Benton RSS Feed

To view Benton's Headlines feed in your RSS=20
Aggregator, paste=20
http://www.benton.org/index.php?q=3Dtaxonomy/term/6/all/feed into your read=
er.
For upcoming media policy events, see http://www.benton.org

LEGISLATION
Protesters face off with Verizon, AT&T
Net neutrality fans pressure U.S. Senate
Unusual Alliances Emerge In Net Neutrality Debate
The Internet's Long War
'Recouping an investment' means 'Hold on to your wallet'
McCain & Martin: Make cable go a la carte
Hutchison Unveils State Franchising Bill
Senate Democratic Staff Float Franchise Bill
Local cable and all its services are threatened
CWA Opposes Sensenbrenner Net Neutrality Bill

GOVERNMENT & COMMUNICATIONS
ACLU requests wiretapping probe
Gonzales's Rationale on Phone Data Disputed=09
Make No Law
A Vote For English
Halt Pentagon Payments To Iraqi Journos, DoD Report Recommends

TELEVISION
Study Shows How Kids' Media Use Helps Parents Cope
House open to narrower Senate bill on decency
TV Stations Revs To Rise $1.5B, Says BIA
Products placed in television plots are here to stay
Court Pulls EchoStar's Distant Signals

INTERNET
Mergers may be next trend for big Internet companies
Bill to Ban Gambling Online Gets 4th Chance
Study: Neb. Should Allow Muni Services

NEWS FROM FCC
Copps Decries FCC Inaction On Media Rules, Cable Merger
FCC's Katrina Panel to Meet June 9

QUICKLY -- DNS Transition; Rural cellphone firms=20
pinched; Google Bolsters Its Washington Presence

LEGISLATION

PROTESTERS FACE OFF WITH VERIZON, AT&T
[SOURCE: C-Net|News.com, AUTHOR: Marguerite Reardon and Declan McCullagh]
Protesters lined streets on both coasts Wednesday=20
to bring public awareness to the=20
telecommunications policy debates currently going=20
on in Washington, D.C., and to show opposition to=20
the phone companies reportedly providing customer=20
records without a court order to the National=20
Security Agency. The protest, called National Day=20
of Out(R)age, was staged in several cities=20
throughout the United States, including New York,=20
Chicago, Boston and San Francisco. Recent=20
consolidation among telecommunications providers=20
has made many people wary of the concentrated=20
power the new mega-phone companies wield,=20
especially in Washington, D.C., where they are=20
spending millions of dollars to lobby Congress as=20
it makes changes to the Telecommunications Act.=20
This, coupled with reports that the phone=20
companies helped the National Security Agency=20
compile a database of Americans' phone records,=20
has raised eyebrows among watchdog groups and=20
concerned citizens. "Communication policy should=20
be decided in a democratic fashion," said Michael=20
Eisenmenger, of a nonprofit group called=20
saveaccess.org, who helped organize the protest=20
in New York City. "And it doesn't look like that=20
is happening today. These companies are spending=20
millions of dollars lobbying and setting=20
Astroturf front groups. And we think someone=20
needs to look out for the public interest."
http://news.com.com/Protesters+face+off+with+Verizon%2C+AT38T/2100-1036_...
076575.html?tag=3Dnefd.top
http://news.com.com/Photos+Calling+all+Verizon+protesters/2300-1028_3-60...
23.html?tag=3Dfd_carsl

NET NEUTRALITY FANS PRESSURE US SENATE
[SOURCE: C-Net|News.com, AUTHOR: Declan McCullagh]
One day before Republicans plan a Senate hearing=20
on a new telecommunications bill without Net=20
neutrality regulations, backers of the concept=20
have thrown their support behind a competing=20
proposal with far more extensive federal rules.=20
During a conference call on Wednesday,=20
representatives from Amazon.com, Google,=20
universities participating in the Internet2=20
project and liberal advocacy groups all called=20
for strict laws that would prohibit what they=20
view as a two-tier Internet. "Tomorrow is a very=20
important day for the future of the Internet,"=20
said Paul Misener, an Amazon vice president. He=20
warned that phone and cable companies will run=20
roughshod over their customers "unless Congress=20
acts to stop them" by approving alternative=20
legislation prepared by Sens. Olympia Snowe of=20
Maine and Byron Dorgan of North Dakota.
http://news.com.com/Net+neutrality+fans+pressure+U.S.+Senate/2100-1028_3...
76231.html?tag=3Dnefd.top
* Congress Debates Network Neutrality
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/extra/features/jan-june06/net_5-24.html

UNUSUAL ALLIANCES EMERGE IN NET NEUTRALITY DEBATE
[SOURCE: Technology Daily, AUTHOR: Heather Greenfield]
What do Trent Reznor of Nine Inch Nails have in=20
common with the Christian Coalition, Gun Owners=20
of America and Google? They are all working in=20
support of network neutrality. In the past, if=20
Reznor and Christian groups were mentioned in the=20
same sentence in Washington, the topic likely was=20
labeling to warn parents about raunchy lyrics --=20
and they were on opposite sides of the issue.=20
While all is not entirely forgiven, the battle to=20
ensure net neutrality has created an atmosphere=20
where the lion can lie with the lamb. "We believe=20
this issue is so important because of free=20
speech," Christian Coalition spokeswoman Michele=20
Combs said. She said her group is concerned that=20
if a cable company has a board that favors=20
abortion rights, it could charge an anti-abortion=20
group more to deliver its messages over that=20
firm's broadband network. Combs said embracing=20
unusual partners is worth it to fight for "a=20
family issue," noting that "Sen. Chuck Schumer,=20
D-N.Y., has a zero on our congressional report=20
card, but we partnered with him on this."
http://www.njtelecomupdate.com/lenya/telco/live/tb-GCBA1148490433740.html

THE INTERNET'S LONG WAR
[SOURCE: TomPaine, AUTHOR: Dawn Holian, Common Cause]
[Commentary] telephone and cable companies would=20
like to transform our Internet from a medium that=20
allows people to connect to one another, engage=20
in debate, and learn about the world into little=20
more than a portal to sell goods and transmit=20
television programs, films and games. And they=92re=20
likely to get their way unless Congress acts. On=20
Thursday, the House Judiciary will be voting on a=20
key piece of legislation to protect the Internet=20
we know it, an Internet that is in jeopardy=20
because of recent decisions by federal=20
regulators. Why is Common Cause so concerned=20
about a seemingly obscure telecommunications=20
issue? Because we care about the potential of the=20
Internet to spur citizen engagement in their=20
democracy. We know how democratic discourse has=20
benefited from this technological marvel. In=20
2004, according to the Pew Internet and American=20
Life Project, 63 million Americans went online=20
for political news. An estimated seven million=20
individuals asked for e-mail updates from=20
candidates, and four million donated money online=20
to parties and campaigns. That involvement is=20
only growing. Millions of citizens access=20
information from advocacy web sites ranging from=20
Amnesty International to the National Rifle=20
Association. And e-activists are transforming the=20
way citizens communicate with their elected=20
officials and have their opinions heard on the=20
most pressing issues of the day. But this=20
Renaissance will be cut short if access to the=20
Internet is determined by corporations more=20
interested in selling goods and entertainment=20
than in encouraging democratic discourse. The=20
Internet Freedom and Non-Discrimination Act is=20
critical to protecting our digital future.
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2006/05/24/the_internets_long_war.php
* Consumer Groups: Network Neutrality Is an Antitrust Issue
http://www.freepress.net/press/release.php?id=3D137
* Pending Internet neutrality legislation is=20
vital to preserving independent Web content and expression
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/editorial/3883948.html
* House Judiciary Committee Mark-up Today
http://judiciary.house.gov/markup.aspx?ID=3D132

'RECOUPING AN INVESTMENT' MEANS 'HOLD ON TO YOUR WALLET'
[SOURCE: Paul Kapustka's Blog]
[Commentary] When the telcos argue against=20
network neutrality, one central theme is that=20
without tiered pricing plans, they won't be able=20
to "recoup their investment" in all these great=20
new services they plan to build. The question to=20
ask is, from where will that "recouping" come?=20
The answer can be found in your wallet. In a=20
conference call this morning with reporters,=20
proponents of network neutrality are finally=20
coalescing behind this idea, and it's a powerful=20
one: The battle is not (as the telcos want you to=20
believe) between them and the Googles of the=20
world, but between telcos and customers -- with=20
customers the ones who will have to pay the=20
freight for the telcos' new shiny networks. Why?=20
Even I can figure this one out. If the phone=20
companies are allowed to charge for tiered=20
Internet services -- much like how cable=20
companies charge for channel plans -- their=20
"partners" in the deals (for video, music,=20
gaming, whatever) are most likely NOT going to=20
"share the costs." On the contrary: just like=20
cable, the telcos are going to have to PAY EXTRA=20
to host specialized content. Just like cablecos=20
pay ESPN a few bucks per customer, so will phone=20
companies have to pay for their content. And who=20
will pay the vig? That's right, you and me.
http://paulsblog.pulver.com/archives/2006/05/recouping_an_in.html

MAKE CABLE GO A LA CARTE
[SOURCE: Los Angeles Times, AUTHOR: Sen John=20
McCain (R-AZ) & FCC Chairman Kevin Martin]
[Commentary] American consumers have little=20
choice when it comes to cable television. If you=20
want ESPN, you must pay for 60-plus channels that=20
you may never watch. If your child loves=20
Nickelodeon, your family must pay for the same=20
60-plus channels, some of which may not be=20
suitable for young children. Now, imagine=20
deciding for yourself which TV channels you want=20
to purchase. You could select the channels you=20
want to pay for, and opt out of those you don't.=20
In fact, right now millions of TV viewers outside=20
the U.S. have these choices. They buy their=20
television channels individually or in smaller=20
bundles =97 and get better deals as a result. Why=20
can't Americans do this now? Because there is too=20
little competition, too much regulation and not=20
enough consumer choice in the cable TV business.=20
The solution to high cable bills isn't price=20
controls or additional government regulation. It=20
is more competition and more choice. For that=20
reason, Congress should pass the proposed=20
Consumers Having Options in Cable Entertainment=20
Act =97 the CHOICE Act =97 which is being introduced=20
today. It would allow cable companies to compete=20
nationally for your business (rather than only at=20
the local level) in exchange for agreeing to=20
offer channels a la carte, either individually or in smaller bundles.
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-oe-mccain25may25,1,1...
41.story?coll=3Dla-news-comment
(requires registration)

HUTCHISON UNVEILS STATE FRANCHISING BILL
[SOURCE: Multichannel News, AUTHOR: Ted Hearn]
Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas) introduced a=20
bill Tuesday that would require state governments=20
to become cable-franchising authorities in lieu=20
of thousands of cities and towns that have been=20
exercising that authority for decades. The bill=20
(S. 2989), modeled after a Texas law passed last=20
year, appears designed to speed phone-company=20
entry into local cable markets, as state=20
governments would have 17 business days to grant=20
valid franchise applications and could not impose=20
market-buildout requirements on new entrants. en=20
Hutchison, a member of the Senate Commerce=20
Committee, might offer her bill as an amendment=20
to a major telecommunications bill (S. 2686)=20
sponsored by Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) when the=20
panel meets June 20 to vote on Stevens=92 bill.=20
Under the Stevens bill, local governments would=20
retain the right to serve as cable-franchising=20
authorities, but they would generally need to=20
approve new cable-franchise applications within=20
30 days under a streamlined process crafted by=20
the Federal Communications Commission. Sen=20
Hutchison=92s bill would allow large incumbent=20
cable operators to obtain state franchises only=20
following the expirations of their local=20
agreements. A small cable incumbent -- defined as=20
having fewer than 40% of subscribers in a=20
franchise area -- could terminate its local=20
agreement and seek a state franchise not later=20
than 120 days after the Hutchison bill became=20
law. In her bill, Hutchison would allow providers=20
of cable service or Internet protocol TV to apply=20
for a state franchise. State franchisees must pay=20
5% of gross revenue -- which would not include=20
income from advertising -- to compensate local=20
governments for use of public rights of way.=20
State franchisees would be barred from denying=20
cable service or video service to =93any group of=20
potential residential subscribers=94 based on=20
income. Individuals denied service and local=20
governments would be eligible to file complaints=20
with the state to seek enforcement. State=20
regulators and the courts would be required to=20
give state franchisees that run afoul of the=20
nondiscrimination ban =93a reasonable period of=20
time to become capable of providing cable or=20
video service to all households within a=20
designated franchise area.=94 In terms of=20
compliance, state franchisees could either extend=20
their wireline facilities or make =93use of an=20
alternative technology that provides comparable=20
content, service and functionality.=94
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6337841.html?display=3DBreaking+News

SENATE DEMOCRATIC STAFF FLOATS FRANCHISE BILL
[SOURCE: Multichannel News, AUTHOR: Ted Hearn]
A telephone company could get a local cable=20
franchise within 30 days if it agreed to the=20
terms and conditions of the franchise most=20
recently granted to the market's cable incumbent,=20
according to a draft bill prepared by staff to=20
Senate Commerce Committee Democrats. The bill,=20
designed to update the Telecommunications Act of=20
1996, would phase in franchisewide buildout=20
requirements on phone companies and impose=20
Internet-nondiscrimination mandates on=20
broadband-access providers. It would also bar=20
cable operators under many conditions from=20
withholding programming not delivered via=20
satellite. Under the bill, a phone company=20
unwilling to sign the incumbent's franchise=20
agreement could negotiate different terms with=20
local regulators during a 60-day window. If those=20
talks failed, the phone company would be allowed=20
to enter the video market within 30 days under=20
"standard franchise" -- a default mechanism that=20
includes a 5% franchise fee and other conditions=20
specified in the bill. Cable incumbents can=20
escape their local franchises and obtain a=20
standard franchise after another video provider=20
with a standard franchise offers service to more=20
than 5% of homes in the same franchise area. The=20
net-neutrality provisions track terms in a Senate=20
bill introduced last Friday by Sens. Olympia=20
Snowe (R-Maine), Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.) and Daniel=20
Inouye (D-Hawaii): no blocking or degrading of=20
Internet traffic and no demands for payment for=20
the prioritization of unaffiliated Web content,=20
data, and applications. The bill would alter=20
program-access laws. Cable operators that=20
terrestrially distribute program networks that=20
they owned would be required to sell the=20
programming to competing pay TV distributors. A=20
cable company that distributes national sports=20
programming could withhold the programming from a=20
competing distributor that itself has exclusive=20
rights to distribute national sports programming.
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6337883.html?display=3DBreaking+News

LOCAL CABLE AND ALL ITS SERVICES ARE THREATENED
[SOURCE: Minneapolis Star Tribune, AUTHOR: Rick=20
Talbot And Steve Larson, North Suburban Access Corp./CTV-15]
[Commentary] The Communications Opportunity,=20
Promotion and Enhancement (COPE) Act of 2006,=20
introduced by House Commerce Committee Chairman=20
Joe Barton, could end local sports and election=20
coverage and other community programming in the=20
Twin Cities area. The bill would preempt state=20
law and local franchises that require cable=20
television providers to serve an entire city and=20
allow the new providers to cherry-pick where they=20
provide service. Although the bill looks like it=20
leaves management of the public rights-of-way to=20
local governments, in fact, all disputes about=20
local rights-of-way rules and regulations must be=20
appealed to the Federal Communications=20
Commission, not state court. This puts ultimate=20
control of our local streets and roads in the=20
hands of bureaucrats in Washington, D.C., a=20
thousand miles away. Furthermore, it is hard to=20
imagine untrained officials trying to resolve a=20
local dispute over an ill-placed 6-foot-high=20
fiber box in a resident's yard. Of equal concern,=20
in order to get a national license to provide=20
cable television service, all an applicant has to=20
do is file the company's name, address and=20
telephone number with the FCC. Although the bill=20
was written to benefit telephone companies=20
Verizon, AT&T and Qwest, the reality is that,=20
under this scheme, a bankrupt, convicted felon=20
could apply for a license and, 30 days later,=20
start digging up the streets in our cities. If=20
you believe in localism, in being able to watch=20
your local government or your next-door neighbor=20
on television, and in control of your local=20
rights-of-way management, contact the members of Congress immediately.
http://www.startribune.com/142/story/446269.html

CWA OPPOSES SENSENBRENNER NET NEUTRALITY BILL
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
The Communications Workers of America has written=20
House Judiciary Committee Chairman James=20
Sensenbrenner (R-WI) opposing his network=20
neutrality bill. Rep Sensenbrenner's bill would=20
not allow networks to charge online content=20
companies for providing them enhanced bandwidth=20
or security, which CWA and the phone companies=20
argue will not allow companies to get a return on=20
their investments in network build-outs and slow=20
those build-outs, and will delay the broadband=20
rollout that is the driving force behind video=20
franchise reform legislation in the House and=20
Senate. CWA says it supports an open Internet,=20
and even used the letter to plug legislation=20
mandating cable =E0 la carte, but said the=20
Sensenbrenner bill was not the right approach.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6337857?display=3DBreaking+News

GOVERNMENT & COMMUNICATIONS

ACLU REQUESTS WIRETAPPING PROBE
[SOURCE: Reuters, AUTHOR: Daniel Trotta]
The American Civil Liberties Union launched a=20
20-state campaign on Wednesday to stop=20
warrantless eavesdropping by the National=20
Security Agency and prevent telecoms firms from=20
providing it with phone records. The rights group=20
was appealing directly to the states because it=20
said the U.S. Congress had failed to exert its=20
oversight role over the White House and because=20
the Federal Communications Commission had chosen=20
not to pursue complaints. The ACLU and its=20
affiliates are petitioning utilities regulators=20
and attorneys general in 20 states to demand=20
investigations and public hearings with a goal of=20
stopping the domestic spying or revealing more=20
about it. "The NSA data mining program is just=20
the latest example of what we believe is a=20
longer-term abuse of power by the executive=20
branch," ACLU Executive Director Anthony Romero=20
told reporters on a conference call. "It's an=20
effort to undercut judicial review, to seize=20
law-enforcement powers that it should not have=20
and that Congress did not grant to it, and an=20
effort to hide information from public scrutiny=20
and public involvement on important issues that=20
affect the basic rights of ordinary Americans," he said.
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=3DdomesticNews&storyID=
=3D2006-05-24T211108Z_01_N24313688_RTRUKOC_0_US-SECURITY-EAVESDROPPING-ACLU=
.xml
* A.C.L.U. Seeks States' Help on Phone Records Inquiry
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/25/us/25phone.html

GONZALES'S RATIONALE ON PHONE DATA DISPUTED
[SOURCE: Washington Post, AUTHOR: Walter Pincus]
Civil liberties lawyers questioned the legal=20
basis that Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales=20
used Tuesday to justify the constitutionality of=20
collecting domestic telephone records as part of=20
the Bush administration's anti-terrorism program.=20
While not confirming a USA Today report May 11=20
saying the National Security Agency has been=20
collecting phone-call records of millions of=20
Americans, Gonzales said such an activity would=20
not require a court warrant under a 1979 Supreme=20
Court ruling because it involved obtaining=20
"business records." Under the 27-year-old court=20
ruling in Smith v. Maryland , "those kinds of=20
records do not enjoy Fourth Amendment=20
protection," Gonzales said. "There is no=20
reasonable expectation of privacy in those kinds=20
of records," he added. Noting that Congress in=20
1986 passed the Electronic Communications Privacy=20
Act in reaction to the Smith v. Maryland ruling=20
to require court orders before turning over call=20
records to the government, G. Jack King Jr. of=20
the National Association of Criminal Defense=20
Lawyers said Gonzales is correct in saying "the=20
administration isn't violating the Fourth=20
Amendment" but "he's failing to acknowledge that=20
it is breaking" the 1986 law, which requires a=20
court order "with a few very narrow exceptions."=20
Kate Martin, director of the Center for National=20
Security Studies, said, "The government is bound=20
by the laws Congress passes, and when the=20
attorney general doesn't even mention them, it is=20
symptomatic of the government's profound disrespect for the rule of law."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/24/AR200605...
2329.html
(requires registration)
* NSA, the FCC and White House Martin=92s, and Sen. Stevens: Beyond Cover-up
http://www.democraticmedia.org/jcblog/?p=3D42

MAKE NO LAW
[SOURCE: Washington Post, AUTHOR: Editorial Staff]
[Commentary] The Senate Judiciary Committee is=20
scheduled today to mark up legislation dealing=20
with the National Security Agency's program of=20
warrantless domestic surveillance. What kind of=20
bill it will report out is anyone's guess. Three=20
different bills are floating around -- one by=20
Chairman Arlen Specter (R-PA), one by Mike DeWine=20
(R-OH) and one by Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) -- and=20
they would do wildly different things. What the=20
committee should do now is clear: nothing. Any=20
legislation is premature, because most members of=20
the committee still have no firm sense of what=20
the NSA surveillance program consists of. The=20
goal of legislation should be to legitimize=20
important surveillance by requiring judicial=20
review, limiting the use of material collected to=20
counterintelligence purposes and ensuring that=20
irrelevant material is not retained. The best way=20
for the Judiciary Committee to move toward this=20
goal is to hold off on a markup and insist that=20
it receive more information about the program --=20
so that it's not shooting in the dark.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/24/AR200605...
2449.html
(requires registration)

A VOTE FOR ENGLISH
[SOURCE: Washington Post, AUTHOR: George Will]
[Commentary] What public good is advanced by=20
encouraging the participation of people who, by=20
saying they require bilingual assistance, are=20
saying they cannot understand the nation's=20
political conversation? By receiving such=20
assistance they are receiving a disincentive to=20
become proficient in English. Declaring English=20
the national language is a mere gesture. But by=20
ending bilingual ballots, American law would=20
perform its expressive function of buttressing,=20
by codifying and vivifying, certain national=20
assumptions and aspirations. Among those is this:=20
The idea of citizenship becomes absurd when=20
sundered from the ability to understand the=20
nation's civic conversation. What makes Americans=20
generally welcoming of immigrants, and what makes=20
immigrants generally assimilable, is that this is=20
a creedal nation, one dedicated to certain=20
propositions, not one whose origins and identity=20
are bound up with ethnicity. But if you are to be=20
welcomed to the enjoyment of American liberty,=20
then America has a few expectations of you. One=20
is that you can read the nation's founding=20
documents and laws and can comprehend the=20
political discourse that precedes the casting of=20
ballots. Is this unreasonable? Of course not.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/24/AR200605...
2433.html
(requires registration)

HALT PENTAGON PAYMENTS TO IRAQI JOURNOS, DOD REPORT RECOMMENDS
[SOURCE: Editor&Publisher]
The Department of Defense investigation into=20
revelations the U.S. military was paying for=20
favorable Iraqi press concludes the propaganda=20
effort could harm American credibility -- and the=20
payments should stop. According to a summary of=20
the investigation led by Rear Adm. Scott Van=20
Buskirk, the Pentagon failed to consider whether=20
the payments would "undermine the concept of a=20
free press in Iraq," and must now implement=20
procedures to "ensure proper oversight" of the=20
private contractors leading the propaganda=20
effort. This appears to be a reference to the=20
Lincoln Group, a Washington-based firm that,=20
according to press reports last fall, was paid to=20
plant articles in Iraqi newspapers without=20
revealing the stories were written by the=20
military. The Lincoln Group also paid some Iraqi=20
journalists directly for favorable press.
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_con...
t_id=3D1002575384
* U.S. Urged to Stop Paying Iraqi Reporters
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/24/world/middleeast/24propaganda.html

TELEVISION

STUDY SHOWS HOW KIDS' MEDIA USE HELPS PARENTS COPE
[SOURCE: Kaiser Family Foundation press release]
Electronic media is a central focus of many very=20
young children=92s lives, used by parents to help=20
manage busy schedules, keep the peace, and=20
facilitate family routines such as eating,=20
relaxing, and falling asleep, according to a new=20
national study released today by the Kaiser=20
Family Foundation. Many parents also express=20
satisfaction with the educational benefits of TV=20
and how it can teach positive behaviors. The=20
report, The Media Family: Electronic Media in the=20
Lives of Infants, Toddlers, Preschoolers, and=20
Their Parents, is based on a national survey of=20
1,051 parents with children age 6 months to 6=20
years old and a series of focus groups across the=20
country. According to the study, in a typical day=20
more than eight in ten (83%) children under the=20
age of six use screen media, with those children=20
averaging about two hours a day (1:57). Media use=20
increases with age, from 61% of babies one year=20
or younger who watch screen media in a typical=20
day (for an average of 1:20) to 90% of 4 to 6=20
year-olds (for an average of 2:03). In many=20
homes, parents have created an environment where=20
the TV is a nearly constant presence, from the=20
living room to the dining room and the bedroom.=20
One in three (33%) children this age has a TV in=20
their bedroom (19% of children ages 1 year or=20
younger, 29% of children ages 2-3 years, and 43%=20
of those ages 4-6 years). The most common reasons=20
parents give for putting a TV in their child=92s=20
bedroom is to free up other TVs in the house so=20
the parent or other family members can watch=20
their own shows (55%), to keep the child occupied=20
so the parent can do things around the house=20
(39%), to help the child fall asleep (30%), and=20
as a reward for good behavior (26%).
http://www.kff.org/entmedia/entmedia052406pkg.cfm
* Who's Watching the Kids? TV
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6337463?display=3DBreaking+News
* Parents Making Use of TV Despite Risks
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/25/us/25crib.html
* Toddlers' TV Habits Run Counter to Medical Advice
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB114847544019661809.html?mod=3Dtodays_us_...
sonal_journal
* Kaiser Stirs Debate Over Kids and Media Exposure
http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/recent_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=3D100...
5246

HOUSE OPEN TO NARROWER SENATE BILL ON DECENCY
[SOURCE: Reuters, AUTHOR: Jeremy Pelofsky]
The House of Representatives would accept a=20
narrower Senate bill to boost fines on television=20
and radio stations for decency violations if=20
differences cannot be worked out between the two=20
chambers, House Commerce Committee Chairman Joe=20
Barton (R-TX) said Wednesday. "The (House)=20
Majority Leader and Speaker are working with the=20
Majority Leader in the Senate to see what their=20
timetable might be to appoint conferees," Rep=20
Barton said. "If that doesn't look hopeful, then=20
the recommendation would be to accept the Senate bill."
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2006/05/24/house_o...
_to_narrower_senate_bill_on_decency/?rss_id=3DBoston.com+%2F+News

TV STATIONS REVENUES TO RISE $1.5 BILLION, SAYS BIA
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
Political bucks will drive a boost in TV station=20
revenues in 2006, according to BIA Financial=20
Network analysts. BIA Financial predicts 2006 TV=20
market revues will be up more than 7% to a total=20
$22.2 billion. That is versus a drop of more than=20
7% last year to $20.7 billion, again partly=20
because of the drop in election ads form the=20
presidential year of 2004. The 2006 increase is=20
expected to be primarily driven by states with=20
competitive Senate and governor races, a pattern=20
BIA has picked up over the last several years.=20
Fox is the leading moneymaker among network TV=20
groups, raking in $2.3 billion in 2005, according=20
to BIA, followed by CBS, NBC, Tribune, then ABC.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6337725?display=3DBreaking+News

PRODUCTS PLACED IN TELEVISION PLOTS ARE HERE TO STAY
[SOURCE: Associated Press, AUTHOR: David Bauder]
Product placement -- a can of soda casually=20
placed on a table while the characters are=20
standing around it -- has been a part of TV for=20
decades, usually creating little controversy. But=20
producers John Wells of "ER" and Neil Baer of=20
"Law & Order: SVU" say they're worried about=20
being forced to use products in their stories in=20
ways that make them look silly. The producers,=20
representing the Writers Guild of America, said=20
they recognize ad integration is here to stay.=20
What they want is to negotiate with networks a=20
process that gives creators a say in what can and=20
can't be done, and they said the networks haven't=20
been willing to put that on paper. They'd like to=20
get a cut of these deals too. There's increased=20
pressure toward integrated ads from several=20
directions. Advertisers are worried that digital=20
video recorders are encouraging more and more=20
consumers to fast-forward through commercials.=20
Between dwindling viewership and increased=20
competition from the Internet, networks are eager=20
to keep their sponsors happy. Product integration=20
has been more prevalent on reality shows, where=20
contestants recently won a bottle of mouthwash in=20
a reward challenge and let it swirl around their mouths like fine wine.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi-0605230377may24,1,7735248.story

COURT PULLS ECHOSTAR'S DISTANT SIGNALS
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John M. Higgins & John Eggerton]
In a decision that could have serious=20
implications for EchoStar's satellite TV=20
business, a federal appeals court has ordered to=20
stop delivering the signals of distant TV=20
stations to its subscribers. The ruling could=20
force EchoStar=92s Dish Network to shuffle the=20
station lineup delivered to hundreds of thousands=20
of subscribers. Some subs may be temporarily=20
unable to receive any broadcast stations at all.=20
In a harshly-worded opinion, the three-judge=20
panel declared: "We have found no indication that=20
EchoStar was ever interested in complying with"=20
laws regulating how satellite TV companies=20
deliver broadcast stations to their customers.=20
The case is part of a long-running copyright=20
dispute between broadcasters and satellite=20
companies over homes located in the fringes of TV=20
markets. EchoStar is permitted to deliver=20
so-called "distant" signals only to homes that=20
receive no other stations over the air. But=20
EchoStar=92s method of determining which customers=20
were eligible for the distant signals has been a=20
bone of contention, and litigation, for years.=20
Broadcasters complain that the company abuses the=20
rules and violates the Satellite Home Viewer Act=20
by regularly delivering the wrong market=92s stations to its subscribers.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6337470?display=3DBreaking+News
* EchoStar Must Cut Off Distant Nets
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6337495.html?display=3DBreaking+News

INTERNET

MERGERS MAY BE NEXT TREND FOR BIG INTERNET COMPANIES
[SOURCE: Reuters, AUTHOR: Eric Auchard]
Speculation is rife on Wall Street that a big=20
Internet deal or alliance is in the works, with=20
Google, Yahoo, eBay or Microsoft as possible=20
partners -- and a Yahoo-eBay partnership seen as=20
most likely. "A partnership or merger between=20
eBay and Yahoo! is the most strategically=20
feasible," a report authored by analyst Imran=20
Khan and the JP Morgan Internet team said on=20
Monday. "A combined company would have the=20
leading position in auctions, communications,=20
payments, graphical advertising, audience reach,=20
and geographic breadth," the report=20
said. Silicon Valley insiders, high-tech bankers=20
and financial analysts are giving new credence to=20
potential merger deals, which fly in the face of=20
common wisdom that the Internet's rapid growth=20
has always outweighed the logic of consolidation.=20
But Internet growth is slowing and competition=20
among the biggest companies -- Google, Yahoo,=20
eBay and Microsoft -- is intensifying.
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=3DinternetNews&storyID=
=3D2006-05-24T160950Z_01_N23175188_RTRUKOC_0_US-INTERNET-MERGERS.xml
** BREAKING NEWS: Yahoo and eBay announced a=20
strategic partnership for Internet searches,=20
advertising, online payments and a co-branded toolbar. **

BILL TO BAN GAMBLING ONLINE GETS 4TH CHANCE
[SOURCE: Washington Post, AUTHOR: Frank Ahrens]
Today, the House Judiciary Committee will mark up=20
a bill introduced by Rep. Robert W. Goodlatte (R)=20
that would ban much online gambling, including=20
bets on sporting events and games of chance --=20
namely poker, which has enjoyed a boom in recent=20
years. The bill would update the Federal Wire=20
Wager Act, which prohibits gambling over=20
telephone lines but may not apply to Internet=20
gambling because not all Web traffic travels over=20
phone lines. It also would force banks to block=20
transactions related to online gambling and would=20
empower law enforcement agencies to force=20
Internet service providers to remove or disable=20
links to gambling sites. The bill effectively=20
would prevent state lotteries from taking their=20
games online, because technology does not exist=20
to keep gambling within a state. Fantasy sports=20
leagues would be exempt. Goodlatte said his bill=20
is neutral on parimutuel horse wagering, which=20
has an online component that is the cause of an=20
ongoing struggle between Congress and the Justice Department.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/24/AR200605...
2432.html
(requires registration)

STUDY: NEBRASKA SHOULD ALLOW MUNI SERVICES
[SOURCE: Multichannel News, AUTHOR: Linda Haugsted]
Nebraska should rescind or modify a law that bars=20
municipal utilities from offering broadband=20
services, according to a report written by the=20
school of law at New York University to a=20
legislative committee studying the impact of the=20
law. Commercial operators have failed to reach=20
7.4% of Nebraska towns, or 43% of rural Nebraska,=20
with high-speed-data connections such as cable=20
modems or digital-subscriber-line service,=20
according to the report. It suggested that=20
cities, using Wi-Max or broadband-over-power-line=20
(BPL) technology, could reach those homes if the=20
state restrictions were lifted. The report --=20
backed by groups such as the Center for Rural=20
Affairs, Nebraska Common Cause, the Nebraska=20
Appleseed Center for Law in the Public Interest,=20
the Rural Policy Research Institute, Free Press=20
and Media Access Project -- has been issued to=20
influence a legislative committee formed when the=20
law was passed in 2005. The broadband=20
recommendation report was written by attorneys=20
with the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU=92s=20
School of Law. It concluded that=20
satellite-delivered Internet access is available=20
via products such as WildBlue Inc. and Hughes=20
Network Systems=92 DirecWay, but it added that the=20
price points for these services are too high to=20
make them a viable broadband option for most=20
rural families. Those services cost $1,000 in=20
installation and service fees the first year and=20
$600 for subsequent years, according to the=20
report. The report concluded that municipal=20
Wi-Max -- a wireless technology that can enable=20
connections within 30 miles of its microwave=20
transmitters -- or municipal BPL could fill in=20
the state=92s gaps in high-speed-data delivery.
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6337843.html?display=3DBreaking+News

NEWS FROM FCC

COPPS DECRIES FCC INACTION ON MEDIA RULES, CABLE MERGER
[SOURCE: Technology Daily, AUTHOR: David Hatch]
FCC Commissioner Michael Copps complained that=20
the agency is dragging its feet on a=20
court-ordered review of media ownership=20
regulations and the proposed acquisition of=20
bankrupt Adelphia Communications by Comcast and=20
Time Warner. Immediate action on both matters=20
would be to the Democrats' advantage because the=20
agency is split 2-2 along party lines, pending=20
the confirmation of Republican Robert McDowell to=20
fill a fifth FCC seat. Reasoning that a GOP=20
majority at the FCC would be less likely to=20
impose tough conditions on the Adelphia purchase,=20
Time Warner Chairman and Chief Executive Officer=20
Richard Parsons originally urged the FCC to delay=20
its review pending the addition of McDowell. But=20
sources said Tuesday that Time Warner and Comcast=20
subsequently have urged the FCC to proceed=20
because the parties want the review completed by=20
July 31, when they are permitted to abandon the=20
deal under the terms of the agreement. Chairman=20
Martin has stated that he is awaiting a full=20
complement of regulators at the FCC before=20
addressing media ownership. But on Tuesday,=20
Tamara Lipper, a special adviser to Martin, put=20
the onus on the agency's two Democrats, who are=20
at odds with their GOP counterparts. "If any=20
commissioner has changed his mind where they are=20
on the issue, the chairman is ready to go," she said.
http://www.njtelecomupdate.com/lenya/telco/live/tb-JVUK1148489411448.html

FCC'S KATRINA PANEL TO MEET JUNE 9
[SOURCE: Federal Communications Commission]
The FCC's Independent Panel Reviewing the Impact=20
of Hurricane Katrina on Communications Networks=20
will hold its final meeting on June 9, 2006 at=20
10:00 a.m. in the FCC's Commission Meeting Room=20
which is located at 445 12th Street, SW, Room=20
TW-C305, Washington, DC. The Panel will consider=20
and vote on a report that addresses the impact of=20
Hurricane Katrina on communications=20
infrastructure, including public safety=20
communications, and includes recommendations for=20
improving disaster preparedness, network=20
reliability and communications among first=20
responders. The Panel Report is due to the FCC=20
by June 15, 2006. As part of its consideration,=20
the Panel may vote on proposed amendments to the=20
Panel Report, if any. Members of the general=20
public may attend the meeting. The FCC will=20
attempt to accommodate as many people as=20
possible. Admittance, however, will be limited=20
to seating availability. Real Audio access to=20
the meeting will be available at=20
www.fcc.gov. Open captioning will be provided=20
for this event. Other reasonable accommodations=20
for people with disabilities are available upon=20
request. To request accommodations, send an=20
e-mail to fcc504( at )fcc.gov or call the Consumer &=20
Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530=20
(voice), 202-418-0432 (TTY). Include a=20
description of the accommodation you will need=20
with as much detail as possible. Also include a=20
way we can contact you if we need more=20
information. Please allow at least five days=20
advance notice; last minute requests will be=20
accepted, but may be impossible to fill. The=20
public may submit written comments before the=20
meeting to: Lisa M. Fowlkes, the FCC's Designated=20
Federal Officer for the Independent Panel, at=20
lisa.fowlkes( at )fcc.gov or by U.S. Postal Mail (Lisa=20
M. Fowlkes, Designated Federal Officer, Hurricane=20
Katrina Independent Panel, Federal Communications=20
Commission, 445 12th Street, SW, Room 7-C737, Washington DC 20554).
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1085A1.doc

QUICKLY

DNS TRANSITION
[SOURCE: National Telecommunications and Information Administration]
The United States Department of Commerce=92s=20
National Telecommunications and Information=20
Administration (NTIA) seeks comment on the=20
continuation of the transition of the technical=20
coordination and management of the Internet=20
domain name and addressing system (Internet DNS)=20
to the private sector. In June 1998, the=20
Department issued a statement of policy on the=20
privatization of the Internet DNS, which among=20
other things articulated four primary functions=20
for global Internet DNS coordination and=20
management, the need to have these functions=20
performed by the private sector and four=20
principles to guide the transition to private=20
sector management of the Internet DNS. On June=20
30, 2005, NTIA released the U.S. Principles on=20
the Internet=92s Domain Name and Addressing System=20
further elaborating on these issues. The=20
Department of Commerce seeks comment regarding=20
the progress of this transition and announces a=20
public meeting to be held on July 26, 2006, to=20
discuss issues associated with this transition.=20
Comments are due on or before July 7, 2006. The=20
public meeting will be held from 2:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. on July 26, 2006.
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/frnotices/2006/NOI_DNS_Transition_0506.htm

RURAL CELLPHONE FIRMS PINCHED
[SOURCE: USAToday, AUTHOR: Paul Davidson]
Rural cellphone carriers say their bigger=20
national competitors are squeezing them out of=20
the wireless market by charging them exorbitant=20
roaming rates or by refusing to allow them to roam at all.
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/money/20060525/ruralcell25.art.htm

GOOGLE BOLSTERS ITS WASHINGTON PRESENCE
[SOURCE: Washington Post, AUTHOR: Judy Sarasohn]
Jamie E. Brown , a special assistant to President=20
Bush for legislative affairs, will join Google=20
next month as federal relations counsel. She'll=20
be working with Alan B. Davidson , head of the=20
office, a Democrat, and previously associate=20
director of the Center for Democracy and=20
Technology, a public policy nonprofit that=20
supports access to the Internet, privacy rights and free expression.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/24/AR200605...
2447.html
(requires registration)
--------------------------------------------------------------
Communications-related Headlines is a free online=20
news summary service provided by the Benton=20
Foundation (www.benton.org). Posted Monday=20
through Friday, this service provides updates on=20
important industry developments, policy issues,=20
and other related news events. While the=20
summaries are factually accurate, their often=20
informal tone does not always represent the tone=20
of the original articles. Headlines are compiled=20
by Kevin Taglang headlines( at )benton.org -- we welcome your comments.
--------------------------------------------------------------