November 2012

Time for a High-Tech Version of the National Guard

[Commentary] When a disaster strikes, access to communications and high-tech infrastructure is critical for saving lives and mobilizing relief efforts. But as we saw a few weeks ago, Hurricane Sandy rendered inoperable the phone lines and computer networks that people needed to call for help and reach loved ones. In the storm’s aftermath many remained unable to access local and federal aid or even find out where they could get gasoline. It doesn’t have to be this way.

Just as the National Guard can be called upon to provide emergency relief, there are thousands of technology professionals ready, willing and able to volunteer their skills to rebuild crucial technology infrastructure in times exactly like these. These men and women could help build emergency cellphone towers and set up mesh Wi-Fi networks. They could assist government agencies to build and maintain the information systems that are needed to locate, manage and deploy food and water, tents and electric generators, and to help health workers keep track of drugs and other critical medical supplies. They also can help small businesses, schools and nonprofit organizations get their own information networks back online and functioning quickly. NET Guard teams could also work with federal, state and local officials on emergency-communication plans that could be put into motion even before a major storm hit, or immediately after an unexpected disaster like an earthquake or terrorist attack. No one questions the need to keep the phone systems running—and it is equally critical that the nation has a means for getting Internet-based communications systems up and running when they go down after a disaster. Information technology is not just about cool smartphones, tablets and computers. Today it is also about providing and delivering crucial information that can save lives, save property, and help rebuild faster when it matters most. The Obama administration now has dramatic evidence of the need to set up a NET Guard to help victims of future disasters recover and reconstruct their lives.

A Needless Charge for Prison Families

[Commentary] After nearly a decade of delay, the Federal Communications Commission is finally focusing on the private telephone companies that charge outrageously high rates for the calls that many of the nation’s 1.6 million prison inmates make to stay in contact with their families.

The commissioners are considering a proposal to seek public comment on prison phone regulation. They need to act to end the burdensome charges that can make a single phone call from prison as expensive as an entire month of home phone service. Prison calls are so expensive because inmates must place them through independent companies that pay the state corrections departments a “commission,” essentially a legal kickback. A 15 minute call can cost a family as much as $17. For struggling families who want to keep in touch with loved ones behind bars, this can sometimes mean choosing between a phone call and putting food on the table. The FCC should move quickly to bring fairness to the system, and it should consider imposing rate caps on what the phone companies can charge.

Investigation Into General Narrows Look at E-Mail

Two and a half weeks after Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta announced an inquiry into e-mail exchanges between Gen. John R. Allen of the Marines and a socialite in Tampa, Fla., some 15 investigators working seven days a week in the Pentagon inspector general’s office have narrowed their focus to 60 to 70 e-mails that “bear a fair amount of scrutiny,” a defense official said.

The defense official, who asked not to be named because of the nature of the inquiry, said investigators were trying to determine whether the e-mails violated Defense Department policy, government regulations or military law. A law enforcement official has described some of them as sexually explicit. Pentagon officials briefed on the matter say they have been told that half a dozen are embarrassing. But General Allen’s associates say they are innocuous and contain little beyond language like “you’re a sweetheart.”

‘Do Not Track’ Internet privacy initiative struggles to keep momentum

The two-year-old drive to give consumers a simple way to block companies from tracking their behavior as they move across the Internet has faltered, say participants in the process who are struggling to reconcile privacy concerns with an advertising model that pays for many free Internet services.

The friction puts in peril the “Do Not Track” initiative that appeared to have widespread support at a White House event in February, when industry officials endorsed it in concept. Federal Trade Commission Chairman Jon Leibowitz, who also embraced the idea as central to the independent agency’s push for protecting personal data privacy, had predicted a deal by the end of the year. But meetings of a key working committee have turned acrimonious in recent months, and a co-chair of the effort plans to step down Nov 28. Participants now say a deal remains months away, and some say it may take federal action to limit Internet tracking.

Professor to Try to Salvage Troubled “Do Not Track” Deal

Ohio State Law professor Peter Swire has agreed to step in to try to salvage contentious negotiations between privacy advocates and the online advertising industry over how to block unwanted online tracking. However, the appointment of Prof Swire, who served as chief counselor for privacy in the Clinton Administration, is unlikely to result in a do-not-track deal by the end of this year, as previously promised. Both the online ad industry and privacy advocates said the appointment of Swire as co-chair of World Wide Web Consortiums’ Tracking Protection Working Group was unlikely to be enough to save the effort.

A local TV trend: And now, the identical news

As the election loomed earlier this month, TV stations around the country were broadcasting the news. The same news. That is, the identical news. How exactly does this happen? And why does it keep happening? The answer is one of the little-known facts about “local” TV news: In some instances it isn’t local at all.

Viewers typically have no idea that a seemingly local story has come from a centralized source. In addition to the major networks, which run their own affiliate services, syndicated shows such as “Entertainment Tonight” and “Access Hollywood” also provide local stations with ready-made scripts and interview packages for their local newscasts, says Mike Cavender, executive director of the Radio Television Digital News Association, a Washington-based trade association. The material not only gives a station in, say, Boise or Wichita a Hollywood connection but also promotes the syndicated show, which usually airs after a station’s 6 p.m. newscast. The canned TV packages are somewhat like the news service stories that many newspapers and Web sites publish, but with a key difference: Unlike news service material, which usually is labeled as such, TV stations typically run affiliate material without identifying its source. But the increasing use of such prepackaged news undermines “localism,” or community-based reporting, the Federal Communications Commission said last year in a wide-ranging report on the news media.

FCC chief’s painstaking approach earns mixed reviews in turbulent times for telecom industry

When he isn’t chairing the Federal Communications Commission, Julius Genachowski enjoys a seat at a poker table. And as it turns out, he approaches cards much like he regulates: with great caution.

Quiet, brainy and restrained, the nation’s top telecom cop and law school friend of the president takes pains to carefully evaluate each hand. He typically shies away from high-stakes, high-risk rounds. Instead, he’ll stick with Texas Hold ’Em long enough to size up rivals, but not long enough to test his luck — even with a decent hand, according to people who have played with him in the homes of Beltway government officials, journalists and sports pros. But in a town full of aggressive lobbyists paid to bend the FCC’s positions in their favor, that careful and measured approach can be frustrating. Genachowski has sometimes been seen as a regulatory Hamlet, deliberating over details as powerful companies push impatiently for action. His term at the agency ends next summer, and while Genachowski hasn’t announced plans for departure, he is widely expected to leave as soon as the administration can arrange for a successor. After two successive Republican chairmen who had generally been restrained in exercising regulatory authority, Genachowski entered the job with the intent of staking out the government’s claim over the fast-growing Internet industry.

Facebook seeks to drop votes on policy

Now that Facebook is being held increasingly accountable by federal privacy regulators, critics fear it is seeking to make itself less accountable to its users. The social network wants to eliminate the once-championed right of users to vote on changes to the company’s data use and governance policies, provoking a backlash from privacy advocates.

Nov 28 is the last day that users can comment on the proposed change. “Mark Zuckerberg peddles Facebook as one of greatest tools to bolster democracy and help elect a president and support revolutions, but the last place he wants to see a revolution is on its eavesdropping of users,” says Jeff Chester, president of the Center for Digital Democracy. The Center for Digital Democracy and the Electronic Privacy Information Center sent a joint letter to Mr Zuckerberg, Facebook’s chief executive, on Monday, urging him to withdraw the proposed changes. Several US senators, congressmen and commissioners with the Federal Trade Commission received copies of the letter. The advocates argue that the changes backtrack on previous commitments from Facebook to involve users in deciding on how the site is governed, and potentially violate agreements with US regulators that gave users more control over how their data are shared.

Google Chief Page Said to Meet FTC Over Antitrust Probe

On Nov 27, Google Chief Executive Officer Larry Page met with Federal Trade Commission officials in Washington as the agency moves to wrap up its 19-month investigation of the company’s business practices, according to a person familiar with the discussions. Google is seeking to persuade the FTC it hasn’t broken antitrust laws and that any final agreement with the agency shouldn’t be bound by a consent decree, according to the person and two others, who declined to be identified because the negotiations aren’t public. Google has been engaged in settlement talks with the FTC for about a week, including an effort to define whether there’s a market where Google has a monopoly, one of the people said. The Mountain View, California-based company, operator of the world’s most popular search engine, is concerned that entering a formal settlement agreement with the agency may hurt its business prospects, the people said.

Will the FCC Finally Act to Enforce the Rule of Law and Protect Our Public Airwaves?

[Commentary] There is a little-known ritual that occurs in the election years when Democrats prevail: Big "Conservative" Media starts to pull progressive talk radio off the air. I documented this in my 2009 documentary film Broadcast Blues: After Democratic candidates made big gains in 2006, Clear Channel and other public airwaves radio licensees pulled several well-performing progressive talk radio stations off the air and replaced them with sports and other programming. It would be easier to understand if the new programs got big ratings bumps, but that didn't happen. The new shows' ratings are typically only half those of progressive talkers.

True to form, Clear Channel Communications, which owns about 850 radio stations nationwide, took the progressive voices off the public airwaves in Portland (OR) just days after Democrats won big nationwide. So if it isn't about ratings, what other motive could the Bain Capital-owned Clear Channel have for denying access to progressive voices over the public airwaves, which we all own? The answer is found in Milwaukee, Wis., where five -- repeat: five -- local right-wing talkers on two stations directly supported Republican candidates from Scott Walker to Paul Ryan over our publicly owned airwaves 15 hours a day, five days a week. Republicans there boast that they win elections primarily due to the extraordinary promotion of these right-wing talk radio hosts, and pro-GOP business leaders are combing the state in search of yet more frequencies that they can find to air righty talk, because they know that that is what is winning elections.

Benton

Search