January 2006

ar!)
For upcoming media policy events, see http://www.benton.org

2005 IN REVIEW -- AND A LOOK AHEAD AT 2006
Blame It on The Weather
FCC Indecency Actions a No-Show
Taking Stock of the Year Ahead
2006 Media Forecast

DIGITAL TV TRANSITION
DTV Bill: Cable Can't Downconvert
Subsidizing the Digital Television Transition
Fee Would Make Digital Shift Less Taxing
HDTV Stars Finally Aligned

MORE ON FUTURE OF TV/VIDEO
The New Deal
Watching the Web on TV
Viewers Should be able to Pick Channels they Pay For
As 30-Second Spot Fades, What Advertisers Will Do Next

QUICKLY -- Schools ask parents to pay up before kids log on; Relocating=20
Federal Spectrum Operations; China ratchets up control on expression; Web=
=20
services thrive, but outages outrage users; Men want facts, women seek=20
relations on Web; The Failures of Post-9/11 Media

2005 IN REVIEW -- AND A LOOK AHEAD AT 2006

BLAME IT ON THE WEATHER
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
After almost two years of breast-beating, hearings and legislative=20
proposals, 2005 passed without any bill boosting FCC indecency fines,=20
without much hope of resolution of the issue of regulating cable content,=
=20
and no proposed indecency fines issued out of the FCC. The year ended with=
=20
minimal progress on a rewrite of the 1996 Telecommunications Act, and an=20
FCC that is still at least one commissioner and maybe two short of full=20
strength. New Commissioner Deborah Tate had been confirmed but not sworn=20
in, while the White House had not submitted a nominee for another open=20
seat. The FCC also has yet to take another shot at crafting new media=20
ownership rules that will pass court muster. Why all the unfinished work?=
=20
In part, policymakers can blame it on the weather: Gulf Coast hurricanes=20
are to blame for pushing back some legislative and regulatory timetables,=
=20
but political divisions over indecency and the digital transition also=20
contributed to delays.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6295754?display=3DNews&referral=
=3DSUPP
(free access for Benton's Headlines subscribers)
* Don't let Congress fool you with deficit =91reduction' bill
[SOURCE: USAToday, AUTHOR: Editorial Staff]
[Commentary] In this year it would be nice to see in Washington a new=20
commitment to fiscal restraint and a resolve to bequeath a solvent=20
government and robust economy to future generations. Among the shortcomings=
=20
in budget legislation waiting final approval from the House are dubious=20
assumptions. Much of this measure's deficit reduction would come not from=
=20
spending cuts but from accounting gimmicks. About $10 billion would come=20
from auctioning the frequencies used for analog television broadcasts=20
slated to end in 2009. Congress has tried this, but the broadcaster lobby=
=20
has repeatedly put off auction dates. Bottom line: Don't count on this=20
money until the checks are cashed.
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20060103/edit02.art.htm

FCC INDECENCY ACTIONS A NO-SHOW
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable 12/30, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
For the first time since 1993, the FCC did not propose any indecency fines=
=20
in 2005. That's a sharp contrast to the $7,928,080 in fines proposed in=20
2004 -- and the attention the issue received from federal policymakers. One=
=20
reason that no actions were taken earlier in the year is that a lot of the=
=20
complaints went away. A number of major media companies--including Viacom,=
=20
Clear Channel, and Emmis Communications--had already settled a host of both=
=20
proposed fines and outstanding complaints through consent decrees with both=
=20
dollars and pledges to crack down on content the FCC doesn't like. Still,=
=20
189,362 complaints were filed in 2005, more than in any year except 2004,=
=20
when the Super Bowl pushed that number to over a million. And the 2005=20
complaints were against 720 broadcast and cable programs, according to the=
=20
FCC's last published count, which is more than twice the number of shows=20
complained about in 2004.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6295524.html?display=3DBreaki...
News&referral=3DSUPP
(free access for Benton's Headlines subscribers)

TAKING STOCK OF THE YEAR AHEAD
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John M. Higgins]
B&C tracks 69 media stocks and the 2005 results were not very good: the=20
index of TV-station owners dropped 20%, even worse than the 17% slide=20
during 2004. Cable operators slid 18% and radio stations dropped 9.1%.=20
Universal McCann advertising forecaster Bob Coen believes spending on all=
=20
media increased by a fairly healthy 4.6% last year. The good news is that=
=20
overall spending should jump another 5.8% next year. But that may not help=
=20
everyone in TV and radio. Except for politicians, Coen sees advertisers=20
favoring national TV -- cable and broadcast networks -- more than local=20
stations. And cable systems, networks and entertainment giants, which don't=
=20
live on advertising alone, say they need a broad increase in consumer=20
spending on subscriptions, DVDs and other entertainment to thrive. Here are=
=20
some lessons from the stock market to carry forward this year: 1) cable=20
operators face a big opportunity in stealing telephone subscribers from the=
=20
Baby Bells, but they also face a huge challenge as the bells introduce=20
video services. 2) Broadcasters' stocks may face another tough year. 3)=20
Howard Stern alone cannot save satellite radio.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6295751?display=3DNews&referral=
=3DSUPP
(free access for Benton's Headlines subscribers)

2006 MEDIA FORECAST
[SOURCE: MediaWeek]
1) Broadcast TV: broadcast executives believe the average $24=20
cost-per-thousand for a 30-second prime-time spot is still an economical=20
way for most advertisers to get the immediate mass reach, or even targeted=
=20
reach, they need to remain competitive. But network sales executives do=20
realize that they cannot remain complacent and continue to count solely on=
=20
30-second spots to bring in all of their revenue. They also realize that=20
product placement may be reaching a saturation point. 2) Cable TV: Perhaps=
=20
the biggest issue facing cable in =9206 is the =E0 la carte issue, which wa=
s=20
brought back wriggling into the light in November when FCC Chairman Kevin=
=20
Martin said that he considered backing such a pricing plan. 3) Interactive=
=20
media: As marketers continue to shift spending from traditional to digital=
=20
media, experts expect spending to surge between 20 percent and 30 percent=
=20
this year. And while emerging segments like videogames, mobile and blogs=20
will all receive their share of attention, three areas in particular should=
=20
enjoy hefty spikes in spending: search, video and behavioral targeting.
http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/index.jsp
Broadcast TV:=20
(http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/recent_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=3D10017=
72509)
Cable TV:=20
http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/recent_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=3D100...
2511
Interactive Media:=20
http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/recent_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=3D100...
2508
TV production:=20
http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/recent_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=3D100...
2510
Magazines:=20
http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/recent_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=3D100...
2507

DIGITAL TV TRANSITION

DTV BILL: CABLE CAN'T DOWNCONVERT
[SOURCE: Multichannel News 12/29, AUTHOR: Ted Hearn]
The Budget legislation agreed to by the Senate and House late last year=20
removed language from the House version of digital television transition=20
provisions that would have allowed cable operators to "downconvert" digital=
=20
TV signals into analog. The change might force millions of subscribers to=
=20
lease set-top boxes in order to maintain their ability to watch local=20
broadcast stations via cable. National Cable & Telecommunications=20
Association president Kyle McSlarrow told Congress cable wanted the right=
=20
to downconvert digital-TV must-carry stations at the headend in order to=20
avoid the cost and inconvenience of deploying millions of set-top boxes.=20
But the National Association of Broadcasters=92 position, which seems to ha=
ve=20
won the day, is that degradation of digital-TV signals should be done by=20
the consumer, not the cable company. By the end of 2006, Comcast Corp. and=
=20
Time Warner Cable plan to offer all customers a digital simulcast of their=
=20
analog channels, allowing analog consumers to transition to digital-TV sets=
=20
and set-tops at their own pace. Under the digital-TV legislation, in 2009,=
=20
Comcast and Time Warner could not offer digital-TV must-carry stations in=
=20
analog. The two major direct-broadcast satellite carriers -- DirecTV Inc.=
=20
and EchoStar Communications Corp.=92s Dish Network -- also had digital-TV=
=20
signal-carriage flexibility removed from the bill.
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6295306.html?display=3DBreaking+News
(requires subscription)

SUBSIDIZING THE DIGITAL TELEVISION TRANSITION
[SOURCE: Center for American Progress, AUTHOR: Mark Lloyd]
[Commentary] Why is George Will concerned about the transition to digital=
=20
television? Will is apparently outraged at the loss of rugged individualism=
=20
that he claims has led the GOP to declare TV a =93collective right.=94 Lloy=
d is=20
more concerned that Congress could cut funds for food stamps and school=20
loans but provide subsidies for television viewers regardless of income. It=
=20
might surprise Will to know that James Madison, George Washington, and=20
Benjamin Franklin, among others, actually formulated a philosophy of=20
government subsidies to encourage communications. While the Founding=20
Fathers were generally united against a standing army or entanglement in=20
foreign disputes, they built a vast and robust communications system, the=
=20
Post, under the control of government. And they subsidized the carriage of=
=20
newspapers even to the territories. But then the Founding Fathers were=20
subsidizing a republic of engaged, communicating citizens, not a society of=
=20
individual consumers. Perhaps Congress might reconsider a set of policies=
=20
that does not respond only to the influential and wealthy voices of the=20
various segments of the communications industry, but actually considers=20
what would best develop a republic of engaged citizens.
http://www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.asp?c=3DbiJRJ8OVF&b=3D1314449
* The Inalienable Right to a Remote
[Commentary] George Will's inspiring column from 12/08/05.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/07/AR200512...
1891_pf.html

FEE WOULD MAKE DIGITAL SHIFT LESS TAXING
[SOURCE: Multichannel News, AUTHOR: Tom Steinert-Threlkeld]
[Commentary] February 2009 marks he end of analog TV in the US; TV=20
households have three options: 1) own a digital TV set, 2) purchase=20
converter boxes enabling their old sets to receive digital signals, or 3)=
=20
subscribe to cable or satellite TV service. In that last case, the set-top=
=20
box will act as their converter. That=92s a lot of potential hookups for pa=
y=20
TV providers. If DirecTV somehow managed to sign up all these over-the-air=
=20
households, it would essentially double its customer base. But the ~15% of=
=20
households that don't subscribe to TV services now probably won't or can't=
=20
start paying $50/month for TV starting in 2009. For these households,=20
Congress is setting aside $1.5 billion to subsidize their purchase of=20
digital-to-analog converters so that their current TVs continue to work.=20
But that's not as much as will be needed to convert all over-the-air=20
households. If those purchasing the spectrum aren't even indirectly going=
=20
to underwrite the full cost of the conversion, who should? ABC, NBC, CBS,=
=20
and Fox? It=92s their viewers that would go dark. But don't count on it. At=
=20
least until the government money gives out. What then? Try the=20
manufacturers. They=92re getting a real bonanza: A federally mandated=20
conversion to digital equipment, with a hard deadline. So, here=92s a=20
private-industry solution, borrowing conceptually from the way governments=
=20
bring in revenue. Tax digital-TV sets to pay for converter boxes for the=20
dispossessed. A 3.5% fee on new digital TV sets could raise another $3=20
billion for converter box subsidies. =93The idea has a lot of merit," said=
=20
policy analyst Kenneth DeGraff of Consumers Union. =93That solves the probl=
em=20
going down the road. That=92s it."
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6295515.html?display=3DOpinion
(requires subscription)

HDTV STARS FINALLY ALIGNED
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: P.J. Bednarski and Anne Becker]
High-definition digital television (HDTV) has been around for years, but=20
until recently, there hasn't been a lot to watch, or many sets in use. Now,=
=20
however, the HD menu is fairly extensive, and growing. With 12 million=20
HDTVs now in U.S. homes, and bullish predictions for the future as prices=
=20
fall, it looks like HDTV has finally arrived. The drivers for consumers=20
seem to sports and music programming.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6295761?display=3DSpecial+Rep...
&referral=3DSUPP
(free access for Benton's Headlines subscribers)

MORE ON FUTURE OF TV/VIDEO

THE NEW DEAL
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: Ben Grossman]
Last year, the TV industry discovered a variety of new ways to deliver=20
their shows - on iPods, on video phones, even online. This year, they vow=
=20
to figure out how to make money off of them. Programmers thrive when new=20
distribution pipes open, but some TV executives cutting the deals say they=
=20
are making it up as they go along. While it is still unclear whether=20
consumers will pay to watch TV on a small screen, executives are already=20
struggling to construct the proper template to make big profits if they do.=
=20
With each new announcement, many say privately they fear being left behind.=
=20
When Apple and ABC set the market by announcing their $1.99-per-download=20
deal last October, it set off a flurry of number crunching, as broadcast=20
networks and studios tried to come up with the right set of rules to make=
=20
money. Now dealmakers are desperately trying to value everything from=20
cellphone clips of 24 to old episodes of Adam 12. Some of these executives=
=20
still quietly maintain that last year's announcements amount to little more=
=20
than hype. TV executives say that, in the coming year, several business=20
trends will emerge as guides for these new deals: 1) There's not much=20
revenue yet from selling TV content to small screen (cell phone, portable=
=20
media players) consumers. 2) The ability for consumers to buy on-demand,=20
download and own both new and classic television shows could signal a=20
challenge ahead for the red-hot TV-on-DVD market. 3) More hits will be=20
available as copyright issues are settled. 4) As technology evolves ever=20
more rapidly, one of the biggest challenges for TV programmers will be=20
getting different divisions of the company on the same page.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6295747?display=3DFeature&ref...
al=3DSUPP
(free access for Benton's Headlines subscribers)

WATCHING THE WEB ON TV
[SOURCE: Wall Street Journal, AUTHOR: Peter Grant peter.grant( at )wsj.com and=
=20
Don Clark]
As the Consumer Electronics Show begins in Las Vegas this week, the buzz is=
=20
about Internet-delivered video services. The past year has seen an=20
explosion of video content on the Internet as major entertainment companies=
=20
have begun making thousands of hours of sports, music videos, movies, news=
=20
and other programs available on the Web. While cable and satellite TV=20
services offer hundreds of channels and up to thousands of video-on-demand=
=20
choices, the amount of content available on the Web is virtually limitless.=
=20
For consumers, this could mean instant access to hard-to-find content, such=
=20
as films in foreign languages and old TV shows, as well as on-demand=20
episodes of prime-time fare that networks like NBC have started to make=20
available. Starz is set to announce today an Internet-based movie=20
subscription service that will offer users unlimited access to more than=20
1,000 movies and other programs for $9.99 a month. While cable companies=20
now make billions by selling high-speed Internet connections, TV on the Web=
=20
could threaten their traditional role as middlemen between viewers and=20
programmers. They haven't rushed to offer set-top boxes, for example, that=
=20
combine their conventional menu of scheduled programming with access to the=
=20
broader Internet. Leading the Internet TV charge, rather, are=20
computer-industry players like Microsoft, Cisco and Intel, which have long=
=20
been trying to muscle into the living room. To be sure, it will be a long=
=20
time before viewers can sit on their couches and easily watch any piece of=
=20
Internet video on their TVs. Some service providers plan to follow the lead=
=20
of cable and satellite operators, cutting deals with content owners to=20
offer only a selection of Web-based programs rather than opening up the TV=
=20
to the Internet. "What you are going to see in the near future is just=20
another walled garden," predicts Saul Berman, a global partner in IBM's=20
media-and-entertainment consulting business. "It's not true Internet TV."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB113626174309436225.html?mod=3Dtodays_us_...
ketplace
(requires subscription)
* DISNEY APPLIES ESPN MODEL TO BROADBAND STRATEGY
[SOURCE: Reuters, AUTHOR: Gina Keating]
For years ESPN has thrived as one of the most lucrative franchises on cable=
=20
TV, commanding high license fees for the loyal viewers who expect to see=20
the sports network in their basic subscription packages. In addition to its=
=20
splashy deal to provide existing TV shows for Apple's online iTunes store,=
=20
Disney has been quietly striking deals with Internet service providers to=
=20
deliver new programing as part of a basic broadband package.
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=3DinternetNews&storyID=
=3D2005-12-31T032346Z_01_FOR103089_RTRUKOC_0_US-DISNEY.xml
* Provider of TV Movie Channels Looks to Expand to PC's and Video Players
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/03/business/media/03starz.html
(requires registration)
* Portable video expected to take center stage
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/money/20060103/1b_video03.art.htm

VIEWERS SHOULD BE ABLE TO PICK CHANNELS THEY PAY FOR
[SOURCE: San Jose Mercury News, AUTHOR: Editorial Staff]
[Commentary] Last month, newspaper business pages reported what they've=20
been reporting almost every December: Cable television prices are set to go=
=20
up again this year at a rate that outpaces inflation. Add the fact that=20
consumers are forced to sign up for large blocks of channels, many of which=
=20
they'll never watch, and you can see why cable TV subscribers may be=20
feeling grumpy. It's not surprising then that the idea of forcing cable=20
companies. Telephone companies and Internet services are poised to start=20
competing with cable TV's quasi-monopoly with new options such as a la=20
carte menus, video on demand and pay-per-download offers. But unless=20
networks are willing to break up their blocks of channels, the newcomers=20
may be unable to experiment with new models. That would be a shame. After=
=20
all, the new video technologies were supposed to be all about delivering=20
compelling new choices to TV viewers.
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/business/technology/13535465.htm

AS 30-SECOND SPOT FADES, WHAT ADVERTISERS WILL DO NEXT
[SOURCE: Wall Street Journal, AUTHOR: Brian Steinberg at=20
brian.steinberg( at )wsj.com and Suzanne Vranica]
It finally sank in on Madison Avenue in 2005 that the 30-second commercial=
=20
is fading as a means of hawking products and services. Audiences are=20
splintering off in dozens of directions, watching TV shows on iPods,=20
watching movies on videogame players and listening to radio on the=20
Internet. All these activities cut out the usual forms of sponsorship and=
=20
take place when and where consumers -- not media executives -- choose. The=
=20
upshot is that any advertiser with an urgent message needs to start=20
planning now to reach consumers in new and unexpected ways. Some already=20
have. Here are some of the strategies more advertisers will be trying in=20
the coming year: 1) advertising everywhere, 2) mobile devices such as=20
cellphones and video iPods are fast emerging as new ad vehicles, 3)=20
advertisers seeking to market new TV shows, movies and songs are exploring=
=20
other media, 4) marketers have become obsessed with finding ordinary people=
=20
to endorse, criticize or simply spread the word about new movies and new=20
products on blogs or other consumer-created media, and 5) going well beyond=
=20
buying a single TV spot or ad page in a magazine, advertisers want ideas=20
that bind their messages inextricably with the media outlets they choose.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB113624334456335918.html?mod=3Dtodays_us_...
ketplace
(requires subscription)
* When Product Placement Goes Too Far
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: Joe Mandese]
Product placement sometimes goes too far and violates the unspoken trust=20
the media, advertisers and agencies have with consumers. But at least one=
=20
advertising executive believes branded entertainment will ultimately=20
transform the way Madison Avenue does business. While the debate over=20
branded entertainment is swirling within television circles, it's heating=
=20
up in other media, too. It's particularly controversial in the print=20
medium, where rigid editorial content policies appear to be easing up as=20
marketers and agencies pressure publishers to mix branded mentions into=20
their stories.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6295746?display=3DAdvertising...
ferral=3DSUPP
(free access for Benton's Headlines subscribers)

QUICKLY

SCHOOLS ASK PARENTS TO PAY UP BEFORE KIDS LOG ON
[SOURCE: USAToday, AUTHOR: William M. Welch]
The Fullerton (CA) public school system is pushing the frontiers of=20
computer technology in the classroom with a program that puts a laptop=20
computer into the backpacks of children as early as first grade. It is=20
pushing the boundaries of financing, too, by asking parents to pay $500 a=
=20
year for three years so each of more than 2,000 elementary and middle=20
school children can have their own Apple iBook G4 laptop. An increasing=20
number of school systems are using computers in the core curriculum of=20
early grades. Don Knezek, CEO of the International Society for Technology=
=20
in Education, a non-profit group in Washington, says one laptop per student=
=20
is the hottest trend in educational computing. But asking parents to pay=20
for it isn't. The Fullerton program, at four of 20 district schools, has=20
created a storm of controversy for the school system and its=20
superintendent, Cameron McCune. It also has raised broader questions about=
=20
how far public schools here and elsewhere can go in using costly technology=
=20
in the face of tight school budgets and limited funding. Some parents worry=
=20
that whatever its educational benefits, the program has created an=20
expensive burden for struggling families and has forged new divisions in=20
the public schools. Some parents say the financial expectations and price=
=20
tag violate California's constitutional guarantee of a free public=20
education -- a principle also in other state constitutions. The parents are=
=20
threatening a lawsuit and have enlisted the help of the American Civil=20
Liberties Union.
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20060103/a_laptops03.art.htm

RELOCATING FEDERAL SPECTRUM OPERATIONS
[SOURCE: National Telecommunications and Information Administration]
On December 27, 2005, the U.S. Department of Commerce provided estimated=20
costs and timeline information associated with relocating federal=20
operations from the 1710-1755 MHz band. The total number of frequency=20
assignments that will be relocated by 12 federal agencies is 2,240 and the=
=20
cost for the relocation of Federal Government operations is estimated to be=
=20
$935,940,312. This effort is part of the 90 MHz of radio spectrum that is=
=20
to be made available for the near term for advanced wireless (including=20
third generation or =933G=94) telecommunications services to meet the deman=
d=20
for new wireless services. To complete the 90 MHz of spectrum being made=20
available for advanced wireless services, the additional 45 MHz of spectrum=
=20
will be provided by the FCC (2110-2155 MHz band). Further information at=20
the URL below. Contact: Gary Patrick of the Office of Spectrum Management=
=20
at NTIA [Gpatrick( at )ntia.doc.gov or (202) 482-9132].
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/osmhome/reports/specrelo/index.htm

CHINA RATCHETS UP CONTROL ON EXPRESSION
[SOURCE: The Christian Science Monitor, AUTHOR: Robert Marquand]
Beijing is policing speech and expression more closely. In the past year,=
=20
the Communist party initiated the broadest ideological education campaign=
=20
in a decade. In part, that campaign discourages liberality and freedom of=
=20
expression. The official news service Xinhua this week, in fact, selected=
=20
this party campaign as its No. 1 story of 2005, calling it "a massive=20
political and ideological education drive among more than 68 million CPC=20
members to maintain their moral and socialist ethical superiority, a new,=
=20
great project to promote Party construction." As a result, in the past year=
=20
"public intellectuals" that spoke out on social welfare or the environment=
=20
have been curbed from doing so in state media.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0103/p06s01-woap.html

WEB SERVICES THRIVE, BUT OUTAGES OUTRAGE USERS
[SOURCE: Reuters, AUTHOR: Adam Pasick]
Web sites that share blogs, bookmarks and photos exploded in popularity in=
=20
2005, but in recent weeks a number of major outages left users stranded and=
=20
frustrated. The new breed of Web site includes blogging services such as=20
TypePad, the photo site Flickr, the shared bookmark site del.icio.us and=20
many others. They are sometimes known collectively as "Web 2.0": hosted=20
online, relying heavily on users' submissions, and frequently updated and=
=20
tweaked by their owners. Their growth in the last year has been huge.=20
Flickr and del.icio.us were high-profile acquisitions for Internet giant=20
Yahoo, and there are now at least 20 million blogs in existence, according=
=20
to some estimates, with tens of thousands being added every day.
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=3DinternetNews&storyID=
=3D2005-12-30T182113Z_01_KWA063299_RTRUKOC_0_US-COLUMN-PLUGGEDIN.xml

MEN WANT FACTS, WOMEN SEEK RELATIONS ON WEB
[SOURCE: Reuters, AUTHOR: Eric Auchard]
A study by the Pew Internet & American Life Project finds that Internet=20
users share many common interests, but men are heavier consumers of news,=
=20
stocks, sports and pornography while more women look for health and=20
religious guidance. Men log on more frequently and spend more time online.=
=20
More men also have access to quick broadband connections than do women.=20
Women are heavier users of e-mail, often going beyond the matter-of-fact=20
responses of male correspondents to use e-mail to share stories, solve=20
issues and reach out to a wider network of friends and family.
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=3DinternetNews&storyID=
=3D2005-12-29T133052Z_01_SPI914926_RTRUKOC_0_US-INTERNET-GENDER.xml&archive=
d=3DFalse
* How Women and Men Use the Internet
http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/r/171/report_display.asp

THE FAILURES OF POST-9/11 MEDIA
[SOURCE: AlterNet, AUTHOR: Laura Barcella]
A new book asks America's top journalists for insights on why post-9/11,=20
pre-Iraq War news coverage was so shoddy.
http://www.alternet.org/mediaculture/29833/
--------------------------------------------------------------
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.
--------------------------------------------------------------