was willing "on the basis of the principles of mutual respect and mutual trust" to discuss the issue. During a March 14 call congratulating newly-elected Chinese President Xi Jinping, President Barack Obama stressed the “importance of addressing cyber-security threats, which represent a shared challenge.”

The Pentagon’s Cyber Command will create 13 offensive teams by the fall of 2015 to help defend the nation against major computer attacks from abroad, Gen. Keith Alexander testified to Congress on March 12, a rare acknowledgment of the military’s ability to use cyberweapons. Alexander said the 13 teams would defend against destructive attacks. “I would like to be clear that this team, this defend-the-nation team, is not a defensive team,” Gen. Keith Alexander, who runs both the National Security Agency and the new Cyber Command, told the House Armed Services Committee. “This is an offensive team that the Defense Department would use to defend the nation if it were attacked in cyberspace. Thirteen of the teams that we’re creating are for that mission alone.” Twenty-seven other teams would support commands such as the Pacific Command and the Central Command as they plan offensive cyber capabilities. Separate teams would focus on protecting the Defense Department’s computer networks. He said the first third of the forces, which officials have said will total several thousand civilians and uniformed personnel, will be in place by September and the second third a year later. Some teams are already in place, Alexander said, to focus on “the most serious threats,” which he did not identify.

But he warned that budget cuts and uncertainty will undermine the effort to build up these forces. About 25 percent of the Cyber Command’s budget is being held up by congressional wrangling over the fiscal 2013 budget, he said. And across-the-board ­cuts that took effect March 1 are forcing civilian furloughs. “By singling out the civilian workforce, we’ve done a great disservice,” said Alexander, noting that one-third of the command workforce is made up of Air Force civilians. He said some cybersecurity recruits have taken a salary cut to work for the government, only to be faced with a furlough. “That’s the wrong message to send people we want to stay in the military acting in these career fields.” He urged Congress to pass legislation to enable the private sector to share computer threat data with the government without fear of being sued.

Democrats and Republicans at the hearing praised U.S. Cyber Command for its development so far, but lawmakers appeared eager for the Defense Department to move more quickly on hiring experts and drafting rules of engagement in cyberspace. The senators expressed deep frustrations with the stream of cyberattacks originating out of China. Lawmakers acknowledged the difficulties in recruiting talent — and previously, key defense leaders sounded those alarms in a critical statement submitted with the 2013 defense authorization bill the President signed in January.

On the same day as Donilon’s speech, Commerce Department officials stressed that Congress needs to pass cybersecurity legislation that incentivizes companies to boost the security of their computer systems and networks, adding that the executive branch cannot grant that power. "Tax incentives, liability protections— those are things that the President can't wave a magic wand and make happen," said Ari Schwartz, senior policy advisor to the Secretary of Commerce. "Congress needs to pass those things."

Testifying before the Senate Intelligence Committee, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said that cyberattacks are the leading security threat facing the United States. At the committee’s annual hearing on worldwide threats, Clapper said on behalf of himself, FBI Director Robert Mueller, CIA Director John Brennan and National Counterterrorism Center Director Matthew Olsen, “Our statement this year leads with cyber, and it’s hard to overemphasize its significance. Increasingly state and non-state actors are gaining and using cyber expertise. These capabilities put all sectors of our country at risk, from government and private networks to critical infrastructures. We see indications that some terrorist organizations are interested in developing offensive cyber capabilities, and as cyber criminals are using a growing black market to sell cyber tools that fall into the hands of state and non-state actors.” “From a national security perspective, I very much hope that the Congress will move forward with legislation,” said Brennan.

Intelligence Committee Chairman Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) said she is planning to start working on an information-sharing cybersecurity bill with Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-GA), the committee’s ranking minority member, in the coming months. At a separate Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on the same day, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said he was working with Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) on a measure that would allow industry leaders to develop a set of cybersecurity best practices, granting certain companies that operate critical infrastructure liability protection if they follow those guidelines.

At that Armed Services Committee hearing, lawmakers tussled over the role of the federal government in guarding against threats. Army Gen. Keith Alexander, head of the U.S. Cyber Command, acknowledged that the Obama Administration is debating internally how to proceed when U.S. companies are under cyberattack. "The issue that we're weighing is: When does a nuisance become a real problem and when are you prepared to step in for that?" he said. "That's the work that I think the Administration is going through right now and highlighting that." Lawmakers acknowledged they can't agree on legislative measures to bolster protections for computer networks.

In much-reported visits with Members of Congress this week, President Obama has included in his list of priorities, White House press secretary Jay Carney revealed, the need for Congress to take action on cybersecurity. President Obama and his top security advisers also met with chief executives from 13 companies in the White House Situation Room to talk about how the government and private sector could improve U.S. cyber security, including the need for legislation. White House officials said the meeting was designed as a “two-way” information exchange. Aides said President Obama wanted to hear directly from industry leaders about how vulnerable their companies were to computer attacks. The President also wanted to discuss efforts the government is taking to address threats. The corporate leaders from the defense, technology, energy and banking industries told the President they agreed cyberattacks are a top security threat but that they were looking for a "light touch" from the government in response to the risk. "Flexibility is important, because this is the kind of threat that changes very quickly," said Honeywell International's David Cote. The meeting also included Randall Stephenson of AT&T, Wes Bush of Northrop Grumman, Rex Tillerson of Exxon Mobil , Jamie Dimon of JPMorgan Chase & Co, Brian Moynihan of Bank of America, and Nicholas Akins of American Electric Power Co.

Testifying before the House Homeland Security Committee, Anish Bhimani, chief information risk officer of JPMorgan Chase (and speaking on behalf of the Financial Services Information Sharing and Analysis Center), and Gary Hayes, chief information officer of CenterPoint Energy, called on Congress to pass legislation that would increase the flow of data shared between the government and industry about cyber threats. Bhimani said “we need to know what's going on and what's affecting us” and that companies need to receive data from the government about online threats in a timely manner so they can thwart cyberattacks in real time. Hays said cybersecurity legislation needs to be flexible enough so it can apply to both small and large businesses.

In an interview aired March 13, the President said that billions of dollars are lost when industrial secrets are stolen online. And he said that some of the attacks on the nation’s private and public computer networks are sponsored by foreign governments. He said that the government is limited in what it can do to confront China and other sponsors of computer attacks. And he said the government needs the authority to require that critical infrastructure in the country is hardened against such attacks. “There are ways that we can harden our critical infrastructure, our financial sector,” President Obama said. “And the only thing that’s holding us back from doing that right now is we haven’t gotten the legislative authority out of Congress. They need to get this done.”

The house seems most likely to act on the Cyber Intelligence and Sharing Protection Act (CISPA or HR 624), a bill sponsored by House Intelligence Committee leadership. But privacy and civil liberties groups have opposed the bill. Michelle Richardson, legislative counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union, told the House Committee on Homeland Security this week that information sharing legislation needs to give a civilian agency the lead role and also minimize the collation of personal information from companies. "There are ways to conduct information-sharing that builds in some of the privacy protections needed to protect this very sensitive data," she said. Critics of the bill -- which is meant to facilitate the sharing of cyber information between the public and private sectors -- believe its definitions are far too broad. Vast amounts of user information could fall into the category of “cyber threat information” and wind up in the wrong hands, the legislation’s opponents have argued.

Recently, a We The People petition crossed the 100,000-signature threshold required for an official response. The Obama Administration will now have to weigh in sooner rather than later on the contentious bill. Last year, the White House threatened to veto CISPA. It passed through the House anyway, but the Senate never passed a cybersecurity bill. Sponsors reintroduced CISPA this year with no changes in the language, so the White House likely still has objections to it. That puts the House on a collision course with President Obama. Either he will have to give up the veto threat, or the bill will have to be modified somehow before it reaches his desk.

In the Washington Post, TechCrunch writer Gregory Ferenstein wonders where is the Internet's outrage over CISPA. He says CISPA would give the government broad new powers to collect personal data from telecommunication and social network companies, often without warrant. Provisions in CISPA give legal immunity to companies, including those in social media and search, for sharing information with authorities and also helps them combat malicious hackers. So, unlike the power to shut down Web sites, intrusive surveillance doesn’t represent an existential threat to the Web. "Given CISPA’s legal benefits to private companies such as Google and Facebook, it’s easier to see why the corporate pillars of the Internet haven’t jumped on the outrage bandwagon," he writes. He's looking for companies that opposed last year's Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) to stand up again. He sees the Internet's "almost parental protection of information and innovation" but wonders if privacy is seen as nice to have, but not essential. "The Internet community will only rise up when they feel threatened. Their inaction is sending the message, whether intended or not, that privacy is not a priority," Ferenstein concludes.

We’ll continue to track this debate and the progress of both CISPA and the Cybersecurity and American Cyber Competitiveness Act which remains the major cybersecurity bill in the Senate. In the meantime, we’ll see you in the Headlines.

March 14, 2013 (A great day for a piece of Pi)

BENTON'S COMMUNICATIONS-RELATED HEADLINES for THURSDAY, MARCH 14, 2013

Today’s agenda http://benton.org/calendar/2013-03-14/

back to top

CYBERSECURITY
   Cyber threats against U.S. 'ramping up,' President Obama says
   Financial, energy sectors call for cyber information-sharing legislation
   US welcomes China willingness to discuss cyber threats [links to web]
   Who pays the bill for a cyber war? [links to web]
   Can a company 'hack back' to retrieve stolen secrets? [links to web]
   China hacker's angst opens a window onto cyber-espionage [links to web]

INTERNET/BROADBAND
   House Commerce Committee Leaders Continue Examination of $7 Billion Broadband Stimulus Programs - press release
   Five Fundamentals for the Phone Network, Part 3: Protecting All Consumers - analysis
   Is that really broadband? A look at the technologies in play.
   What Do You Do With the World’s Fastest Internet Service? - analysis
   Consumers Visit Retailers, Then Go Online for Cheaper Sources [links to web]

WIRELESS/SPECTRUM
   Keeping the Incentive in Incentive Auctions - editorial
   Newest Phone Unlocking Bill Criticized as 'Temporary Fix'
   Fast, unlimited wireless at last? What a combined T-Mobile/MetroPCS means to you
   Why Cellphones Are So Annoying [links to web]
   Verizon's Palmer details the company's AWS deployment strategy, VoLTE launch plans and more [links to web]
   Google’s Android lead steps down [links to web]
   ITC Postpones iPhone Ban Decision [links to web]
   NAB Slams Wireless Call for BAS Spectrum [links to web]

CONTENT
   House lawmakers skeptical of relaxing computer crime law [links to web]
   Introducing Netflix Social
   Aaron Swartz Lawyers Accuse Prosecutor Stephen Heymann Of Misconduct [links to web]
   Berkeley e-mail tax is not the answer - editorial [links to web]
   Google Reader lived on borrowed time: creator Chris Wetherell reflects [links to web]

PRIVACY
   Google Hastens to Show Its Concern for Privacy
   Recalculating the privacy debate after Google Maps penalty - editorial
   Sen. Franken Pushes In-Store Tracker Euclid to Seek Shopper Permission [links to web]

TELEVISION/RADIO
   FCC Mulls Over Raising Limits on Foreign Ownership of Broadcast Stations - analysis
   FCC’s Pai: Retransmission Relief Must Come from Congress [links to web]
   ACA Summit: WOW CEO Abdoulah Says It's Time for FCC to Call Out Broadcasters on Retransmission [links to web]
   ACA Summit: Sen. Heller Says Video Regulations Need Reboot [links to web]

HEALTH
   Solving the talent equation for health IT - research [links to web]
   'Virtual house calls' for Parkinson's as beneficial as office visits: study [links to web]

GOVERNMENT & COMMUNICATIONS
   Engaging with Mayor Booker To Improve Government Social Media [links to web]

LOBBYING
   Video game industry hires former Capitol Hill aides [links to web]

STORIES FROM ABROAD
   China Mobile to invest $30.6 billion in 4G [links to web]
   Mobile Apps Put Users’ Privacy at Risk, EU Regulators Say [links to web]
   América Móvil suffers as reforms sink in [links to web]
   Vodafone and France Telecom in Spain deal [links to web]
   EMC donates Vatican storage of biblical proportions [links to web]

MORE ONLINE
   Kids To Marketers: We Want Tech Gadgets, Not Toys [links to web]
   Forrester Forecasts 13% Gain In Online Sales [links to web]

CYBERSECURITY

PRESIDENT OBAMA ON CYBERSECURITY
[SOURCE: Reuters, AUTHOR: Susan Heavey]
Cyber security threats against the United States are growing, President Barack Obama said before meeting corporate leaders to discuss rising concerns about hacking attacks emanating from China. "What is absolutely true is that we have seen a steady ramping up of cyber security threats," President Obama said in an interview with ABC, noting that some threats were "state sponsored." "We've made it very clear to China and some other state actors that, you know, we expect them to follow international norms and abide by international rules," the President said. President Obama took the unusual step of meeting with corporate chief executives in the White House Situation Room, the secure site in the West Wing basement where the president meets with national security advisers during crises. The meeting included Honeywell International's David Cote, AT&T's Randall Stephenson, and Northrop Grumman's Wes Bush.
benton.org/node/147800 | Reuters | LA Times
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top


BUSINESS LEADERS CALL FOR LEGISLATION
[SOURCE: The Hill, AUTHOR: Jennifer Martinez]
Two representatives from the financial and energy sectors called on Congress to pass legislation that would increase the flow of data shared between the government and industry about cyber threats. "At the end of the day, we need to know what's going on and what's affecting us," said Anish Bhimani, chief information risk officer of JPMorgan Chase, who testified on behalf of the Financial Services Information Sharing and Analysis Center at a House hearing. Bhimani told members of the House Homeland Security Committee that companies need to receive data from the government about online threats in a timely manner so they can thwart cyberattacks in real time. "What we care most about is that we're able to receive actionable, timely information from whoever has it," he said. Gary Hayes, chief information officer of CenterPoint Energy, said cybersecurity legislation needs to be flexible enough so it can apply to both small and large businesses. "One size fits all is not appropriate," he said.
benton.org/node/147799 | Hill, The
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

INTERNET/BROADBAND

BROADBAND STIMULUS OVERSIGHT
[SOURCE: House of Representatives Commerce Committee, AUTHOR: Press release]
Republican leaders of the House Commerce Committee continued their examination of the president’s broadband stimulus programs, requesting information from both the Rural Utilities Service (RUS) and Government Accountability Office (GAO) regarding Rural Utilities Service’s Broadband Initiatives Program (BIP). In a letter to RUS Acting Administrator John Padalino, the members requested information regarding the agency’s management and oversight of the BIP program, particularly its review process for awarding $66.4 million in grants and loans to Lake County. Members expressed concern that the Lake County project may be overbuilding areas already served by existing broadband providers, instead of expanding access to underserved or unserved areas, as required by ARRA.
Additionally, committee leaders requested GAO examine all of the loans and grants distributed through the BIP program. The members wrote, “As we seek to expand the deployment of broadband infrastructure in a constrained budget environment, the overbuilding of existing broadband networks using federal dollars represents a significant concern. As GAO and others have reported, access to broadband service can improve economic growth and quality-of-life. Yet, overbuilding diverts scarce budget resources from areas without broadband service to areas with service and can impede vital private-sector investment. Given the need to ensure the most efficient and effective use of federal dollars and guard against waste, fraud, and abuse, we ask that GAO conduct an in-depth analysis of work already completed under BIP.”
benton.org/node/147767 | House of Representatives Commerce Committee
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top


PROTECTING ALL CONSUMERS
[SOURCE: Public Knowledge, AUTHOR: Lucy Wolf]
Public Knowledge has proposed Five Fundamentals to guide the phone network upgrade to an IP-based system and this piece focuses on protecting all consumers. The need for consumer protection builds upon PK’s previous two principles for the PSTN transition. The first principle states that everyone has the right to be a consumer of the phone network and that phone carriers have a duty to bring service to all Americans. The second principle promotes competition and interconnection between carriers, meaning that anyone should be able to place a call to another person, regardless of which phone company they use. Interconnection and other competition policies lead to a healthy, consumer-friendly market for phone service. Yet competition between carriers does not always guarantee all aspects of consumer protection. PK’s third principle ensures that all consumers are protected from potential harm dealt to them by their phone service providers, by enforcing privacy principles, truth-in-billing, and safety from predatory practices. It is important that the consumer protections ensured in current communications law are updated to reflect the IP-based infrastructure of the future. Today, the law explicitly protects consumers’ confidential information, and the FCC has relied on its authority over the traditional phone network to extend this protection to VoIP (voice over internet protocol) services. But the FCC has jurisdiction over other safeguards like “slamming rules” and “cramming rules” that they have yet to apply to VoIP providers.
benton.org/node/147758 | Public Knowledge
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top


IS THAT REALLY BROADBAND
[SOURCE: GCN, AUTHOR: Kevin McCaney]
The National Broadband Plan has set ambitious goals for high-speed Internet connectivity across the country, and agencies, cities and other municipalities have hopped on the broadband bandwagon. But what exactly counts as broadband? The Federal Communications Commission originally designated broadband as anything faster than 200 kilobits/sec, which basically meant anything that wasn't the old dial-up modem, then upgraded it to 768 kilobits/sec downstream and 200 kilobits/sec upstream. The National Telecommunications and Information Administration still considers 768 kilobits/sec to be broadband at the most basic level, but the FCC in 2010 set the bar for the national broadband plan at 4 megabits/sec downstream and 1 megabit/sec upstream. The range of available broadband technologies is still wide. Here’s is a rundown of the most common types of broadband, their range of transmission speeds and, to put it into context for the everyday user, an estimate of how long, on average, each technology would take to download a 1M book, 4M song and 6.14G movie, drawn from the trove of information available from NTIA's National Broadband Map.
benton.org/node/147753 | GCN
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top


GOOGLE FIBER
[SOURCE: Slate, AUTHOR: Farhad Manjoo]
Google’s gigabit initiative, called Google Fiber, has sparked a round of questions across the tech industry. Is Google looking to become an Internet service provider? Does it simply want to spur other ISPs into providing faster service? And why wire Kansas City rather than, say, Silicon Valley or New York? And, finally, why gigabit Internet—what does Google expect people to do with the world’s fastest broadband service? In this piece, I’ll focus on the last two questions: What has it been like for the people of Kansas City to live and work with the world’s fastest Internet? In my next column, I’ll examine Google’s strategic interests in Fiber—why is the search company building its own Internet lines? The fundamental problem with Google Fiber: It’s totally awesome, and totally unnecessary. During my time in Kansas City, I spoke to several local businesspeople, aspiring startup founders, and a few city boosters. They were all thrilled that Google had come to town, and the few who’d gotten access to the Google pipe said they really loved it. But I couldn’t find a single person who’d found a way to use Google Fiber to anywhere near its potential—or even a half or quarter of what it can do. It was even difficult to find people who could fully utilize Google Fiber in their imaginations. As hard as people tried, few could even think up ways to do something truly amazing with the world’s fastest Internet.
benton.org/node/147755 | Slate
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

WIRELESS/SPECTRUM

INCENTIVE AUCTIONS
[SOURCE: House of Representatives Commerce Committee, AUTHOR: Chairman Greg Walden (R-OR)]
[Commentary] What if the Federal Communications Commission held a broadcast incentive auction and no one came? That’s a distinct possibility if the Commission does not heed the advice that a coalition of television stations filed recently with the agency. The CC must encourage as many broadcasters as possible to participate, since without broadcasters there is no spectrum to auction. The FCC must also maximize the amount of money it raises, since the FCC will need to compensate the broadcasters that relinquish spectrum and reimburse broadcasters that relocate, with $7 billion left over for public safety and preferably more to help with the deficit. The Expanding Opportunities for Broadcasters Coalition, representing more than 40 stations in the top dozen markets, listed three critical elements for a successful auction.
First, the Commission must not artificially limit the potential compensation to broadcasters. This is, after all, an incentive auction, and it would be foolhardy to limit the incentives from the get-go. The market forces of the auction will apply competitive pressures on the compensation broadcasters require and determine the prices wireless carriers are willing to pay while still maximizing broadcaster participation.
Second, the Commission must not exclude potential wireless bidders. Closing the auction to certain carriers would reduce competitive pressures and likely suppress the final bid amount, leaving crucial revenue on the table.
Third, the FCC must auction all the airwaves it clears rather than giving some away for unlicensed use. Freeing the spectrum will come with appropriate but considerable cost, and the FCC needs not only to cover that cost but earn a healthy return if it is going to meet the legislation’s objectives.
benton.org/node/147769 | House of Representatives Commerce Committee
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top


PHONE UNLOCKING BILL
[SOURCE: PC Magazine, AUTHOR: Chloe Albanesius]
Another phone unlocking bill has emerged on Capitol Hill, with Judiciary Committee members from both chambers joining forces to allow users to unlock their devices without carrier permission. Judiciary Committee Chairman Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Sen Al Franken (D-MN), as well as Sens Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), Orrin Hatch (R-UT), and Mike Lee (R-UT) unveiled the Unlocking Consumer Choice and Wireless Competition Act yesterday. In the House, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte and Ranking Member John Conyers are backing companion legislation. The bill reverses a decision from the Library of Congress's Copyright Office, which made cell phone unlocking illegal back in January. "This straightforward restoring bill is about promoting consumer rights," Sen. Leahy said in a statement. "When consumers finish the terms of their contract, they should be able to keep their phones and make their own decision about which wireless provider to use." "It just makes sense that cell phone users should be able to do what they want with their phones after satisfying their initial service contract," Sen. Hatch said. "This bill reinstates that ability, while also ensuring that copyrights are not violated."
benton.org/node/147756 | PC Magazine
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top


WHAT T-MOBILE/METROPCS MEANS TO YOU
[SOURCE: The Verge, AUTHOR: Chris Ziegler]
With approval from the Federal Communications Commission and the Department of Justice, we could be just months away from the biggest transaction in the US telecom industry in years — a transaction that would be great news for T-Mobile. But what does it mean for customers? Turning off MetroPCS's network has major advantages: by not having to support two entirely different kinds of networks on the same bandwidth, the combined company can eventually devote most or all of its AWS spectrum to LTE — 20MHz of it in some locations, which is an extremely fat, fast data pipe. By comparison, neither Verizon nor AT&T have more than 20MHz of LTE spectrum active in any market, and each of those carriers has more than twice the number of subscribers that a merged T-Mobile-MetroPCS would. But the roll-in of MetroPCS's airwaves isn't the only thing going for T-Mobile right now — it's been collecting valuable spectrum in droves since AT&T called off its doomed deal last year.
benton.org/node/147762 | Verge, The
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

CONTENT

NETFLIX SOCIAL
[SOURCE: Netflix, AUTHOR: Cameron Johnson]
Netflix members in the U.S. can share their favorite shows and movies on Netflix with friends by connecting to Facebook and agreeing to share. By default, sharing will only happen on Netflix. You'll see what titles your friends have watched in a new “Watched by your friends” row and what they have rated four or five stars in a new “Friends’ Favorites” row. Your friends will also be able to see what you watch and rate highly. You are in control of what gets shared. You can choose not to share a specific title by clicking the “Don't Share This” button in the player. You can also visit your “Social Settings” in “Your Account” on Netflix.com to turn on additional sharing to Facebook or stop sharing altogether. We will be adding the ability to turn on these features for our US members over the coming days, so keep an eye out for them. All U.S. Netflix members will have access to the social features by the end of this week.
benton.org/node/147749 | Netflix | Bloomberg | B&C | The Hill | GigaOm | Washington Post | NYTimes | WSJ
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

PRIVACY

GOOGLE CARES
[SOURCE: New York Times, AUTHOR: David Streitfeld, Claire Cain Miller]
Google has repeatedly redefined how people communicate and acquire knowledge in the 21st century, and it has repeatedly been accused of breaking the rules in the process. The company says it has taken its mistakes in the Street View case to heart and has already changed. Never again, it says, will a midlevel engineer be able to do anything like what one did in Street View: start a program to scoop up data secretly from potentially millions of unencrypted Wi-Fi networks around the world, without his bosses bothering to know. To make sure of this, a coalition of 38 states has drawn up numerous specific steps for Google to take, ranging from educating its engineers to educating its lawyers. Whatever Google was doing before to improve its privacy controls was not enough, the states say. Google’s internal compliance will not be directly monitored. But if states feel Google is not upholding its side of the deal, they can bring the matter up to the executive committee that brokered the deal, including the attorneys general of Illinois, Massachusetts and Texas. Some privacy experts think the program has a fair chance of success.
benton.org/node/147821 | New York Times
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top


GOOGLE AND PRIVACY
[SOURCE: The Christian Science Monitor, AUTHOR: Editorial staff]
[Commentary] By now, consumers and citizens may have detected a pattern: New technologies allow new types of privacy invasions, which then lead to ad hoc remedies – until the next type of intrusion. As the string of Google violations shows – along with dozens of new privacy laws passed since the 1970s – the pace of this cat-and-mouse privacy quest has quickened in the Digital Age. Even a mighty Internet company like Google, whose informal motto is “do no evil,” can falter when it creates new technologies with new uses without always knowing exactly what privacy guardrails society expects. The basic need is to better define the purposes of privacy rather than simply react to the fear of losing it. If tech users, companies, and government had a broad consensus on the benefits of privacy, then it would be easier to design comprehensive and consistent policy. Lawmakers and law enforcers would not always be playing catch-up with the latest “violation,” and coming up with a patchwork of solutions.
benton.org/node/147820 | Christian Science Monitor, The
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

TELEVISION/RADIO

FOREIGN OWNERSHIP
[SOURCE: CommLawCenter, AUTHOR: Richard Zaragoza]
[Commentary] Should the Federal Communications Commission be open to allowing non-citizens and foreign companies to hold more than a 25% equity interest in U.S. radio and television stations? The deadline for public comments is April 15, with reply comments due by April 30. The Coalition for Broadcast Investment -- comprised of national broadcast networks, radio and television station licensees, as well as community and consumer organizations -- is urging the FCC to publicly commit, going forward, to considering on their individual merits transactions proposing significant foreign investment in broadcast stations, rather than reflexively rejecting foreign ownership above the 25% mark, as the FCC has traditionally done when reviewing broadcast transactions.
benton.org/node/147786 | CommLawCenter
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

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