Benton's Communications-related Headlines for 1/31/05
New children's television rules go into effect tomorrow and there will be a=
=20
discussion about universal service on the Hill this week. For these and=20
other upcoming media policy events, see http://www.benton.org/calendar.htm
OWNERSHIP
Media Group Asks Supreme Court to Hear Ownership Case
FCC Dems Fear 'Stealth Airwaves Grab'
SBC, AT&T Boards Are Set To Vote on Merger Deal
Lee Enterprises to Buy Pulitzer Inc.
Groups Led by KKR, Comcast to Compete In Adelphia Bidding
Challenge to Laws That Shrink the Public Domain
CONTENT
Bush to Parents: 'Turn Off Indecency'
Pundit Payola: Williams, Gallagher Were Wrong, But What's Right?
Law Cautions Against Outside PR Spending -- Sort Of
Children's TV Fears a Funding Flap after =91Buster'
U.S. Students say Press Freedoms go Too Far
POLICYMAKERS/LOBBYING
Congress Proposes Tax on all Net, Data Connections
After Powell
Don't Be Fooled Again
Draft Cable Rate Rule Sent to 8th Floor
NCTA, Cities: Can You Hear Us Now?
B=92casters Ready to Storm the Hill
Will Franks Head NAB?
NCTA Taps McSlarrow
QUICKLY -- Why punish the technology?; Teens not as Web-savvy as Parents
OWNERSHIP
MEDIA GROUP ASKS SUPREME COURT TO HEAR OWNERSHIP CASE
The Tribune Company, Fox, NBC Universal and Viacom are asking the U.S.=20
Supreme Court to overturn the US Appeals Court Philadelphia's ruling that=20
blocks media companies from buying more local TV stations and newspapers.=20
The action comes after the US Solicitor General and the FCC decided not to=
=20
ask the High Court to overturn. The media groups argued that the appeals=20
court conclusion that spectrum scarcity justifies rational-basis review of=
=20
broadcast ownership restrictions directly conflicts with two decades of=20
decisions by the U.S. Appeals Court Washington, DC. They argue, =93This case=
=20
falls within each of the three circumstances that this court has already=20
indicated would separately justify reconsideration of the spectrum scarcity=
=20
rationale=94: 1) the FCC acknowledges that the prior cross-ownership rule=
and=20
local ownership restrictions perpetuated by the appeal court=92s decision=20
inhibits rather than increases diversity of viewpoints; 2) the FCC=92s order=
=20
confirms that broadcast channels are no longer uniquely important sources=20
of information; and 3) actions of Congress and the FCC =93signal=94 that=20
industry conditions have changed sufficiently to justify
reconsideration of whether broadcast speech deserves lesser First Amendment=
=20
protection. The broadcasters also questioned whether speech restrictions=20
can apply to newspaper owners that are limited in controlling broadcast=20
stations. =93Other courts of appeals have determined that ownership=20
regulations directed to particular industries and affecting speech require=
=20
heightened scrutiny,=94 the group said.
The Institute for Public Representation (IPR) at the Georgetown University=
=20
Law Center said if the Supreme Court overturns the appeals court decision=20
and adopts a more restrictive standard, the interpretation of the=20
Communications Act regulating telecom would be jeopardized. In an ex parte=
=20
filing at the FCC, IPR said the Supreme
Court taking on the FCC=92s case would put many =93important issues at risk=
=94=20
such as regulation of DTV, indecency and children=92s programming. That=92s=
one=20
reason the FCC decided not to appeal, an industry source said. It=92s not=20
known when the Supreme Court will decide whether to hear the media groups=92=
=20
case.
[SOURCE: Communications Daily, AUTHOR: Tania Panczyk-Collins]
(Not available online)
Also in --
WSJ:=20
http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB110712975573340603,00.html?mod=3Dtoda...
s_page_one
FCC DEMS FEAR 'STEALTH AIRWAVES GRAB'
FCC Commissioners Jonathan Adelstein and Michael Copps hailed the decision=
=20
by the Solicitor General=92s office not to appeal the court-ordered rewrite=
=20
of deregulatory FCC ownership rules, but warned against an industry=20
flanking maneuver. "I think there are companies out there who want to game=
=20
the process by having the Commission write quick rules,=94 Copps said. =93On=
e=20
by one and under the radar scope, and accomplish piecemeal what they=20
couldn't get whole. The American people are not served by a stealth=20
airwaves grab.=94
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA500095?display=3DBreaking+New...
ferral=3DSUPP
(free access for Benton's Headlines subscribers)
SBC, AT&T BOARDS ARE SET TO VOTE ON MERGER DEAL
On Sunday afternoon, the Wall Street Journal reported that the rumor was=20
becoming a reality: SBC had agreed in principle to purchase AT&T for=20
roughly $16 billion in shares and cash. The move still has to be approved=20
by the boards of directors from both companies and votes were scheduled=20
Sunday. In addition to board approval, the move will be subject to=20
regulatory approval. The deal, if completed, would mark the creation of the=
=20
largest U.S. telecom carrier with a leading presence in wireless as well as=
=20
corporate telecom services.
[SOURCE: Wall Street Journal, AUTHOR: Almar Latour almar.latour( at )wsj.com and=
=20
Shawn Young shawn.young( at )wsj.com ]
http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB110711095360640355,00.html
On Monday morning, WSJ reports deal is approved by boards.
http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB110711095360640355,00.html?mod=3Dtoda...
s_page_one
(requires subscription)
A big deal facing tough regulatory scrutiny -- is it worth it? Business=20
Week finds a number of analysts that say "No."
[SOURCE: BusinessWeek, AUTHOR: Steve Rosenbush; Catherine Yang]
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/jan2005/tc20050127_6124_t...
.htm
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/jan2005/tc20050128_2548_t...
.htm
WashPost:=
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A50006-2005Jan30.html
=
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/business/daily/graphics/att_013105....
l
(AT&T timeline)
NYTimes: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/31/business/31phone.html
USAToday:=
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/money/20050131/1b_sbc31.art.htm
LATimes:=20
http://www.latimes.com/business/printedition/la-fi-sbc31jan31,1,1235106....
y?coll=3Dla-headlines-pe-business
LEE ENTERPRISES TO BUY PULITZER INC
Midwest newspaper publisher Lee Enterprises Inc. is buying Pulitzer for=20
about $1.4 billion in cash, in a deal that would make it the country's=20
fourth-largest owner of daily newspapers. The purchase would increase Lee's=
=20
holdings to 58 daily papers in 23 states and raise its total daily=20
circulation to 1.7 million.
[SOURCE: Los Angeles Times, AUTHOR: Reuters]
http://www.latimes.com/business/printedition/la-fi-pulitzer31jan31,1,659...
.story?coll=3Dla-headlines-pe-business
(requires registration)
GROUPS LED BY KKR, COMCAST TO COMPETE IN ADELPHIA BIDDING
More than 10 bids are expected today in the sale of Adelphia=20
Communications, the nation's fifth-largest cable operator. Industry leaders=
=20
Comcast and Time Warner are combining for a bid for the entire company=20
while groups of small cable companies, teamed with private-equity firms,=20
are expected to bid on one or more of the seven clusters of cable systems=20
that Adelphia has created to encourage more active bidding. Adelphia is=20
estimated to be worth $15-19 billion and is not likely to accept a sale=20
unless bids reach at least $17.5 billion. The company is currently=20
operating under Chapter 11 bankruptcy-court protection.
[SOURCE: Wall Street Journal, AUTHOR: Peter Grant peter.grant( at )wsj.com &=20
Dennis K. Berman dennis.berman( at )wsj.com ]
http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB110713079317040628,00.html?mod=3Dtoda...
s_money_and_investing
(requires subscription)
CHALLENGES TO LAWS THAT SHRINK THE PUBLIC DOMAIN
The Brennan Center for Justice, the American Civil Liberties Union of=20
Northern California, and the nonprofit advocacy groups Public Knowledge,=20
the Center for the Public Domain, and the First Amendment Project filed an=
=20
amicus brief today in Kahle v. Ashcroft, arguing that Congress=92s=20
elimination of copyright renewal requirements in 1992 created serious First=
=20
Amendment problems by radically shrinking the public=92s access to works=
that=20
belong in the public domain.
[SOURCE: Brennan Center for Justice Press Release]
http://www.brennancenter.org/presscenter/releases_2005/pressrelease_2005...
8.html
See the full brief:
http://www.fepproject.org/courtbriefs/kahle.pdf
CONTENT
BUSH TO PARENTS: 'TURN OFF INDECENCY'
Free speech advocate President George Bush said that parents, not=20
government, are the "first line of responsibility when it comes to=20
protecting children from indecent TV programming. Parents should turn off=20
the TV, he said, when they see content that is not appropriate for their=20
kids. The government, can, he said, "at times, not censor, but call to=20
account programming that gets over the line." The President said that when=
=20
he interviews a new FCC Chairman, he will ask where he thinks that line is,=
=20
but later clarified that that was not a litmus test.
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: Bill McConnell & John Eggerton]
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA499783?display=3DBreaking+New...
ferral=3DSUPP
(free access for Benton's Headlines subscribers)
See also --
Multichannel News:=20
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA499977.html?display=3DBreaking+New...
ferral=3DSUPP
More on indecency legislation from LATimes:
http://www.latimes.com/business/printedition/la-fi-fcc31jan31,1,1305231....
y?coll=3Dla-headlines-pe-business
PUNDIT PAYOLA: WILLIAMS, GALLAGHER WERE WRONG, BUT WHAT'S RIGHT?
Most columnists agree that receiving money for supporting an Administration=
=20
point of view is wrong, but they seem fine with accepting fees to talk to=20
trade groups, issue-oriented organizations, and at universities -- and they=
=20
defended that practice. The amounts of money paid for these speeches can be=
=20
staggering and should spark questions of how influential outside fees can=20
be on columnists who can make up to $800,000/yr in "extra" income for these=
=20
speeches.
[SOURCE: Editor & Publisher, AUTHOR: Joe Strupp=
jstrupp( at )editorandpublisher.com]
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_con...
_id=3D1000779048
LAW CAUTIONS AGAINST OUTSIDE PR SPENDING -- SORT OF
"Appropriated funds may not be used to pay a publicity expert unless=20
specifically appropriated for that purpose," states a provision in the U.S.=
=20
Code. Well, there you have it, right? According to this 1913 law, you can't=
=20
hire PR firms to promote proposed laws. Perhaps, but the General=20
Accountability Office, which publishes a four-volume guide to=20
appropriations laws like this, has no enforcement power. Congress or the=20
administration imposes sanctions. The intent of that provision, according=20
to the GAO manual, is to prevent the use of publicity experts to bring=20
acclaim to an agency activity or to officials, rather than to advance the=20
real work of the agency. The law acknowledges, however, that "the effective=
=20
implementation of the duties of some agencies requires the acquisition and=
=20
dissemination of information." Indeed, over the past four years, agencies=20
have spent at least $254 million on 286 contracts with major PR agencies,=20
according to a recent analysis of federal contracting data by the=20
Democratic staff of the House Committee on Government Reform. Agencies=20
spent $88 million on such contracts in 2004, up from $39 million in 2000,=20
the last year of the Clinton administration.
[SOURCE: Washington Post, AUTHOR: Christopher Lee]
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A49757-2005Jan30.html
(requires registration)
More on paying for pundits --
USAToday:=
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20050131/a_capcol31.art.htm
CHILDREN'S TV FEARS A FUNDING FLAP AFTER 'BUSTER'
Education Secretary Margaret Spellings is sworn in today in Washington, but=
=20
she's already delivered a chilling message to the makers of children's TV.=
=20
In a letter to PBS last week, Spellings told PBS she had =93very serious=20
concerns=94 about an episode in which a little girl in Vermont introduces=20
cartoon bunny Buster Baxter to her mother and her mother's lesbian partner.=
=20
Spellings suggested that funding for future programming could be in=20
jeopardy. The episode was pulled, PBS says, before the letter was received.=
=20
But WGBH's vice president for children's programming, Brigid Sullivan,=20
believes the episode complies with the program's mission. The series, she=20
says, is a =93direct response to a request=94 from the Ready to Learn=
program,=20
which is administered by PBS on behalf of the Department of Education, for=
=20
a show about =93diversity and tolerance in modern America for school-age=20
children.=94 In the 40 Buster episodes that were made, families have=
included=20
Muslims, Orthodox Jews, Mormons and evangelical Christians. =93The show is=
=20
about children,=94 Sullivan says. =93It's not about their parents. It's=
about=20
letting children validate children as children, regardless of the family=20
they live in.=94
[SOURCE: USAToday, AUTHOR: Ann Oldenburg]
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/life/20050131/d_bottomstrip31.art.htm
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/life/20050131/d_pbsinside31.art.htm=20
(more on homosexuality and kids TV)
US STUDENTS SAY PRESS FREEDOMS GO TOO FAR
One in three U.S. high school students say the press ought to be more=20
restricted, and even more say the government should approve newspaper=20
stories before readers see them, according to a survey to be released today=
=20
by the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation. The survey =93confirms what a=
=20
lot of people who are interested in this area have known for a long time,=94=
=20
he says: Kids aren't learning enough about the First Amendment in history,=
=20
civics or English classes. It also tracks closely with recent findings of=20
adults' attitudes.
[SOURCE: USAToday, AUTHOR: Greg Toppo]
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/life/20050131/bl_bottomstrip31.art0...
POLICYMAKERS/LOBBYING
CONGRESS PROPOSES TAX ON ALL NET, DATA CONNECTIONS
The Joint Committee on Taxation released a report last week that included a=
=20
suggestion to modify the an existing 3% telecommunications tax to cover=20
"all data communications services to end users," including broadband;=20
dial-up; fiber; cable modems; cellular; and DSL, or digital subscriber=20
line, links. Currently, the excise tax applies only to traditional=20
telephone service. But because of technological convergence and the=20
dropping popularity of landlines, the Congressional committee concluded in=
=20
its review of tax law reforms that it might make sense to extend the=20
100-year old levy to new technologies. The committee did not take a=20
position on whether Congress should approve such an extension and simply=20
listed it as an "option." It lists three different telecommunications tax=20
options, one of which would cover all data communications. A second choice=
=20
would extend the excise tax to cell phones and perhaps VoIP. The third=20
would clearly levy the charge on VoIP, including Internet-only phone calls=
=20
using services that do not touch the public telephone network. James Maule,=
=20
who teaches tax law at Villanova University, said the more extreme taxation=
=20
option may be a way for committee members to make the others "look a bit=20
more palatable. There's some psychology going on." "The odds of something=20
happening in 2005 that amends the tax law is extremely high," Maule said,=20
referring to President Bush's promise to revise the tax code. "I suspect=20
that (one of these options) is going to be tacked on."
[SOURCE: C-Net|News.com, AUTHOR: Declan McCullagh]
http://news.com.com/Congress+proposes+tax+on+all+Net%2C+data+connections...
0-1028_3-5555385.html?tag=3Dnefd.top
See the committee report at http://www.house.gov/jct/s-2-05.pdf
AFTER POWELL
Although he generally sides with broadcasters on decisions that affect=20
their business, FCC Commissioner Kevin Martin, the agreed-upon front-runner=
=20
to succeed current Chairman Michael Powell, may prove to be even tougher on=
=20
tougher on prime time TV sex and violence. If anything, Commissioner Martin=
=20
has expressed that the FCC did not go far enough in the last year to=20
discourage stations from airing shows inappropriate for kids. He would use=
=20
the agency=92s pulpit to persuade broadcasters to voluntarily dedicate an=20
hour of prime time each night to family-friendly programming. Martin also=20
wants the FCC to give TV affiliates the right to reject any network shows=20
they deem inappropriate for their viewers.
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: Bill McConnell]
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA499967.html?display=3DNews&re...
al=3DSUPP
(free access for Benton's Headlines subscribers)
See also --
BusinessWeek:=20
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_06/b3919055_mz011.htm
DON'T BE FOOLED AGAIN
[Commenary] In an age when our economy, our schools and our health care=20
system =AD indeed our national security =AD have become so dependent upon=
our=20
national communications infrastructure and the rules that guide its=20
operation, few new federal appointments will be as important as the Federal=
=20
Communications Commission Chairman. Lloyd suggests that the American public=
=20
deserves better than departing Chairman Michael Powell. The Senate must=20
take seriously its responsibility to review and consider the next=20
appointment, and make certain that the public interest it is not ignored=20
again. We need a true public servant at the FCC, someone with heart and=20
head enough to provide all Americans with an information infrastructure=20
that serves them as citizens and as consumers.
[SOURCE: Center for American Progress, AUTHOR: Mark Lloyd]
http://www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.asp?c=3DbiJRJ8OVF&b=3D307119
DRAFT CABLE RATE RULE SENT TO 8TH FLOOR
Cable operators would like the FCC to make a determination that when direct=
=20
broadcast satellite (DBS) penetration exceeds the 15% threshold, =93effectiv=
e=20
competition=94 exists and cable operators should qualify for exemptions from=
=20
local rate regulation. Local governments vigorously oppose such a move,=20
contending that freeing cable operators from rate regulation would harm=20
consumers. Local municipalities still regulate rates for basic (not=20
expanded basic) cable services. Apparently a draft order on the issue is=20
circulating among the five FCC commissioners and a decision could come=20
before Chairman Powell's departure (at least, that's what the cable=20
industry is hoping). There are a number of states in which the 15%=20
threshold has already been reached. However, a new FCC study raises=20
questions about DBS as an effective competitive factor for cable because of=
=20
the =93substantial switching costs to move from cable to DBS services.=94=
The=20
study, which comes on the heels of the anticipated
release of the FCC=92s competition in video report, says consumers view DBS=
=20
as a substitute for cable for higher-quality premium services and when=20
facing large increases for basic services. But when prices are lowered,=20
consumers don't opt for satellite because of the long-term contracts for=20
DBS service that increase the cost of
switching service.
[SOURCE: Communications Daily, AUTHOR: Anne Veigle]
(Not available online)
NCTA, CITIES: CAN YOU HEAR US NOW?
The cable industry is reaching out to local governments to test whether=20
they can forge an alliance to block Verizon Communications from entering=20
the cable business under liberalized state laws designed to accommodate the=
=20
phone giant=92s broadband-deployment plans. Cable=92s relationship with=
cities=20
and towns has never been easy, and it probably reached its nadir three=20
years ago, when cable backed the Federal Communications Commission=92s=20
decision to deny local governments about $500 million in annual cable-modem=
=20
fees. But in the policy world, no one is your friend or enemy forever. So=20
discussions began a few weeks ago at National Cable & Telecommunications=20
Association headquarters in Washington (DC) and included representatives=20
from the National League of Cities, the National Association of Counties=20
and the U.S. Conference of Mayors.
[SOURCE: Multichannel News, AUTHOR: Ted Hearn]
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA499936.html?display=3DBreaking+New...
ferral=3DSUPP
(free access for Benton's Headlines subscribers)
B'CASTERS READY TO STORM THE HILL
Capitol Broadcasting Company in Raleigh (NC) plans to take the fight for=20
"multicast must-carry" to Capitol Hill. On Feb. 10, the FCC is planning to=
=20
vote on a proposal that would ban TV stations from demanding cable carriage=
=20
of more than one digital-TV programming service. Insiders say Chairman=20
Powell has the three votes needed to pass the ban. Broadcasters argued that=
=20
multicasting is an ideal way for local TV stations to expand=20
local-programming options. But those new services are not viable=20
financially unless cable operators are forced to carry them. Capitol=92s=20
Raleigh CBS affiliate, WRAL, provides HDTV programming and a separate=20
digital news channel. Time Warner Cable carries both services in the=20
market. =93The question is: In a world where 85% of our viewers are=20
multichannel subscribers, could we afford to program the WRAL NewsChannel=20
without cable carriage? The answer is no,=94 Smith told the FCC. Smith said=
=20
that without multicast must-carry, small, independent TV stations could not=
=20
negotiate cable carriage of multiple services, but stations owned by ABC,=20
NBC, CBS and Fox have the market clout to do so. Whether the independently=
=20
owned affiliates of the =93Big Four=94 could bargain for multiple carriage=
=93is=20
a toss-up,=94 Smith said. She argued that the independent affiliates would=
=20
likely have to partner with the Big Four networks to force carriage=20
concessions from cable, but such a result was undesirable =93because one=20
thing all affiliates fear is ceding more power to the networks to control=20
our programming.=94
[SOURCE: Multichannel News, AUTHOR: Ted Hearn]
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA499960.html?display=3DBreaking+New...
ferral=3DSUPP
(free access for Benton's Headlines subscribers)
WILL FRANKS HEAD NAB?
Insiders expect National Association of Broadcasters President Eddie Fritts=
=20
to announce that he plans to resign during the organization's annual=20
convention this April in Las Vegas. Fritts, 63, has told confidants he no=20
longer wants to contend with divisions between the group's TV and radio=20
membership. Lobbyists for several TV-station groups say the leading=20
candidate to succeed him is CBS Executive Vice President Martin Franks, a=20
Washington veteran who currently heads the network's digital-TV operations,=
=20
programming standards and practices, and other special projects for parent=
=20
company Viacom. Franks' current duties keep him on top of the most critical=
=20
and politically controversial issues that broadcasters grapple with,=20
including the switch to digital TV and the FCC's indecency crackdown.
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: Bill McConnell]
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA499965.html?display=3DNews&re...
al=3DSUPP
(free access for Benton's Headlines subscribers)
NCTA TAPS MCSLARROW
On March 1, senior Energy Department official Kyle McSlarrow will become=20
president of the National Cable & Telecommunications Association (NCTA).=20
McSlarrow, who resigned from his former post two weeks ago, served as chief=
=20
of staff to the late Sen. Paul Coverdell and as deputy chief of staff and=20
chief counsel to former Senate Majority Leaders Bob Dole and Trent Lott. He=
=20
was mainly picked for his Republican ties to Congress and the White House;=
=20
he has no experience in cable issues.
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: Bill McConnell]
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA499968?display=3DNews&referra...
SUPP
(free access for Benton's Headlines subscribers)
See NCTA Press Release:=20
http://www.ncta.com/press/press.cfm?PRid=3D571&showArticles=3Dok
QUICKLY
WHY PUNISH TECHNOLOGY?
[Commentary] Ever since Napster got closed down, the content industry's=20
strategy for dealing with the peer-to-peer challenge can be summed up in=20
three words: Sue the bastards. Everyone of sane mind can agree there's a=20
need to address digital piracy. But how about trying something more nuanced=
=20
than a sledgehammer approach?
[SOURCE: C-Net|News.com, AUTHOR: Charles Cooper]
http://news.com.com/Why+punish+the+technology/2010-1071_3-5553805.html?tag=
=3Dnefd.ac
STUDY SHOWS SOME TEENS NOT AS WEB-SAVVY AS PARENTS
A study by the Nielsen Norman Group found that, contrary to stereotype,=20
teens as a group are not as adept as adults in navigating the Web.=20
Additional findings in the study: 1) Some Web site features tend to turn=20
off teens: complex or incomplete content, long downloading times and=20
confusing navigation. 2) Teens tolerate ads more than adults, though=20
overkill is a risk. 3) Teens tend to be apprehensive about downloading=20
plug-ins and clicking on unknown links. The main reason: They fear viruses.=
=20
4) The word =93kid=94 is a teen-repellent.
[SOURCE: USAToday, AUTHOR: Edward C. Baig]
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/money/20050131/1b_teens31.art.htm
--------------------------------------------------------------
Communications-related Headlines is a free online news summary service=20
provided by the Benton Foundation (www.benton.org). Posted Monday through=20
Friday, this service provides updates on important industry developments,=20
policy issues, and other related news events. While the summaries are=20
factually accurate, their often informal tone does not always represent the=
=20
tone of the original articles. Headlines are compiled by Kevin Taglang=20
(headlines( at )benton.org) -- we welcome your comments.
--------------------------------------------------------------