February 2012

Big Tech, Obama And The Politics Of Privacy

[Commentary] For now, the lack of details in the grand privacy announcements means it is unclear when (or if) consumers will be able to turn of behavioral tracking entirely. But in the short term, the “Privacy Bill of Rights” is a political winner for both President Obama and for the tech companies with which he is ideologically and financially allied.

More specifically, it allows the President to appear out front on the privacy debate at a time when Republicans also want to make political hay out of the issue. For the Internet companies, the announcement will permit them at least a partial reprieve as they lobby to minimize regulatory oversight. Their ability to do so is shrinking, though, as other political actors continue to step into the privacy arena.

‘Do Not Track’ button — what it will and won’t do

“Do not track” buttons have been a mixed bag in the past because while they have let advertisers know that users don’t want to be followed across the Web, not all advertisers had agreed to abide by the request. Consumer Reports pointed out that the “do not track” technology won’t protect consumers when, for example, they are signed into Google services if they have not opted out of having Google track their Web history. The same is true for social networks such as Facebook, if signed-in users choose to tell the service that they “Like” a product or use their Facebook log-in to connect to another site.

‘Privacy bill of rights’: Advocacy groups, industry weigh in

There was a lot of reaction from online privacy advocates and Internet companies to the White House’s “privacy bill of rights” — much of it positive.

  • “The Administration would seek implementation of a Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights by way of enforceable Codes of Conduct that would be derived through a collaborative process involving multiple stakeholders,” said privacy expert Lisa Sotto. “But the Administration does not put its faith entirely in the stakeholders to implement the Bill of Rights through Codes of Conduct; the Administration also calls for legislation to enact the Bill of Rights into law, as well as stronger FTC enforcement authority.”
  • Chris Wolf, the co-chair of the Future of Privacy Forum, echoed those comments, saying this is a “co-regulation” model, and one that he believes will help the U.S. address privacy in an era of changing technological innovation. In a statement, Wolf said he hopes lawmakers in Europe will look to this same model as a potential one for regulation.
  • Privacy advocate Justin Brookman, of the Center for Democracy and Technology, also said in a statement that the announcement is a step in the right direction. He gave the advertising industry credit for voluntarily implementing “do not track” technology” in web browsers.
  • The ACLU called it an "important first step. Day by day, we live more of our lives online, shopping, managing bank accounts and communicating with friends and family," said ACLU legislative counsel Christopher Calabrese. "It's crucial that the information we share is properly safeguarded. It's very encouraging to see the Obama administration making this issue a priority. Americans need clear and distinct policies in place when it comes to the kind of access law enforcement and private companies have to their online information."
  • Consumers Union (which published Consumer Reports) and Consumer Federation of America said the announcement signaled progress toward more consumer control of online data collection and use. "By including a Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights, the government is emphasizing the importance of transparency, individual control, and the ability to access and correct personal information, and recognizes there may be a need to for heightened protections for children and teens on the Internet," the groups said.

Silicon Valley pans Obama tax overhaul

Silicon Valley is panning President Obama’s plan to change the corporate tax code. Tech companies loathe Obama’s proposal to tax multinational corporations some undisclosed amount on their overseas earnings. Multinationals are currently not taxed on such earnings unless they “repatriate” the money to the United States, at which point they pay the 35 percent corporate income tax. Tech companies are plumping instead for a tax holiday on repatriated earnings, supported by Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA).

TechAmerica’s statement gives the gist of the tech sector’s gripe with Obama’s plan: “By its nature, the tech sector is global and this framework would penalize U.S. companies that also operate overseas. We are the only G-8 country to use a global tax system, which puts our companies at a disadvantage as everyone else moves towards a ‘territorial’ system. We strongly discourage any proposals that would raise taxes on U.S.-based firms that are globally competitive.”

Stations Need Transparency in Political Ads

The public has a right to know who is paying for advertising for politicians who put themselves before the public in election cycles. And I believe that it is in the interest of the community and the larger political audience to know exactly what a station has earned in an election campaign cycle and to know who purchased those ads. The Internet will not replace the role of the local broadcaster in the community. It will, however, change some of the practices. Transparency is now easily affordable and the coin of the Internet realm. The Federal Communications Commission must stand for that value and ask only that broadcasters offer the body politic the insight into the "who," "what" and "how much" is contributed in an advertising cycle in a campaign year.

[King is dean and the John Thomas Kerr Distinguished Professor of the School of Journalism and Mass Communication at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.]

If Android is a "stolen product," then so was the iPhone

Apple CEO Steve Jobs called Android a "stolen product," but theft can be a tricky concept when talking about innovation.

The iPhone didn't emerge fully formed from Jobs's head. Rather, it represented the culmination of incremental innovation over decades—much of which occurred outside of Cupertino. Innovation within multitouch and smartphone technology goes back decades—the first multitouch devices were created in the 1980s—and spans a large number of researchers and commercial firms. It wouldn't have been possible to create the iPhone without copying the ideas of these other researchers. And since the release of Android, Apple has incorporated some Google ideas into iOS. You can call this process plenty of names, some less than complimentary, but consumers generally benefit from the copying within the smartphone market. The best ideas are quickly incorporated into all the leading mobile platforms.

Canoe To Shutter Interactive TV Ad Business, Lay Off 120

Canoe Ventures is shutting down interactive TV advertising operations -- closing its New York office and laying off 120 employees, including CEO Kathy Timko -- leaving about 30 employees to focus on VOD ads as its sole product, the company confirmed.

The decision to abandon ITV ads and dramatically pare back Canoe's mission came after a review by its cable operator owners, according to a Canoe spokeswoman. "It's the result of what the marketplace told us," she said. Despite Canoe's technical achievements, Madison Avenue did not buy the promise of nationally delivered interactive TV ads in a significant way. Among the reasons were that Canoe's reach across households and networks simply wasn't broad enough for the biggest marketers, and that the complexity of executing interactive campaigns didn't justify the additional time and expense. Canoe, in its radically slimmed-down form, will now attempt to create a national video on demand advertising platform that encompasses both traditional on-demand and eventually TV Everywhere. The company will be based in Denver and headed by newly appointed CEO Joel Hassell, who previously was chief technology officer.

Are aggregation and curation journalism? Wrong question

[Commentary] The battle between traditional media and the blogosphere over aggregation (or “curation,” if you prefer) continues to rage. In the latest skirmish, Forbes blogger Kashmir Hill got thrown under the bus by many for a recent blog post in which she summarized a New York Times piece about data-mining practices and privacy. According to her critics, Hill “stole” the story from the NYT, along with a lot of web traffic that rightfully belonged to the newspaper. Some argue that this doesn’t deserve to be called “journalism” — but in many ways the eternal debate over what qualifies as journalism is a red herring. The reality is that aggregation and curation are part of the new media ecosystem, and they can add a lot of value whether we like them or not. The question that matters is whether it serves the reader.

People don’t care about scoops, they care about trust

Social media and the “democratization of distribution” has compressed the news cycle to the point where the half-life of a scoop is measured in minutes rather than hours or days. And judging by a survey of media attitudes that Craigslist founder Craig Newmark has just released, the number of people who care about who reported something first is rapidly diminishing — if it was ever that big to begin with. Instead, what matters most to readers and listeners and viewers is the trustworthiness of the source, whether it’s a TV program or a newspaper. Trust, as Newmark likes to say, is “the new black.”

What does Google Fiber mean for the future of TV?

Google’s video franchise license application in Kansas City follows an application that Google submitted to the Federal Communications Commission a few weeks ago to build a receive-only satellite farm in Council Bluffs, Iowa, which is about 200 miles away from the Kansas City markets and close to one of its major data centers. Together, the applications point to a serious effort on the part of Google to introduce TV services on top of its fiber broadband plans.

There are some major questions left unanswered, as Google works to pull a video service together:

  • Will Google be able to get content owners on board?
  • Will Google TV extend beyond the Kansas City markets?
  • What will Google’s TV service cost?
  • Will YouTube be integrated?