BENTON'S COMMUNICATIONS-RELATED HEADLINES for THURSDAY, APRIL 25, 2013
The Lifeline Program (preview below), Diversity and the FCC’s Next Agenda highlight a busy day http://benton.org/calendar/2013-04-25/
TELECOM
'Obama phone' facts still a hang-up in Washington
Public Interest Advocates Defend Lifeline Program
INTERNET/BROADBAND
Senate votes 75-22 to advance online sales tax bill
CBO Scores Marketplace Fairness Act: no impact on the federal budget - research [links to web]
The fight over Internet sales taxes - analysis
Direct Marketing Association Urges Senate To Reject Online Tax Bill [links to web]
Internet Sales Taxes Are Inevitable - op-ed
Homeland Security Chairman to develop cybersecurity bill [links to web]
Coming Soon: Defense’s New 100 Gigabit Supercomputer Network [links to web]
SPECTRUM/WIRELESS
Preliminary Findings on Federal Relocation Costs and Spectrum Auction Revenues - research
CPB study to examine public policy implications of spectrum auctions
FCC Static Will Distort the Spectrum Auction
MetroPCS Shareholders Approve T-Mobile USA Merger [links to web]
Why NASA is Firing Cell Phones Into Space [links to web]
Verizon eyes $100 billion bid for Vodafone's Wireless stake
ELECTIONS AND MEDIA
What's Really Happening With Obama's Voter Data
Corporate Donations and the SEC - editorial [links to web]
GOVERNMENT & COMMUNICATIONS
What’s the White House Policy on Neutralizing Damaging Tweets?
E-mail Trove Is Big Job for Bush Library [links to web]
Civic Engagement in the Digital Age - research
OWNERSHIP
Could the billionaire Koch brothers buy the Tribune newspapers? - analysis [links to web]
Koch News Is Bad News - op-ed
EDUCATION
Why iPads? It’s a question of innovation [links to web]
PRIVACY
Updating an E-Mail Law From the Last Century
The Digital Ad Industry Gets Dressed Down in Washington
CONTENT
Preventing Misinformation from Spreading through Social Media [links to web]
Have an Unhealthily Close Relationship with Google? Diversify Your Data [links to web]
House Judiciary Chairman to launch sweeping review of US copyright law [links to web]
Hoax Won't Deter Tweeting [links to web]
E-mail Trove Is Big Job for Bush Library [links to web]
TELEVISION
A La Carte TV Will Never Be - editorial
Cable: A Recession-Proof Industry - analysis [links to web]
STORIES FROM ABROAD
Google makes concessions to EU antitrust body
MORE ONLINE
Wrapports explores printer alternatives to Tribune [links to web]
Disruption in media biz unlocks opportunities [links to web]
RTDNA joins groups to oppose California bills - press release [links to web]
back to top
TELECOM
OBAMA PHONE FACTS
[SOURCE: Politico, AUTHOR: Jessica Meyers]
The “Obama phone” debate is still ringing in Washington — as is a bad connection with some of the facts. Lifeline, the controversial phone subsidy program that snagged attention during the first Obama administration, has landed back in the spotlight. Critics then accused the White House of dishing out free cellphones to the poor. Now they’re questioning whether reforms put in place by the Federal Communications Commission to tackle rampant misuse will actually work. The false rumors that started circling nearly four years ago continue to haunt the program as opponents push a welfare state narrative along the lines of Obamacare. A Republican-led House bill with 42 co-sponsors would nearly gut the federal program. An amendment in the recent Senate budget debate tried to eliminate funding entirely. And a House Communications subcommittee hearing Thursday will dissect its worth.
benton.org/node/150342 | Politico
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top
PUBLIC INTEREST ADVOCATES DEFEND LIFELINE PROGRAM
[SOURCE: National Consumer Law Center, AUTHOR: Olivia Wein]
In a letter to House Communications Subcommittee leaders Greg Walden (R-OR) and Anna Eshoo (D-CA), a dozen public interest organizations urged the panel to allow a recent round of reforms to take hold before precipitously altering this the Federal Communications Commission’s Lifeline program which provides modest, affordable, essential phone service to low-income households. The letter was signed by the National Consumer Law Center, Advocates for Basic Legal Equality, the Benton Foundation, the Center of Media Justice, Connecticut Legal Services, the Low Income Utility Advocacy Project, the Legal Services Advocacy Project, New Jersey SHARES, Inc, the Ohio Poverty Law Center, Open Access Connections, Pro Seniors, and Springwire. The groups argue that the Lifeline program:
Provides Affordable No-Frills Voice Service
Enhances the Network Effect
Is a lifeline for the working poor and the unemployed
Enhances the efficient operation of other assistance programs
Helps the medical community provide care
Is essential in emergency situations
Has Undergone Serious Reforms That Should be Allowed to Play Out
Recent surveys of wireless Lifeline customers show:
Around half are over 45 to 50 years of age, with a substantial percent over sixty.
Veterans participate.
Consumers with disabilities participate.
A large percent are unemployed or underemployed and use their Lifeline service to find work.
Lifeline service provides access to healthcare.
Lifeline service provides an introduction to wireless service.
http://benton.org/node/150317
National Consumer Law Center
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top
INTERNET/BROADBAND
SENATE AGAIN ADVANCES ONLINE SALES TAX BILL
[SOURCE: The Hill, AUTHOR: Ramsey Cox]
The Senate took a second procedural step on a bill that would allow states to collect online sales tax. In a 75-22 vote, the Senate proceeded to The Marketplace Fairness Act, S. 743, which would empower states to collect taxes on purchases made online by consumers in their states. The latest vote suggests supporters of the bill are likely to see it win approval in the Senate later this week. Its path through the House, despite the support of many GOP governors, is less clear. Senators in states without a sales tax voiced opposition to the bill, arguing it would burden retailers in their states by forcing them to collect taxes for other state governments. “This legislation would impose new burdens on small businesses not only in New Hampshire but actually across the country,” Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) said. “Small businesses across the country — not just in non-sales tax states, such as New Hampshire, but small businesses across the country — will see their tax burdens increase.” Those supporting the bill have called it a “states’ rights bill” because it would allow states — many of which are battling large budget deficits — to collect the revenue they need to fund state programs.
benton.org/node/150311 | Hill, The
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top
THE FIGHT OVER INTERNET SALES TAXES
[SOURCE: Columbia Journalism Review, AUTHOR: Ryan Chittum]
We’re more than 20 years into the mainstream Web era—20 years!—and Congress is finally seriously considering force retailers to collect sales taxes online, ending a loophole that has given online-only retailers an unfair advantage over physical retailers. Thanks to a catalog company’s 1992 Supreme Court victory, states can’t require retailers that don’t have a physical presence within their borders to collect sales taxes on transactions done living in the state. That ruling predated the Mosaic browser by less than eight months, and combined with inaction at the federal level, it has given online retailers a serious leg up (as much as 10 percent) over their bricks-and-mortar competition. When Congress considered legislation to fix the problem back in the (original) dot com bubble, opponents argued that taxes would kill the baby in the cradle. When online retailers turned into Baby Huey—and Amazon is the poster child here—they argued that it would be a logistical burden to collect sales taxes in the thousands of different localities—never mind that the Barnes & Nobles and Targets of the world have already had to do that with their online sales. Now Amazon, having lost several battles with states over collecting taxes, and wanting to expand its physical presence to speed up its delivery, says it’s on board with a federal law allowing states.
benton.org/node/150309 | Columbia Journalism Review
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top
INTERNET SALES TAXES ARE INEVITABLE
[SOURCE: Slate, AUTHOR: Matthew Yglesias]
[Commentary] Online sales taxes is an issue in which the hyper-polarized politics of the 21st century give way to old-school deal-making, pragmatism, and parochialism. The issue at hand relates to what Tim Fernholz calls large-scale “accidental Internet tax evasion.” Online shoppers have been engaged in it for the past 10–15 years. Most states and some municipalities in the United States depend on retail sales taxes for revenue. And if you look up those laws, you’ll find that in theory you’re generally supposed to pay sales taxes to the state where you live on everything you buy even if you got it from another state or bought it on the Internet. In practice, of course, nobody does this. Until recently, cross-border shopping wasn’t economically significant, and no enforcement mechanisms existed to compel you to pay taxes back in your home state. Then came the Internet. States are seeing their tax base melt away. Enter the Marketplace Fairness Act, enthusiastically pushed by big-box retail chains and Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL). There’s a lot of clout behind taxing Internet sales. Even if it doesn’t pass the House this year, it’s hard to see the no-taxation coalition holding up in the long run. As a bonus, it even makes sense on the merits! E-commerce is great, but it shouldn’t just be a vehicle for tax evasion.
benton.org/node/150307 | Slate
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top
SPECTRUM/WIRELESS
FEDERAL SPECTRUM RELOCATION
[SOURCE: Government Accountability Office, AUTHOR: Mark Goldstein]
The Government Accountability Office was asked to review the costs to relocate federal spectrum users and revenues from spectrum auctions. This testimony before the Senate Committee on Armed Services addresses GAO’s preliminary findings on 1) estimated and actual relocation costs and revenue from the previously auctioned 1710-1755 MHz band, 2) the extent to which DOD followed best practices to prepare its preliminary cost estimate for vacating the 1755-1850 MHz band, and 3) existing government or industry forecasts for revenue from an auction of the 1755-1850 MHz band. GAO reviewed relevant reports; interviewed Department of Defense, Federal Communications Commission, National Telecommunications and Information Administration, and Office of Management and Budget officials and industry stakeholders; and analyzed the extent to which DOD's preliminary cost estimate met best practices identified in GAO's Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide (Cost Guide). DOD's preliminary cost estimate for relocating systems from the 1755-1850 MHz band substantially or partially met GAO's best practices, but changes in key assumptions may affect future costs. Adherence with GAO's Cost Guide helps to minimize the risk of cost overruns, missed deadlines, and unmet performance targets. GAO found that DOD's estimate substantially met the comprehensive and well-documented best practices. [GAO-13-563T]
benton.org/node/150315 | Government Accountability Office
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top
CPB AND INCENTIVE SPECTRUM AUCTIONS
[SOURCE: Current, AUTHOR: Dru Sefton]
The Corporation for Public Broadcasting has initiated a six-month research project on the upcoming broadcast spectrum auctions that will culminate with publication of a white paper. The study will examine multiple complex issues surrounding the auctions, such as preservation of universal service of public broadcasting to all Americans; the role of Community Service Grant policy in spectrum discussions; how much noncommercial spectrum may be necessary in large and overlap markets; the financial implications for individual stations as well as the system as a whole; and station responsibilities to their communities. The intended audience for the paper, said Mark Erstling, s.v.p. system development, will be the CPB Board, station boards and management “who are making the tough decisions” regarding the future of their spectrum; policymakers in state and federal government and other key stakeholders; and the public. One significant reason for doing the white paper, noted CPB COO Vincent Curren, “is for CPB to play an influential role to help influence policy discussions at the FCC. They are aware of the importance of maintaining universal public media service; we are confident there is an understanding of that at the staff level,” Curren said. “But for the full FCC, it’s helpful to have a report from us saying this is critical to pay attention to.”
benton.org/node/150305 | Current
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top
INCENTIVE AUCTIONS
[SOURCE: Wall Street Journal, AUTHOR: Preston Padden]
[Commentary] The Federal Communications Commission is considering modifications to the statutory plan to auction off spectrum that could cause the auction to fail. The Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 is intended to obtain 120 megahertz of spectrum currently allocated to TV and auction it off to wireless carriers—giving these carriers more capacity to complete cellphone calls and enhance Internet access. In most markets, the FCC will be able to simply "repack" the existing TV stations' six MHZ of spectrum into tighter blocks, freeing up spectrum space to be auctioned off. But in the biggest, most congested urban markets (such as New York, Philadelphia, Boston and Los Angeles), there are too many TV stations to get the needed spectrum through repacking. In those markets, the legislation calls for the FCC to pay stations to go off the air. If the auctions are conducted as Congress envisioned, they will entice broadcasters to sell their spectrum and yield $7 billion in surplus revenue to fund the planned First Responders Network and apply the rest toward reducing the federal deficit. The success of the congressional plan crucially depends on attracting, through the prospect of large payments, enough TV stations to surrender their channels. And that requires a robustly competitive auction among wireless carriers. Unfortunately, instead of conducting a straight-up, unbiased auction to recover TV channels, the FCC has proposed a "scoring system" that assigns different prices to TV stations based on the opinions of FCC staff regarding the value of those stations. [Padden is executive director of the Expanding Opportunities for Broadcasters Coalition, a group of more than 40 major-market TV stations potentially willing to participate in the FCC's Incentive Auction]
benton.org/node/150337 | Wall Street Journal
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top
VERIZON-VODAFONE
[SOURCE: Reuters, AUTHOR: Soyoung Kim]
Verizon Communications has hired advisers to prepare a possible $100 billion cash and stock bid to take full control of Verizon Wireless from its partner Vodafone, two people familiar with the matter said. Verizon, which already owns 55 percent of the company, has not put a proposal to Vodafone yet but it has hired both banking and legal advisers for a possible bid, the sources said. Verizon, which has made little secret of its wish to buy out its British joint venture partner, has ramped up the pressure in recent months, and London-based analysts and investors interpreted the latest move as an attempt to force Vodafone in to serious talks. The sources said Verizon was now ready to push aggressively for a deal. It hopes to start discussions with Vodafone soon for a friendly agreement but is prepared to take a bid public if the British company does not engage, one of the sources added.
benton.org/node/150333 | Reuters
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top
ELECTIONS AND MEDIA
VOTER DATA
[SOURCE: AdAge, AUTHOR: Kate Kaye]
It's conventional wisdom that Democrats lucky enough to get the Obama campaign's data files are going to have a massive marketing advantage in upcoming elections. And when Organizing for Action, President Barack Obama's data-savvy post-2012 campaign operation was established in January, it seemed to answer the question on every politico's mind: Where will the data go? But a direct transfer of the coveted Obama data from campaign to nonprofit is not so simple -- not by a long shot. Exactly where the Obama 2012 data lives is complex, in some cases still undetermined, and mostly obscured. The receptacle for some of the information -- which included voter-file data, social-media data, ad interaction and measurement information, email data, polling data, volunteer-profile data and competitive intelligence on GOP contender Mitt Romney's media buys -- remains unsettled in part because Federal Election Commission rules on coordination and campaign financing prevent the old Obama for America campaign from porting everything lock-stock-and-barrel to the new OFA that spun out of it.
benton.org/node/150303 | AdAge
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top
GOVERNMENT & COMMUNICATIONS
WHAT'S THE WHITE HOUSE POLICY ON NEUTRALIZING DAMAGING TWEETS?
[SOURCE: nextgov, AUTHOR: Aliya Sternstein]
The Obama Administration's social media outreach apparently does not extend to countering market-moving falsified tweets about the White House. A hacked Associated Press Twitter account informed the public that blasts at the White House had harmed the President. The Dow tumbled for a bit in response. The Homeland Security Department noticed the bogus tweet -- or should have given that DHS admittedly monitors Twitter and other public social media to identify threatening situations. Yet there was radio silence from the Administration online. Sure, a few minutes of economic insecurity isn’t worth issuing a terrorist alert tweet. But federal agencies are supposed to be scored on social media responsiveness, according to new public engagement guidelines. There were no assurances President Barack Obama was safe on the various White House Twitter accounts or on the White House website. White House Press Secretary Jay Carney took to traditional media, telling reporters at a briefing: "The President is fine. I was just with him."
benton.org/node/150298 | nextgov
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top
CIVIC ENGAGEMENT IN THE DIGITAL AGE
[SOURCE: Pew Internet and American Life Project, AUTHOR: Aaron Smith]
Social networking sites have grown more important in recent years as a venue for political involvement, learning, and debate. Overall, 39% of all American adults took part in some sort of political activity on a social networking site during the 2012 campaign. This means that more Americans are now politically active on social networking sites (SNS) than used them at all as recently as the 2008 election campaign. At that point, 26% of the population used a social networking site of any kind. The growth in several specific behaviors between 2008 and 2012 illustrates the increasing importance of SNS as places where citizens can connect with political causes and issues:
In 2012, 17% of all adults posted links to political stories or articles on social networking sites, and 19% posted other types of political content. That is a six-fold increase from the 3% of adults who posted political stories or links on these sites in 2008.
In 2012, 12% of all adults followed or friended a political candidate or other political figure on a social networking site, and 12% belonged to a group on a social networking site involved in advancing a political or social issue. That is a four-fold increase from the 3% of adults who took part in these behaviors in 2008.
benton.org/node/150331 | Pew Internet and American Life Project
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top
OWNERSHIP
KOCH NEWS IS BAD NEWS
[SOURCE: The Huffington Post, AUTHOR: Timothy Karr]
[Commentary] Over the years, Charles and David Koch have financed a vast organizing network, including Americans for Prosperity, that amplifies their extreme anti-environment, anti-labor and anti-democracy views. They've bankrolled a constellation of think tanks, including the Cato Institute, the Heartland Institute and the Mercatus Center, which churn out research designed to prop up the Kochs' position that corporations should not be regulated. But that isn't enough for the Koch brothers. According to the New York Times, the Kochs want a national media presence as well. That's especially bad news for anyone living in the communities these papers serve. American humorist and writer Peter Finnley Dunne wrote that journalism's central purpose is "to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable." But Koch-controlled media outlets would likely cover up corporate and political abuse -- not expose it. And they'd not only cover up but also promote injustice. The Kochs are supporters of the American Legislative Exchange Council (or ALEC), which was active last year pushing legislation to disenfranchise voters. The legislation was insidiously designed to remove voters from based on race and income. While more than 40 companies have withdrawn their support from ALEC -- as a result of the pressure campaigns by groups including Center for Media and Democracy, ColorofChange.org and Common Cause -- the Kochs are holding out.
benton.org/node/150300 | Huffington Post, The
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top
PRIVACY
ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS PRIVACY ACT
[SOURCE: New York Times, AUTHOR: Somini Sengupta]
Congress is now set to clarify electronic privacy rules, bringing a quarter-century-old law, the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) in line with the Internet age. On April 25, the Senate Judiciary Committee will start deliberating a measure that would require the government to get a search warrant, issued by a judge, to gain access to personal e-mails and all other electronic content held by a third-party service provider. The current statute requires a warrant for e-mails that are less than six months old. But it lets the authorities gain access to older communications — or bizarrely, e-mails that have already been opened — with just a subpoena and no judicial review. The law governs the privacy of practically everything entrusted to the Internet — family photos stored with a Web service, journal entries kept online, company documents uploaded to the cloud, and the flurry of e-mails exchanged every day. The problem is that it was written when the cloud was just vapor in the sky. Silicon Valley companies as well as advocacy groups from the political left and right have been lobbying for change for many years, and reform legislation seems to be gaining broad political support.
benton.org/node/150340 | New York Times | The Hill
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top
DO NOT TRACK HEARING
[SOURCE: New York Times, AUTHOR: Natasha Singer]
Senator John D. Rockefeller IV (D-WV) lambasted the digital advertising industry for failing to voluntarily honor privacy requests from online consumers called “Do Not Track” signals. Negotiations between advertising groups and privacy advocates have bogged down over basic questions of how exactly to define, standardize and respond to the privacy signals. Although major browsers now allow users to express their preferences about online tracking, very few companies now honor browsers’ don’t track me flags. Frustrated by the seemingly slow progress, Sen Rockefeller, the chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, grilled industry representatives at a hearing about Do Not Track. Do Not Track “is still just an idea, not a reality,” said Chairman Rockefeller. “What exactly is the holdup?” Although the industry ad choices program does put some limits on its members’ use of consumer data — restricting it to activities like fraud prevention and security — Chairman Rockefeller says the industry’s exceptions for market research and other uses promote unfettered data collection about consumers’ online activities. The senator introduced a bill in February that would direct the Federal Trade Commission to create standards for Do Not Track mechanisms as well as develop rules that prohibit companies for collecting data about consumers who opt out of tracking. “I do not want to hear assertions that the current self-regulatory scheme fulfills Do Not Track requests,” Chairman Rockefeller said.
benton.org/node/150338 | New York Times | The Hill | B&C | AdWeek | Associated Press
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top
TELEVISION
A La Carte TV Will Never Be - editorial
A LA CARTE WILL NEVER BE
[SOURCE: Variety, AUTHOR: Andrew Wallenstein]
[Commentary] The prospect of consumers getting the ability to choose which cable channels they want has proven to be a remarkably resilient fantasy. Maybe that’s because TV executives can’t seem to resist giving the proposition just enough attention to make it seem possible. Verizon CEO Lowell McAdam described the a la carte business model at the National Assn. of Broadcasters confab earlier this month as “a novel way that could help protect subscriptions in the long run.” An unprecedented antitrust suit filed by Cablevision against Viacom has also renewed speculation. But now is as good a time as any to point out the absurdity inherent in a debate that has raged from Congress to coffee shops going back a decade. A-la-carte channel choice no longer makes a lick of sense in the age of on-demand viewing. A post-bundle world would require a much different environment than the one a la carte fans envision, one that probably draws more on title-oriented platforms like Netflix or iTunes than on TV’s linear lineage.
benton.org/node/150332 | Variety
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top
STORIES FROM ABROAD
GOOGLE CONCESIONS
[SOURCE: Associated Press, AUTHOR: Juergen Baetz]
Google is offering major concessions on how it displays search results in Europe — including a better labeling of its own promoted content and displaying links to its competitors — to appease concerns it might be abusing its dominant market position, the European Union's antitrust body said. Google has offered to more clearly label search results stemming from its own services such as YouTube, Google Maps or its shopping search function, allowing users to distinguish between natural search results and others promoted by Google. It also agreed to display some search results from its competitors and links to their services, the EU Commission said. The Commission is now proposing a market test of the concessions for a month as a test run. That would give competitors the chance to say whether they deem them sufficient. Once the Commission accepts them — revised or not — they become legally binding for the company for the next five years. Google has worked closely with the Commission on the concessions' design until formally submitting them earlier this month.
benton.org/node/150329 | Associated Press
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top
