September 2013

European Newspapers Wake Up to New Reality

Long cushioned by state subsidies and wealthy owners more interested in power than profits, European newspapers are facing a shakeout, hemorrhaging red ink and jobs as government support dries up and print advertising crashes.

Until recently, European newspaper groups were often shielded from pressures that have driven U.S. rivals to slash costs, declare bankruptcy and search for new advertising and subscription dollars online. In France, newspapers received €800 million ($1.06 billion) in state subsidies and tax breaks last year, while tiny Greece boasted about 70 newspapers before the crisis, many fed by ads from state-owned companies. That system is crumbling—particularly in Europe's hard-hit south. Subsidies to newspapers are falling victim to government austerity just as print advertising is down by double digits. Last year, France's La Tribune became weekly, while the owner of Spain's El Pais is near insolvent. Dozens of publications in Spain and Greece have folded. The euro zone crisis is exposing how ill-prepared many Continental newspapers are to exploit the digital revolution following years of government coddling.

NSA Spies on International Payments

The National Security Agency (NSA) widely monitors international payments, banking and credit card transaction. The information from the American foreign intelligence agency, acquired by former NSA contractor and whistleblower Edward Snowden, show that the spying is conducted by a branch called "Follow the Money" (FTM).

The collected information then flows into the NSA's own financial databank, called "Tracfin," which in 2011 contained 180 million records. Some 84 percent of the data is from credit card transactions. Further NSA documents from 2010 show that the NSA also targets the transactions of customers of large credit card companies like VISA for surveillance. NSA analysts at an internal conference that year described in detail how they had apparently successfully searched through the US company's complex transaction network for tapping possibilities. Their aim was to gain access to transactions by VISA customers in Europe, the Middle East and Africa.

The FISA court will release more opinions because of Snowden

Call it the Edward Snowden effect: Citing the former National Security Agency contractor, a federal judge has ordered the government to declassify more reports from the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.

In an opinion from the FISC itself, Judge F. Dennis Saylor told the White House to declassify all the legal opinions relating to Section 215 of the Patriot Act written after May 2011 that aren't already the subject of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) litigation. The court ruled that the White House must identify the opinions in question by Oct 4. "The unauthorized disclosure of in June 2013 of a Section 215 order, and government statements in response to that disclosure, have engendered considerable public interest and debate about Section 215," wrote Judge Saylor. "Publication of FISC opinions relating to this opinion would contribute to an informed debate."

Can the FCC promote broadband competition, innovation, and investment? The courts and Congress to decide

[Commentary] On Monday, September 9, a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit heard oral arguments in Verizon v. Federal Communications (11-1355). Judges Judith W. Rogers, David S. Tatel, Laurence H. Silberman will now decide the fate of the FCC’s Open Internet rules. The case will determine, according to former White House Aide, Susan Crawford, “does the U.S. government have any role to play when it comes to ensuring ubiquitous, open, world-class, interconnected, reasonably priced Internet access? Does the government have good reason to ensure that facility in America?” The case is also a test of Verizon's novel argument that its decisions about traffic on its network are subject to the same First Amendment rights a publisher has in deciding what to put in a newspaper. By the end of the hearing, the question appeared to be whether the FCC's Open Internet Rules would be invalidated in their entirety, or whether only some of them would be thrown out.

Tech firms press legal case over surveillance, feds promise reply by Sept 30

Silicon Valley firms at the center of an ongoing surveillance scandal are renewing their legal push to reveal details about how often the US government obtains information about their users.

In a new filing, Microsoft again asked America’s secret spy court to declare that it has a First Amendment right to disclose how many so-called Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) letters (a surveillance demand aimed at foreigners that can also ensnare Americans) it receives. The break-down of talks in August has led Microsoft to file a renewed complaint, asking to reveal the specific number of surveillance requests it receives. The tech companies acknowledge that the government may be justified in concealing information about specific surveillance targets; but they claim that blanket gag orders that forbid them from disclosing the number of requests they receive violate the Constitution’s free speech guarantees. In related new filings, the federal government agreed to file its long-awaited response to the First Amendment complaints by September 30.

Net Neutrality Delayed, Net Neutrality Denied

[Commentary] The Internet, grown beyond adolescence now, is still filled with the energy of youth and the power to continually reshape our lives. But wait! The home the adolescent grew up in is not the house into which the young adult is moving. Its new domicile is populated with gatekeepers and powerful interests intent on exchanging the open environment that nurtured so much innovation and so many consumer benefits for a constricted environment of walled gardens and monopoly toll booths. The Internet, raised for the most part in an atmosphere of openness and creativity, becomes each day more vulnerable to the control of rent-seeking landlords and hugely powerful sentinels. In 2009, following the election of Barack Obama, a new FCC came to town. Its majority embraced the concept of Internet freedom but was divided on how to guarantee it. This was the setting for the hearing in the DC Circuit Court of Appeals over Verizon’s suit contesting the Commission’s rules. Never shy, Verizon’s lawyers added a claim that not only does the FCC lack the power to enforce any Internet freedom rules, but that the company has a First Amendment right to block content on its system because it should enjoy freedom of speech—a ridiculous claim made more so because in other venues the company has argued it is merely a conduit and not a speaker. Lost in all the legal briefs is any concern for the speech rights of consumers. The Internet is an increasingly important resource for voters to inform themselves, activists to organize themselves, and everyday citizens to make themselves heard. Allowing Verizon or AT&T or Comcast to censor citizen speech is a direct threat to our democracy. As Senator Al Franken sagely forecast in 2010, “net neutrality is the First Amendment issue of our time.”

[Michael Copps served as a commissioner on the Federal Communications Commission from May 2001 to December 2011 and was the FCC's Acting Chairman from January to June 2009.]

Celebrating National Lifeline Awareness Week in Washington and California

[Commentary] This week, civil rights groups joined with public interest and media reform organizations to highlight the importance of Lifeline – the Universal Service Fund program that supports telephone service for low-income consumers. To celebrate National Lifeline Awareness Week (September 9-15, 2013), Federal Communications Commission Chairwoman Mignon Clyburn, California Public Utility Commissioner Catherine Sandoval and low-income consumer advocates made the case for strengthening and modernizing Lifeline. The week is designed to both raise awareness of and participation in Lifeline a federal/State program that helps make telephone service more affordable for qualified customers. The program became the focus of partisan gamesmanship during the 2012 election cycle and detractors often refer to as “Obama Phones.” At a New America Foundation event, Chairman Clyburn said she aimed to “set the record straight.”

Lifeline is a hand up, not a handout

[Commentary] At a time when many working families have been left behind in the economic recovery, the Federal Communications Commission’s Lifeline program has never been more vital – or misunderstood. Lifeline provides a modest subsidy to low-income consumers to pay for basic telephone service, crucial access that would otherwise be unaffordable. Lifeline is a hand up, not a hand out.

People need affordable services to connect and contribute to the outside world. According to statistics from the telephone carriers, nearly 80 percent of subscribers to Lifeline have a household income of less than $15,000 per year. Subscribers include struggling families, people with disabilities, veterans, rural residents, Native Americans, seniors and individuals from communities of color. People from every part of the country use Lifeline to stay in touch with their children, call 911, take care of their medical needs, and apply for jobs. Instead of foregoing essentials like food and health care in order to participate in our society and economy, deserving Lifeline subscribers can engage fully as citizens.

[Henderson is president and CEO of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, and Aaron is president and CEO of Free Press and the Free Press Action Fund.]

Cellphones are now essentials for the poor

Once considered a luxury, the cellphone has become one of the most popular communication technologies in the world. As a result, many people — regardless of income level — view the cellphone as more of a necessity.

Before landlines became essential, they, too, were once used by the privileged few. "Today every family must have a telephone if it is to contact emergency services," Linda Gibbs, New York City’s deputy mayor for health and human services, wrote in a 2007 poverty report. "If it is to have access to news, information and culture a TV, radio, and newspapers are essential. This was not always true, but it is true now. And soon (if not now) we will need to add cellphones and access to the Internet to that list." Six years later, 91 percent of American adults own a cellphone, according to a 2013 survey by the Pew Research Center; more than half of those are smartphones. Over a third of American homes have even become cell only, according to a 2012 National Health Interview Survey. Phone companies are scrambling to meet the diverse demand. While cheap pre-paid cellphone plans are increasingly available commercially, there are also low-income programs, operated with subsidies from the FCC’s Lifeline Assistance program, that people can qualify for to get a low monthly rate.

Keep Vulnerable Communities Connected

More than 80 groups representing a coalition of public interest, civil rights, faith-based, media justice and community organizations sent a letter urging the House and Senate Commerce Committees to continue their support of the government’s Lifeline program, which subsidizes basic phone service for low-income individuals.

The coalition sent the letter on Sept 12 as part of Lifeline Awareness Week. The letter notes that Lifeline enables vulnerable populations — veterans, seniors, the disabled, rural residents, people of color and struggling families — to more meaningfully participate in our society by gaining access to economic opportunities and critical emergency services. “People need affordable communications services to connect to the outside world for job opportunities, medical services, educational advancement, and civic participation,” the coalition’s letter states.

Benton

Search