October 2008

Coverage of Election Now Lacks Suspense

Cable news and network anchors are not saying point-blank that the election is over. Instead they are saying, "We're not saying it's over ..." with a "but" that speaks volumes. One week away from the election news anchors and commentators have the taut, self-conscious demeanor they don on election nights when the exit polls are in, but when they are duty-bound not to declare a winner. Sometimes, however, they can't quite stifle the blue-stained maps in their minds. It's not over, but terms like "highly favored," "touchdown favorite," "comfortable lead" and even "a near-insurmountable lead" are bouncing all over television these days. They fill many viewers, regardless of their party affiliation, with opposite but parallel forms of dread: inevitability, or the illusion of it, breeds complacency on one side, and defeatism on the other.

In Senate Battlegrounds, Fusillades of TV Ads

In the 11 states with the closest Senate races this year, record amounts of money are being spent on TV commercials that carry common messages. For the Democrats, it is the venerable mantra that it is "time for a change," epitomized cleverly by the codgers spot. Attacking long tenures in Washington is popular, and linking Republicans to President Bush, Big Oil and tax cuts for large corporations seems to be obligatory. For Republicans and their supporters, all confronting a hostile political environment, it is presenting Democratic opponents as profligate taxers and spenders. Candidates themselves are spending less money on TV ads than outsiders and party committees.

ABC Jumps Too Late On Obama's 'Buy'

ABC finally offered Sen Barack Obama's camp the 8 p.m. half-hour in its Wednesday lineup for his campaign-related program -- which will air at that time on the other major broadcast networks. But, in an ironic twist, the Democratic presidential candidate's campaign passed on ABC's offer, saying it has allocated the funds elsewhere. ABC, which has spent the gross national product of a Third World country trying to relaunch its three struggling Wednesday sophomore dramas, originally offered to sell Obama's campaign other time slots on other nights. That way it wouldn't have to preempt one of its hour-long shows to make room for Obama's 30-minute telecast. But the Obama camp passed, hoping to create what's called a "roadblock" across broadcast TV. A viewing roadblock occurs when all the broadcast networks air the same program simultaneously.

Obama ads overwhelm TV presence of McCain

Sen Barack Obama's ad spending will easily surpass the record $188 million President George Bush (R) spent in 2004, according to Evan Tracey of the Campaign Media Analysis Group, which tracks political ads. "Obama has rewritten the playbook on running a presidential campaign," he said. "There's nothing he can't afford to do." Sen John McCain (R-AZ), who is limited to spending $84.1 million because he accepted taxpayer funds for the general election, has teamed up with the Republican National Committee to share advertising costs. They are likely to hit $130 million in TV ads by Election Day, Tracey said. Last week alone, Sen Obama (D-IL) outspent McCain by 3-to-1 in TV ads. Both are spending in traditional battlegrounds such as Pennsylvania and GOP strongholds such as North Carolina.

Critics Urge FCC to Delay Action on Phone Rates

The Federal Communications Commission's scheduled Nov. 4 vote to change how phone companies charge each other to deliver traffic is facing growing opposition from companies concerned about losing revenue and consumer advocates worried that the plan will cause phone bills to rise. The idea is to simplify the way phone companies compensate each other for delivering calls, so that all providers -- traditional land line, wireless and Internet-based -- would pay the same rate. Currently, rates vary depending on the type of call and where it travels. Changing the rates would result in some phone companies receiving less revenue -- an estimated $4 billion total. To help those companies recoup some of that lost money, the FCC has proposed raising fees on consumers. Phone companies now charge consumers as much as $6.50 a month in a subscriber-line charge for traditional, wired phone service. Under the new plan, that rate would jump to as much as $8 a month. FCC officials can't say how many subscribers would pay a higher upfront fee for service, or when a price increase would occur. FCC Chairman Kevin Martin proposed the plan in mid-October and scheduled a vote on Election Day, prompting some opponents to suggest that he is trying to sneak the plan by when the public isn't watching.

Some Consumers Keep Old TVs Despite Switch to Digital Signals

Sales of inexpensive converter boxes that allow older televisions to receive digital signals have been strong this year -- a bad omen for sales of new televisions heading into the holidays. Retailers and manufacturers were counting on stronger television sales this year, partly because of the digital changeover, and partly due to the ongoing shift to high-definition sets. But so far, surprising numbers of Americans are sticking with their old TVs and buying converters, which retail for $50 to $75, instead of paying hundreds more for a new television. Analysts say there is growing evidence of oversupply in the U.S. television market, mainly because manufacturers produced a glut of flat-panel sets, but also because nearly every big retailer -- from Wal-Mart Stores Inc. to Sears Holdings Corp. to Circuit City Stores Inc. -- stocked up on them before the economy soured.

Testing for Tech Literacy

Technology classes are entering the curriculum in schools around the country, but they're not common enough, say educators, company executives, and policymakers. In a bid to make technology literacy more widespread, the National Assessment Governing Board this month announced plans to develop the first nationwide assessment of technological learning in U.S. schools. NAGB, a government-commissioned independent council, awarded nonprofit WestEd, a 40-year-old educational research and service group, a $1.86 million contract to work with educators, school officials, the business community, and the public on constructing the test, set to hit schools in 2012.

Et tu, Brute?

He is one of the most respected, accomplished and well-liked public servants ever to grace the Federal Communications Commission. Now, mobile phone carriers, TV network moguls and others want his head. Julius Knapp, chief of the agency's Office of Engineering and Technology, has a big target on his back. There is nothing subtle about the disdain gushing his way. Knapp is running interference so to speak for FCC Chairman Kevin Martin regarding controversial white spaces and advanced wireless services-3 initiatives. The floodgates opened after the OET issued testing reports that concluded unlicensed devices can operate without disruption to others in TV airwaves and that a new national wireless broadband service can coexist in frequencies next to those purchased for billions of dollars by wireless carriers at a 2006 auction. Broadcasters and their ilk contend the OET's analysis of white spaces interference testing is flawed.

Is America Still a Beacon for Press Freedom?

[Commentary] The United States of America -- land of the free, home of the First Amendment -- is supposed to be a beacon for the rest of the world. So where do we stand in the latest global rankings of press freedom? Thirty-sixth. That's not a typo. It's a national disgrace. The Press Freedom Index released last week by Reporters Without Borders reflects both the freedoms journalists enjoy as well as the "efforts made by the authorities to respect and ensure respect for this freedom." The annual rankings examine the way that financial pressures lead to self-censorship in the press, government abuses of the press, as well as murders, imprisonment and physical abuse of journalists. As we enter a new year and a new administration, America's 36th-place finish is a clarion call for us to take a hard look at how we are meeting the information needs of our communities and upholding the values of the Constitution.

Black issues invisible in this campaign

[Commentary] What's odd is that while this election is historic precisely because of the major-party candidacy of a man who, under U.S. standards of race, is black, race goes unaddressed. Instead, race is both everywhere and nowhere, overriding and unacknowledged, a presence rather than a set of concrete issues. It stalks the conference room, uninvited, and never gets to sit at the table with the subjects that matter. The media's failure to force either candidate to talk about race-related policies creates an enormous potential for Obama, no less than McCain, to ignore or soft-pedal a basketful of historically explosive issues. Three years ago, after Hurricane Katrina reacquainted white Americans with the persistence of black poverty, brave words were spoken and bold pledges made. How ironic it would be if now this racially historic campaign ushered in a new era of racial neglect. (Edward Wasserman is Knight professor of journalism ethics at Washington and Lee University.)

Benton

Search