1. Monthly archive
  2. September 2013

September 2013

Verizon wants you to replace your landline phone with an LTE-powered box

Verizon's taking another step toward doing away with landlines.

It's already begun replacing landlines with routers connected by its wireless network as a way to quickly restore service after a storm, but those routers hadn't been made widely available. Now however, Verizon is beginning to sell one online, allowing anyone to connect their entire home Internet and voice services to their wireless plan. Verizon's descriptively named 4G LTE Broadband Router with Voice includes both voice and data service to the home, but the company sees it as much more than that: because it uses a wireless network — and therefore isn't tied down to a specific location — Verizon suggests that it could be toted around to hotels, vacation spots, and the office as needed so that travelers can always have high-speed Internet and their home phone number with them. But the router's broader debut isn't simply a matter of giving consumers more options. Telecommunications providers would be more than happy to rid themselves of costly copper telephone lines, and the more people that Verizon can get to switch over to new wireless technologies, the better for them.

Court refuses to help author who was victim of alleged bogus DMCA takedown notices

[Commentary] An author and her publisher disagreed on the content of two of the author’s new books. So, rather than deal with the publisher, the author self-published the works on Amazon. The publisher sent Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) takedown notices to Amazon, with which Amazon complied. The author sued the publisher. She sought a temporary restraining order (TRO), asking the court to instruct the publisher to tell Amazon to make the works available. The court denied the TRO motion, finding that the author had failed to show she would suffer irreparable harm if the works were not put back on the market. In the court’s view, the author failed to show how a temporary delay in sales would affect her reputation or goodwill.

[Evan Brown is an attorney in Chicago helping businesses and individuals make good decisions about technology and intellectual property]

Movie Screenwriters Increasingly Turning to TV, Writers Guild Survey Says

Nearly 90% of writers — more than half of whom wrote feature films – say they’ll be looking for TV work, according to the Writers Guild of America East (WGAE).

When asked in a survey by the writers’ union to select the biggest challenges WGAE members will face in the next five years, half of the respondents identified the decreased number of feature films being made. Many also decried the lack of development deals in feature film and limited revenues from digital and online reuse of their work. When asked about the biggest opportunities for WGAE members in the next five years, 77 percent identified new production and distribution models in digital media, and nearly two-thirds said additional hours of scripted programming on TV and online.

Netflix, A La Carte Cable Favored by Majority of Customers, Study Finds

Cable customers are tired of big bills and want the ability to pick and choose the channels they subscribe to, a new study by PricewaterhouseCoopers finds.

Seventy three percent of the more than 1,000 people the firm surveyed about their video consumption habits said they would like an a la carte option or want the ability to customize their cable packages instead of being limited to a few, wide-ranging bundles. Given that flexibility, 65 percent say they would be willing to pay for access to more than 10 channels. However, demographics play a role here. Seventy three percent of older viewers, aged 50 to 59, want 10 or more channels, while only 55 percent of younger viewers, aged 18 to 24, want that many channels. When it comes to pricing each individual channel, more than sixty percent of respondents are willing to pay up to $2.99 per channel, while 72 percent are willing to pay up to $1.99 per show per month.

What 'A La Carte' TV Would Mean For Advertisers

No matter how many arguments are made against a la carte as a remedy for the broken pay-TV model, the idea just won't die. While TV networks are staunchly against the idea, fearing consumers wouldn't pay for their smaller or mid-sized networks, advertisers could also suffer if cable bundles break up and smaller channels thin in number, because more viewers would go to the bigger networks, effectively driving up prices for advertisers to reach a mass audience.

Marketers don't typically buy advertising on networks that reach fewer than 25 million homes, and Amy Sotiridy, senior VP-director of national broadcast at Initiative, said for many of her clients the threshold is 50 million. This would in turn make it difficult for niche networks to survive. Meanwhile, media buyers are supportive of new networks entering the ecosystem since they increase competition and negotiating power. But a la carte would make it nearly impossible for a new network to launch, Sotiridy said. Why would a consumer pay for a channel that isn't proven, and how does a network develop cachet unless it has carriage? Ultimately, this could make advertising on online platforms like Hulu and AOL even more attractive and help speed the shift of dollars out of TV and into digital.

If a la carte did materialize, Needham analyst Laura Martin estimates 50%, or $70 billion, would evaporate from the TV ecosystem (half coming from subscriber fees and the other half from advertising) and fewer than 20 channels would attract enough subscribers to survive.

Advertisers Struggle to See the ROI on Branded Content

Part of the allure of branded content is that when people share it in social media or it's hosted on websites, marketers aren't paying media companies to distribute it. But marketers are finding content is far from cheap, and that "owned" and "earned" media don't mean you don't pay handsomely.

A Gartner survey earlier this year found marketers now spend almost as much on content creation and management as they do on paid online display. And they're spending almost twice as much on the infrastructure behind digital content -- such as website operations, video production and social-media marketing -- as they do on paid display and search combined. Hence, efforts to measure and improve return on investment for content are on the rise. Procter & Gamble Co., which spends 25% to 35% of its US marketing budget on digital, according to Chairman-CEO A.G. Lafley, has been particularly focused on content ROI, according to people familiar with the matter.

Everyone Wants In on Content, But What's the Best Approach?

In a story last year, Ad Age detailed how two marketers collaborated to create long-form vignettes that ran during commercial breaks of a network TV show. But once the piece was posted online, the advertisers raised an objection to our characterization of the spots as "commercials." Instead, they argued, they were content. In reality, they were both—and the concept is hotter than ever.

Everyone from agencies to former custom publishers, production studios and media owners seem to be rethinking their strategies (or even restructuring) to capitalize on content by carefully fitting their marketing message into a new framework of the medium surrounding the ad. According to an Ad Age survey, content marketing attracted 12% of marketers' budgets in 2012 and more than half of marketers plan to spend even more on it this year. As demand grows for talented directors and feature-film-like content (marketer-funded and -branded webisodes or documentaries, for example) studios are gaining direct access to brands and bringing in more freelance creative strategists. "Clients welcome [producers] and they know how to sell ideas," said Mike Wiese, director-original and branded content at WPP's JWT. It's clear content marketing is only going to continue growing; producing and contributing to quality content, whether in the form of a 30-second TV ad, product placement or an original series, isn't going away. And marketers increasingly will be forced to zero in on the model that best suits their short-term and long-term marketing goals.

News Organizations Face Tricky Trade-Off With 'Sponsored Content'

[Commentary] Publishing used to be a simple -- and very profitable -- business. But with profits shrinking, the industry is getting more creative to attract marketers' dollars. And all anyone seems to want are sponsored posts.

Marketers are projected to spend $1.9 billion on sponsored content this year, up 22% from 2012, according to eMarketer. By 2017, it predicts that number will reach $3.1 billion. For marketers, the appeal is simple: Audiences understand that advertisers have a commercial relationship with a publisher. By wrapping ad messages in a format that looks like editorial content—and calling them something else, such as "sponsored" or "partner" content—they hope to trade on the trust and goodwill editorial has built up with the audience. A bit of confusion is inherent in the appeal. It's a tricky trade-off. The line between advertising and editorial is getting really blurry. Guidance could be on the way, though. The Federal Trade Commission said it would hold a workshop on native advertising in December. The agency wants a better understanding of best practices and whether consumers are able to recognize sponsored content as advertising. Until there's a standard for what goes too far, publishers are leaning on their own version of the famous Supreme Court measure for obscenity: "I know it when I see it." Occasional blunders are inevitable since even the best gut instincts have off days -- and the ultimate risk is that such moves result in an outcome that's bad not just for publishers but marketers, too: jaded, distrusting consumers.

Schools, Health and Libraries Broadband Coalition (SHLB)
Tuesday, October 1, 2013
9:30am to 2:45pm
http://www.shlb.org/events

A thoughtful discussion of the key issues in the FCC's E-rate Modernization proceeding and the ConnectED Initiative.

The Seminar will be Webcast Live by TVWorldwide!

Agenda

9:00 a.m. Registration Opens

9:30 – 9:40 Introduction: John Windhausen, Executive Director, SHLB Coalition

9:40 - 9:55 Doug Levin, Executive Director, State Educational Technology Directors Association (SETDA)

10:00 – 11:10 Panel #1: How Can the E-Rate Program Support High Capacity Broadband?
Denise Atkinson-Shorey, President, e-Luminosity (on behalf of CoSN)
Dennis Sampson, Associate Director, Utah Education Network
Gene Hainer, Assistant Commissioner, State Librarian, Colorado Department of Education (on behalf of COSLA)
Jim Kohlenberger, JKStrategies (on behalf of EducationSuperhighway)
Moderator: Alan Fishel, Arent Fox, LLP

11:10 – 11:20 Break

11:20 – 12:20 Panel #2: Wireless and Internal Connections: What Options Are Available to Bring Broadband into the Classroom and Out to the Community?
Jeff Campbell, Director, Technology Policy, Cisco
Melinda Stanley, State Education Technology Coordinator, Kansas State Department of Education
Katherine Messier, Managing Director, Mobile Beacon
Moderator: Steve Augustino, Kelley, Drye & Warren, LLP

12:20 – 1:00 Lunch

1:00 – 1:40 Conversation with Tom Power, Deputy Chief Technology Officer for Telecommunications, Office of Science and Technology Policy, Executive Office of the President

1:50 – 2:50 Panel #3: How Can the E-rate Program Be Strengthened for the Long-Term?
John Harrington, CEO, Funds for Learning
Bob Collie, CTO, Education Networks of America (ENA)
Sheryl Abshire, CTO, Calcasieu Parish School System, Lake Charles, Louisiana
Larra Clark, Director, Program on Networks, OITP, American Library Association


September 25, 2013 (Broadband Report Reveals Gender Inequalities)

BENTON'S COMMUNICATIONS-RELATED HEADLINES for WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 2013

Headlines provides updates all day long @benton_fdn

INTERNET/BROADBAND
   UN agency’s annual broadband report reveals gender inequalities
   What if Verizon succeeds in killing the Internet? - editorial
   Cut the cord for home broadband? Not so fast
   Bring in the IP transition - op-ed
   Is VoIP a public utility? - op-ed
   Rural Ohio County Designated a ‘Connected Community’ [links to web]
   Senate working on counterpart to CISPA cybersecurity bill

WIRELESS/SPECTRUM
   The FCC Must Stay on Course on Mobile Competition - op-ed
   FCC Seeks More Input on Auction Relocation Fund Costs
   Unchained Cellphones - editorial
   Spectrum Auctions: Sens. Want 'Expeditious' Coordination With Mexico, Canada [links to web]
   Verizon's McAdam dismisses unlimited data plans: 'You will run out of gas'
   Universities looking to pass technology test [links to web]
   AT&T and Fon agree to share Wi-Fi hotspots, charge significantly for the convenience [links to web]
   AT&T will build an LTE-Broadcast network tailor-made for video
   What’s Behind AT&T’s Plans for Alltel Assets?
   AT&T Chief: Cricket Will Be Our Lower-Cost Brand [links to web]
   AT&T's Stephenson Says Open to European Acquisitions
   AT&T Won't Set Table With Dish - analysis [links to web]

PRIVACY
   California online tracking, 'eraser button' bills set to alter online privacy
   Public interest groups appeal $20 Million Facebook “Sponsored Stories” deal
   US Senate expands data privacy investigation

CONTENT
   Al Jazeera English unblocks its YouTube videos for US-based viewers [links to web]
   Consumer Demand for Digital Learning Games, Simulations Growing Worldwide [links to web]

TELEVISION
   More Cord-Cutting Drumbeats: “Very Likely” Cutters Growing In Number [links to web]
   FX’s John Landgraf on a la Carte Cable’s Threat to Hollywood’s Creativity [links to web]
   Viacom: A La Carte Not the Answer [links to web]
   Aereo CEO Chet Kanojia – ‘Cable’s an Inefficient Packaging System’ [links to web]

ELECTIONS AND MEDIA
   Hume explains why conservative talkers can cause problems for some House Republicans

ADVERTISING
   Analyst: FTC Condition on Nielsen-Arbitron Hardly Matters
   The Role of Native Advertising in Our Search for a New Media Equation - editorial

JOURNALISM
   Journalists need this federal 'shield' - editorial
   Paying attention to the shield law’s critics - op-ed

GOVERNMENT & COMMUNICATIONS
   Brazilian president rails against US surveillance at UN assembly [links to web]
   Chairman Patrick Leahy backs sweeping NSA restrictions [links to web]
   Dropbox joins the call for transparency, asks government to let it publish surveillance requests [links to web]
   Former US CTO Says APIs Are Key to Unlocking Government Data [links to web]
   Google Is Quietly Making It Harder For The NSA To Monitor Internet Traffic [links to web]

POLICYMAKERS
   Apple's top lobbyist nominated to State Department [links to web]
   Comcast taps 'Internet guy' to think outside the cable box [links to web]
   Judge Rejects LightSquared Director, Citing Possible Conflict of Interest [links to web]
   24 Extraordinarily Creative People Who Inspire Us All: Meet the 2013 MacArthur Fellows - press release [links to web]

STORIES FROM ABROAD
   China may lift ban on Facebook, Twitter in Shanghai free-trade zone
   China's smartphone shipments to exceed 450 million in 2014: IDC [links to web]
   Europe must not try to regulate the Internet - op-ed

back to top

INTERNET/BROADBAND

UN AGENCY’S ANNUAL BROADBAND REPORT REVEALS GENDER INEQUALITIES
[SOURCE: GigaOm, AUTHOR: Lauren Hockenson]
The United Nations’ International Telecommunication Union has added something new to its annual report on worldwide broadband penetration: gender inequality. According to the study, about 41 percent of men (1.5 billion total) will have access to the Internet by the end of 2013, compared to just 37 percent of women (1.3 billion total). That gap could grow to 350 million by the end of 2016 — a sign that women are coming online at a much slower pace than men. This disparity is most pronounced in developing nations, where women trail in Internet usage by 16 percent. For the first time, the State of Broadband report also tracks a new target mandating ‘gender equality in broadband access by the year 2020’, which was set by the Broadband Commission for Digital Development, at its March meeting in Mexico City. ITU figures confirm that, worldwide, women are less likely to have access to technology than their male counterparts. While the gap is relatively small in the developed world, it widens enormously as average income levels fall.
benton.org/node/160880 | GigaOm | International Telecommunication Union
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top


WHAT IF VERIZON SUCCEEDS IN KILLING THE INTERNET?
[SOURCE: InfoWorld, AUTHOR: Paul Venezia]
[Commentary] Verizon is making a big push to begin actively blocking content and competition from its network. But what happens if Verizon wins? What happens if Verizon establishes a precedent for censorship? Many in the free-market camp will say that customers unhappy with Verizon's service can simply take their computers and go to another provider. Ah, if it were only that simple. If there were any kind of actual competition in broadband service in the United States, we wouldn't be in this position to begin with. The market would take care of these kinds of transgressions naturally. However, this is not the case, and the vast number of markets that have no real competition will be faced with a choice between a neutered Internet and no Internet at all. "But you can go wireless!" they say. Sure, for vastly overcharged subscriptions and minuscule data plans. Oh, and Verizon is in that market, too. If Verizon wins, the citizens lose, no matter who they are bound to for Internet access. In any case, my hope is that we will begin to see clear and unconstrained Internet access as a public service, a constitutional right, a given -- that we will someday be able to enjoy the pricing, speed, and availability of Internet access enjoyed by Romania or South Korea. It's obvious that we cannot count on the big ISPs to bring us there without placing strong controls on their behavior.
benton.org/node/160883 | InfoWorld
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top


CUT THE CORD FOR HOME BROADBAND? NOT SO FAST
[SOURCE: USAToday, AUTHOR: Rob Pegoraro]
Question: I need a broadband Internet connection — no phone, no TV, just data — for my new home in Naples (FL). What are my options? Answer: Realistically, this reader only has one option. And that's the case for many Americans. Few can choose between two services offering uncapped bandwidth faster than maybe 5 Mbps; almost none can indulge in offerings like the 1-billion-bits-per-second, $70-ish connections available from Google Fiber in Kansas City, Sonic.net in the Bay Area and the municipally owned power utility in Chattanooga (TN). This lack of competition explains the debate over "net neutrality" regulations that ban Internet providers from blocking or slowing access to some sites — and which Verizon is suing the Federal Communications Commission to have overturned. If you don't appreciate your ISP rearranging the Internet in those ways, firing it and switching to another is not always so easily done … as our reader probably now realizes.
benton.org/node/160887 | USAToday
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top


BRING IN THE IP TRANSITION
[SOURCE: The Hill, AUTHOR: Steve Pociask, Barry Umansky]
[Commentary] Our nation’s telecommunications system still overly relies on an outdated 20th century technology consisting largely of copper wiring that harkens back to the days of Alexander Graham Bell and rotary telephone dials. But a change is afoot, a change that can meet the growing demand of consumers who thirst for faster and more advanced broadband. This is a change that must be made if the US also wants to compete effectively with the rest of the world. That change means making the transition from the 20th century technology to fiber and all-Internet Protocol (IP) technology of our century. Late last year, the Federal Communications Commission announced the formation of a committee to investigate the processes, benefits and complexities of moving to an all-IP system. Part of the FCC’s plan to transition to all-IP networks includes the IP transition trials, which would offer a runway for test flights of new services, new infrastructure and a workable process for converting consumers from the old to the new. The potential benefits of the IP transition would be tremendous in terms of economic development, job creation and growth, and consumer welfare. What is needed is more fiber deployment, along with more spectrum for wireless broadband. What’s the solution to moving forward? As co-chairs of the FCC Consumer Advisory Committee’s Internet Protocol Transition Working Group, we implore the FCC to move forward with the trials to get the ball rolling. If we, as a nation, are to meet the goals of the president’s National Broadband Plan, we need new investment and a new plan to carry forward the United States into the 21st century.
[Steve Pociask is president of the American Consumer Institute Center for Citizen Research and Barry Umansky is an attorney and professor at Ball State University’s Digital Policy Institute] (Sept 11)
benton.org/node/160861 | Hill, The
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top


IS VOIP A PUBLIC UTILITY?
[SOURCE: American Enterprise Institute, AUTHOR: Daniel Lyons]
[Commentary] State policymakers are waging an unusual and relatively quiet battle over the future of voice service. An increasing number of Americans are swapping traditional landline telephone service for Internet-based VoIP service. This migration has prompted state regulators to consider whether, and to what extent, they may regulate this new service. State regulators are worried that if VoIP lies outside their jurisdiction, they will be unable to enforce consumer protection, universal service, and carrier of last resort obligations that states traditionally place upon telephone companies. As customers switch to VoIP service, they are also worried about losing revenue from telephone taxes. Legislators are concerned that regulating Internet services will be costly and will retard innovation by subjecting new nationwide services to a plethora of state-by-state regulatory regimes. This flurry of intrastate squabbling would be unnecessary if the Federal Communications Commission would simply do its job. The Commission is our nation’s telecommunications expert and can answer the basic question of how to classify VoIP service under the Communications Act. But it refuses to do so.
benton.org/node/160897 | American Enterprise Institute
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top


SENATE CYBERSECURITY BILL
[SOURCE: The Hill, AUTHOR: Brendan Sasso]
Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) is working on legislation that would encourage companies and the government to share information about cyberattacks. Chairman Feinstein said she has prepared a draft bill and plans to move it forward. The legislation would be the Senate's counterpart to the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act, known as CISPA, which cleared the House in April. CISPA would remove legal barriers that prevent companies from sharing information with each other and the government about cyberattacks. It would also allow the government to share more information with the private sector. But privacy advocates fear that CISPA would give the National Security Agency access to a vast new trove of private information.
benton.org/node/160900 | Hill, The
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

WIRELESS/SPECTRUM

THE FCC MUST STAY ON COURSE ON MOBILE COMPETITION
[SOURCE: Wall Street Journal, AUTHOR: Matt Wood]
[Commentary] Congress and the Federal Communications Commission have taken on an important mission. These policymakers are trying to make more public airwaves available for mobile broadband while simultaneously preserving some free, over-the-air broadcast television signals. It’s a big task, made all the more complicated by the number of public interest considerations the FCC has to balance, and by the fact that the agency can’t compel broadcasters to give up their licenses. All it can do, under the statute that Congress passed, is create incentives for TV stations to surrender those licenses voluntarily. In return for pitching in, TV stations that participate will receive a portion of the money that companies like AT&T, Verizon, Sprint and T-Mobile pay in an auction for the right to use that spectrum. There’s the first issue the FCC faces, if this “reverse” auction works and incentivizes TV stations to give up some inventory: Will multiple mobile carriers be able to bid for this spectrum, which is the lifeblood of any wireless service? Or will it be gobbled up by the two dominant players, AT&T and Verizon? The FCC is on course to consider the right questions in this proceeding. It’s far from completing that course, and has any number of decisions to make along the way. The suggestion that competitive considerations are off track is a self-serving statement made by the big carriers in the best position today. Of course they see no need for more competition or faster innovation. But the FCC, the Department of Justice and the rest of us know better.
[Matt Wood is Policy Director at Free Press]
benton.org/node/160893 | Wall Street Journal
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top


FCC SEEKS MORE INPUT ON AUCTION RELOCATION FUND COSTS
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
The Federal Communication Commission's Media Bureau wants to hear more from broadcasters and cable operators about what specific costs of incentive auction repacking they will want to cover out of the $1.75 billion relocation fund Congress approved for that purpose, including specific prices, ways to keep those prices down, and bulk buying. The FCC's notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) on the auction, released last December, asked for input on hard costs like equipment and tower services and "soft" costs like legal and engineering costs. But, according to a public notice the bureau says it wants to drill down on those, as well as strategies to limit costs--the commission has also scheduled a Sept. 30 public workshop to discuss those issues. The FCC is looking for specific pricing info on repacking costs, including whether there are regular discounts. The bureau said it did not get much info the first time around on bulk purchases, so wants to hear whether manufacturers could be encouraged to provide built-in discounts reflecting the amount of business the FCC will be sending their way via repacking.
benton.org/node/160865 | Broadcasting&Cable | FCC | CommLawBlog | Broadcast Law Blog
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top


UNCHAINED CELLPHONES
[SOURCE: New York Times, AUTHOR: Editorial staff]
[Commentary] The Obama administration is pushing the Federal Communications Commission to make it easier for consumers to “unlock” their cellphones and tablet computers once their wireless contracts are completed. The FCC should do so quickly. Some lawmakers in Congress have also sensibly proposed to make it legal for consumers themselves to unlock their wireless devices at any time, though they would still have to pay fees associated with breaking their contracts. There’s clearly a need for regulations that streamline this process. Ideally, wireless companies should unlock all phones automatically once users fulfill their contracts, without the consumers having to do anything.
benton.org/node/160905 | New York Times
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top


VERIZON'S MCADAM DISMISSES UNLIMITED DATA PLANS: 'YOU WILL RUN OUT OF GAS'
[SOURCE: Fierce, AUTHOR: Sue Marek]
Verizon Wireless believes that competitors like Sprint, which offers unlimited data plans to customers for the life of their phone line, will eventually have difficulty maintaining that promise to customers. Speaking at the Goldman Sachs 22nd Annual Communacopia Conference, Verizon Communications Chairman and CEO Lowell McAdam said that with traffic on the networks steadily increasing there is going to be a point where operators hit a ceiling in terms of available bandwidth. "If you are allowing unlimited, you will run out of gas. It's physics," he said. McAdam also said that he believes Verizon, which has always used network quality to differentiate itself from its competitors, will continue to lead on that front. Specifically, he said that 4G is not the end of the lifecycle of the network and he hinted that 5G is coming. "5G is video," he said, adding that there is still a lot of room for growth on the 4G network. McAdam said that while there is demand for a business model in which the content providers pay for their content to be distributed over the wireless network, he said that he thinks it will be at least two years before that model actually becomes a reality in the marketplace.
benton.org/node/160871 | Fierce
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top


AT&T WILL BUILD AN LTE-BROADCAST NETWORK TAILOR-MADE FOR VIDEO
[SOURCE: GigaOm, AUTHOR: Kevin Fitchard]
AT&T hopes to breathe new life into some old airwaves by building a broadcast network, ideal for pushing out live video to many multiple devices without jamming up its pipes with traffic. The technology is called long-term evolution (LTE) Broadcast, and as it name implies it turns what is normally a two-way mobile broadband network into a one-way multicast network similar to those used by TV broadcasters. Announcing the new project at the Goldman Sachs Communacopia Conference, AT&T Chairman and CEO Randall Stephenson said AT&T’s mobile focus is “all about architecting networks to deliver video,” FierceWireless reported. The new network will also give AT&T a use for the old MediaFLO airwaves it bought off Qualcomm in 2011 after it shut down its FLO TV experiment. LTE-Broadcast’s best use case is for big live events like the Super Bowl, which could be watched by millions of people simultaneously. But the distributed nature of the LTE network could also let carriers tailor individual broadcast content for very specific locations. Cell sites at a stadium could send out a constant play-by-play feed as well as transmit highlights and replays to thousands of phone and tablets simultaneously. Stephenson didn’t say exactly when the new network would go live, though he hinted at a three-year horizon.
benton.org/node/160877 | GigaOm | Fierce
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top


WHAT’S BEHIND AT&T’S PLANS FOR ALLTEL ASSETS?
[SOURCE: telecompetitor, AUTHOR: Joan Engebretson]
Now that AT&T’s purchase of wireless assets that formerly belonged to Alltel has closed, AT&T plans to convert that network – which currently uses Code division multiplex access (CDMA) – to Evolved High-Speed Packet Access (HSPA+) and long-term evolution (LTE). The assets, which include rural areas of six states, were in the hands of Atlantic Tele-Network. According to the Federal Communications Commission’s conditional order approving AT&T’s purchase, AT&T estimates that 100% of the population covered in the former Alltel markets will have access to AT&T HSPA+ services within 15 months and that 75% will have access to LTE services within 18 months. An additional 10% will have access to LTE within 36 months, according to the order. These plans would appear to fit quite nicely into AT&T’s plans for modernizing rural markets where the company is the incumbent local telephone service provider, calling for the expansion of LTE so that it covers 300 million people by year-end 2014, including unserved areas that cannot get broadband service and where the carrier is not planning to deploy high-speed DSL. Five of the six states included in AT&T’s purchase from ATNI/Alltel are states in which AT&T operates as an incumbent local exchange carrier (ILEC) including Georgia, Illinois, North Carolina, Ohio and South Carolina, as well as one non-ILEC state, Idaho. AT&T made the commitment to upgrade its rural areas after determining it would not be feasible to sell those territories. The upgrade could be critical to the carrier retaining business in its rural areas as the FCC moves along with its Connect America Fund program. AT&T apparently is hoping that if it can bring LTE to its ILEC markets that lack landline broadband, the FCC will consider those markets to have broadband. AT&T this year accepted some Connect America funding in exchange for committing to bring broadband to some of its landline customers that cannot currently get broadband.
benton.org/node/160876 | telecompetitor
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top


AT&T EYES EUROPE
[SOURCE: Wall Street Journal, AUTHOR: Thomas Gryta, Ryan Knutson]
AT&T Chief Executive Randall Stephenson signaled anew his interest in possible acquisitions in Europe, saying the telecommunications company would welcome significant deals at the right price. "If there were opportunities that presented a good value, of course we would do it," he said. Stephenson emphasized that US regulators are unlikely to tolerate more wireless consolidation, limiting AT&T's options at home. "We have pretty much written off that any kind of large-scale deal in our sector is going to get done," he said, referring to the US. AT&T sees room to move the European market in the direction of the US by investing in networks, shifting pricing strategies to encourage mobile data use and collecting more revenue as use increases. At the same time, heavy competition, declining revenue and the regulatory environment pose risks. The European mobile industry considers consolidation as being overdue.
benton.org/node/160904 | Wall Street Journal
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

PRIVACY

CALIFORNIA ONLINE TRACKING, 'ERASER BUTTON' BILLS SET TO ALTER ONLINE PRIVACY
[SOURCE: The Hill, AUTHOR: Kate Tummarello]
Gov Jerry Brown (D-CA) signed into law a bill changing the way websites deal with Internet users under the age of 18. A second bill still sitting on the Governor's desk, which he is likely to sign soon, would require websites to tell all Internet users if and how they can opt out of online tracking. The new law introduces an “eraser button” to protect minors surfing online by requiring sites to take down information posted by a minor upon request. It also restricts what kind of products can be advertised to Internet users under the age of 18 on websites and apps directed at minors. Supporters said the new law would allow young Internet users to get rid of embarrassing information on social media websites that could haunt them for years. The initial bills faced heavy criticism from members of the Internet industry. According to technology lawyers who worked on the bills when first introduced, the two pieces of legislation were not technology neutral and would have harmed the online advertising ecosystem. Gov. Brown has until Oct. 13 to act on the Do Not Track bill. If he doesn’t act by then, the bill becomes law automatically.
benton.org/node/160891 | Hill, The
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top


PUBLIC INTEREST GROUPS APPEAL $20M FACEBOOK “SPONSORED STORIES” DEAL
[SOURCE: GigaOm, AUTHOR: Jeff John Roberts]
Facebook users and advocacy groups are calling on a California appeals court to review a controversial settlement that would see the social network pay $20 million to resolve claims that it showed users’ photos in ads without permission. The multiple appeals were filed by the Children’s Advocacy Center and the Center for Public Interest Law, as well as by individual Facebook users on behalf on themselves and their children who are included in the settlement. The settlement in question relates to so-called “Sponsored Stories,” in which Facebook shows ads to a user’s friends to indicate that he or she “Liked” a product or company. Under the deal, Facebook will pay $15 to about 615,000 users and divide the rest of the money between lawyers and 14 non-profit groups. One of the groups, the MacArthur Foundation, has declined the money on the grounds it doesn’t work on consumer privacy issues; Facebook has not commented on how the groups were selected.
benton.org/node/160890 | GigaOm
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top


DATA PRIVACY INVESTIGATION
[SOURCE: Financial Times, AUTHOR: Emily Steel]
Several companies that are the target of a US government investigation into the data broker industry have refused to reveal specific details about their business practices, intensifying scrutiny over the mass trade of personal details about consumers. Sen Jay Rockefeller (D-WV), chairman of the US Senate Commerce Committee, announced that he is expanding his nearly year-long investigation into the multibillion-dollar data broker industry to include 12 health, personal finance and family-focused websites. The sites – which include Time’s Health.com, Condé Nast’s Self.com, Fool.com, Investopedia.com and Babycenter.com – could be collecting sensitive details about a consumer’s health or financial status and feeding it to the data brokers, he said. The investigation has expanded beyond the original set of nine data brokers after many refused to identify the “specific sources of consumer information they obtain,” Sen Rockefeller said. As a result, investigators were kept in the dark as to how the industry operated, he added.
benton.org/node/160901 | Financial Times
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

ELECTIONS AND MEDIA

HUME EXPLAINS WHY CONSERVATIVE TALKERS CAN CAUSE PROBLEMS FOR SOME HOUSE REPUBLICANS
[SOURCE: Daily Caller, AUTHOR: Jeff Poor]
On “The O’Reilly Factor”, Fox News senior political analyst Brit Hume explained how conservative radio talk show hosts like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Mark Levin can cause serious problems for the Republican Party. “I’m not sure you’d say they’re calling the shots, but make no mistake about it, Bill — some of these radio talk show hosts have real influence,” Hume said. “They have a huge following particularly in very conservative areas where they are most popular and where the many members of Congress who inhabit those areas are not worried about getting reelected if they can get nominated. But that are worried about a primary challenge that could deny them the nomination. So they’ll go a long way to avoid it and keeping radio talk show hosts off their back is one way of doing that.” Hume then linked the influence of radio talk show hosts to the rise of the “defund Obamacare” movement.
benton.org/node/160884 | Daily Caller
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

ADVERTISING

NIELSEN-ARBITRON CONDITION
[SOURCE: AdWeek, AUTHOR: Katy Bachman]
Commissioner Joshua Wright blasted the Federal Trade Commission in his dissent for over-reaching in the condition it imposed on Nielsen’s purchase of Arbitron, but the ultimate impact of the condition on the future market for cross-platform audience measurement may be inconsequential. The Federal Trade Commission’s condition on Nielsen’s $1.3 billion purchase of Arbitron, to keep alive “Project Blueprint,” a one-year-old custom research project, was engineered by Arbitron and comScore to benefit only one client, ESPN. As part of the condition, Nielsen must license data gathered by Arbitron’s portable people meter and other software, to the project. No Nielsen assets are involved in the condition, and there are no restrictions on Nielsen in developing XCR, its own cross-platform product. “We view this condition as almost equivalent to no condition at all,” wrote Bernstein Research senior analyst Todd Juenger Tuesday in a report issued to investors.
benton.org/node/160898 | AdWeek
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top


THE ROLE OF NATIVE ADVERTISING IN OUR SEARCH FOR A NEW MEDIA EQUATION
[SOURCE: Forbes, AUTHOR: Lewis DVorkin]
[Commentary] The native ad business is quickly moving forward. At FORBES, we’re offering marketers (for a price, of course) the ability to use the same tools I do to publish content on our site, always transparently identified and labeled as marketer content. Their posts, just like mine, flow through our content management system and organically across Forbes.com (even in the Most Read module). Native ad solutions must be carefully thought out and methodically implemented. We’ve worked hard to do both.
benton.org/node/160851 | Forbes
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

JOURNALISM

JOURNALISTS NEED SHIELD LAW
[SOURCE: Los Angeles Times, AUTHOR: Editorial staff]
[Commentary] The Senate Judiciary Committee has approved a proposed Free Flow of Information Act that garnered support from all 10 of the committee's Democrats and three of its eight Republicans. While the bill isn't exactly the legislation we would have written, it would provide considerable protection for journalists who promise confidentiality to their sources in order to obtain and publish information of public concern. The bill's centerpiece is robust judicial review of attempts by the federal government to force journalists to disclose the identity of anonymous sources or documents they promised to keep confidential. A judge could approve a subpoena if the information being sought was essential to the resolution of a criminal or civil case and the government had exhausted other possible sources for the information. But in doing so, the judge would have to weigh the public interest in compelling disclosure against the public interest in "gathering and disseminating the information or news at issue and maintaining the free flow of information." That balancing act shouldn't be left to the prosecution. Some critics claim that the Senate bill protects only the mainstream media. That's an exaggeration. Ideally, the shield law backed by the Judiciary Committee would be improved in the ways we have suggested. But even in its present form it would represent a victory for both a free press and an informed citizenry.
benton.org/node/160902 | Los Angeles Times
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top


PAYING ATTENTION TO THE SHIELD LAW’S CRITICS
[SOURCE: Columbia Journalism Review, AUTHOR: Eric Newton]
[Commentary] When a Senate committee approved the “Free Flow of Information Act of 2013,” applause was heard from scores of media shield law supporters, from the Newspaper Association of America to the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. To them, the news came as a relief after revelations the feds had secretly seized Associated Press phone records and labeled a Fox News reporter a criminal “co-conspirator” as an excuse to get his emails. So perhaps it isn’t surprising that the AP story on the bill and newspaper coverage generally was unburdened by complexity: Long-overdue shield law advances; journalists to protect confidential sources and information. Yet magazine websites told a different story, one of a flawed law with holes that worry “even some supporters.” This raises a question: Shouldn’t the critics get more attention in the mainstream coverage? The shield law opponents object to Congress making laws about the press when the First Amendment begins with the words “Congress shall make no law.” They worry we are trading a large constitutional shield for a small legislative one. Yet the same federal courts that have pushed back First Amendment protections for journalists will, under the shield law, be asked to make important decisions about who qualifies for protection. The very idea of Congress and judges defining the word “journalist” is controversial. What the law does not cover are organizations, like WikiLeaks, that publish raw government secrets directly to the Web. But there’s no guarantee the definition won’t change. [Newton is senior adviser to the president at the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation]
benton.org/node/160855 | Columbia Journalism Review
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

STORIES FROM ABROAD

CHINA MAY LIFT BAN ON FACEBOOK, TWITTER IN SHANGHAI FREE-TRADE ZONE
[SOURCE: Los Angeles Times, AUTHOR: Jessica Guynn]
In what could be the toehold that Facebook has been looking for, the giant social network and other websites banned in China may be accessible in a free-trade zone that is being set up in Shanghai, according to a report in the South China Morning Post. China's first free-trade zone will allow the access in a rare exception to strict government control of the Internet, the Hong Kong newspaper reported. The report, citing unnamed government sources, said authorities would also welcome bids from foreign telecommunications firms for licenses to offer Internet services in the trade zone, an area established in July that covers less than 20 miles.
benton.org/node/160863 | Los Angeles Times
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top


EUROPE MUST NOT REGULATE THE INTERNET
[SOURCE: Financial Times, AUTHOR: Joanna Shields]
[Commentary] Europe’s digital economy ministers will meet to discuss the future. Their agenda should be obvious. The Internet has been the bright spot in an otherwise bleak EU economy. The agenda for European governments should be clear: concentrate on policies that enable new business creation and encourage established businesses to innovate through technology. Create incentives for risk-taking to counter the worrying decline in venture capital investment. Make it quick and easy to start your own company and take the stigma out of failure by creating incentives that encourage entrepreneurs to try again. Embrace trade and fair competition and back innovation. The real focus of governments should be on creating the necessary conditions for business growth and job creation. Far better to concentrate our collective energies on: support for innovation, developing public procurement from innovative small and medium-sized enterprises, increasing access to capital for start-ups and growth firms, boosting infrastructure and enhancing training and digital skills. EU nations should consider carefully how to ensure their economies profit from these Internet enterprises, new jobs and greater economic dynamism. That is the real prize. The new global economy is digital and those countries that support the growth of technology businesses will be the real winners. [Shields is chief executive of Tech City UK and UK business ambassador for digital industries]
benton.org/node/160894 | Financial Times
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

© 1994-2024 Benton Institute for Broadband & Society. All Rights Reserved.