Benton RSS Feed

February 15, 2013
Source 
Verizon Wireless
Author 
Robin Nicol
Coverage Type 
Lauren Frayer

Verizon Wireless has completed three spectrum license sale transactions following agreements reached late last year as part of the open sale process for its 700 MHz A and B Block licenses.

Nortex Communications and Panhandle Telecommunication Systems, Inc. closed on their respective purchases this week. Colorado Valley Communications completed its purchase on January 16, 2013. Nortex Communications, based in Muenster, Texas, acquired the Texas RSA 6-Jack 700 MHz lower B-block license, which covers a four-county area northwest of Dallas. Panhandle Telecommunication Systems, Inc., based in Guymon, Okla., acquired the Texas RSA 2-Hansford 700 MHz lower B-block license, which covers 12 counties in the northwest part of Texas. Colorado Valley Communications purchased a partitioned A-Block license covering a five-county area in the Houston market.

Verizon Wireless Completes Spectrum Sales to Three Rural Companies

Topics

Related Headlines

February 15, 2013
Source 
BBC
Author 
Rory Cellan-Jones
Coverage Type 
Lauren Frayer

Arkholme, a rural community in Lancashire has decided to fit their own cables for a better broadband connection. After realizing that they were not likely to get the fast connection speeds they required, members of the community took the project on themselves. Funded and operated by volunteers in the community, B4RN digs trenches to lay the fiber optic wires necessary to connect the residents to super-high-speed Internet for less than $50 per month. A few locals have already been hooked up to the local network and their once ancient and tired computers are catching up with the times.

Lancashire villagers install fast Internet cables themselves DIY Broadband Comes To The English Countryside (NPR)

Topics

Related Headlines

February 15, 2013
Source 
Broadcasting&Cable
Author 
John Eggerton
Coverage Type 
Lauren Frayer

Federal Trade Commission Chairman Jon Leibowitz will remain atop the agency into next week. He had planned to step down February 15, but has now said he would stick around a little while longer. According to sources, that is to give the Administration a chance to make a decision about a new chair or acting chair, which has yet to be named. Chairman Leibowitz is expected to exit by the end of next week, regardless. If the Administration has not named an acting chair by then, it would leave the FTC split, 2-2.

FTC Chairman Leibowitz Will Stick Around a Few More Days

Topics

Related Headlines

February 15, 2013
Source 
Broadcasting&Cable
Author 
John Eggerton
Coverage Type 
Lauren Frayer

A Federal Trade Commission source has confirmed that the agency is in the process of moving enforcement of the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act from its Advertising Practices division to it Privacy and Identity Protection (PIP) division. The move, launched by outgoing Chairman Jon Leibowitz, will take several months, according to the source.

FTC Moving COPPA Under Privacy Division

Topics

Related Headlines

February 15, 2013
Source 
TVNewsCheck
Author 
Harry Jessell
Coverage Type 
Lauren Frayer

[Commentary] Republican Federal Communications Commissioner Ajit Pai last week made a strong defense of joint sales and shared service agreements that allow broadcasters to operate second stations in markets where they are not allowed to own two under the current ownership rules. That I liked. What I didn't like was Pai's reminder that the Democratic majority still seems fixated on cracking down on virtual duopolies based on joint sales agreements (JSAs) and shared services agreements (SSAs) and limiting broadcasters in medium and small markets to the operation of just one station.

The FCC should rule that virtual duopolies based on JSAs and SSAs are allowable only if the owners of the second stations are minorities or women. This would act as a powerful incentive for broadcasters to seek out such partners and give them the experience to eventually venture out on their own.

How To Help Minorities And Save Duopolies

Topics

Related Headlines

February 15, 2013
Source 
Atlantic, The
Author 
Woodrow Hartzog
Evan Selinger
Coverage Type 
Lauren Frayer

[Commentary] Simple solutions have been proposed to help users cope with the vulnerability of disclosing information on the social web. These remedies are clear and decisive, but they demand significant trade-offs -- perhaps greater sacrifice than typically is acknowledged.

One such option, which Farhad Manjoo, the technology columnist at Slate, bluntly spelled out in a two-word article, "How to Stay Private on Facebook," is "Quit Facebook." Manjoo offers this security-centric path for folks who are anxious about the service being "one the most intrusive technologies ever built," and believe that "the very idea of making Facebook a more private place borders on the oxymoronic, a bit like expecting modesty at a strip club". Bottom line: stop tuning in and start dropping out if you suspect that the culture of oversharing, digital narcissism, and, above all, big-data-hungry, corporate profiteering will trump privacy settings. Another path is that pursued by Wall Street Journal journalist Julia Angwin who just deleted her 666 Facebook friends. She's lost faith in the service's capacity to safeguard what privacy scholar Helen Nissenbaum calls "contextual integrity" (here meaning a respect for the informational norms of certain groups or friends). The other unattractive option is for social web users to willingly pay for connectivity with extreme publicity.

This privacy-abdicating path is fueled by the sense that "the way to approach Facebook and all other sites on the Web, actually, is to think of them as a public forum, as a place where if you post something, potentially everyone you know and everyone beyond everyone you know will be able to see it." In other words, go this route if you believe privacy is dead, but find social networking too good to miss out on. Sensible as these choices seem -- especially given the increasingly blurry line between private companies and law enforcement -- the increasingly popular framing shouldn't be accepted as a practical user's guide to social media realism.

While we should be attuned to constraints and their consequences, there are at least four problems with conceptualizing the social media user's dilemma as a version of "if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen."

  1. Abandoning the social web is not a surefire remedy.
  2. While abandoning a single social technology might seem easy, this "love it or leave it" strategy -- which demands extreme caution and foresight from users and punishes them for their naiveté -- isn't sustainable without great cost in the aggregate.
  3. The "just leave" response is predicated on the questionable idea that alternative social technologies will voluntarily protect their new users in areas their competitors did not.
  4. The fourth problem with the "leave if you're unhappy" ethos is that it is overly individualistic.

[Woodrow Hartzog is an assistant professor at Samford University’s Cumberland School of Law and affiliate scholar at the Center for Internet and Society at Stanford Law School. Evan Selinger is an associate professor of philosophy at Rochester Institute of Technology and a fellow at the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technology.]

Quitters Never Win: The Costs of Leaving Social Media

Topics

Related Headlines

February 15, 2013
Source 
New York Times
Author 
Robert Draper
Coverage Type 
Lauren Frayer

1.25 million more young people supported Obama in 2012 over 2008. While the Romney campaign raised slightly more money from its online ads than it spent on them, Obama’s team more than doubled the return on its online-ad investment. But the problem for the G.O.P. extends well beyond its flawed candidate and his flawed operation. The unnerving truth is that the Republican Party’s technological deficiencies barely begin to explain why the G.O.P. has lost the popular vote in five of the last six presidential elections.

The party brand — which is to say, its message and its messengers — has become practically abhorrent to emerging demographic groups like Latinos and African-Americans, not to mention an entire generation of young voters. As one of the party’s most highly respected strategists told me: “It ought to concern people that the most Republican part of the electorate under Ronald Reagan were 18-to-29-year-olds. And today, people I know who are under 40 are embarrassed to say they’re Republicans. They’re embarrassed! They get harassed for it, the same way we used to give liberals a hard time.”

Can the Republicans Be Saved From Obsolescence?

Topics

Related Headlines

Submitted on February 15, 2013

“America must … face the rapidly growing threat from cyber-attacks,” said President Barack Obama during the State of the Union address on February 12. “Now, we know hackers steal people’s identities and infiltrate private emails. We know foreign countries and companies swipe our corporate secrets. Now our enemies are also seeking the ability to sabotage our power grid, our financial institutions, our air traffic control systems. We cannot look back years from now and wonder why we did nothing in the face of real threats to our security and our economy.”

And with that the President announced that he had signed a new executive order aimed at strengthening U.S. cyber defenses, increasing information sharing, and developing standards to protect national security, jobs, and privacy. The Executive Order requires federal agencies to produce unclassified reports of threats to U.S. companies and requires the reports to be shared in a timely manner. The Order also expands the Enhanced Cybersecurity Services program, enabling near real time sharing of cyber threat information to assist participating critical infrastructure companies in their cyber protection efforts. The Order allows companies that oversee infrastructure like dams, electrical grids and financial institutions to join an experimental program that has provided government contractors with real-time reports about cyberthreats. It will also put together recommendations that companies should follow to prevent attacks, and it will more clearly define the responsibilities for different parts of the government that play a role in cybersecurity.

The Executive Order:

  • Includes strong privacy and civil liberties protections based on the Fair Information Practice Principles. Agencies are required to incorporate privacy and civil liberties safeguards in their activities under this order. Those safeguards will be based upon the Fair Information Practice Principles (FIPPS) and other applicable privacy and civil liberties policies, principles, and frameworks. Agencies will conduct regular assessments of privacy and civil liberties impacts of their activities and such assessments will be made public.
  • Establishes a voluntary program to promote the adoption of the Cybersecurity Framework. The Department of Homeland Security will work with Sector-Specific Agencies like the Department of Energy and the Sector Coordinating Councils that represent industry to develop a program to assist companies with implementing the Cybersecurity Framework and to identify incentives for adoption.
  • Calls for a review of existing cybersecurity regulation. Regulatory agencies will use the Cybersecurity Framework to assess their cybersecurity regulations, determine if existing requirements are sufficient, and whether any existing regulations can be eliminated as no longer effective. If the existing regulations are ineffective or insufficient, agencies will propose new, cost-effective regulations based upon the Cybersecurity Framework and in consultation with their regulated companies. Independent regulatory agencies are encouraged to leverage the Cybersecurity Framework to consider prioritized actions to mitigate cyber risks for critical infrastructure consistent with their authorities.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology, an agency of the U.S. Department of Commerce, will work collaboratively with critical infrastructure stakeholders to develop the Cybersecurity Framework relying on existing international standards, practices, and procedures that have proven to be effective. The framework will provide guidance that is technology neutral and that enables critical infrastructure sectors to benefit from a competitive market for products and services.

On February 13, NIST announced it will issue a Request for Information (RFI) from critical infrastructure owners and operators, federal agencies, state, local, territorial and tribal governments, standards-setting organizations, other members of industry, consumers, solution providers and other stakeholders. NIST will use the input gathered to identify existing consensus standards, practices and procedures that have been effective and that can be adopted by industry to protect its digital information and infrastructure from the full range of cybersecurity threats. The framework will not dictate “one-size-fits-all” solutions, but will instead enable innovation by providing guidance that is technology neutral and recognizes the different needs and challenges within and among critical infrastructure sectors. NIST will ask organizations to share their current risk management practices; use of frameworks, standards, guidelines and best practices; and other industry practices. NIST plans to hold workshops over the next several months to collect additional input and will complete the framework within one year.

The RFI will request additional information on a number of core practices NIST views as applicable across industry, for example:

  • Encryption and key management—With multiple encryption tools in use at any given organization, how does one protect, store and organize encryption keys?
  • Asset identification and management—How does an organization determine which assets need protection and their value?
  • Security engineering practices—How does an organization design its systems to meet security needs?

In addition to the Executive Order, the White House released a Presidential Policy Directive on Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience. The Directive -- a rewrite of the nation's longstanding, broad critical-infrastructure strategy -- establishes national policy on critical infrastructure security and resilience. This endeavor is a shared responsibility among the Federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial (SLTT) entities, and public and private owners and operators of critical infrastructure ("critical infrastructure owners and operators"). The directive also refines and clarifies the critical infrastructure-related functions, roles, and responsibilities across the Federal Government, as well as enhances overall coordination and collaboration. The Federal Government, the Directive states, also has a responsibility to strengthen the security and resilience of its own critical infrastructure, for the continuity of national essential functions, and to organize itself to partner effectively with and add value to the security and resilience efforts of critical infrastructure owners and operators.

The White House is pointing at six key deliverables for the effort:

  1. Development of a description of the functional relationships within the Department of Homeland Security and across the Federal Government related to critical infrastructure security and resilience within 120 days.
  2. Completion of an assessment of the existing public-private partnership model and recommended options for improving the partnership within 150 days.
  3. Identification of baseline data and systems requirements for the Federal Government to enable efficient information exchange within 180 days.
  4. Development of a situational awareness capability for critical infrastructure within 240 days.
  5. Update the National Infrastructure Protection Plan within 240 days.
  6. Completion of a national critical infrastructure security and resilience research and development plan within 2 years.

Measures considered most important by cybersecurity experts — like minimum requirements for how crucial infrastructure should be protected — were not included in the Order because they require Congressional approval. The Administration's call for voluntary cybersecurity standards lacks incentives. Absent a new law, the White House isn't easily able to encourage widespread business participation — instead, the order urges federal agencies to explore the sort of carrots they can offer in the interim. There also are barriers to the sort of unfettered information sharing backed by White House leaders, congressional lawmakers and private-sector executives. The obstacles are particularly pronounced for businesses that want to share with other businesses, and there's no liability protection from lawsuits. Cybersecurity experts say the equipment used by companies overseeing the nation’s critical infrastructure is notoriously outdated and insecure because it was not built with the potential for a serious cyberattack in mind.

“The executive order is about information sharing — it does not even begin to address the real problem, which is that these systems are completely insecure,” said Dale Peterson, the founder of Digital Bond, a security firm that focuses on infrastructure. He added: “I’m amazed that 11 ½ years after 9/11, the government hasn’t even had the courage to say, ‘You need to replace this insecure equipment.’ If you get on these systems, they have no security and you can do whatever you want.”

“Now Congress must act as well,” said President Obama during the State of the Union address, “by passing legislation to give our government a greater capacity to secure our networks and deter attacks. This is something we should be able to get done on a bipartisan basis.”

Only Congress can revise federal hiring authority to attract new cyber experts to the government's ranks — a problem, particularly, for the Pentagon as it seeks new cyber expertise. Administration officials said it would be imperative for Congress to pass legislation to safeguard the government's own computer systems from attack. “Executive action alone cannot create the new tools and authorities needed to meet the Nation’s collective cybersecurity challenges,” wrote Michael Daniel, the Special Assistant to the President and Cybersecurity Coordinator. “The Administration continues to urge Congress to pass legislation to more fully address our Nation’s cybersecurity needs.” The thinking behind the Executive Order is that taking one year to achieve consensus with industry on voluntary information-sharing and security controls will enable new laws to immediately take effect, whenever Congress acts. 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.

"I think it's worth highlighting that an executive order is not magical. It doesn't create new power or authorities for any government agency," said Andy Ozment, a senior director for cybersecurity at the White House. "Instead, it's an expression of the president's strategic intent." "It's, again, critical to highlight that this is not a substitute for legislation. We need comprehensive cybersecurity legislation," he added. "We cannot do everything under our existing authorities."

"This executive order is only a downpayment on what we need to address this threat," National Security Agency Director Keith Alexander said during an event at the Commerce Department to discuss the administration's action. "This executive order can only move us so far and is not a substitute for legislation."

President Obama may have forced Capitol Hill’s hand, writes Tony Romm for Politico, but it doesn’t mean lawmakers are finished fighting over the country’s digital defenses. Substantial policy differences between both parties and chambers remain. Senate Democrats and Republicans continue to quarrel over the need for government to set any new security standards for critical infrastructure — the very battle that scuttled the chamber’s cybersecurity legislative efforts in 2012. Congressional supporters of robust cybersecurity reform saw significant benefit in the President’s action. Sen. Tom Carper (D-DE), the new leader of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, said the action is justified after the White House “waited for all of last year to see if we could get our act together … and we were unable to do that.” Some Republicans immediately blasted the Executive Order: Sens. John McCain (R-AZ), John Thune (R-SD), and Saxby Chambliss (R-GA), veterans of the 2012 fight, criticized the President for signing the document ahead of his annual address. House Republicans, including Reps. Mike McCaul (R-TX) and Mac Thornberry (R-TX), offered similar criticisms. Those members still pledged to return to the legislative drafting table this year.

On February 13, the leaders of the House Intelligence Committee reintroduced the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA), a bill that passed the House in the last Congress but which President Obama threated to veto. The bill was resoundingly criticized by internet privacy and freedom activists, including the Electronic Frontier Foundation and Fight for the Future, who said that it did not contain enough restrictions on how companies and the government could share personal user information. Already, Fight For the Future has set up a new CISPA protest website http://cispaisback.com/ encouraging users to email Congress against the bill. Meanwhile, AT&T, Verizon (PDF) and the telecommunications lobbying group USTelecom all declared their support for the revival of CISPA.

CISPA would:

  • Allow the Federal government to provide classified cyber threat information to the private sector to help American companies better protect themselves from advanced cyber threats;
  • Empower American businesses to share cyber threat information with others in the private sector and enable the private sector to share information with the government on a purely voluntary basis, all while providing strong protections for privacy and civil liberties;
  • Provides liability protection for companies acting in good faith to protect their own networks or share threat information.

The bill’s major sponsors, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers (R-MI) and Ranking Member C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger (D-MD), point to the bill’s protections for privacy and civil liberties:

  • Narrow definitions that permit only the voluntary sharing by the private sector of a limited category of information—cyber threat information—and only for cybersecurity purposes;
  • Strict restrictions on the government’s use, retention, and searching of any data voluntarily shared by the private sector;
  • Provisions permitting individuals to sue the government in federal court for violations of the bill’s privacy restrictions;
  • Requiring the independent Intelligence Community Inspector General to conduct a detailed review of the government’s use of any information voluntarily shared by the private sector, and provide an unclassified report to Congress;
  • A sunset for the bill’s authorities in five years, requiring Congress to carefully review the use of the authorities provided under the legislation to determine whether they should be extended or modified.

The bill has 112 co-sponsors in the House.

Back in January, Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller (D-WV), Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), and Senate Homeland Security Committee Chairman Tom Carper (D-DE) introduced a bill, the Cybersecurity and American Cyber Competitiveness Act (S 21), to secure the United States against cyber attack, to improve communication and collaboration between the private sector and the Federal Government, to enhance American competitiveness and create jobs in the information technology industry, and to protect the identities and sensitive information of American citizens and businesses. The bill calls for the enactment of bipartisan legislation to improve communication and collaboration between the private sector and the federal government to secure the United States against cyber attack, enhance the competitiveness of the United States and create jobs in the information technology industry, and protect the identities and sensitive information of U.S. citizens and businesses by:

  • enhancing the security and resiliency of public and private communications and information networks against cyber attack;
  • establishing mechanisms for sharing cyber threat and vulnerability information between the government and the private sector;
  • developing a public-private system to improve the capability of the United States to assess cyber risk and prevent, detect, and respond to cyber attacks against critical infrastructure such as the electric grid, the financial sector, and telecommunications networks;
  • promoting research and development investments and professional training;
  • preventing and mitigating identity theft;
  • enhancing U.S. diplomatic capacity and public-private international cooperation to respond to emerging cyber threats;
  • expanding resources for investigating and prosecuting cyber crimes in a manner that respects privacy rights and civil liberties and promotes U.S. innovation; and
  • maintaining robust protections of the privacy of U.S. citizens and their online activities and communications.

The question remains: can Congress get anything done? Earlier this month, former House Homeland Security Committee counsel Kevin Gronberg said Congress is unlikely to pass a comprehensive cybersecurity reform bill this year, largely because public concern about computer hacking doesn’t sway elections. He suggested that prospect is likely to change only after an event involving major property damage, casualties and a direct connection to malicious network activity. “As of yet, cyber still does not win votes,” said Gronberg, who stepped down after the 2012 election. “It will always be one of those issues that politicians will be able to push aside [in favor of] the issue of the day -- such as sequestration,” he said. “That's how these Congress members keep their jobs."

We’ll be tracking the progress of both cybersecurity bills on Benton’s legislation tracker as well as developments in cybersecurity. In the meantime, we’ll see you in the Headlines. http://benton.org/headlines

February 15, 2013 (More on Cybersecurity)

BENTON'S COMMUNICATIONS-RELATED HEADLINES for FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 2013

Headlines will be celebrating Presidents’ Day, as we hope you will be. We will return TUESDAY, February 19.


CYBERSECURITY
   National Cybersecurity Strategy, Roles, and Responsibilities Need to Be Better Defined and More Effectively Implemented - research
   Sec Napolitano: Sequestration Could Compromise US Computer Networks [links to web]
   The President Revives an Old Debate About Privacy
   Is CISPA the New SOPA?
   Rebirth of CISPA, but 'concerns haven't gone away' [links to web]
   Why Some Privacy Advocates are Grinning Over Obama’s Cybersecurity Order
   The U.S. needs to tame the cyber-dragon - editorial

MORE ON INTERNET/BROADBAND
   Lawmakers claim momentum in push for Internet sales tax
   Amazon’s Love Note to Senate Backs Sales Tax Proposal [links to web]
   HUD Will Join Connect2Compete's Digital Literacy Coalition - press release
   US Public Libraries and the Broadband Technology Opportunities Program - research
   Broadband Speed as Promised
   Streamlining Telegraph Rules: This is Tricky Stuff - press release
   Free Press: FCC Should Ignore AT&T's Bullying - press release
   Sen. Wicker Outlines Broadband Focus [links to web]
   Bill would ban muni broadband if one home in census tract gets 1.5Mbps [links to web]

ELECTIONS AND MEDIA
   Proof positive: Need to dial back ads

TELEVISION/RADIO
   Study: 3 million political ads in 2012 [links to web]
   FCC Defends Viewability Rule Sunset [links to web]
   Comcast: Rate hike likely to pay for programming [links to web]
   UN celebrates World Radio Day [links to web]
   The myth of deregulation's consumer benefits - analysis [links to web]

CONTENT
   Library of Congress Issues Plan to Preserve Recordings [links to web]
   Rep Doyle's bill would require free access to federally funded research [links to web]
   Sesame Street Nears 1 Billion Views on YouTube [links to web]
   Fresh From the Internet’s Attic [links to web]
   YouTube Phenoms Raise Record Cash [links to web]
   More Cash for Covers [links to web]
   Court ruling ‘bad news’ for internet companies [links to web]

PRIVACY
   Google under fire for sending users' information to developers

MEDIA AND VIOLENCE
   Common Sense Suggestions for Violence Studies
   Rep. Wolf criticizes Obama for ignoring mental health, media violence in State of the Union [links to web]

OWNERSHIP
   Department of Justice clears Random House-Penguin merger [links to web]
   Media and tech companies swept up in buyout frenzy [links to web]
   Confidence on Upswing, Mergers Make Comeback [links to web]
   The End of Empire: Time Warner 2002-2013 - analysis [links to web]

WIRELESS/SPECTRUM
   Lower 700 MHz A Block licensees gain more time to build networks [links to web]
   Men more gabby than women on cell phones [links to web]

TELECOM
   The myth of deregulation's consumer benefits - analysis [links to web]
   Skype calls now equivalent to one-third of global phone traffic [links to web]
   Telecoms groups must make the right call [links to web]

JOURNALISM
   Report Sees Journalists Increasingly Under Attack [links to web]
   The Mainstream Media Is Gobbling Up Conservative Crazies - analysis [links to web]

POLICYMAKERS
   Sen Lautenberg Won't Seek Re-Election [links to web]

STORIES FROM ABROAD
   Telecoms groups must make the right call [links to web]
   Court ruling ‘bad news’ for internet companies [links to web]

MORE ONLINE
   The Demographics of Social Media Users — 2012 - research [links to web]
   How one school district deployed 10,000 iPads in five weeks [links to web]

back to top

CYBERSECURITY

GAO REPORT ON CYBERSECURITY
[SOURCE: Government Accountability Office , AUTHOR: Gregory Wilshusen, Nabajyoti Barkakati]
GAO and inspector general reports have identified a number of key challenge areas in the federal government’s approach to cybersecurity, including those related to protecting the nation’s critical infrastructure. While actions have been taken to address aspects of these, issues remain in each of these challenge areas, including:
Designing and implementing risk-based federal and critical infrastructure programs
Detecting, responding to, and mitigating cyber incidents.
Promoting education, awareness, and workforce planning.
Promoting research and development (R&D)
Addressing international cybersecurity challenges.
No overarching cybersecurity strategy has been developed that articulates priority actions, assigns responsibilities for performing them, and sets timeframes for their completion. In 2004, GAO developed a set of desirable characteristics that can enhance the usefulness of national strategies in allocating resources, defining policies, and helping to ensure accountability. Existing cybersecurity strategy documents have included selected elements of these desirable characteristics, such as setting goals and subordinate objectives, but have generally lacked other key elements. The missing elements include:
Milestones and performance measures
Cost and resources
Roles and responsibilities.
Linkage with other key strategy documents.
To address missing elements in the national cybersecurity strategy, such as milestones and performance measures, cost and resources, roles and responsibilities, and linkage with other key strategy documents, GAO recommends that the White House Cybersecurity Coordinator develop an overarching federal cybersecurity strategy that includes all key elements of the desirable characteristics of a national strategy. Such a strategy would provide a more effective framework for implementing cybersecurity activities and better ensure that such activities will lead to progress in cybersecurity.
This strategy should also better ensure that federal departments and agencies are held accountable for making significant improvements in cybersecurity challenge areas, including designing and implementing risk-based programs; detecting, responding to, and mitigating cyber incidents; promoting education, awareness, and workforce planning; promoting R&D; and addressing international cybersecurity challenges. To address these issues, the strategy should 1) clarify how OMB will oversee agency implementation of requirements for effective risk management processes and 2) establish a roadmap for making significant improvements in cybersecurity challenge areas where previous recommendations have not been fully addressed.
Further, to address ambiguities in roles and responsibilities that have resulted from recent executive branch actions, GAO believes Congress should consider legislation to better define roles and responsibilities for implementing and overseeing federal information security programs and for protecting the nation’s critical cyber assets.
[GAO-13-187]
benton.org/node/145146 | Government Accountability Office
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top


REVIVING AN OLD DEBATE ABOUT PRIVACY
[SOURCE: New York Times, AUTHOR: Somini Sengupta]
Few expect Internet privacy legislation in Congress this year. But many were heartened that the “p” word came up at all in the State of Union address. The Obama administration’s latest salvo resurrects a difficult, urgent debate over keeping Americans safe online and respecting their privacy. His executive order on cybersecurity sought to strike a balance. It asked government agencies to share with private companies what intelligence they have about computer security threats; but it did not ask the private sector to share its own information with the government. The president, in his State of the Union address, explicitly cited the need to protect both “national security” and “privacy.” The White House cybersecurity order reopens rather than settles an argument that computer scientists, lawyers and civil liberties groups have been having for years over whether increased surveillance of our digital lives will make us safer. It has been fought over body scanners at the airport and surveillance cameras on the street. But expect a new political brawl on this. Both sides have powerful advocates in Washington.
benton.org/node/145144 | New York Times
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top


IS CISPA THE NEW SOPA?
[SOURCE: AdWeek, AUTHOR: Katy Bachman]
The same groups that fought off the anti-piracy bill Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) are now rallying the Internet community against Cyber Intelligence and Sharing Protection Act (CISPA). Like all good advocacy groups these days, Internet activist groups Demand Progress and Fight for the Future are employing social media in a big way in the campaign to put added pressure on lawmakers. On the same day CISPA was introduced, Demand Progress and Fight for the Future delivered to the Hill a petition with 300,000 signatures opposing the act. The groups also set up a dedicated Twitter account (@CISPApetition) that automatically tweets (under the hashtag #NoCISPA) a portion of the signatures every hour to Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI), the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, and Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger (D-MD), the ranking member of the committee. Other organizations, including Free Press and the Electronic Frontier Foundation are also collecting signatures for online petitions opposing the bill. In total, the groups have amassed more than 1 million signatures to date. Opponents of the bill argue it violates consumer privacy because it would allow companies to share users' private data with the government in unprecedented ways. Aaron Swartz, co-founder of Demand Progress, who died in January, had said, "It sort of lets the government run roughshod over privacy protections and share personal data about you."
benton.org/node/145142 | AdWeek | Washington Post | The Hill
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top


WHY SOME PRIVACY ADVOCATES ARE GRINNING OVER OBAMA'S CYBERSECURITY ORDER
[SOURCE: National Journal, AUTHOR: Brian Fung]
President Barack Obama’s cybersecurity executive order sets up some new ways for Washington to share threat information with the private sector. For now, it’ll be a one-way relationship: the government can notify private businesses if they’ve been targeted for cyberattack, but the businesses won’t be giving anything to the government in return. The White House hopes Congress will change that through legislation this year. Bills like the perennially controversial Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA) would open the floodgates of information in the other direction. Privacy groups aren’t a fan of those efforts, as they worry companies won’t be held accountable if personally identifiable data gets handed over and abused. But at least when it comes to the executive order, some have only praise. “Greasing the wheels of information sharing from the government to the private sector is a privacy-neutral way to distribute critical cyber information," said Michelle Richardson, legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union. Part of the reason the ACLU supports Obama’s move is because everything contained in the order — and in particular, the development by federal agencies of in-house cybersecurity standards — will be held up against the Federal Trade Commission's universally recognized privacy standards, the Fair Information Practice Principles (FIPP). Here’s how they’ll help preserve privacy.
Transparency and openness. Agencies will have to be clear about who’s collecting the data, who’ll have access to it, and how it’ll be used.
Choice and consent. This is the opt-in/opt-out checkbox you’re probably familiar with if you’ve ever been asked to install a toolbar, search widget, or other third-party software along with a program.
Access and participation. People and organizations have to be able to learn exactly what’s been collected about them.
Integrity and security. Agencies will have to take “reasonable” measures to protect any data they’ve collected.
Enforcement and redress. There must be a way for people to challenge the system if they think there’s been a breach of the principles.
benton.org/node/145073 | National Journal
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top


TAME THE CYBER-DRAGON
[SOURCE: Washington Post, AUTHOR: Editorial staff]
[Commentary] In the absence of action by Congress, President Obama has just issued an executive order intended to help the private sector defend against cyberattacks by China and others. But discussions with China itself have gone nowhere. The time is ripe for something stronger. In an interview with reporters before leaving office, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said that the United States must make it clear to Beijing that there will be consequences for unbridled hacking. The United States could begin to speak more firmly to China’s leadership about the problem, perhaps threatening to deny visas or expel those found to be involved in economic espionage. If a little pressure does not succeed, the United States could ponder more aggressive options, such as whether to launch offensive cyber-assaults to preemptively disarm adversaries. That would be delicate and risky. As Ms. Clinton noted, this “can become a very unwelcome and even dangerous tit-for-tat that could be a crescendo of consequences, here and around the world, that no one wants to see happen.” China is no longer the poor and isolated nation of Mao’s day. In cyberspace, it must behave like a global economic superpower and not like a petty pickpocket.
benton.org/node/145543 | Washington Post
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

MORE ON INTERNET/BROADBAND

INTERNET SALES TAX BILL
[SOURCE: The Hill, AUTHOR: Brendan Sasso]
A bipartisan group of 35 House members and 18 senators introduced legislation that would allow states to tax online purchases. "This is gaining momentum, and this is the year to do it," Sen. Mike Enzi (R-WY), the lead Senate sponsor, said during a Capitol Hill press conference. Rep. Steve Womack (R-AR), the bill's top author in the House, said he is confident the measure will become law this year. "I have talked to [Senate Majority Leader] Harry Reid [(D-NV)]. Harry Reid wants to bring this to the floor," Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) said. Many of the same lawmakers pushed similar legislation last year, but the measures never made it to the floor for a vote. The latest version of the bill, called the Marketplace Fairness Act, combines several proposals from the last Congress and includes revisions aimed at winning over skeptics. The lawmakers argued that their bill would close an unfair loophole that benefits online retailers over local brick-and-mortar stores. The Marketplace Fairness Act would empower states to tax online purchases. The bill would exempt small businesses that earn less than $1 million annually from out-of-state sales — an increase from the $500,000 threshold proposed last year.
benton.org/node/145188 | Hill, The
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top


HUD WILL JOIN CONNECT2COMPETE’S DIGITAL LITERACY COALITION
[SOURCE: Federal Communications Commission, AUTHOR: Press release]
Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski and Department of Housing and Urban Development Secretary Donovan joined Zachary Leverenz, CEO, Connect2Compete (C2C), Susan Hildreth, Director, Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS), Scott Durchslag, President of Online and Global e-Commerce, Best Buy, and Adrianne Todman, Executive Director, District of Columbia Housing Authority (DCHA) at the Southwest Family Enhancement Center in Washington (DC) to announce that HUD will join C2C as a digital literacy outreach partner. Currently, one-third of Americans don’t subscribe to broadband services at home and more than 60 million Americans lack the digital literacy skills needed to use a computer and access the Internet. Since 1995, when HUD launched the Neighborhood Networks initiative, HUD has encouraged the development of computer labs in public and assisted housing.
HUD to Join C2C Digital Literacy Coalition as Outreach Partner
C2C Will Launch Nationwide Digital Literacy Training Program
HUD and C2C Holding Successful Digital Literacy Training Curriculum Pilot at HUD Sites
HUD is Committed To Extending Access to Computers and the Internet for Low-Income Americans
Digital Literacy is Key to America’s Economic Future
Connect2Compete Is a National Nonprofit Organization Improving the Lives of Americans Through the Power of Technology
benton.org/node/145187 | Federal Communications Commission
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top


ALA BTOP REPORT
[SOURCE: American Library Association, AUTHOR: ]
The American Library Association (ALA) Office for Information Technology Policy released the first national report detailing U.S. library engagement with the Broadband Technology Opportunities Program (BTOP). The preliminary report highlights statewide library BTOP projects and improvements they have made to public access technology resources, digital literacy and workforce development. The report estimates that 1744 libraries were impacted through public computer center grants and 226 libraries were impacted by sustainable broadband adoption grants, which were aimed at providing computer training. In addition 1438 libraries received broadband connectivity through the infrastructure program. Other notable statistics include:
13% of libraries added or replaced computers with BTOP funds in FY2012 and 12% plan to add or replace computers with such funds in FY2013.
Public libraries reported an average of 16.4 computers in FY2012, up from 14.2 computers two years earlier. 65% of libraries report insufficient public computers to meet demand, down from 76% the previous year.
62% of libraries report being the only source of free public access to computers and the Internet in their communities.
77% of Americans aged 16 and older say free access to computers and the Internet is a “very important” service of libraries
30 million people relied on library public access technology for job search resources and assistance in one year. Of these people, 76% used the library’s computers or Internet access for their job search and 23% received job-related training at the library.
58% of U.S. adults have public library cards.
The report also includes detailed descriptions of the impact of the BTOP program on libraries in 19 states and the District of Columbia, many of which include anecdotal evidence about the program’s impact. [more at the URL below]
benton.org/node/145148 | American Library Association | telecompetitor
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top


BROADBAND SPEED AS PROMISED
[SOURCE: Wall Street Journal, AUTHOR: Danny Yadron]
American Internet users generally receive the download speeds that companies advertise, with fiber and satellite connections frequently outperforming expectations, according to a new report from the Federal Communications Commission. The study, conducted last September, found most companies offer download speeds during peak periods that roughly match what they advertise. Verizon’s fiber connection, the company's fastest, averaged download speeds that were 118% of advertised download rates. Cablevision Systems came in at 115% and Comcast delivered 103%, the report found. ViaSat, which offers broadband via satellite, offered connections at rates usually slower than those of land-based Internet companies. But the California-based company still delivered download speeds at 137% of that advertised. The report, issued periodically by regulators, comes as Americans try to satisfy their ever-increasing thirst for bandwidth to watch streaming videos and full-length-movies online. The report found that more Internet users are signing up for faster and generally more-expensive speed tiers from Internet companies.
benton.org/node/145545 | Wall Street Journal
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top


TELEGRAPH RULES
[SOURCE: AT&T, AUTHOR: Bob Quinn]
For anyone who thought that we didn’t need a comprehensive, focused inquiry on how to clear the path for communications to move from a TDM-based circuit switched world to an all-IP, broadband future , you must have noticed a ripple in the force last week. That ripple, of course, was caused by the failure of the FCC to meet the statutory one-year deadline to decide a US Telecom petition that seeks forbearance from, among other things, rules which apply to carriers engaged in furnishing “radio-telegraph, wire-telegraph, or ocean-cable service,” and requires such carriers to maintain “separate files for each damage claim of a traffic nature.” That’s right. One year was not enough time to determine whether we could finish making the move from the telegraph-era to the telephone-era. Apparently, this is tricky stuff. But fear not, under the statute, the Commission is only allowed to extend the due date on this request for three more months , and I am confident that, given that extra time, the Commission will see the light and grant this relief.
benton.org/node/145065 | AT&T
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top


FREE PRESS: AT&T IS A BULLY
[SOURCE: Free Press, AUTHOR: Press release]
Free Press responded to claims in a blog post by AT&T Senior Vice President Bob Quinn that the Federal Communications Commission is moving too slowly on a petition that would eliminate certain regulations that ensure consumers and businesses have access to quality services at reasonable prices. Free Press has filed comments with the FCC that raise serious concerns about the long-term impact of AT&T's request that the agency facilitate the transition to all-IP networks. If granted under the FCC's current broadband-classification framework, AT&T’s request would result in the complete removal of all regulatory oversight of our nation's critical telecommunications infrastructure. Free Press Research Director S. Derek Turner made the following statement:
"AT&T's latest missive against the FCC shows once again that its penchant for bullying is as boundless as its hubris. The FCC is correct to take additional time to fully consider the petition brought by AT&T's mouthpiece, the U.S. Telecom Association. If granted in full, the changes AT&T and USTA seek could have severe impacts on consumers, businesses, competition and jobs. AT&T's agenda is clear: It wants no limits on its ability to jack up the prices for basic services, to redline already underserved consumers or to use its market power to raise its rivals' costs. The FCC should ignore AT&T's intimidation tactics and focus on the facts and the law."
benton.org/node/145063 | Free Press | see Free Press filing
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

ELECTIONS AND MEDIA

NEED TO DIAL BACK POLITICAL ADS
[SOURCE: Politico, AUTHOR: Steve Rosenthal, Karyn Bruggeman]
[Commentary] As the dust of the 2012 election cycle settles, voters are enjoying their increasingly brief respite from the avalanche of negative political ads that have come to define modern campaigns. Everyone knows that campaigns are too negative; candidates and consultants know it, voters know it and the data show it. Nearly everyone agrees that something must change, but the question is, what? One key development from 2012 that has been significantly overlooked is the People’s Pledge adopted in the Massachusetts Senate race. Scott Brown and Elizabeth Warren signed the pledge in January 2012, and in doing so put in place a system of financial penalties designed to discourage media spending by outside groups. The agreement effectively banned the presence of outside television ads in the race — a development nearly unheard of in the post-Citizens United era. Given this unique exclusion of outside ads, Massachusetts provides a good case study on the impact of outside media spending on overall tone. Fewer outside ads meant fewer negative ads, and the tone of the race remained positive until much later in the cycle. Though a handful of outside groups aired broadcast ads in the race before the signing of the pledge, the next negative ad didn’t hit the airwaves until September 2012, months later than in other races. When the race did go negative, the candidates only had to respond to each other, not to the anonymous negative attacks of third-party groups and PACs. It placed a degree of accountability and respectability in the campaign that was unparalleled throughout the cycle. This is a significant accomplishment, and one that merits further consideration as we move toward 2014.
[Steve Rosenthal is a former AFL-CIO political director, founder and CEO of America Coming Together and currently president of the Atlas Project and the Organizing Group. Karyn Bruggeman is a political analyst at the Atlas Project.]
benton.org/node/145540 | Politico
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

PRIVACY

GOOGLE APP PRIVACY
[SOURCE: Los Angeles Times, AUTHOR: Jessica Guynn]
Google is coming under fire just as regulators in the U.S. and overseas are stepping up their scrutiny of how all the players in the industry -- mobile apps, stores, advertising networks and others -- handle consumers' private information. Regulators are pushing for greater transparency of what information is collected by apps and how it's shared. Google Play has worked differently than Apple Inc.'s iTunes since it launched in October 2008. An app developer sets up an account through the mobile payment system Google Wallet, which makes them a merchant in the store. When someone buys his or her app from Google Play, that transaction -- and the customer's information -- is sent to the developer. The developer has to comply with rules about what he or she can do with the information. But at Apple, iTunes is the merchant. App developers say they never receive customer information. Google defended how Google Play operates. "Google Wallet shares the information necessary to process a transaction, which is clearly spelled out in the Google Wallet Privacy Notice," Google said.
benton.org/node/145084 | Los Angeles Times
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

MEDIA AND VIOLENCE

SUGGESTIONS FOR VIOLENCE STUDIES
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
Common Sense Media has recommendations for how the government studies the relationship between violent media and real-life violence, which it based on an analysis of the existing research into children and media. Common Sense says that the current research into children and teenagers' violent media exposure is out of date and incomplete, including almost no data on online exposure. But it says the research that is available "allows us to think about violent media as a 'risk factor' to violence -- one variable among many that increases the risk of violent behavior among some children." Common Sense's recommendations for filling in the research "gaps" are:
Monitoring children's cumulative exposure to violence across multiple forms of media, including movies/video, advertising, music, social media, and other online venues;
Longitudinal studies that include the most current media -- especially the ultra-violent first-person shooter games, and the latest movies and television shows;
Studies that both pay attention to and control for the multiple additional risk factors and variables that potentially influence violent behavior, including trait aggression and family violence; and
Additional and more current studies about children's exposure to violence in the advertisements they see each day on television, while streaming content, and in other new media venues.
benton.org/node/145076 | Broadcasting&Cable
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

February 15, 2013
Source 
New York Times
Author 
Peter Lattman
Coverage Type 
Lauren Frayer

For the corporate takeover business, the last half-decade was a fallow period. Wall Street deal makers and chief executives, brought low by the global financial crisis, lacked the confidence to strike the audacious multibillion-dollar acquisitions that had defined previous market booms. Cycles, however, turn, and in the opening weeks of 2013, merger activity has suddenly roared back to life.

Example: Liberty Global, the company controlled by the billionaire media magnate John C. Malone, struck a $16 billion deal to buy the British cable business Virgin Media. “Since the crisis, one by one, the stars came into alignment, and it was only a matter of time before you had a week like we just had,” said James B. Lee Jr., the vice chairman of JPMorgan Chase. Still, bankers and lawyers remain circumspect, warning that it is still too early to declare a mergers-and-acquisitions boom like those during the junk bond craze of 1989, the dot-com bubble of 1999 and the leveraged buyout bonanza of 2007. They also say that it is important to pay heed to the excesses that developed during these moments of merger mania, which all ended badly.

Confidence on Upswing, Mergers Make Comeback

Topics

Related Headlines

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