Public colleges and universities in California this past year backed several initiatives to promote online course materials, and publishers and entrepreneurs are stepping up release of electronic textbooks, which typically sell at reduced prices.
[Commentary] John McCain's Internet is a strange and wondrous world, not like the Internet most people experience. It's a place not for innovation and creativity, but one to be controlled by the telephone and cable companies. McCain's view of the Internet is an Internet is largely infiltrated by pirates and filled with dangers that require government protections and enforcement. His policy is filled with contradictions and inconsistencies. That's not surprising, considering that he took a variety of policy positions on the crucial question whether his friends in the telecom business should have been given immunity for spying on Americans. At different times, he supported and questioned it, then skipped the crucial vote entirely. He was not alone in doing this, but it takes on added significance when combined with this policy plan. As we expected, it's the product of a team of advisors that gives lip service to consumers, but when the rubber meets the road, it's the corporations that get most of the goodies. Somewhat like the McCain campaign more generally, it also contains some internal contradictions that muddy the waters that make this look like the product of a group that was trying very hard to make some attempts to appear consumer-friendly, when it's mostly corporate-friendly.
Last year, seven of the 16 major presidential contenders kicked off their campaigns online. Andrew Rasiej, a former Howard Dean adviser and founder of Personal Democracy Forum, a website and annual conference that explores the relationship between politics and technology, thinks the Internet will change not only campaigns, but also democracy itself. Sen Barack Obama (D-IL) has 1.3 million supporters on Facebook; Sen John McCain (R-AZ) has only about 200,000. Sen Obama is using Twitter, a social-networking and micro-blogging service featuring instant messaging. By signing up to Sen Obama's twitters, the campaign at once signs up to yours. This, says Mr Rasiej, proves that Sen Obama "understands the DNA of the Internet". Sen McCain frankly admits he doesn't. But this may not matter, says Patrick Ruffini, who worked on George Bush's 2004 run and is co-founder of The Next Right, an online hub for center-right activism. "What matters a lot are the tactics he employs." The Republicans are beginning to raise their game to compete with Sen Obama's skill.
Fourteen years after health insurance providers created Harry and Louise to question why the government should be getting involved in healthcare, in spots aimed at defeating First Lady Hillary Clinton's effort to remake healthcare, the couple is being re-enlisted for a new set of healthcare-related ads. This time a 30-second ad to run on cable and Sunday talk shows during the Democratic and Republican conventions come from health groups and hospitals. It takes a far less confrontational tone in suggesting that maybe it is time for Congress to look at healthcare. The groups backing the ad include the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, the American Hospital Association, the Catholic Health Association, Families USA and the National Federation of Independent Business.
Stations in Denver and Minneapolis are coming up with innovative ways to cover the political conventions on what are often limited budgets. Executives said it's both a banner time and a tough one to cover an event of this magnitude: On one hand, never before has there been such an array of media platforms on which to engage the audience. On the other, the sorry state of the broadcasting economy means stations are forced to create all that content with light staffs.
The 2008 biennial news consumption survey finds four distinct segments in today's news audience: Integrators, who comprise 23% of the public; the less populous Net-Newsers (13%); Traditionalists - the oldest (median age: 52) and largest news segment (46% of the public); and the Disengaged (14%) who stand out for their low levels of interest in the news and news consumption. For more than a decade, the audiences for most traditional news sources have steadily declined, as the number of people getting news online has surged. However, today it is not a choice between traditional sources and the Internet for the core elements of today's news audiences. A sizable minority of Americans find themselves at the intersection of these two long-standing trends in news consumption. Integrators, who get the news from both traditional sources and the Internet, are a more engaged, sophisticated and demographically sought-after audience segment than those who mostly rely on traditional news sources. Integrators share some characteristics with a smaller, younger, more Internet savvy audience segment - Net-Newsers - who principally turn to the web for news, and largely eschew traditional sources. The results suggest that viewers of the "fake news" programs "The Daily Show"and "The Colbert Report" are more knowledgeable about current events (as judged by three test questions) than watchers of "real" cable news shows hosted by Lou Dobbs, Bill O'Reilly and Larry King, among others -- as well as average consumers of NBC, ABC, Fox News, CNN, C-SPAN and daily newspapers. When Americans were asked in a 2007 poll by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press to name the journalist they most admired, Jon Stewart, the fake news anchor, came in at No. 4, tied with the real news anchors Brian Williams and Tom Brokaw of NBC, Dan Rather of CBS and Anderson Cooper of CNN. And a study this year from the center's Project for Excellence in Journalism concluded that " 'The Daily Show' is clearly impacting American dialogue" and "getting people to think critically about the public square."
[Commentary] The House of Representatives has a chance to do what it would not in 2003: take a stand against media consolidation, which is one of the greatest threats to democracy. The Senate worked in the public's interest when it passed a "resolution of disapproval" of media consolidation in May. The House has been content to sit on its companion piece, which would kill a new Federal Communications Commission rule that essentially lifts the media cross-ownership ban. The Senate, which passed a similar blocking resolution the last time the FCC tried to scrap the ban, acted quickly and decisively. It is past time the House did the same.
Sirius XM Radio struck an "ugly" debt deal to close the merger of the only two U.S. satellite radio operators, chief executive Mel Karmazin said. A bond sale the evening of July 28 allowed Karmazin, previously the chief executive of Sirius, to complete the $2.76 billion all-stock purchase of Washington-based XM Satellite Radio Holdings. Together, XM and Sirius have more than 18 million subscribers and constitute the second-biggest U.S. radio operator by sales, after broadcaster Clear Channel Communications. Karmazin, concerned that traditional radio operators might persuade a judge to block the merger he had pursued for more than a year, sought to conclude the deal within hours of getting regulatory approval. To do so, he needed to accept unfavorable terms on refinancing.
"The 10 O&Os [owned-and-operated stations] are the last bastion of distribution-oriented assets Disney has left, for which they receive no credit in their stock price," said an investment research note from Caris & Co. "Should we be correct and management invite a transaction, Disney could eventually become the only traditional, large-cap media name that is virtually 100% asset-weighted toward pure content." But Disney said there is no truth to the speculation that it might sell its 10 ABC-owned TV stations and instead invest in content, such as Pixar Animation Studios and kids' online virtual world Club Penguin. Caris estimates Disney could raise $4.8 billion for its broadcast-TV stations in New York, Los Angeles, Chicago and seven other big cities. There is no precedent for a major broadcast network operating without a foundation of O&O TV stations as an anchor in major cities, but there is no regulatory obstacle. The Caris report said Disney would simply require buyers of its O&O stations to maintain ABC network affiliation.
[Commentary] It is far too early to start the funeral arrangements for municipal broadband. Much of the media are confusing the collapse of one company -- or one model of broadband deployment -- with the failure of the entire idea of municipalities providing high-speed Internet services. Many projects -- especially in small towns and mid-sized cities -- are thriving. City-owned wireless systems are up and running, serving local residents and businesses or local police and emergency workers. Places like Sallisaw, Oklahoma, and Kutztown, Pennsylvania, are building their own fiber-optic networks that offer high-speed Internet and cable TV. In total, more than 400 cities and towns already have launched, or are developing, municipal broadband systems. Spending on municipal networks increased last year and is expected to keep rising. MuniWireless.com projects that annual spending on equipment and services will exceed $900 million by 2010. Municipal broadband is caught up in a classic "hype cycle" -- a term coined by the Gartner Research Group to chart technology trends. It works like this: First, new technology triggers a wave of excitement that builds to a "peak of inflated expectations." For municipal broadband this was 2005's heady days of "free Internet for everyone everywhere." After the peak, there's a rapid slide toward what Gartner calls "the trough of disillusionment" -- a.k.a. rock bottom or, in this case, the headline in the March 22 edition of The New York Times: "Hopes for Wireless Cities Are Fading."
© 1994-2025 Benton Institute for Broadband & Society. All Rights Reserved.
