Benton RSS Feed

Coverage Type 

BUSH DIRECTIVE INCREASES SWAY ON REGULATION
[SOURCE: New York Times, AUTHOR: Robert Pear]
President Bush has signed a directive that gives the White House much greater control over the rules and policy statements that the government develops to protect public health, safety, the environment, civil rights and privacy. In an executive order published last week in the Federal Register, President Bush said that each agency must have a regulatory policy office run by a political appointee, to supervise the development of rules and documents providing guidance to regulated industries. The White House will thus have a gatekeeper in each agency to analyze the costs and the benefits of new rules and to make sure the agencies carry out the president’s priorities. This strengthens the hand of the White House in shaping rules that have, in the past, often been generated by civil servants and scientific experts. It suggests that the administration still has ways to exert its power after the takeover of Congress by the Democrats. Consumer, labor and environmental groups denounced the executive order, saying it gave too much control to the White House and would hinder agencies’ efforts to protect the public.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/30/washington/30rules.html?ref=todayspaper
(requires registration)

* Bush Order Limits Agencies' 'Guidance'
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/29/AR200701...


http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/30/washington/30rules.html?ref=todayspaper
Coverage Type 

FIBER-OPTIC FOCUS, ASSET SALES TRIM VERIZON'S PROFIT
[SOURCE: Washington Post, AUTHOR: Crayton Harrison]
Verizon, the second-largest U.S. telephone company, said fourth-quarter profit declined 38 percent because of costs to build a fiber-optic network and shed assets. Profit fell to $1.03 billion from $1.66 billion during the same period a year ago. Chief executive Ivan Seidenberg sacrificed profit from the wireless unit to expand Verizon's faster network for Internet and TV service. The $23 billion investment is designed to compete with cable companies such as Comcast, which have attracted more subscribers by offering phone service. The company's mobile phone unit gained 2.3 million wireless subscribers, helping to offset the loss of revenue from the 366,000 customers who shut off their home phones in the quarter.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/29/AR200701...
(requires registration)


Fiber-Optic Focus, Asset Sales Trim Verizon's Profit

Benton's Communications-related Headlines For Tuesday January 30, 2007

Two items on the telecom policy agenda this week: 1) Local Media
Diversity Matters to All Americans hosted by the Center for American
Progress today and 2) a Senate Commerce Committee oversight hearing
on the FCC on Thursday.
For upcoming media policy events, see http://www.benton.org

INTERNET/BROADBAND
Web War: Nothing Neutral About It
Beyond Network Neutrality Lies Internet Freedom
Internet TV Is Finally a Reality Show
An alternative to San Francisco's Wi-Fi deal
FBI turns to broad new wiretap method
Broadband Speed

MEDIA OWNERSHIP
News Corp. and Liberty Ask FCC To OK DirecTV Deal
Australia Media Open for Business
Air America Finds Buyer in SLG Radio

MEDIA & ELECTIONS
TV Stations Prepare for $1 Billion Presidential Ad Onslaught
Liberate Political Speech

QUICKLY -- Bush Directive Increases Sway on Regulation; Fiber-Optic
Focus, Asset Sales Trim Verizon's Profit

INTERNET/BROADBAND

WEB WAR: NOTHING NEUTRAL ABOUT IT
[SOURCE: BusinessWeek, AUTHOR: Catherine Holahan]
There's a high-stakes battle raging in Washington over who picks up
the tab for the rising rivers of Internet data and the newly upgraded
networks that deliver it. On one side are a host of tech companies --
from Google to Yahoo! to Intel to Microsoft -- that specialize in
Web-related content and technology, pushing for rules that they say
would keep the Internet free from discriminatory pricing. On the
other are the phone and cable companies that run the networks
shuttling that information from place to place. They oppose
regulation of the Internet. Last year, the skirmish ended in
stalemate. The battle will rage on again in 2007, with the Google
camp likely to gain the upper hand. Both sides of the issue spent the
better part of 2006 trying in vain to win over the
then-Republican-controlled Congress to its vision of the Internet's
future. A bill that favored telecom companies such as AT&T and cable
operators such as Comcast was passed in June by the House of
Representatives, but it went on to die in the Senate. Similarly, an
amendment to that bill viewed as favorable to the opposite camp was
also rejected, largely by Republicans. This year, the Democrats are
in control, and they're seen as more sympathetic to laws favoring
so-called network neutrality, which would bar phone and cable
companies from erecting tiered pricing that favors some Web traffic
or sites over others.
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/jan2007/tc20070129_444703...

BEYOND NET NEUTRALITY LIES INTERNET FREEDOM
[SOURCE: TomPaine.com, AUTHOR: Ben Scott, Free Press]
[Commentary] Once Network Neutrality is back on the books, we can set
our sights higher than protecting the free and open network we've
always had. We can start pushing for the big goal: universal access
to a world-class broadband network at affordable prices. We need a
national broadband policy, not a series of laws designed to prop up
the business models of incumbent telephone and cable companies. We
want to make the information superhighway a public good, to bring the
transformative spirit of free speech and free markets to every
community. The organizers of the SavetheInternet.com Coalition
recently unveiled the "Internet Freedom Declaration" to pursue these
goals. This is an uphill fight, but the new Congress has leaders in
key positions that favor an expansive, public interest broadband
policy. Throughout the early months of 2007, we should expect House
and Senate Commerce Committees to conduct a series of hearings to
determine the best paths for bringing a bigger, better, more
affordable Internet to the American public. For once, the lawyers of
the largest corporations won't be the only voices at the table. We'll
see scholars, consumer representatives, unions and entrepreneurs who
can give testimony about why we need a universal broadband to
super-charge our economy and enhance social opportunity.
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2007/01/25/beyond_net_neutrality_lies_i...

INTERNET TV IS FINALLY A REALITY SHOW
[SOURCE: BusinessWeek, AUTHOR: Cliff Edwards]
After years of build-up, it looks as if content, computers, and
consumer electronics are all finally converging. So far there's been
scant consumer interest in Internet TV. Indeed, two-thirds of U.S.
homes that have gone to the trouble of setting up wireless networks
and Ethernet routers still only use them to share Internet access and
have no other devices connected -- not even printers or other PC
peripherals, according to researcher In-Stat. Even though prices for
such products are low, most consumers still consider it too
complicated to network all their electronic gear. To make the
technology as simple as possible, Sony, HP, and other vendors are
finally creating software that can be used across all their devices
-- be it PCs, TVs, or set-top boxes. Consumers for the first time
won't have to learn new tricks for using different products from the
same company. And third-party software vendors will have a common set
of development tools for a particular company's products, helping
speed time to market. The battle for dominance is expected to be
bruising. Traditional cable and satellite companies will fight it out
with Web portals like Yahoo! and Google, as well as their own content
partners. "The fight to capture the expanding base of IPTV
subscribers will put telecom operators on a collision course with
existing pay-TV market competitors and with a new class of broadband
video portals as they roll out progressively more sophisticated
offerings," says Mark Kirstein, iSuppli vice-president for multimedia
content and services.
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/jan2007/tc20070129_246549...

AN ALTERNATIVE TO SAN FRANCISCO'S WI-FI DEAL
[SOURCE: San Francisco Chronicle 1/29, AUTHOR: Becca Vargo Daggett,
Institute for Local Self-Reliance]
[Commentary] San Francisco Supervisors who would reject the
Earthlink-Google deal now have an alternative. The central conclusion
of a recent report from the San Francisco budget analyst is that a
municipally owned wireless network is fiscally feasible. But equally
important for the upcoming Board of Supervisors' vote is the report's
conclusion: that the process leading to the Earthlink-Google deal was
profoundly flawed. The result of this flawed process is the
inadequate Earthlink-Google deal, which accomplishes little more than
the most basic goal of free Internet access. The free service is
decidedly slow: half the speed of the DSL access AT&T is now required
to sell for $10 per month, under terms imposed on its acquisition of
BellSouth, and one-third the speed available for free in neighboring
communities. The need for a wireless bridge device, to bring the
outdoor wireless signal indoors, forces low-income households either
to buy such a device for $80 to $200, or subscribe to the paid
service at $22 per month. Both these options limit the number of
low-income individuals who will use the network. The network also
limits potential competition.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2007/0...
* See "Localizing the Internet: Five Ways Public Ownership Solves the
U.S. Broadband Problem"
http://www.ilsr.org/pubs/pubsrecent.html

FBI TURNS TO BROAD NEW WIRETAP METHOD
[SOURCE: C-Net|News.com, AUTHOR: Declan McCullagh]
The FBI appears to have adopted an invasive Internet surveillance
technique that collects far more data on innocent Americans than
previously has been disclosed. Instead of recording only what a
particular suspect is doing, agents conducting investigations appear
to be assembling the activities of thousands of Internet users at a
time into massive databases, according to current and former
officials. That database can subsequently be queried for names,
e-mail addresses or keywords. Call it the vacuum-cleaner approach.
It's employed when police have obtained a court order and an Internet
service provider can't "isolate the particular person or IP address"
because of technical constraints.
http://news.com.com/FBI+turns+to+broad+new+wiretap+method/2100-7348_3-61...

BROADBAND SPEED
[SOURCE: Wall Street Journal, AUTHOR: Nate Herpich]
How fast is your Internet connection? It's also worth checking to see
if you are getting the full speed that you are paying for with your
cable or phone company. Speakeasy's test is at
www.speakeasy.net/speedtest/; Bandwidth is at
www.bandwidthplace.com/speedtest/ and Windows Users Group Network for
PC users is at www.wugnet.com/myspeed/speedtest.asp and click on
"Click to Start My Speed."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB117012963161092095.html?mod=todays_us_pe...
(requires subscription)

MEDIA OWNERSHIP

NEWS CORP AND LIBERTY ASK FCC TO OK DIRECTV DEAL
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
News Corp. Monday filed a petition with the FCC for permission to
transfer its interest in DirecTV to Liberty Media. Liberty will also
get three regional sports networks serving Denver, Pittsburgh and
Seattle and $550 million in cash in the deal, which is valued at
about $11 billion. Liberty will also give up its stake in News
Corp. Liberty has agreed to abide by the conditions--including
program access and carriage conditions for the regional sports
networks -- that were imposed on News Corp. by the FCC when it
approved the company's purchase of over a third of the satellite
broadcaster from Hughes Corp. in January 2004. Those include not
Liberty's agreement not to enter into exclusive programming
arrangements with any multichannel video provider, discriminate
against unaffiliated program services, and to submit and regional
sports network carriage impasse to independent arbitration. Liberty
owns QVC and Starz! It spun off its half-interest in Discovery in
2005, although Liberty Chairman John Malone is Chairman, CEO and a
major stockholder in Discovery. Liberty also owns a stake in
satellite broadband company WildBlue, Expedia, GSN and Hallmark,
among others. The WildBlue stake could be of particular interest to
the FCC. Broadband competition and roll-out to underserved areas is a
big priority for FCC Chairman Kevin Martin. In the petition, News
Corp. and Liberty pointed out that the WildBlue interest, as well as
that of Starz! and QVC, would "lead to continued development and
deployment of innovative products that will be available to all U.S.
consumers, including those underserved or unserved by terrestrial
alternatives."
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6411134.html?display=Breaking...
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6411170.html?display=Breaking+News

AUSTRALIA MEDIA OPEN FOR BUSINESS
[SOURCE: Wall Street Journal, AUTHOR: Lyndal McFarland
lyndal.mcfarland( at )dowjones.com]
Australia's decision to relax media-ownership rules has international
buyout groups and industry chiefs jostling for pieces of the action.
The government won't formalize changes to the country's 20-year-old
media laws until later this year. But billions of dollars in deals
already have been unveiled since lawmakers approved the new rules in
late 2006. Prominent among the deal makers in the sector -- which is
40 billion Australian dollars in size (US$30.93 billion) -- have been
buyout giants Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co. and CVC Asia Pacific.
Irish billionaire Tony O'Reilly's Independent News & Media PLC last
week revived a A$2.8 billion plan to buy newspaper-and-radio offshoot
APN News & Media Ltd. with Providence Equity Partners and Carlyle
Group. The new rules relax cross-ownership restrictions and scrap
foreign-ownership limits.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB117012558938491983.html?mod=todays_us_mo...
(requires subscription)

AIR AMERICA FINDS BUYER IN SLG RADIO
[SOURCE: MediaWeek, AUTHOR: Katy Bachman]
SLG Radio, an entity controlled by Stephen Green, founder and
chairman of SL Green Realty Corp, will buy Air America Radio. Green
said, "We'll do three things. First, we'll stabilize its finances.
Second, we'll build on its line up to assure the best radio talent
possible, since in the long run content is king. And third, we'll
extend this special brand by partnering with other platforms beyond
radio to make sure Air America's content reaches the wide audience it
deserves." With the announced sale, the network also announced that
it would lose its marquee personality Al Franken, whose last day
hosting The Al Franken Show, would be Feb. 14, 2007. Thom Hartmann,
host of The Thom Hartmann Program, will move into Franken's Noon to 3
p.m. weekday time slot. Stephen Green's brother, Mark Green, has been
a frequent guest and host on the network.
http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/recent_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=10035...
* Air America to Be Acquired by New York Investor
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/30/business/media/30radio.html

MEDIA & ELECTIONS

TV STATIONS PREPARE FOR $1 BILLION PRESIDENTIAL AD ONSLAUGHT
[SOURCE: AdAge, AUTHOR: Ira Teinowitz]
The 2008 presidential race is shaping up to be an embarrassment of
riches -- and possibly headaches -- for TV markets across the
country. Amid mouthwatering visions of more than $1 billion in
spending on the most wide-open race since the TV era began, stations
will have to devise some way to handle the rush when close to two
dozen candidates come knocking at the same time. And some local TV
stations will look to the web for help. Many managers said stations
will boost their websites, using them to deliver additional news
coverage and more ad availability. Even though it's only January 2007
and basics such as the once-set-in-stone primary and caucus schedule
have yet to be resolved, Evan Tracey, chief operating officer of
TNSMI/Campaign Media, said advertising could well start in force this
summer, with candidates trying to introduce or establish themselves early.
http://adage.com/article?article_id=114554

LIBERATE POLITICAL SPEECH
[SOURCE: Los Angeles Times, AUTHOR: Editorial Staff]
[Commentary] The Supreme Court may be having second thoughts about
upholding provisions of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law
which ban "electioneering communications" paid for out of the
treasuries of independent organizations. As defined by the law,
electioneering communications are advertisements that mention a
candidate for federal office and are broadcast within 30 days of a
primary election or within 60 days of a general election. They need
not (and usually do not) tell viewers to vote for or against a
candidate. Last month, a three-judge federal court in Washington
ruled that the "issue ad" provision deprives free-speech rights. If
the Supreme Court agrees, political speech will be given more
breathing room. And such a ruling needn't derail the soft-money
provisions of the McCain-Feingold legislation. But if the court isn't
willing to go back to the drawing board, Congress should. An
advertisement praising or criticizing a politician -- even one
seeking reelection -- has more in common with the endorsement
editorials that appear on this page than it does with the campaign
contributions (in hard or soft dollars) that have received only
minimal 1st Amendment protection from the courts. The "bright line"
that needs to be drawn is the one between financing someone else's
message and articulating your own.
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-ed-campaign30jan30,1...
(requires registration)

QUICKLY

BUSH DIRECTIVE INCREASES SWAY ON REGULATION
[SOURCE: New York Times, AUTHOR: Robert Pear]
President Bush has signed a directive that gives the White House much
greater control over the rules and policy statements that the
government develops to protect public health, safety, the
environment, civil rights and privacy. In an executive order
published last week in the Federal Register, Mr. Bush said that each
agency must have a regulatory policy office run by a political
appointee, to supervise the development of rules and documents
providing guidance to regulated industries. The White House will thus
have a gatekeeper in each agency to analyze the costs and the
benefits of new rules and to make sure the agencies carry out the
president's priorities. This strengthens the hand of the White House
in shaping rules that have, in the past, often been generated by
civil servants and scientific experts. It suggests that the
administration still has ways to exert its power after the takeover
of Congress by the Democrats. Consumer, labor and environmental
groups denounced the executive order, saying it gave too much control
to the White House and would hinder agencies' efforts to protect the public.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/30/washington/30rules.html?ref=todayspaper
(requires registration)
* Bush Order Limits Agencies' 'Guidance'
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/29/AR200701...

FIBER-OPTIC FOCUS, ASSET SALES TRIM VERIZON'S PROFIT
[SOURCE: Washington Post, AUTHOR: Crayton Harrison]
Verizon, the second-largest U.S. telephone company, said
fourth-quarter profit declined 38 percent because of costs to build a
fiber-optic network and shed assets. Profit fell to $1.03 billion
from $1.66 billion during the same period a year ago. Chief executive
Ivan Seidenberg sacrificed profit from the wireless unit to expand
Verizon's faster network for Internet and TV service. The $23 billion
investment is designed to compete with cable companies such as
Comcast, which have attracted more subscribers by offering phone
service. The company's mobile phone unit gained 2.3 million wireless
subscribers, helping to offset the loss of revenue from the 366,000
customers who shut off their home phones in the quarter.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/29/AR200701...
(requires registration)
--------------------------------------------------------------
Communications-related Headlines is a free online news summary
service provided by the Benton Foundation (www.benton.org). Posted
Monday through Friday, this service provides updates on important
industry developments, policy issues, and other related news events.
While the summaries are factually accurate, their often informal tone
does not always represent the tone of the original articles.
Headlines are compiled by Kevin Taglang headlines( at )benton.org -- we
welcome your comments.
--------------------------------------------------------------

Coverage Type 

WHY THE FCC WILL GET MEDIA OWNERSHIP WRONG AGAIN
[SOURCE: American Progress, AUTHOR: Mark Lloyd]
[Commentary] The Federal Communications Commission will complete its review of FCC media ownership policies this spring. All those concerned about the state of our democracy should be very worried, which is why the Center for American Progress on January 30 will unveil a new set of formulas that the FCC could use to measure the diversity available to all communities in local media markets across the country. But what if the FCC did something that was really new? What if it defined the public interest in a way that actually seemed to coincide with what most of us think that means? What if the FCC defined the public interest to mean the best interests of a democratic public? What if the FCC created an index that could really show the relationship between media ownership and what local citizens know about government? As a new Congress controlled by Democrats begins oversight of an FCC controlled by Republicans, it is crucial to begin asking why the agency repeatedly fails to ask the right questions before it tries to loosen media concentration rules. Congressional oversight, however, is not sufficient. An entirely new way of discerning media diversity in local American broadcast markets is clearly needed.
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2007/01/media_myopia.html

See also --

* The FCC and Media Ownership Rulemaking
[SOURCE: The Associated Press]
A timeline, from June 2003 to January 2007, on the FCC's media ownership proceeding.
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-Media-Ownership-Timeline.html
(requires registration)

* For more on the FCC's Media Ownership proceeding see http://www.benton.org/index.php?q=initiatives/ownership


Why the FCC Will Get Media Ownership Wrong Again
Coverage Type 

BLACK BROADCASTERS CALL FCC MEDIA OWNERSHIP PROCEEDING "GROSSLY DEFICIENT"
[SOURCE: Lasar's Letter on the FCC, AUTHOR: Matthew Lasar]
A black broadcasters group and Jesse Jackson's Rainbow/PUSH coalition have called the Federal Communications Commission's ongoing media ownership proceeding so "grossly deficient at this point" that the two organizations cannot file a complete reply to previous comments yet. Rainbow/PUSH and the National Association of Black Owned Broadcasters (NABOB) charge that the proceeding fails to address key minority broadcaster issues required by law and by an appeals court decision in 2004. Those issues are: furthering minority ownership, a definition of a "socially and economically disadvantaged business", and identifying "market entry barriers for entrepreneurs and other small businesses in the provision and ownership of telecommunications services and information services." The groups' filing, dated January 17th, also casts doubt on the scope of media ownership studies commissioned by the FCC in late November. "The brief descriptions of the studies provided by the Commission raise serious questions about whether the studies will cover all necessary subjects or go into the appropriate depth in their examination of those subjects," PUSH and NABOB write.
http://www.lasarletter.net/drupal/node/307


Black broadcasters call FCC media ownership proceeding "grossly deficient"
Coverage Type 

THE STATE OF THE MEDIA
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
Now that President Bush has delivered his the state-of-the-union address, B&C asked some other presidents -- and chairmen, CEOs, executive directors and commissioners -- to weigh in on the state of the media. Whether celebrating the arrival of the digital future or grappling with media ownership, all agree that 2007 will be a year of great possibilities.

1) Bob Wright, NBCUniversal: If you're a diversified media company with good results in most of your areas, you're probably fine. There are areas of weakness, however. If you're more narrowly focused -- in an advertiser-dependent print business, for example -- you're having a tougher time.

2) FCC Chairman Kevin Martin: Mark February 19, 2007 on your calendar -- the digital TV transition offers broadcasters the opportunity to offer new services and create new revenue streams. "Policymakers should assist broadcasters to carefully manage the digital transition. Fostering new services while protecting existing ones from interference must be a priority. Equally important, however, is meeting the Communications Act's basic requirements that the digital signal be viewable by all TV watchers and that it not be materially degraded by a cable or satellite provider.

3) House Commerce Committee Chairman John Dingell: "we must not forget that large companies still control much of what we see and hear, and it is incumbent on all of us to remain vigilant, such that a glorious diversity of voices remains the hallmark of our national and local media landscape."

4) FCC Commissioner Michael Copps: Media ownership concentration imperils localism, diversity and coverage of "great issues and controversies facing our democracy." The FCC "can do a far better job than it has in defining what broadcasters must provide the American people in return for free use of the spectrum."

5) Jeff Chester, Center for Digital Democracy: It is the worst of times; it is the best of times -- media giants operate without regard for the public interest, financial concerns squeeze newsrooms, and journalism failed the country in the lead up to the war.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6410685.html?display=News


http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6410685.html?display=News
Coverage Type 

VIEW OF MEDIA OWNERSHIP LIMITS CHANGES
[SOURCE: USAToday, AUTHOR: David Lieberman]
When members of the Federal Communications Commission look at TV stations these days, they aren't just kicking back to watch American Idol or Heroes. Regulators are about to reassess their rules on who can own stations and how many -- a review they are legally bound to do every four years. And to rule on the most controversial proposals, they must determine how much damage -- if any -- the Internet and other new media are inflicting on local stations, which collectively had an estimated $26 billion in ad sales last year. If officials conclude that competition from the digital world threatens local TV, they might decide it's OK to ease the rules and let companies own multiple stations in a market, or let a newspaper buy a station in its town. Broadcasters and newspaper companies (including USA TODAY parent Gannett, the largest newspaper publisher and a major owner of TV stations) are lobbying for that. But the case for change becomes weaker if, as many consumer advocates say, stations still generate healthy cash flows and dominate local news. While the issues are important, some can't help but look at this year's debate with skepticism. "The term 'media monopoly' has meaning, it's had meaning for 60 years, but I think the content of the term is changing," former FCC chairman Reed Hundt says. "'Media monopoly' seems now to be about whether you can use the Internet for free or whether there's any limit on what you can send over the Internet," he adds. "The issues of the last 10 years don't have that much resonance anymore."
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/money/20070129/mediaownership.art.htm


View of Media Ownership Limits Changes
Coverage Type 

"[W]e must not forget that large companies still control much of what we see and hear, and it is incumbent on all of us to remain vigilant, such that a glorious diversity of voices remains the hallmark of our national and local media landscape."
-- House Commerce Committee Chairman John Dingell (D-MI)


http://www.benton.org/index.php?q=node/4661
Coverage Type 

AT&T Is Venturing Cautiously Into Local Telephone Business
[SOURCE: New York Times 1/28/1997, AUTHOR: Mark Landler]
The AT&T Corporation announced its first significant foray into the local telephone business ten years ago. But the modest scope of the two new services underscored that AT&T was tiptoeing into this $100 billion market, even a year after passage of the 1996 Telecom Act opened the market to competition. AT&T said it would offer local phone service to small- and medium-size business customers in California. The long-distance carrier would not build its own local operations but would lease lines on the existing local network of Pacific Telesis Group. Industry experts said AT&T's go-slow approach was evidence that the new law was not unleashing the competition that many experts had predicted.
http://select.nytimes.com/search/restricted/article?res=F10913F93A5E0C7B...
(requires TimesSelect subscription)


http://select.nytimes.com/search/restricted/article?res=F10913F93A5E0C7B8EDDA808…
Coverage Type 

POWER PLAYERS SAY THEY DON'T CONTROL AGENDA
[SOURCE: MarketWatch, AUTHOR: William Watts]
Being the boss just doesn't carry the same weight it used to when it comes to setting the global agenda -- but that's OK, a high-powered mix of politicians and executives agreed Friday. The Internet and other media and communications platforms have given regular folk around the world more power to set the agenda, but politicians haven't yet caught on, said Gordon Brown, the U.K.'s chancellor of the exchequer, in a panel discussion focused on the rather fuzzy concept of exactly who sets the global agenda. Politicians "remain stuck in the slow lane of the information superhighway," Brown said. Lloyd Blankfein, chief executive of Goldman Sachs Group , said the proliferation of new media platforms and sources of information has extended the marketplace metaphor to the world of ideas. And while leaders shouldn't necessarily go with the flow of every social movement that springs up, they should look closely at what's feeding discontent and recognize that there may be a legitimate reason for it, he noted. On the issue of globalization, for instance, "there are people who really are being left out," Blankfein said. But that doesn't mean the Internet should drive decision-making, said media magnate Rupert Murdoch. "We shouldn't all lie down and say let's poll the Internet," he said.
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/davos-power-players-say-they/story...

* 'It's like networking on steroids'
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/money/20070129/davos29.art.htm


Power Players say they Don't Control Agenda