Benton RSS Feed

This morning, the Senate Commerce Committee continues its mark-up
of the Communications, Consumers' Choice, and Broadband Deployment
Act of 2006.
See
(http://commerce.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Hearings.Hearing&...)

GOVERNMENT & COMMUNICATIONS
Bush Orders Update of Emergency Alert System
Bush, Cheney Assail Media over Bank-Data Program
House Judiciary Committee Demands NSA Records
China May Fine News Media to Limit Coverage

TELECOMMUNICATIONS
Supreme Court to Review Antitrust Case Against Phone Companies
Barton Calls USF Bloated, Unsustainable
USF Cap Proposal Irks Rural Groups

MEDIA OWNERSHIP
Media Mergers Are Damaging U.S. Democracy
Big Media's Cross to Bear
FCC Denies Challenge, Renews Station License
Media General Gets Duopoly Waiver
In Late Twist, Univision Accepts Bid

NET NEUTRALITY
An Internet for the few or the many?
Don't let the service providers discriminate on the Internet
Net Neutrality -- Spring Sweeps or Last Season's Rerun?

BROADCASTING/CABLE
Stevens Denies Must-Carry Intervention at FCC
NTIA Seeks DTV Partners
LPTV Group Seeks Must-Carry
Industry Campaign Targeted for July Launch
Multicast Madness

QUICKLY -- Senate looks into caveats Bush places on legislation; By
the Numbers; Online Effort Is Planned Against Child Pornography;
Bankruptcy Judge Ready for Adelphia; Wireless firms agree on rules
for mobile Web sites; Cell phone signals excite brain

GOVERNMENT & COMMUNICATIONS

BUSH ORDERS UPDATE OF EMERGENCY ALERT SYSTEM
[SOURCE: Washington Post, AUTHOR: Spencer S. Hsu]
President Bush yesterday ordered Homeland Security Secretary Michael
Chertoff to overhaul the nation's hodgepodge of public warning
systems, acknowledging a critical weakness unaddressed since the 2001
terrorist attacks and exposed again last year by Hurricane Katrina.
The Emergency Alert System, best known for weather bulletins and
Amber Alerts for missing children, should be upgraded to explore
communicating by cellphones, personal digital assistants and text
pagers targeted to geographic areas or specific groups, U.S.
officials said. In a 30-paragraph executive order issued by the White
House without comment, President Bush assigned Sec Chertoff to
implement a freshly stated U.S. policy "to ensure that under all
conditions the President can communicate with the American people,"
including in cases of war, terrorist attack, natural disaster or
other public danger. The move follows mounting criticism that the
nation's alert systems are outmoded relics of the Cold War. The first
was set up in 1951 to enable the president to address the public in
the event of nuclear attack through a chain of television and radio
broadcasters. Under existing rules, for example, participation of
broadcasters in state and local alerts is voluntary. The Federal
Communications Commission limits messages to two minutes, and the
system's technology is outdated.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/26/AR200606...
(requires registration)
* Executive Order: Public Alert and Warning System
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/06/20060626.html

BUSH, CHENEY ASSAIL MEDIA OVER BANK-DATA PROGRAM
[SOURCE: Reuters, AUTHOR: Caren Bohan]
President George W. Bush on Monday denounced as "disgraceful" the
revelation by the media of a secret U.S. program that tracks
international financial records in pursuit of terrorists. Vice
President Dick Cheney also singled out The New York Times for
criticism of its reporting on both bank-records searches and a
separate anti-terror program involving warrantless eavesdropping on
phone calls. The U.S. Treasury Department since the September 11
attacks has been examining data from a Brussels-based financial
consortium for evidence of potential activity by terror groups.
Despite the government's efforts to keep the program quiet, The New
York Times laid out the program in detail last week and other major
U.S. newspapers also reported on it. President Bush said the
financial-records monitoring was legal and an important tool for
preventing terror attacks. "Congress was briefed. And what we did was
fully authorized under the law. And the disclosure of this program is
disgraceful," President Bush said.
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=politicsNews&storyID...
* Bush Says Report on Bank Data Was Disgraceful
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/27/washington/27prexy.html
* Bush Denounces Surveillance Disclosure
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/26/AR200606...
* Bush slams papers for divulging secret program
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20060627/a_bush27.art.htm
* Bush Criticizes Reports About Bank Tracking
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-na-bush27jun27,1,10...
* Treasury Secretary Hits 'NYT' in Letter to Keller
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_con...

HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE DEMANDS NSA RECORDS
[SOURCE: Center for Democracy and Technology]
In a surprise move Wednesday, the House Judiciary Committee passed a
resolution that demands the Administration turn over requests made by
the NSA and other federal agencies to phone companies to obtain
information about ordinary Americans without warrants. The resolution
had the support of Chairman James Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.), who
promised to seek a vote on the resolution from the full House if the
Administration does not comply with his requests for information.
www.cdt.org
H. Res. 819: http://www.cdt.org/legislation/109/#H.RES.819

CHINA MAY FINE NEWS MEDIA TO LIMIT COVERAGE
[SOURCE: New York Times, AUTHOR: Joseph Kahn]
Chinese media outlets will be fined if they report on "sudden events"
without prior authorization from government officials, under a draft
law being considered by the Communist Party-controlled legislature.
The law would give government officials a powerful new tool to
restrict coverage of mass outbreaks of disease, riots, strikes,
accidents and other events that the authorities prefer to keep
secret. Officials in charge of propaganda already exercise
considerable sway over the Chinese news media, but their power tends
to be informal, not codified in law. More than 100 million Chinese
have access to the Internet, and hundreds of commercially driven
newspapers, magazines and television stations provide a much wider
selection of news and information than was available in the past. But
Chinese authorities have sought fresh ways to curtail reporting on
topics they consider harmful to social and political stability.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/27/world/asia/27clampdown.html
(requires registration)
* Chinese Media Law Would Require Consent
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/26/AR200606...

TELECOMMUNICATIONS

SUPREME COURT TO REVIEW ANTITRUST CASE AGAINST PHONE COMPANIES
[SOURCE: New York Times, AUTHOR: Stephen Labaton]
The Supreme Court announced Monday that it would consider a lawsuit
that accuses the nation's largest telephone companies of violating
federal antitrust law by conspiring to carve up local markets to
preserve their monopolies. AT&T, Verizon and Qwest asked the court to
rule after they failed to persuade an appeals court that the large
consumer action should be dismissed for lack of evidence. The
complaint by the consumers did not offer direct evidence of a
conspiracy. Instead, it relied on the fact that the companies had
engaged in "parallel conduct" of not moving into each other's service
areas. The phone companies said the standard set by the appeals court
was so low that it would inevitably encourage baseless lawsuits. The
case has gained attention because it could set the standard for
motions to dismiss antitrust claims filed under Section 1 of the
Sherman Act. A collection of influential business interests, some of
whom have been defendants in antitrust cases, has filed briefs
supporting the phone companies. They include the United States
Chamber of Commerce, the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, the
National Association of Manufacturers and companies in the airline,
commodities, credit card and chemical industries. The appeals court
told the telephone companies that there would be ample opportunity
for them to make the case at trial that there was not enough evidence
to prove a conspiracy. The telephone appeal, Bell Atlantic v.
Twombly, No. 05-1126, will be heard in the Supreme Court's next term,
which begins in October.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/27/business/27bizcourt.html
(requires registration)

BARTON CALLS USF BLOATED, UNSUSTAINABLE
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
On Wednesday, the House Telecommunications Subcommittee heard
testimony from 10 witnesses on the Universal Service Fund, which
telecom companies pay into to underwrite phone service to rural and
underserved areas. Republicans on the committee were in general
agreement that the fund, essentially a tax on long-distance telephone
service providers, needs major reform, "if we can't kill it," said
House Commerce Committee Chairman Joe Barton (R-TX), clearly favoring
the latter. Saying the fund was bloated and unsustainable, Rep Barton
argued that it was meant to underwrite one telephone hookup in every
house but had morphed into a gold-plated subsidy for multiple
services at escalating cost to those paying into the system, which
could be easily gamed. "The Universal Service Fund as we know it
today consumes more than $7 billion. B as in 'boy'," he said. "In
1996, when we passed the Telecommunications Act, that same fund spent
less than $1 billion. So it's grown 7,000 percent, or something like
that, in the last 10 years."
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6346161?display=Breaking+News

USF CAP PROPOSAL IRKS RURAL GROUPS
[SOURCE: Technology Daily, AUTHOR: David Hatch]
Senate Commerce Chairman Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), a longtime champion
of rural telephone interests, faces potentially fierce opposition
from rural phone carriers to his sweeping telecommunications
legislation. Organizations representing rural providers were incensed
by comments that Sen Stevens made Thursday during the first round of
consideration of his bill. He shocked many in the packed room when he
expressed support for a cap on the universal service fund that
subsidizes telecom service for rural and low-income citizens. Adding
insult to injury, sources said, is language inserted by Chairman
Stevens and Commerce ranking member Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii) that
could result in additional universal service funding for the
lawmakers' states. A source said the amendment would require the FCC
to examine whether noncontiguous states and "insular" regions should
receive more money to aid carriers. On Friday, four rural phone
associations -- ITTA, NTCA, OPASTCO and WTA -- met with Sen Stevens'
staff to express concern about a possible cap and other items. Sen
Stevens made his comments in response to an amendment offered by Sen.
John McCain (R-AZ) that would establish a $6.5 billion limit on the
fund, now set at $7.3 billion. Stevens convinced Sen McCain and
others to withdraw the measure and work with him to craft a threshold.
http://www.njtelecomupdate.com/lenya/telco/live/tb-LYWX1151334850145.html

MEDIA OWNERSHIP

MEDIA MERGERS ARE DAMAGING US DEMOCRACY
[SOURCE: Financial Times, AUTHOR: FCC Commissioner Michael Copps]
[Commentary] Americans have always been crazy for news. When Alexis
de Tocqueville toured the nations back roads nearly two centuries
ago, he marvelled at the astonishing circulation of letters and
newspapers among these savage woods. De Tocqueville chalked this up
to our uniquely local politics. Under a centralized government, a
handful of national newspapers might have been enough. But America
offered the utmost national freedom combined with local freedom of
every kind. Today, the US is richer and more powerful than when de
Tocqueville visited. But do we still have media capable of keeping
democracy strong? Not by a long shot. Newspaper competition has died
in most cities and towns. Radio, television and the Internet have
replaced them but these are primarily national, not local, and geared
towards selling products through entertainment. In the last off-year
elections, more than half of local newscasts contained no campaign
coverage at all. Why and how has this happened? A leading culprit is
the staggering consolidation among communications companies in recent
years. A handful of conglomerates now controls nearly all the
mainstream media. An even smaller group of network providers controls
Internet access. These two trends are not typically thought to be
related. But both are attempts at stifling competition by seizing
control of content and distribution. The fight against consolidation
is not liberal versus conservative or red state versus blue. It is a
grassroots, all-American campaign to preserve the very democracy that
de Tocqueville saw in America. Every citizen is a stakeholder in the
outcome and every citizen should be part of the decision-making.
http://www.freepress.net/news/16168
(via Free Press)

BIG MEDIA CROSS TO BEAR
[SOURCE: The Street 6/22, AUTHOR: Sandy Brown]
Newspapers and local TV stations aren't necessarily a match made in
heaven, big media companies are learning. A number of big newspaper
outfits bought into the TV business in a bid to reap supposed
advertising synergies. But while some operators have succeeded --
E.W. Scripps and Belo come to mind -- such cases are proving to be
the exception, not the rule. Hard-won experience shows both the paper
and the TV station must be market leaders for the owner to enjoy the
benefits of cross-ownership. Newspaper companies that don't enjoy
significant efficiencies from local TV assets might be smart to sell
some stations.
http://www.thestreet.com/_tscfoc/stocks/media/10293067.html

FCC DENIES CHALLENGE, RENEWS STATION LICENSE
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
The FCC has dismissed a challenge to the license of Raycom's KWWL(TV)
Waterloo, Iowa, and granted the station a new seven-year lease on
life. The license had been challenged over two station editorials
that the petitioner said were motivated by undisclosed financial
interest in the issues, and in one cast, was delivered without
sufficient time for reply. The FCC concluded that it had little power
to interfere with news decision-making, that private and public
interests were not mutually exclusive, and that there was
insufficient evidence that granting the license would, on its face,
be inconsistent with the public interest. One editorial was called
"The Digital Age of Television" and advocated maintaining the 2009
hard date for the digital switch. The other opposed a ballot
initiative creating a local telecommunications utility commission.
Raycom, said petitioner Richard C. Young, did not disclose that it
had a financial interest in not extending the time during which it
would have to simulcast analog and digital, and did not disclose that
it had a financial relationship with a cable provider who would be
directly affected by the creation of the utility commission. In
addition, Young said, the editorial on the utility commission came
the night before the election, not providing the other side
sufficient time for rebuttal. The FCC pointed out that, since it had
scrapped the fairness doctrine -- almost 20 years ago -- there was no
guaranteed right of reply, so the station was not required to make
any time available for rebuttal. The FCC also said that news was the
core programming protected by the First Amendment and that the
Commission "has very little authority to interfere with a licensee's
selection and presentation of...editorial programming. Station
KWWL(TV) exercised its good faith discretion in determining that the
two editorials were relevant and important to the community it served."
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6347209.html?display=Breaking...

MEDIA GENERAL GETS DUOPOLY WAIVER
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
The FCC has granted a waiver of its duopoly rules to allow Media
General to buy WVTM TV Birmingham, Ala., from NBC. It already owns
WIAT(TV) there and both stations are ranked among the top four in the
market. Media General is technically not allowed to own them both
under current FCC ownership rules. The FCC does not allow duopolies
among two of the top four stations. Media General has promised to
sell WIAT within six months--the length of the waiver--and points out
the FCC has issued similar waivers. That is, in part, because the
FCC's rules have been up in the air since a court remanded them in
2003. Since then, broadcasters, including Media General and Tribune
prominently, have had to seek waivers awaiting the outcome of a
just-launched rule review to establish just how many stations the
government will allow them to own, and where. The application for
waiver was unopposed.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6347223.html?display=Breaking...
** For more see:
Media General Closes Four-Station Sale
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6347271.html?display=Breaking...

IN LATE TWIST, UNIVISION ACCEPTS BID
[SOURCE: New York Times, AUTHOR: Andrew Ross Sorkin]
The board of Univision Communications, the nation's largest
Spanish-language broadcaster, agreed to sell the company last night
for $11 billion to a private equity consortium, people involved in
the negotiations said. Univision's directors approved the sale at a
meeting in Los Angeles, and both sides were scrambling to sign the
agreement so that it could be announced this morning. At $11.1
billion or $36.25 a share, the sale is less than the $40 a share that
Univision had originally hoped to receive when it put itself up for
auction in February. Though the price was less than anticipated, it
remains one of the highest multiples paid for a media company in
recent history. The sale of Univision, known for its telenovelas, or
soap operas, and its coverage of the World Cup soccer tournament, is
a surprise twist in a long-running auction that only last week
appeared on the verge of collapse. The deal would put Univision in
the hands of a group that includes the billionaire investor Haim
Saban. The group also includes four private equity firms -- Madison
Dearborn Partners, Providence Equity Partners, the Texas Pacific
Group and Thomas H. Lee Partners -- with stakes in business like
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer and Warner Music. With the agreement, the
consortium seems to have topped a rival group led by Grupo Televisa,
the Mexican broadcast giant, which had been expected to win the
auction. Univision is the ultimate media juggernaut in the rapidly
growing Latino market in the United States, a segment worth some $480
billion in annual buying power. It is the fifth-largest television
network in the country behind Fox, reaching some 98 percent of
Spanish-speaking households through its 62 TV stations, more than 90
affiliate stations and more than 2,000 cable affiliates. In addition
to the network, which dwarfs Telemundo, a unit of General Electric's
NBC, Univision also owns the nation's largest Spanish language radio
broadcaster, music company and online operations.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/27/business/media/27deal.html
(requires registration)
* Univision Weighs $11.1 Billion Bid, But Televisa Is Still in the Running
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB115138134149391638.html?mod=todays_us_pa...
* $11.3-Billion Univision Bid Is Accepted
http://www.latimes.com/business/printedition/la-fi-univision27jun27,1,60...

NET NEUTRALITY

AN INTERNET FOR THE FEW OR THE MANY?
[SOURCE: C-Net|News.com, AUTHOR: Stefanie Olsen and Anne Broache]
An interview with FCC Commissioner Michael Copps. He'd like the
technology industry to become more engaged in the Net neutrality
debate. "I'm a believer that we have to preserve the openness of the
Internet. What this boils down to is Internet freedom. Are we going
to keep this platform open and dynamic and--small "d"--a democratic
technology platform that we have gotten accustomed to with dial-up
Internet? Or in this age of high-speed broadband, are we going to
turn it over to others to operate? Are we just going to transform the
whole nature of the Internet from where the pipe in the middle was
dumb and the intelligence was on the ends--are we going to reverse
that and give all the control and intelligence to the pipe and
network operators and relegate ourselves to less of a role on the edges?"
http://news.com.com/An+Internet+for+the+few+or+the+many/2008-1028_3-6088...

DON'T LET SERVICE PROVIDERS DISCRIMINATE ON THE INTERNET
[SOURCE: San Jose Mercury News 6/25, AUTHOR:John Doerr (Kleiner
Perkins Caufield ) and Reed Hastings Netflix)]
[Commentary] A debate about the future of the Internet is taking
place now in our nation's capital, and American innovation as we know
it is at stake. The debate is over "net neutrality," an obscure term
that refers to control of Internet content: What Web sites can be
shown; what products can be displayed; what costs Internet consumers
will pay. The term may be arcane, but it is net neutrality that has
ensured the Internet's growth as a vibrant, open and
non-discriminatory marketplace since its inception. This longstanding
principle of net neutrality is now under threat, and the implications
for the Internet and for American innovation are profound. This is
not a debate about imposing new regulations on the Internet. This is
a debate about preserving a fundamental principle of openness and
non-discrimination that has always been a foundation of the
Internet's growth and vitality. At its core, this is a debate about
competition, consumer choice and above all, the innovation that has
been a hallmark of the Internet
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/opinion/14899507.htm

NET NEUTRALITY -- SPRING SWEEPS OR LAST SEASON'S RERUN?
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: Deborah Lathen, former chief of
FCC's Cable Services Bureau ]
[Commentary] Is the "Net Neutrality" debate really a rerun from the
"open access" debate of the 1990s? Not long ago, "open access" was
the rallying cry of consumer advocate groups, independent Internet
service providers ("ISPs"), noted academics and, yes, even some of
the major telephone companies.They argued that ISPs would wither away
unless cable companies were required to share their proprietary
facilities with them. Their predictions that cable companies would
discriminate by providing better quality of service for their
content, block access to their competitors' and raise prices, did not
happen. Fortunately the leaders of the day decided to "do no harm"
and said "no" to open access.Subsequently, the telephone companies
were deregulated and competition and investment in new high speed
networks exploded. So, why would anyone want to go backward? Is
network neutrality legislation really necessary? No.Net-neutrality
seeks to reverse a regulatory policy that has proved effective.The
metamorphosis of the Internet occurred in an unregulated environment.
Its continued evolution is contingent upon maintaining its freedom
from those who ironically think they can protect it by regulating
it.Undue regulation is perhaps the biggest threat to the openness of
the Internet. Net neutrality is a remedy looking for a problem;
instead of living through the summer re-runs of the seasons' best and
worst, we should look to the future and the future's "must see TV."
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6347085?display=Breaking+News

BROADCASTING/CABLE

STEVENS DENIES MUST-CARRY INTERVENTION AT FCC
[SOURCE: Multichannel News 6/22, AUTHOR: Ted Hearn]
Senate Commerce Committee chairman Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) said
Thursday that he did not intervene at the Federal Communications
Commission to block the agency's planned June 21 vote to impose new
digital-TV mandates on cable operators. Communications lobbyists told
Multichannel News Stevens or his staff persuaded Republican FCC
member Robert McDowell to block the vote because Stevens wanted to
deal with the carriage issue in his pending telecommunications bill
(S. 2686). "That's not true," Stevens told reporters, adding that his
only comments on the subject came two weeks ago when he made it clear
that he would support FCC adoption of the new cable-carriage rules.
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6346428.html?display=Breaking+News

NTIA SEEKS DTV PARTNERS
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
John Kneuer, Acting assistant secretary of Commerce for
Communications & information for the National Telecommunications &
Information Agency, stressed Thursday that the transition to digital
television would be arguably the biggest communications sea change
ever, bigger than the switch to color TV "with more immediate impact"
than anything he had ever experienced in his communications career.
He pointed out, in his speech to the Media Institute in Washington,
that Congress has only given NTIA $5 million for a public-education
campaign. He told the crowd they knew better than anyone how far that
would go, which isn't far, and said the industries whose viewers will
be affected have to pitch in big time. He said he welcomes all the
help he can get.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6346321?display=Breaking+News

LPTV GROUP SEEKS MUST-CARRY
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
Una Vez Mas, which owns Spanish-language low power TV stations in 19
markets, wrote Senate Commerce Committee Members last week asking
them to support an proposed amendment to a Senate telecom reform bill
that would grant must-carry status to class A low powers: "Our
audience is being denied access to programming that is both
entertaining and informative because we do not have 'must carry'
rights. Small broadcasters serving important community needs should
not be denied equal access to cable and satellite distribution." Una
Vez Mas played the consolidation card, saying that the community
needed "access to an independent voice that is not controlled by a
major media company." Group President Robert Hyland says that "if you
are licensed to a market and an over-the-air broadcaster, you should
have the same must-carry rights." By having to pay to get on cable
systems, he says, the stations have less money to do news or other
local programming. Hyland concedes the amendment has little chance,
but says that, eventually, larger broadcasters will start buying
LPTV's as a way to build coverage while staying under the FCC's
ownership cap, which doesn't apply to LPTVs. It is in their interests
to back granting class A's must-carry status, he says.
http://broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6346147.html?display=Breaking+News

INDUSTRY CAMPAIGN TARGETED FOR JULY LAUNCH
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
Former Motion Picture Association of America head Jack Valenti tells
B&C that the pan-industry consumer-awareness campaign on parental
content control he is heading is targeted for launch before Congress'
August recess. He pledged to Senate Commerce Committee Co-Chairmen
Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) and Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii) last fall that
they would get a preview of the campaign before launch, so he says he
is currently working on setting a date for that presentation. The
campaign will launch within days of that preview. The goal is to let
parents know what technologies are already available to help control
their family's TV viewing, including cable set-top controls and the
broadcast V-chip/rating system. An equally important goal is to
convince Washington that parental control, not government regulation,
is the way to address content criticisms.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6346853?display=Breaking+News

MULTICAST MADNESS
[SOURCE: Multichannel News, AUTHOR: Steve Donohue]
When television stations owned by NBC, CBS and other broadcasters
first began transmitting digital-TV signals in 1998, the concept of
"multicasting" -- squeezing up to four networks into space previously
occupied by a single analog channel -- seemed like it could
revolutionize the TV business. Some stations quickly jumped on
multicasting to offer viewers local news and weather channels -- or
even broadcast up to four "March Madness" college basketball games
simultaneously. Now, the Big Four TV networks and stations have
instead chosen to distribute programming directly to viewers via the
Internet. Rather than repeats of 24 or Desperate Housewives showing
up on multicast channels, ABC, Fox, NBC and CBS have turned to
platforms such as Apple Computer Inc.'s iTunes Music Store and their
own Web sites in fresher bids to drive new subscription ($1.99
downloads) and ad revenue. Why funnel programming through the
Internet, instead of targeting viewers watching TV in their living
rooms? About 70% of Americans rely on basic-cable subscription
packages to watch broadcast networks. The only way for viewers to get
HDTV and multicast networks over the air from broadcast towers is
with a rooftop antenna and a digital-broadcast receiver, the latter
can cost up to $500. "I think people were very hesitant about going
back to the days of antennas," said John Harris, director of
programming at Raleigh, N.C., CBS affiliate WRAL-TV, owned by Capitol
Broadcasting Corp.
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6346618.html

QUICKLY

SENATE LOOKS INTO CAVEATS BUSH PLACES ON LEGISLATION
[SOURCE: USAToday]
The Senate Judiciary Committee opens a hearing today on President
Bush's practice of issuing "signing statements" when he signs bills
into law. Such statements often give objections to a bill or assert a
right to disregard parts of it. The idea is that if a law is
challenged, courts can look at the president's intent in signing the
law as well as Congress' intent in writing it.
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20060627/a_capcol27.art.htm

BY THE NUMBERS
[SOURCE: American Journalism Review, AUTHOR: Jube Shiver Jr.]
Television has always relied on ratings to know what people are
watching. Now newspapers can get statistics showing which stories on
their Web sites attract the most attention. Will those numbers
heighten the tabloidization of America's newspapers?
http://www.ajr.org/Article.asp?id=4121

ONLINE EFFORT IS PLANNED AGAINST CHILD PORNOGRAPHY
[SOURCE: New York Times, AUTHOR: Saul Hansell]
In the face of government pressure, a group of Internet companies is
undertaking a cooperative effort to help combat child pornography
online. The group, organized last week by AOL, includes Yahoo,
Microsoft, Earthlink and United Online. It will initially pay $1
million for a new project of the National Center for Missing and
Exploited Children that will develop systems meant to help identify
child exploitation on the Internet and refer cases to law
enforcement. The first project is to create a central database that
could help identify images of child pornography sent by e-mail.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/27/technology/27porn.html
(requires registration)

BANKRUPTCY JUDGE READY FOR ADELPHIA
[SOURCE: Multichannel News, AUTHOR: Mike Farrell]
U.S. Bankruptcy Court Judge Robert Gerber is expected to hear
arguments in the Adelphia Communications bankruptcy case Tuesday
morning, which could set the stage for the ultimate transfer of
Adelphia's 5 million subscribers to Time Warner Inc. and Comcast.
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6347358.html?display=Breaking+News

WIRELESS FIRMS AGREE ON RULES FOR MOBILE WEB SITE
[SOURCE: Reuters]
Some of the world's top wireless and Internet companies, including
Nokia, Vodafone and Google, have agreed on a set of Web site
development guidelines aimed at making it easier to surf the Internet
on cell phones. The majority of cell phones today have Web browsers
as wireless providers hope to expand beyond voice services, but only
about 19 percent of U.S. mobile phone users regularly use the Web on
their phones, according to researcher M:Metrics Inc. The Worldwide
Web Consortium (W3C), a group backed by 30 industry players, hopes to
improve on this percentage by creating 60 guidelines for developers
to design sites that are easy to use on cell phones, which have much
smaller screens and tiny keypads.
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=technologyNews&story...

CELL PHONE SIGNALS EXCITE BRAIN
[SOURCE: Reuters]
Cell phone emissions excite the part of the brain cortex nearest to
the phone, but it is not clear if these effects are harmful, Italian
researchers reported on Monday. Their study, published in the Annals
of Neurology, adds to a growing body of research about mobile phones,
their possible effects on the brain, and whether there is any link to cancer.
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=technologyNews&story...
--------------------------------------------------------------
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.
--------------------------------------------------------------