Benton RSS Feed
FCC CHIEF PLEDGES LOYALTY TO USF, REFORMS
[SOURCE: Technology Daily 5/15, AUTHOR: David Hatch]
FCC Chairman Kevin Martin has responded to a detailed query from Rep. Edward Markey (D-MA) regarding the regulator's positions on the multibillion-dollar universal service program that subsidizes telecommunications and Internet connections in rural and impoverished areas. Chairman Martin's response to Rep Markey's April inquiry surfaced publicly Monday. In his letter, Chairman Martin said preserving the stability of the fund "is one of the commission's most important responsibilities." He added that "the system requires fundamental reform, and I support modifying the current contribution system and moving to a more competitively and technology-neutral system." He also told Rep Markey he wants the FCC to explore "how and to what extent" the fund could assist with the deployment of high-speed Internet service in rural and low-income areas, or at least remove barriers to deployment. The chairman reiterated his support for so-called "reverse auctions," which would award subsidies to carriers agreeing to receive the lowest subsidies. He also expressed hesitancy toward subsidizing multiple carriers in high-cost rural areas because that could "lead to inefficient and/or stranded investment and a ballooning universal service fund."
http://www.njtelecomupdate.com/2007/05/fcc_chief_pledges_loyalty_to_u.html
FCC Chief Pledges Loyalty To USF, Reforms
IT'S SILICON VALLEY VS TELCOS IN BATTLE FOR WIRELESS SPECTRUM
[SOURCE: Wired, AUTHOR: Frank Rose]
Apple's iPhone may be the most eagerly awaited gadget of the year, but when it finally goes on sale some time next month, only 30 percent of US mobile phone customers -- those who subscribe to AT&T's wireless service -- will be able to use it. Verizon subscribers might have had a shot, but executives at that carrier nixed the idea of letting an Apple device onto their network years ago. It's as if Mac owners had to connect to the Internet through AT&T because their machines wouldn't work on Verizon, Comcast or Time Warner Cable. The wire-line Internet doesn't work that way, and wireless doesn't have to either. By the end of this year, the FCC is expected to start auctioning a frequency band that could be used for a wireless network that any device -- be it a cell phone, laptop, desktop, TV or toaster -- would be able to connect to. A proposal to build such a network has been presented by Frontline Wireless, a startup backed by three of Silicon Valley's biggest players: Venture capitalist John Doerr, Google angel investor Ram Sriram and one-time Netscape CEO James Barksdale. But Frontline will be bidding against behemoths like Cingular and Verizon, and whether it has a chance will be determined within the next few weeks, when the FCC sets the rules for the auction.
http://www.wired.com/techbiz/media/news/2007/05/uhf_spectrum
It's Silicon Valley vs. Telcos in Battle for Wireless Spectrum
PROTECTING KIDS FROM ONLINE FOOD ADS
[SOURCE: C-Net|News.com, AUTHOR: Stefanie Olsen]
In January, the FCC began enforcing new federal rules that restrict children's TV channels like Nickelodeon from displaying Web site addresses that contain any links to commercial content. But critics argue that those regulations are short-sighted, given that marketers today are targeting children on media beyond the TV. Particularly in the last few years, marketing and digital media have merged to create a powerful force in the lives of younger generations, through devices like mobile phones and within virtual reality sites. Nutrition experts and some members of Congress are already showing support for new regulations surrounding digital food marketing. In comments to the Federal Trade Commission Thursday, The Center for Digital Democracy, Children Now and the Berkeley Media Studies Health group argue that there is a need for government intervention in advertising to make sure that marketers "serve the health of our children rather than undermine it."
http://news.com.com/Protecting+kids+from+online+food+ads/2100-1025_3-618...
* FTC Asked to Conduct a Broader Food Marketing Inquiry
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6442853.html?rssid=193
* Is Online Marketing Making Kids Obese?
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/may2007/tc20070517_416894...
* Comprehensive New Report Documents Use of Digital Marketing Tactics By Food & Beverage Companies Targeting Children & Teens
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=109&STORY=/www/story/0...
* Interactive Food & Beverage Marketing: Targeting Children and Youth in the Digital Age
http://digitalads.org/
Protecting kids from online food ads
THE SOUND OF COPY RESTRICTIONS CRASHING
[SOURCE: Washington Post, AUTHOR: Rob Pegoraro]
The idea of ditching "digital rights management" for music downloads is rapidly changing from dream to business reality -- and faster than anybody might have hoped. Amazon said yesterday that it would open an online store that stocks only MP3 music files without copying restrictions. That would be huge news, except that Amazon is only catching up with Apple, which announced in early April that it would offer DRM-free downloads by the end of this month. Both stores have the public backing of EMI, one of the four big record labels, which yesterday also said it would sell unrestricted music downloads at some European sites. This should delight customers, who will no longer have to worry about being able to listen to their song files on their next music player or their computer. But it must unsettle many music industry executives.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/16/AR200705...
(requires registration)
* Amazon.com takes digital music sales to the next, unprotected level
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/money/20070517/amazon17.art.htm
* Will labels sing along with DRM-free music?
http://news.com.com/Apple%2C+Amazon+may+hold+future+of+DRM-free+music/21...
The Sound of Copy Restrictions Crashing
MEDIA COMPANIES FIRE BACK AT VIOLENCE STUDIES
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
University of Toronto professor Jonathan Freedman concedes that there is a correlation between violent media and aggression, but says that is not the same as causation. While he FCC's recent report to Congress concludes that research shows TV violence is harmful to kids, Prof Freedman says advocates claiming "overwhelming" evidence for the causal connection are wrong -- and need to be challenged on it. Instead, he said, the FCC did no thorough analysis of the research. "There seems to be mainly an acceptance of that view because more of those they talked with favored it than favored the other view," saying the result "could not hope to produce anything of much use." "The Violence Report was very clear to differentiate between causation and correlation," countered an FCC official. "It said the data on causation is mixed/inconclusive at this time but that there is strong evidence of correlation and that alone warrants some action to be taken."
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6442496.html?rssid=193
* Freedman's paper: http://www.mediainstitute.org/issue_papers/policyviews/2007/Freedman-Tel...
* Media Institute challenge FCC
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117965058.html?categoryid=14&cs=1&nid=...
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6442496.html?rssid=193
HOW TO END THE REIGN OF SHOCK JOCKS
[SOURCE: Media is a Plural, AUTHOR: Rory Connor]
[Commentary] Other than the desire to shock listeners -- and thereby create controversy, grow audiences and sell advertising -- the current spate of repulsive shock-jock gibberish all share something else: a salary from CBS. Once peacock-proud of their self-styled “Tiffany” network -- so-called for its supposed devotion to quality -- the corporate heirs of William Paley traded public service for private profit long ago. But now no amount of filthy lucre can perfume away the stench wafting from the current trench of programming sewage being shoveled our way of late by such CBS on-air alleged ‘talent’ as Opie & Anthony, JV and Elvis, and Don “I-Man” Imus.
http://www.roryoconnor.org/blog/2007/05/15/the-imus-effect-cbs-shock-joc...
* Listeners shocked by XM hosts' suspension
[SOURCE: Los Angeles Times, AUTHOR: Jim Puzzanghera and Amy Kaufman]
Satellite radio bills itself as the Wild West of the airwaves, an uncensored outpost beyond the reach of federal regulators where expletives fly with impunity and the banter can get as raunchy as at a strip club. But the decision this week by XM Satellite Radio to suspend shock jocks Opie and Anthony for 30 days for crude sexual comments about First Lady Laura Bush, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Queen Elizabeth II has listeners wondering whether there's a new sheriff in town. Some XM listeners were outraged — not at the comments but at XM's reaction.
http://www.latimes.com/business/printedition/la-fi-shockradio17may17,1,5...
(requires registration)
How to End the Reign of Shock Jocks
FCC FINES MORE STATIONS FOR KIDS TV VIOLATIONS
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
The FCC has proposed another $36,000 in fines against TV stations for violations of kids TV rules. The biggest fine is $20,000 against Media General's WRBL(TV) Columbus, Ga., for willful and repeated violations of rules requiring it to file reports on compliance with kids TV ad limits, for its failure to publicize the existence of its kids TV programming reports, and for not reporting its FCC-friendly kids programming to program guide publishers.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6442615.html?rssid=193
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6442615.html?rssid=193
COURT BACKS COMCAST IN DISPUTE WITH NFL
[SOURCE: Technology Daily 5/14, AUTHOR: Michael Martinez]
The television network owned by the National Football League is moving to challenge a recent court ruling in New York that lets Comcast carry it on a special tier for sports programming. In a decision made public late last week, the New York Supreme Court found that Comcast, the nation's largest cable provider, should be allowed to offer the NFL Network in a niche package with fewer subscribers, potentially cutting off the NFL from millions in revenue. Comcast pays the league a fee for each subscriber with access to the channel.
http://www.njtelecomupdate.com/2007/05/court_backs_comcast_in_dispute.html
Court Backs Comcast In Dispute With NFL
CLEAR CHANNEL SALE IS GAINING MOMENTUM
[SOURCE: Wall Street Journal, AUTHOR: Dennis K. Berman dennis.berman@wsj.com and Sarah McBride sarah.mcbride@wsj.com]
Strong momentum was building last night for a final plan to clinch the $19.4 billion sale of Clear Channel Communications Inc. to a duo of private-equity firms. Major shareholders Highfields Capital Management and Fidelity Investments were expected to be on board with a new buyout proposal brought forward last week. This proposal would sweeten the offer for the San Antonio media-and-entertainment company by 20 cents a share, to $39.20. The deal also offers current shareholders a chance to own as much as 30% of the newly constituted Clear Channel, which would be majority-owned by Bain Capital and Thomas H. Lee Partners. The shareholders' support for the plan clears the way for a deal that has endured months of contention among shareholders, the company's management and the private-equity firms, which had originally hoped to strike a deal at $37.60 per share late last year.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB117937277807805941.html?mod=todays_us_ma...
(requires subscription)
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB117937277807805941.html?mod=todays_us_marketplac…
BEWARE OF THE PROMISES OF MURDOCH
[SOURCE: New York Observor, AUTHOR: Joe Conason]
[Commentary] After decades of observing the old buccaneer and his deceptions, we know -- and, of course, he knows we know -- that promises he makes are not the kind that will be honored. They merely serve as a temporary gloss covering the sellout of journalistic ideals to Mammon, the company also known as News Corp. What Mr. Murdoch usually guarantees, as he prepares to sack and burn an institution like Dow Jones, is editorial independence and freedom from political or commercial manipulation by him and his operatives. Such promises are -- as Mr. Murdoch reportedly told an editor at The Times of London, who had listened to similar assurances from him about that august publication -- “not worth the paper they are printed on.”
http://www.observer.com/2007/beware-promises-murdoch
Beware of the promises of Murdoch