Benton RSS Feed

To view Benton's Headlines feed in your RSS Aggregator, paste
http://www.benton.org/index.php?q=taxonomy/term/6/all/feed into your reader.

GOVERNMENT & COMMUNICATIONS
Justice Dept. to Examine Its Use of NSA Wiretaps
Oversight board briefed on NSA electronic eavesdropping
The Cowards Turned Out to Be Right

MEDIA OWNERSHIP
Will O.J. Fallout Affect Cross-media Ownership Rules?
Rintels on O.J. Flap: "The Dark Side of Synergy"
Is Hometown Ownership Really the Next Big Thing?
Tribune Co. Rejects Consortium Inquiry About Baltimore Sun

TELECOM
Phone firms' TV market bid may skip Congress
Supreme Court Case on Baby Bells May Affect Antitrust Enforcement
FTC Readies Stricter Rules For 'Robo Calls'

QUICKLY -- Don't Trust the News?; British Junk-Food Ad Ban Rocks TV
Business; U.S. Copyright Office issues new rights; Writers spurn
studios on talks

GOVERNMENT & COMMUNICATIONS

JUSTICE SEPT TO EXAMINE ITS USE OF NSA WIRETAPS
[SOURCE: Washington Post, AUTHOR: Dan Eggen]
The Justice Department's inspector general yesterday announced an
investigation into the department's connections to the government's
controversial warrantless surveillance program, but officials said
the probe will not examine whether the National Security Agency is
violating the Constitution or federal statutes. In a letter to House
lawmakers, Inspector General Glenn A. Fine said his office decided to
open the probe after conducting "initial inquiries" into the program.
Under the initiative, the NSA monitors phone calls and e-mails
between people in the United States and others overseas without court
oversight if one of the targets is suspected of ties to terrorism.
The "program review" will examine how the Justice Department has used
information obtained from the NSA program, as well as whether Justice
lawyers complied with the "legal requirements" that govern it,
according to Fine's letter. Officials said the review will not
examine whether the program itself is legal.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/27/AR200611...
(requires registration)
* NSA spy program is under review
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-na-spy28nov28,1,133...

OVERSIGHT BOARD BRIEFED ON NATIONAL SECURITY ELECTRONIC EAVESDROPPING PROGRAM
[SOURCE: Associated Press, AUTHOR: John Solomon]
Several members of a government board appointed to guard privacy and
civil liberties during the war on terror say they're impressed with
the protections built into the Bush administration's electronic
eavesdropping program. The Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight
Board received a long-awaited briefing on the secret program last
week by senior members of the National Security Agency. Two of the
five board members told The Associated Press on Monday they were
impressed by the safeguards the government has built into the NSA's
monitoring of phone calls and computer transmissions and wished the
administration could tell the public more about them to ease
distrust. The briefing had been delayed for over a year because
President Bush was concerned - after several press leaks - about
widening the circle of people who knew the exact details of the
eavesdropping program.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/T/TERROR_PRIVACY?SITE=SCCHA&SECTION...

THE COWARDS TURNED OUT TO BE RIGHT
[SOURCE: New York Times, AUTHOR: Nicholas Kristof]
[Commentary] For several years, the White House and its Dobermans
helpfully pointed out the real enemy in Iraq: those lazy, wimpish
foreign correspondents who were so foolish and unpatriotic that they
reported that we faced grave difficulties in Iraq. As we try to
extricate ourselves from Iraq, a basic lesson for the administration
is that it should deal with bad news in ways more creative than
clobbering the messenger. From the beginning of the war, the Pentagon
has had an incredibly sophisticated news operation (now including its
own news channel, carried on some cable networks), but it has often
seemed more concerned with disseminating propaganda than with
gathering facts. So how about if the administration devotes itself
less to managing the news and more to trying to manage Iraq?
http://select.nytimes.com/2006/11/28/opinion/28kristof.html
(requires subscription)

MEDIA OWNERSHIP

WILL O.J. FALLOUT AFFECT CROSS-MEDIA OWNERSHIP RULES?
[SOURCE: AdAge, AUTHOR: Claire Atkinson]
Even though Fox Broadcasting's O.J. special was canceled, it still
may have done lasting harm to the broadcast industry. The backlash
comes at a sensitive time for broadcasters, which have been battling
the belief that cross-media ownership gives them too much power --
and some fear the incident gives ammunition to their foes. The
Federal Communications Commission is reconsidering rules that
determine whether media companies can own more than two TV stations
in a market, as well as whether those that own radio stations and
newspapers should also be allowed to own TV stations. News Corp.'s
Fox is at the forefront of a broadcast-network-TV push to be allowed
to buy more of its affiliate stations. "Think about how much O.J.
they could have crammed in if they owned three TV stations, eight
radio stations and the local paper in your town," said Craig Aaron,
communications director for Free Press, a group campaigning against
loosening of the rules. "It certainly doesn't help Big Media's case
for throwing out the rules."
http://adage.com/mediaworks/article.php?article_id=113468
See also --
* People Power Forced Rupert Murdoch to Abandon O.J.
[SOURCE: AdAge 11/26, AUTHOR: Matthew Creamer and Claire Atkinson]
American consumers sent a very clear message last week to Rupert
Murdoch and the rest of the media world: We have standards. They may
be low and not terribly visible, but we do have them.
http://adage.com/mediaworks/article?article_id=113471
* How the O.J. Debacle Restored a Bit of Faith in the Media
http://adage.com/columns/article?article_id=113452
* The O.J. Lesson: Ad Agencies Should Use Their Clout More Often
http://adage.com/smallagency/article?article_id=113472

RINTELS ON O.J. FLAP: "THE DARK SIDE OF SYNERGY"
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable 11/20, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
Jonathan Rintels, president of The Center for Creative Voices in
Media, sees a link between media consolidation and the growing flap
over Fox's O.J. Simpson If I Did It sweeps special, calling it the
"dark side of synergy." While a growing number of Fox affiliates say
they won't carry the show, he says he has heard of no network-owned
station who has dropped out. "Stations owned by the national network
don't preempt for taste reasons or content reasons content that their
network is putting out there," he says, a check and balance that is
missing because of consolidation. Rintels and company argue that a
lot of the indecency complaints can be traced to formerly locally
owned stations bought up by the networks after the FCC lifted the
ownership caps.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6393555.html?display=Breaking...

IS HOMETOWN OWNERSHIP REALLY THE NEXT BIG THING?
[SOURCE: Editor&Publisher, AUTHOR: Mark Fitzgerald and Jennifer Saba]
There may be nothing new under the sun, but the sudden widespread
clamor to return troubled newspapers to local ownership -- after
decades of relentless industry consolidation -- at least represents a
dramatic change in course. among industry experts, opinion is growing
that this phenomenon might just have legs. "My personal belief is
that it's the start of a trend -- and that the trend is going to
continue," says Scott Stawski, senior principal at Knightsbridge
Solutions. Just a year ago, the idea that local investors would line
up around the block for the chance to buy a metro daily seemed as
unlikely as the idea that big chains like Knight Ridder or Tribune
Co. would be forced to put them up for sale in the first place. The
tipping point for the local ownership boomlet surely came this spring
when the McClatchy Co. immediately hung "for sale" signs on 12
dailies it acquired in its purchase of Knight Ridder. Yet moving from
chain ownership to local ownership remains rare. "When that does
happen, typically it's because the chain has screwed up [the paper]
so badly it has to dump it," says one broker who insisted on
anonymity. That's because if a property were hot, potential local
buyers wouldn't have a fighting chance. "Generally you will find that
if something is attractive, the newspaper groups will be able to
outbid everyone else, including private equity funds," says Robert
Broadwater, founder of investment firm Broadwater & Associates.
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_con...

TRIBUNE CO REJECTS CONSORTIUM INQUIRY ABOUT BALTIMORE SUN
[SOURCE: Washington Post, AUTHOR: Frank Ahrens]
The embattled Tribune Co., which has put its 11 newspapers and 25
television stations up for sale, is not ready to consider bids for
individual properties. Ted Venetoulis, a businessman and former local
politician, is leading a consortium of prominent Baltimoreans who
want to buy the Sun, if Tribune decides to break up the company and
sell it piece by piece. Tribune has declined Venetoulis access to the
Sun's books, saying the company continues to seek a single buyer for
all of its properties. Venetoulis said he has had conversations with
nearly all of the bidders who want to purchase the entire company to
let them know they have a willing buyer for the Sun if the new owners
want to unload the Baltimore paper. The company received nonbinding
bids in late October from Los Angeles billionaires Eli Broad and Ron
Burkle, private equity firms Bain Capital, Thomas H. Lee Partners and
Providence Equity Partners and record company mogul David Geffen. The
Gannett Co., owner of USA Today, also reportedly expressed an interest.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/27/AR200611...
(requires registration)

TELECOM

PHONE FIRMS' TV MARKET BID MAY SKIP CONGRESS
[SOURCE: Los Angeles Times, AUTHOR: Jim Puzzanghera
jim.puzzanghera( at )latimes.com]
Big phone companies trying to dial in an overhaul of
telecommunications laws will have to hang up and try the call again
next year. The Democratic takeover of Congress makes it increasingly
unlikely that AT&T Inc. and Verizon Communications Inc. will be able
to push through stalled legislation to make it easier for them to
sell pay television. Instead, they probably will focus their efforts
on state legislatures as they try to deliver more services to compete
against cable companies. Lobbyists have all but given up on the
telecommunications legislation, which also includes new anti-piracy
measures for digital TV and radio signals, a three-year ban on new
cellphone taxes and a permanent moratorium on Internet access taxes.
Even the bill's most ardent backer, Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) has
little hope. "I really don't see much chance to get a bill like that
out," he said. "It's got firm objections." The bill, which would have
eliminated most state and local regulation of pay television, has
been stalled for months because of a dispute over rules to assure
that data continue to flow freely across phone and cable company
lines. Democrats support those rules, known as "network neutrality,"
which would apply to high-speed Internet access delivered by the same
lines. But most Republicans oppose them and kept them out of the
legislation. With Democrats set to take control of the Senate and the
House of Representatives in January, they have no desire to allow the
outgoing Republican majority to pass major legislation while still in
charge. The legislation would have to be drafted from scratch next
year. And Democrats, who will control all congressional committee
chairmanships, may not make telecommunications overhaul as high a
priority as the Republicans had.
http://www.latimes.com/business/printedition/la-fi-telecom28nov28,1,4646...
(requires registration)

SUPREME COURT CASE ON BABY BELLS MAY AFFECT ANTITRUST ENFORCEMENT
[SOURCE: Wall Street Journal, AUTHOR: Jess Bravin jess.bravin( at )wsj.com]
In a case with implications for antitrust enforcement, the Supreme
Court heard arguments on how specific a plaintiff's allegations must
be to claim anticompetitive behavior. The case springs from the
decades-old legal saga that ended the Bell system telephone-service
monopoly and created today's marketplace. The 1996 Telecommunications
Act gave the Bell system's regional successors, the Baby Bells, the
right to sell long-distance service in return for opening their local
networks to competitors. Despite Congress's expectation the law would
create a competitive market, the Baby Bells have remained dominant in
their respective regions. The plaintiffs, a group of individuals who
bought local telephone and Internet service since the law was enacted
and represented by the class-action firm Milberg Weiss Bershad &
Schulman LLP, filed suit in 2003, alleging the Baby Bells conspired
to restrict entry into their territories of competitors in local
telephone and Internet service. They claimed the Baby Bells, which
after several mergers and name changes now include AT&T, BellSouth,
Qwest and Verizon, violated the Sherman Antitrust Act, which
prohibits "every contract, combination...or conspiracy, in restraint
of trade or commerce." The plaintiffs had no direct evidence of such
a conspiracy, however, and instead based their claim on
circumstantial indicators of anticompetitive behavior, such as the
parallel conduct of the Baby Bells in declining to compete in each
other's territory and allegedly impeding other carriers from
connecting to their networks. The Baby Bells argued that without more
-- such as an allegation of a specific meeting in which a deal was
made to restrain trade -- the case should be dismissed without
allowing the plaintiffs discovery of internal documents.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB116466004540033694.html?mod=todays_us_pa...
(requires subscription)
* High court tackles phone antitrust case
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/money/20061128/scotus_telecom28.art...

FTC READIES STRICTER RULES FOR 'ROBO CALLS'
[SOURCE: Wall Street Journal, AUTHOR: Erika Lovley erika.lovley( at )wsj.com]
A Federal Trade Commission proposal banning most recorded sales calls
has many telemarketers urging the government to stick with
more-lenient Federal Communication Commission regulations. The FTC
proposal, which goes into effect Jan. 2, would prohibit telemarketers
from making "robo calls" to any customer -- unless a customer gives
written permission to do so. On the other hand, FCC rules allow
recorded calls to any customer with whom the company has an
established business relationship. Recorded telephone solicitations
-- in contrast with ones made by live operators -- have been
prohibited in some form by the FCC since 1991, and the FTC since
2003. The FTC has held off on enforcing its rules for the past three
years but plans to begin cracking down after Jan. 2. The FTC proposal
has left some telemarketers uncertain about how to proceed, since
both agencies regulate some portion of the telemarketing industry.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB116467792280534048.html?mod=todays_us_pa...
(requires subscription)

QUICKLY

DON'T TRUST THE NEWS?
[SOURCE: AlterNet, AUTHOR: Rory O'Conner]
[Commentary] How can you be sure that the news you see and hear is
true? Are there any journals and journalists that you can really
trust and rely on? If so, how can you find them amidst the clangor
and the clutter? Enter NewsTrust, an online social news network aimed
at helping people identify quality journalism -- or "news you can
trust." This free, not-for-profit service offers the most trusted
news of the day, as selected by community members using
state-of-the-art media literacy tools. By filtering content available
from online sources, establishing common metrics for evaluation, and
accessing the "wisdom of the crowds" through social networking, the
free, not-for-profit NewsTrust service offers one possible solution
to the "News You Can Trust" conundrum. The website, where members
rate the news online based on commonly accepted standards of
journalistic quality, features news and analysis from hundreds of
mainstream and independent news sources. This non-partisan community
effort tracks news media worldwide and helps citizens make informed
decisions about democracy across party lines.
http://www.alternet.org/mediaculture/44818/

BRITISH JUNK-FOOD AD BAN ROCKS TV BUSINESS
[SOURCE: AdAge, AUTHOR: Emma Hall]
Marketers and media owners are counting the cost following U.K.
regulator Ofcom's surprise decision to end junk-food advertising to
all children under 16. Under the ban, U.K. media owners could lose
$75 million in ad revenue in 2007. Hardest-hit will be the dedicated
children's channels, which will lose up to 15% of ad revenue. For all
commercial broadcasters, the lost ads represent up to 0.7% of their
income, according to Ofcom's own calculations. Ofcom's ruling
includes a total ban on advertising foods high in fat, salt and sugar
(referred to as HFSS), not only around children's programming but
also in youth-oriented and adult programs which attract a lot of
viewers under 16. Many of the marketers involved have voluntarily
stopped targeting young children in recent years, and moved their
campaigns onto youth channels such as MTV, believing they were safe
in targeting teenagers.
http://adage.com/article?article_id=113444

U.S. COPYRIGHT OFFICE ISSUES NEW RIGHTS
[SOURCE: Associated Press 11/22, AUTHOR: Anick Jesdanun]
Cell phone owners will be allowed to break software locks on their
handsets in order to use them with competing carriers under new
copyright rules announced last week. Other copyright exemptions
approved by the Library of Congress will let film professors copy
snippets from DVDs for educational compilations and let blind people
use special software to read copy-protected electronic books. The new
rules took effect Monday and expire in three years.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061123/ap_on_hi_te/digital_copyright
* Rulemaking on Exemptions from Prohibition on Circumvention of
Technological Measures that Control Access to Copyrighted Works
http://www.copyright.gov/1201/

WRITERS SPURN STUDIOS ON TALKS
[SOURCE: Los Angeles Times, AUTHOR: Richard Verrier]
In a development that underscores the deteriorating state of labor
relations in Hollywood, the chief negotiator for the major studios
Monday accused the union that represents TV and film writers of
jeopardizing production by rejecting his request to enter early
contract talks. J. Nicholas Counter, president of the Alliance of
Motion Picture Television Producers, said his offer to begin
negotiations in January had been spurned by David Young, executive
director of the Writers Guild of America, West. Instead, Counter
said, Young proposed beginning talks in September, just before the
writers' contract expires Oct. 31. The failure to schedule early
contract talks reflects rising labor tensions in Hollywood that
eventually could lead to a strike or work slowdown if they aren't
defused soon. Writers and actors believe that they were shortchanged
for years by studios during the DVD boom, and have vowed not to let
it happen again as Hollywood moves toward the digital delivery of
entertainment. The studios' contract with actors expires in 2008.
http://www.latimes.com/business/printedition/la-fi-writers28nov28,1,1154...
(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.
--------------------------------------------------------------