June 2006

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

FCC NEWS
The FCC's New Agenda
Senators Push Public-Interest Proceeding
Why Not More Media Consolidation?
NAB Buoyed By Movement on Multicast
FCC upholds CBS fine for Jackson Breast Flash

UNIVERSAL SERVICE
Universal Service safe through 2008
Universal Service Fund Changes Mulled Amid Evolving Telecom Landscape
Cable USF Payments May Soar
FCC Inspector General's Report to Congress

INTERNET/TELECOM LEGISLATION
Governors Protest Barton's National Franchise
Access to the Internet: Is it a right or a privilege?
Content Providers Square Off Against Phone, Cable Companies
Neutral Net? Who Are You Kidding?
California assembly votes bill easing cable rules

GOVERNMENT & COMMUNICATIONS
Telecoms call for Legal Fixes after Katrina
U.S. asks Internet Firms to Save Data

QUICKLY -- Bill Moyers' Address to PBS Annual=20
Meeting; Franchise Battles Speed IPTV Rollouts;=20
Catch 475; Comcast: Non-Video Subs to Take Lead;=20
Comcast to Speed Downloads Of Some Movie, Music=20
Files; McClatchy Collects Offers on 6 Papers on=20
Final Day; Ad Spending Up for Broadcast Networks in Q1

FCC NEWS

THE FCC'S NEW AGENDA
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
With a Republican majority for the first time in=20
his tenure, FCC Chairman Kevin Martin has a=20
number of proceedings he'd like to launch as soon=20
as the Commission's June 15 meeting. Chairman=20
Martin informed the other commissioners of his=20
intention to take up the ownership issue June 15,=20
though he is free to change the agenda right up=20
until the meeting. Martin is likely to get the=20
votes to get the ownership proceeding started,=20
since it only marks the beginning a process that=20
is likely to take a year or more. It would, in=20
that sense, be a "first vote for progress" on a=20
long-stalled issue, one that would have little=20
apparent downside. The ownership item is said to=20
consist of a proposed rulemaking rolling up=20
several elements, including a proceeding begun in=20
2001 to define radio markets, a proceeding on=20
newspaper/broadcast crossownership, the 2003=20
deregulatory rules and the FCC's quadrennial=20
review (Congress requires it to review its rules=20
every four years). It will lay out the issues,=20
call for comment and replies -- 45 days for=20
comment, 15 for replies -- and go from there.=20
Democrats Michael Copps and Jonathan Adelstein=20
are likely to push for swift FCC action on two=20
other ownership-related proceedings, a localism=20
proceeding launched by Chairman Michael Powell in=20
2003 to quell some of the criticism of the=20
derogatory ownership rules, and a DTV public=20
interest obligation proceeding launched in 1999.=20
Chairman Martin is also expected to call for a=20
vote on granting broadcasters' multicast=20
must-carry at that meeting if the commissioners=20
haven't already voted the item on circulation,=20
which is a vote by computer that does not require=20
the commissioners to meet. The newest=20
commissioner, Robert McDowell, could be sworn in=20
to his post by the end of the week -- perhaps=20
even today -- and, in theory, could ask that the=20
must-carry vote be delayed a month. The=20
must-carry proceeding is said to consist of an=20
order reversing the FCC's earlier decision=20
denying multicast must-carry, plus a notice of=20
proposed rulemaking on whether cable can degrade=20
the DTV signal and whether cable or subscribers=20
have to pay for the DTV set-top box to receive it.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6339724?display=3DBreaking+News

SENATORS PUSH PUBLIC-INTEREST PROCEEDING
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
Senators Trent Lott (R-Miss.) and Byron Dorgan=20
(D-ND) have written to FCC Chairman Kevin Martin=20
asking that the FCC wrap up a 2003 proceeding on=20
broadcasters' public interest service before=20
launching a rewrite of deregulatory ownership=20
rules. "The FCC must first establish that there=20
are sufficient mechanisms in place to ensure that=20
broadcasters are serving their local communities=20
before any loosening of ownership can occur," the=20
senators wrote. Former-FCC Chairman Michael=20
Powell, in an effort to preserve his deregulatory=20
ownership rules, argued that loosening those=20
rules was a procedural matter and that the=20
public-interest implications of the changes were=20
better addressed in a separate proceeding, which=20
he opened in 2003. Now Chairman Martin has=20
tentatively scheduled a vote on launching the=20
long-delayed omnibus proceeding at the FCC's June=20
15 meeting, but according to a source, the=20
public-interest proceeding was not part of the=20
proposed notice, which folds in the 2003=20
ownership rule remand, two open proceedings -- on=20
newspaper-broadcast crossownership and radio=20
markets -- and the congressionally mandated quadrennial review of FCC rules.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6339853?display=3DBreaking+News

WHY NOT MORE MEDIA CONSOLIDATION?
[SOURCE: Huffington Post, AUTHOR: Norman Horowitz]
[Commentary] This administration, (like so many=20
in the past), would like us to have as little=20
diversity in our media as possible, and be able=20
to control access for such content into our=20
homes. At some time in the future will the=20
government be bashful about determining what we=20
watch and listen to on cable or on the Internet?=20
(National security you know). The greater the=20
consolidation, the easier it is for the=20
government to accomplish this either by law or by=20
pressure on the media companies. It has been the=20
stated goal of our illustrious Federal=20
Communications Commission (FCC) to promote media=20
competition, diversity, and localism, but what is=20
the FCC is doing to assist America achieve=20
competition, diversity, and localism? If the FCC=20
does what it appears to be doing, AT&T, Time=20
Warner, and Comcast will control over half of the=20
high speed Internet connections in our country.=20
When AT&T merges with Bell South, they, along=20
with Verizon, will control over 2/3 of American=20
local phone connections. Comcast and Time Warner=20
are in the process of devouring Adelphia Cable,=20
and are clustering their holdings to reduce their=20
operating costs and increase their market=20
leverage. This will allow them control over=20
national and regional programming services. For=20
an added bonus, they will ultimately become=20
America's dominant broadband providers. It would=20
be nice to think that the FCC will only approve=20
mergers that will protect the public interest,=20
but just look at its history. It uses glowing=20
terminology to describe its horrid actions.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/norman-horowitz/why-not-more-media-consol_...
1926.html

NAB BUOYED BY MOVEMENT ON MULTICAST
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
Not surprisingly, the National Association of=20
Broadcasters was buoyed by the news that FCC=20
Chairman Kevin Martin is circulating a proposed=20
rulemaking granting broadcasters multicast=20
must-carry. "We're encouraged by reports that=20
Chairman Martin supports revisiting an issue=20
that, if adopted, will bring more program choice=20
to cable customers," said NAB spokesman Dennis=20
Wharton. "It is NAB's longstanding position that=20
DTV multicasting rules will result in an=20
explosion in programming choices, including=20
public-interest programming that has long been=20
the hallmark of local=20
broadcasting." Broadcasters argue that they need=20
mandatory cable carriage of all the free channels=20
they can fit into their digital spectrum=20
allotment if they want to be competitive in a=20
multichannel world. Getting multicast must-carry=20
has been a primary goal of the NAB.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6339473?display=3DBreaking+News

FCC UPHOLDS CBS FINE FOR JACKSON BREAST FLASH
[SOURCE: Reuters]
The Federal Communications Commission upheld on=20
Wednesday its decision to fine 20 CBS Corp.=20
television stations a total of $550,000 for=20
airing pop singer Janet Jackson's breast flash in=20
2004. "The commission affirms its finding that=20
CBS' violation was willful and declines to reduce=20
the forfeiture imposed upon CBS," the agency said=20
in a statement. In a separate statement, FCC=20
Commissioner explained why he dissented, in part,=20
from the order: "While I agree with the ultimate=20
outcome of today's Order on Reconsideration, I=20
concur in part because the Commission again has=20
not provided much-needed clarity and guidance to=20
our decision-making process in indecency=20
enforcement. In addition, I dissent in part=20
because I continue to believe the Commission has=20
erred in fining only CBS owned and operated=20
stations, not all stations that broadcasted the=20
indecent material." He added: "I also have grave=20
concerns with the failure of this Order to=20
provide clear guidance on the nature of the=20
Commission's new fine imposition policy announced=20
in the March 15th, 2006, Omnibus TV=20
Order. Rather than stating what the new policy=20
is not, as today's Order does, the Commission=20
should state affirmatively the key features of=20
our new 'more limited approach towards the=20
imposition of forfeiture penalties.' After all,=20
it is still unclear how the Commission determines=20
the sufficiency of a viewer's complaint in light=20
of this new enforcement policy."
http://today.reuters.com/news/NewsArticle.aspx?type=3DentertainmentNews&...
ryID=3D2006-05-31T203903Z_01_WBT005460_RTRUKOC_0_US-MEDIA-DECENCY-CBS.xml
* FCC press release:
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-265722A1.doc
* FCC order:
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-68A1.doc
* Statement by Commissioner Adelstein
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-68A2.doc
* FCC Reaffirms Its Indecency Fine for CBS
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB114911044636367845.html?mod=3Dtodays_us_...
ketplace

UNIVERSAL SERVICE

UNIVERSAL SERVICE SAFE THROUGH 2008
[SOURCE: Reuters]
Federal Communications Commission promised that=20
past accounting problems would not affect=20
subsidies for telephone and Internet services=20
through 2008, including in rural and poor areas,=20
Sen. John Rockefeller (D-WV) said on Tuesday.=20
Until last week, Sen Rockefeller had blocked the=20
nomination of a new FCC commissioner amid=20
concerns over the agency's management of the=20
Universal Service Fund. The USF subsidizes=20
communications services in schools, libraries,=20
rural areas and low-income households. In 2004,=20
the agency briefly halted hundreds of millions of=20
dollars in subsidies for schools and libraries=20
across the country after discovering the program=20
did not comply with certain U.S. government=20
accounting standards. Congress had to approve=20
exemptions to the so-called Anti-Deficiency Act=20
so the USF programs would not run afoul of the=20
accounting rules. The most recent exemption goes=20
through 2006. "After internal FCC review, the FCC=20
has assured me that all of the USF programs will,=20
at least early into 2008, continue without=20
disruption because they are in full compliance=20
with federal budgetary requirements," said Sen=20
Rockefeller whose largely rural state is a=20
beneficiary of the program. He said in a=20
statement that Congress would continue to work toward a permanent fix.
http://today.reuters.com/investing/FinanceArticle.aspx?type=3DbondsNews&...
ryID=3D2006-05-30T222544Z_01_N3018894_RTRIDST_0_TELECOMS-ERATE.XML

UNIVERSAL SERVICE FUND CHANGES MULLED AMID EVOLVING TELECOM LANDSCAPE
[SOURCE: e-Commerce Times, AUTHOR: Keith Regan]
To many telecommunications customers, the=20
Universal Service Fund, or USF, is one of several=20
hidden costs of making long-distance phone calls.=20
It is one of a handful of government fees that=20
appear on each month's phone bill. Currently,=20
customers pay a monthly USF charge based on how=20
much they spend on long-distance charges. Now,=20
however, the Federal Communications Commission is=20
mulling a change to a flat-fee, numbers-based=20
system that would charge everyone who owns a=20
phone number a single monthly fee. Supporters say=20
the change would continue to maintain the fund --=20
which is funneled to provide telecom access for=20
poor and rural residents by setting up telecom=20
and Internet access points in schools, libraries=20
and other public locations -- while also=20
simplifying the collection of the fee at a time=20
when everything about telecommunications is=20
becoming increasingly complex. The change enjoys=20
widespread support and is seen being adopted in=20
time. Some in the telecom industry say the FCC=20
should proceed with caution, however, to avoid=20
harming the very people the USF was established=20
to help, urging exemptions for free phone=20
services and cautioning that the exploding VoIP=20
landscape complicates any discussion of telecom fees.
http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/82BukDICU35uPX/Universal-Service-Fun...
hanges-Mulled-Amid-Evolving-Telecom-Landscape.xhtml
* FCC considers fee to bolster flagging long-distance taxes
http://www.nj.com/business/ledger/index.ssf?/base/business-0/11490506672...
50.xml&coll=3D1
* FCC Weighs Internet Phone Charge
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB114913071311968394.html?mod=3Dtodays_us_...
e_one

CABLE USF PAYMENTS MAY SOAR
[SOURCE: Multichannel News, AUTHOR: Ted Hearn]
Cable operators that offer=20
voice-over-Internet-protocol service could see=20
their federal phone-subsidy payments more than=20
double under a proposal supported by Federal=20
Communications Commission Chairman Kevin Martin,=20
according to cable and other sources familiar=20
with the plan. Chairman Martin=92s plan is designed=20
to shore up the universal-service fund (USF) as a=20
result of changes in the voice-communications=20
market and the agency=92s decision last year to=20
exempt digital-subscriber-line revenue from going=20
toward USF contributions. The DSL exemption alone=20
is expected to drain $350 million annually from=20
the $6.5 billion program. The FCC could vote on=20
Martin=92s plan at its June 15 meeting, but an=20
agency spokesman would not confirm any proposed=20
changes to the USF. Martin=92s plan is considered=20
an interim step. In an approach supported by the=20
cable industry, he is in favor of adopting what=92s=20
called a numbers-based approach, which would=20
involve charging a monthly fee on each working=20
phone number in order to collect the $6.5 billion=20
needed. A cable-industry source said a=20
numbers-based approach would cost a cable VoIP=20
customer about $1 per month, compared with $2.83=20
under Martin=92s interim plan. USF fees may be=20
passed along to consumers. Under Martin=92s plan,=20
the wireless formula is to rise to 37.1%. But=20
VoIP providers are to assume that 65% of revenue=20
is interstate, forcing Time Warner to increase=20
its USF payments. Wireless carriers will end up=20
paying 4% of total revenue and cable operators 7%=20
of their VoIP revenue into the USF.
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6339867.html?display=3DBreaking+News
* Bigger bills loom for users of wireless and Net phones
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/money/20060601/voip01.art.htm

FCC INSPECTOR GENERAL REPORT TO CONGRESS
[SOURCE: Federal Communications Commission]
Kent Nilsson, the FCC's Acting Inspector General,=20
released his Semiannual Report to Congress.=20
Concerning Universal Service, he concludes: "Our=20
involvement in E-rate beneficiary audits and=20
investigations has not lessened our concerns=20
about fraud, waste, and abuse in Universal=20
Service Fund programs. We remain committed to
meeting our statutory responsibility to provide=20
effective, independent oversight of the Universal=20
Service Fund program. We believe we are making=20
significant progress toward achieving our goal of=20
designing, and eventually implementing, an=20
effective oversight program. However a lack of=20
adequate resources continues to impede our=20
ability to provide effective, independent=20
oversight of the E-rate program and the other=20
programs that are financed through the Universal Service Fund."
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-265713A1.pdf
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-265713A1.txt

INTERNET

GOVERNORS PROTEST BARTON'S NATIONAL FRANCHISE
[SOURCE: Multichannel News, AUTHOR: Ted Hearn]
In a letter to the chairman and ranking member of=20
the House Commerce Committee, the National=20
Governors Association (NGA) wants the=20
Communications Opportunity, Promotion and=20
Enhancement (COPE) Act (H.R. 5252) changed to=20
give states the option to take control of the=20
cable-franchising process from the Federal=20
Communications Commission. Under H.R. 5252, the=20
FCC would take control of cable franchising of=20
new entrants, such as AT&T and Verizon=20
Communications, across the country. Cable=20
incumbents are eligible for national franchises=20
in certain cases, including if new providers=20
enter their video markets under FCC licensing.=20
The bill would continue to allow any=20
cable-service provider to rely on a local or=20
state franchise in lieu of a national franchise.=20
But NGA argues that COPE would interfere with=20
efforts by states to adopt statewide cable=20
franchising in order to promote cable competition=20
in a manner that does not ignore local needs.=20
Texas, Virginia and Indiana have enacted=20
statewide franchising. COPE, NGA says,=20
=93eviscerates these efforts with a federal=20
framework that does not reflect the priorities=20
and prerogatives of states.=94 NGA also objects to=20
provisions that would allow local governments to=20
offer cable, information or telecommunications=20
service without state authorization. It calls the=20
provisions =93an unwarranted federal intrusion into=20
state affairs =85 which preempts states=92 ability to=20
manage broadband deployment in its political subdivisions.=94
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6339554.html?display=3DBreaking+News

ACCESS TO THE INTERNET: IS IT A RIGHT OR A PRIVILEGE?
[SOURCE: Minneapolis Star Tribune, AUTHOR: John Reinan]
Imagine if the Internet were like cable TV. You=20
pay $40 a month to Time Warner or Comcast, and=20
you get a menu of 80 websites to visit. Want to=20
go to a site devoted to Japanese anime cartoons?=20
Sorry, that's not on the menu. Looking for that=20
crazy blog about the history of matchbook covers?=20
No longer available -- or so slow to load it's=20
not worth your while. That scenario could become=20
real, some Internet mavens say, unless Congress=20
acts quickly to preserve freedom of the Web. A=20
recent U.S. Supreme Court decision has opened the=20
door to greater corporate control of the=20
Internet, and big business is ready to walk through it.
http://www.startribune.com/535/story/458590.html

CONTENT PROVIDERS SQUARE OFF AGAINST PHONE, CABLE COMPANIES
[SOURCE: AdAge, AUTHOR: Ira Teinowitz ]
The potential winners if tiered Internet becomes=20
a reality: the nation's big phone and cable=20
companies, as well as the marketing partners who=20
can afford the tolls for the access required to=20
provide high-speed video and audio. The losers:=20
consumers, who may have fewer choices and could=20
see prices rise for Internet downloads; content=20
providers that don't hook up with the phone or=20
cable companies; content providers that compete=20
with phone or cable companies; and the raft of=20
small businesses and consumers who won't be able=20
to compete, period. If a tiered Internet were put=20
in place -- still an if, now that the House=20
Judiciary Committee has sent its own legislation=20
guaranteeing Net neutrality to the floor and the=20
Senate Commerce Committee is considering an=20
amendment imposing net neutrality -- the major=20
content providers could afford to pay to play,=20
but the ramifications would be felt by both=20
consumers and marketers. It could change which=20
sites consumers use to download music and videos,=20
search the Web and even book travel reservations.=20
It could force marketers and media companies to=20
take telephone companies and cable providers as=20
new partners. Finally, it could raise Internet ad=20
prices either indirectly, as content providers=20
look to lessen the impact of the new tolls, or=20
directly, as marketers are required to pay to use=20
the better pipes to deliver their advertising. It=20
also could concentrate Web users (and therefore=20
ad dollars) with those providers willing and able=20
to pay the fees. Sound familiar? Glenn Reynolds,=20
a law professor and a former communications=20
lawyer, warned that tiered service would "likely=20
result in an Internet that looks more like cable=20
TV than the Internet." Oddly, while some big=20
marketers are raising the alarm about Net=20
neutrality, media companies have been silent.=20
Disney/ABC, NBC and CBS all declined requests for=20
comment on Net neutrality. "Things in Washington=20
tend to get compartmentalized," said Art Brodsky,=20
a spokesman for Public Knowledge, a group=20
organizing for Net neutrality. "A lot of guys=20
aren't focusing on this as an issue that could=20
drastically affect their businesses."
http://adage.com/article?article_id=3D109555

NEUTRAL NET? WHO ARE WE KIDDING?
[SOURCE: Wired News, AUTHOR: Michael Grebb]
How neutral is the net right now? Not very, it=20
turns out. Net neutrality" has many meanings, but=20
in the broadest sense refers to a cooperative=20
principle whereby everyone on the net is supposed=20
to make the same effort to help deliver everyone=20
else's traffic. In fact, pushing bits through the=20
network-of-networks that makes up the Internet is=20
an anarchic business and frequently an ugly one.=20
ISPs must often fight to get their data carried=20
on neighboring networks, and those who are=20
willing to pay extra reap immediate benefits in=20
the form of faster and better service. Vast=20
amounts of traffic are rerouted and blocked every=20
day. The system, while successful overall, seems=20
to ride on the very edge of chaos, insiders say.=20
"I don't think the Internet has ever been=20
perfectly equal or neutral," says Khaled Nasr, a=20
partner at venture-capital firm InterWest=20
Partners. "There has always been some level of=20
inequality." Seconds Matt Tooley, CTO of=20
broadband optimization firm CableMatrix: "I don't=20
think it's as egalitarian as people would like to think it is."
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/internet/1,71012-0.html

CALIFORNIA ASSEMBLY VOTES BILL EASING CABLE RULES
[SOURCE: Reuters]
California's Democratic-dominated Assembly passed=20
a bill on Wednesday that could increase=20
competition among cable television providers and=20
make it easier for telephone companies to enter=20
the market. The bill by Assembly Speaker Fabian=20
Nunez would eliminate city-by-city franchises,=20
which he said made it nearly impossible for=20
rivals with new technologies to enter=20
California's market for television entertainment=20
services. It passed by a rare unanimous vote of=20
70-0 in the often-divided Legislature, with 10=20
members not present during the Wednesday night=20
vote. "We need to set a framework that is=20
technology neutral, and we don't have that=20
currently," said bill co-sponsor Lloyd Levine.
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=3DtechnologyNews&sto...
D=3D2006-06-01T104025Z_01_N01278706_RTRUKOC_0_US-TELECOMS-CABLE-CALIFORNIA.=
xml

GOVERNMENT & COMMUNICATIONS

TELECOMS CALL FOR LEGAL FIXES AFTER KATRINA
[SOURCE: C-Net|News.com, AUTHOR: Anne Broache]
Days after Hurricane Katrina pummeled the Gulf=20
Coast last August, repair crews hoping to breathe=20
life into a damaged telephone network were=20
temporarily blocked by government officials who=20
refused to give phone company workers permission=20
to enter a disaster-stricken area. And when=20
looting and gunfire erupted in New Orleans,=20
bureaucratic mix-ups and problems in=20
communication delayed efforts by BellSouth to=20
revive a rapidly growing number of dead telephone=20
lines that could have saved lives had they been=20
working. With the formal start of hurricane=20
season on Thursday, some of the nation's largest=20
wireless and wireline providers are vowing to=20
prevent that from happening again. Through=20
private correspondence and in public statements,=20
telecommunications companies are calling on=20
President Bush and the Department of Homeland=20
Security to change the way the government=20
responds to a natural disaster, and a federal=20
panel is expected to release a report in two=20
weeks. One answer would be to change federal=20
policy and recognize telecommunications workers=20
as "emergency responders." That designation would=20
let them work more closely with authorities on=20
the scene and to obtain "nonmonetary" federal=20
help, such as security escorts and "priority"=20
access to fuel, water and shelter. "We're not=20
looking for financial support, but the=20
recognition and the arms-and-legs support to make=20
sure we have the appropriate access at the right=20
time...to make sure infrastructure is restored as=20
soon as possible," said Michael Hickey, head of=20
Verizon's national security team and a member of=20
a Federal Communications Commission advisory panel on Hurricane Katrina.
http://news.com.com/Telecoms+call+for+legal+fixes+after+Katrina/2100-103...
-6078811.html?tag=3Dnefd.lede
* FCC panel meets 6/9: http://www.benton.org/index.php?q=3Dnode/2465

US ASKS INTERNET FIRMS TO SAVE DATA
[SOURCE: USAToday, AUTHOR: Jon Swartz and Kevin Johnson]
Top law enforcement officials have asked leading=20
Internet companies to keep histories of the=20
activities of Web users for up to two years to=20
assist in criminal investigations of child=20
pornography and terrorism, the Justice Department=20
said Wednesday. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales=20
and FBI Director Robert Mueller outlined their=20
request to executives from Google, Microsoft,=20
AOL, Comcast, Verizon and others Friday in a=20
private meeting at the Justice Department. The=20
department has scheduled more discussions as=20
early as Friday. Justice is not asking the=20
companies to keep the content of e-mails,=20
spokesman Brian Roehrkasse said. It wants records=20
such as lists of e-mail traffic and Web searches,=20
he said. Roehrkasse said the government is=20
required to seek proper legal authority, such as=20
a subpoena, before obtaining the records. He said=20
any change in the retention period would not=20
alter that requirement. Law enforcement officials=20
have seen investigations derailed =93time and time=20
again=94 because of a lack of data, Roehrkasse=20
said. The government's request forces the=20
companies to strike a balance between satisfying=20
law enforcement demands and honoring the privacy of millions of customers.
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20060601/1a_lede01_dom.art.htm
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20060601/1a_ledebox01_dom.art.htm

QUICKLY

BILL MOYERS' ADDRESS TO PBS ANNUAL MEETING
[SOURCE: Working for Change, AUTHOR: Bill Moyers]
Bill Moyers is optimistic about the future of=20
public TV. "The telecommunications revolution is=20
upon us and special interests are counting on=20
controlling it from inside the Beltway while no=20
one is looking. Let=92s not let it happen this=20
time. Let=92s make the telecommunications=20
revolution our story. Let=92s tell the public how=20
the decisions are getting made, who=92s making them=20
and why, who will win and who will lose. Let=92s=20
own this story with reporting, hearings,=20
commentary, talking heads. Let=92s get the country=20
involved in the debate about where the Internet=20
is going, where our digital revolution is headed,=20
how our media can foster civic participation,=20
make government more accountable, give low-income=20
people a place at the table. We have it in our=20
power to bring the country into the story. We are=20
public broadcasting, right? We=92re not=20
congressional broadcasting =AD that=92s C-SPAN. We=92re=20
not the White House network =AD that=92s Fox News.=20
We=92re the only broadcasting operation in the=20
country with the words =93public=94 and =93service=94 in=20
our name. That=92s our constituency =AD not the=20
politicians and Washington officials =AD but the=20
public. The theologian H. Richard Niebuhr once=20
said the most important question a society can=20
ask is: =93What=92s going on?=94 Well, that=92s what we=20
can do now =AD tell the American people what=92s=20
going on with this digital revolution. Inform=20
them and awaken them. They'll do the rest. I've=20
been around a long time now. What great company=20
all of you have been. But I really think the best=20
is yet to come. We=92ve never been more needed.=20
Democracy is troubled. Our two parties are wholly=20
owned subsidiaries of Big Money and subservient=20
to Big Media. The majority of the American people=20
don't know where to turn, who to trust. Here we=20
are -- with a mandate to put the public first. A=20
new leader who is the right person in the right=20
place at the right time, and with roots in=20
communities around the country that constitutes=20
the building blocks of hope. We have it in our=20
reach truly to be the Public Broadcasting Service =AD a force of democracy."
http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?itemid=3D20889

FRANCHISE BATTLES SPEED IPTV ROLLOUTS, SAYS REPORT
[SOURCE: Telecommunications Online, AUTHOR: Bob Wallace]
The four-way battles now raging around the=20
question of municipal, state or national=20
franchise agreements for "Telco TV" video=20
services will see the telcos ultimately prevail=20
over cable operators and local governments,=20
according to new analysis from ABI Research. This=20
would mean an accelerated deployment of IPTV=20
video services to customers, and increased sales=20
of set-top boxes, according to the research and=20
consultancy. "We are at the cusp of a strong=20
run-up in IPTV subscriber bases over the next=20
year or two," says principal analyst Michael=20
Arden. "The telcos have sympathy at the higher=20
levels of government, and in general the=20
principles of encouraging competition and=20
preventing monopoly mean that the telcos will be=20
victorious in this battle. It=92s just a question of when."
http://telecommagazine.com/newsglobe/article.asp?HH_ID=3DAR_2111

CATCH 475
[SOURCE: Bunnie Riedel]
[Commentary] How good is the FCC at handling local cable complaints?
http://www.riedelcommunications.blogspot.com/

COMCAST'S BURKE: NON-VIDEO SUBS TO TAKE LEAD
[SOURCE: Multichannel News, AUTHOR: Gary Arlen]
Comcast Corp. will have =93more non-video customers=20
than video subscribers=94 within the next five=20
years, chief operating officer Steve Burke said=20
Wednesday. The nation=92s largest cable-system=20
operator expects to have 25 million Internet and=20
voice accounts, significantly larger than its=20
current base of 21.5 million video subscribers,=20
Burke said. For instance, the number of Comcast=20
high-speed-Internet customers is growing 15%=20
annually, compared with 1% growth industrywide of multichannel-video custom=
ers.
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6339823.html?display=3DBreaking+News

COMCAST TO SPEED DOWNLOADS OF SOME MOVIE, MUSIC FILES
[SOURCE: Wall Street Journal, AUTHOR: Dionne=20
Searcey dionne.searcey( at )wsj.com and Sarmad Ali sarmad.ali( at )wsj.com]
As the war for broadband customers continues=20
among high-speed Internet providers, Comcast=20
Corp. said it plans to add a new free broadband=20
feature to its existing Internet service that=20
will give a temporary turbocharge, doubling=20
speeds for many downloads. The feature, called=20
Powerboost, will be activated when customers are=20
downloading movies, music, graphic-heavy Web=20
pages or other services that use a large amount=20
of capacity and tend to test a typical=20
subscriber's patience. The feature will be rolled=20
out starting next week and will be given=20
automatically to customers who subscribe to=20
Comcast's six-megabits-per-second service plan=20
for $42.95 a month or eight-megabits-per-second=20
plan for $52.95 a month. The company didn't say=20
which markets were eligible for the upgrades.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB114912327633568170.html?mod=3Dtodays_us_...
sonal_journal
(requires subscription)

MCCLATCHY COLLECTS OFFERS ON 6 PAPERS ON FINAL DAY
[SOURCE: Associated Press]
Six former Knight Ridder newspapers awaited word=20
on their fate Wednesday as McClatchy Co.=20
collected offers on the final day of bidding for=20
the newspapers, the last of 12 that McClatchy=20
intends to sell. The other six newspapers have=20
already found new owners, including The=20
Philadelphia Inquirer, which was sold to a local=20
investor group there, and four others that were=20
bought by MediaNews Group, a privately held=20
company based in Denver. That leaves six=20
newspapers in smaller markets, the largest of=20
which is the Akron Beacon Journal. There was no=20
immediate word on how many bids were submitted=20
for those papers, when the new owner McClatchy=20
might decide on possible buyers or whether the=20
papers would be sold as a group or one by one.
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_con...
t_id=3D1002611401

AD SPENDING UP FOR BROADCAST NETWORKS IN Q1
[SOURCE: TVWeek, AUTHOR: Jon Lafayette]
Boosted by the Winter Olympics on NBC,=20
advertising spending on broadcast network TV rose=20
12.3 percent to $6.5 billion in the first quarter=20
of 2006, according to data from TNS Media Intelligence.
http://www.tvweek.com/news.cms?newsId=3D10099
(requires free 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.
--------------------------------------------------------------