February 2015

INTERNET/BROADBAND

SENIORS AND THE INTERNET
[SOURCE: Benton Foundation, AUTHOR: Cecilia Garcia, Bob Harootyan]
[Commentary] At a time when communications technology is evolving at a frantic pace and the Internet is fast becoming the primary conveyor of information and services, a significant segment of our population remains offline. National survey data for 2014 show that 41-43% of persons age 65+ do not use the Internet, compared to only 13-14% of all adults age 18+ (Pew Research Center, 2000-2014). The reasons for this continuing digital divide involve seniors’ concerns about affordability, a belief that the Internet holds no relevance for them, and a fear that computers are too difficult to learn. This “senior digital divide” is greatest among the oldest and least advantaged older adults. Of the estimated 18.9 million offline elders in 2014, 61% (11.5 million) are age 75+. But older age is not the whole story. Seniors with the lowest incomes and least education are much more likely to be offline – double and triple jeopardy.
[Garcia, former Executive Director of the Benton Foundation, is a communications advisor with an extensive background in public affairs, television production and advocacy. Bob Harootyan is the research manager at Senior Service America, Inc. (SSAI), where he directs internal and external projects related to low-income older workers and the aging workforce.]
https://www.benton.org/blog/deeper-dive-data-seniors-and-internet
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

FCC COMMISSIONER CLYBURN BREAKS SILENCE ON INTERNET RULES
[SOURCE: The Hill, AUTHOR: Mario Trujillo]
Commissioner Mignon Clyburn of the Federal Communications Commission said she is “pleased” that the network neutrality order tracks closely to her prior recommendations. During a speech at the Federal Communications Bar Association, she said she was breaking her policy to not publically discuss proposed orders before a vote is held because of the importance of the net neutrality proposal. "The Open Internet item vote is clearly one of the most important and consequential decisions this Commission will be called to make,” she said. “The gravity of it all is not lost on me.” “My office is still in discussions with [FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler's] office about the item and I will not divulge those specifics,” she said. “But what I will say, is that it is imperative that the order strikes the right balance.”
benton.org/headlines/fcc-commissioner-clyburn-breaks-silence-internet-rules | Hill, The
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

T-MOBILE: FCC'S NET NEUTRALITY RULES WON'T HURT OUR BUSINESS
[SOURCE: ars technica, AUTHOR: Jon Brodkin]
Like Sprint before it, T-Mobile US has said it's not that concerned about the Federal Communications Commission's network neutrality plan. "There is nothing in there that gives us deep concern about our ability to continue executing our strategy,” T-Mobile Chief Operating Officer Mike Sievert said. However, Sievert also said the reclassification isn’t the most desirable approach.
benton.org/headlines/t-mobile-fccs-net-neutrality-rules-wont-hurt-our-business | Ars Technica
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

NET NEUTRALITY FROM MUSKETS TO MEGABITS
[SOURCE: Huffington Post, AUTHOR: Art Brodsky]
[Commentary] On Feb. 26, the Federal Communications Commission will do something that few have ever accused the government of doing. It will recognize reality and act appropriately. That, in a nutshell, is the debate over Net Neutrality. Just as plain telephone service connected people and was regulated, now it's data services. Calls or video are all just megabits. Telephone companies couldn't discriminate in their traffic then, neither should they or cable companies be able to play favorites or manipulate customers now. That basic, regulated fairness is what allowed the Internet to develop, a point some current opponents seem to miss, whether blinded by ideology or money. If you listen to the anguished cri de coeur from the loyal defenders of the big telecom companies, you would think the FCC's action was a government coup d'interconnecter -- a takeover of The Internet. Net Neutrality is nothing more than re-establishing timeless, basic principles of fairness backed by some commonsense rules. The loudly voice objections, backed by big money and/or ideology, can't cover up that simple truth.
[Art Brodsky is a veteran journalist and advocate in Internet and telecommunications issues.]
benton.org/headlines/net-neutrality-muskets-megabits | Huffington Post
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

INTERNET TAXES, ANOTHER WINDOW INTO THE NET NEUTRALITY DEBATE
[SOURCE: New York Times, AUTHOR: Steve Lohr]
In a rare act of bipartisan unity, Republican and Democratic Senators presented legislation that would permanently ban taxes on high-speed Internet service to American homes. But the Senate move came shortly after Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler proposed strong, utility-style rules to protect an open Internet, or network neutrality. That reignited the debate over whether regulation plucked from the telephone playbook, called Title II, would open the door to the imposition of state and local taxes and fees -- the litany of charges on monthly phone bills. Kim Hart, a spokeswoman for the FCC, said Chairman Wheeler's plan “does not raise taxes or fees. Period.” And, she added, the Internet tax freedom act “bans state and local taxes on broadband access regardless of how the FCC classifies it." The fault line on the tax issue, as in so much of the debate surrounding Chairman Wheeler’s plan, hinges on how open-ended or how restrained his tailored model of Title II regulation of Internet service is likely to be.
benton.org/headlines/internet-taxes-another-window-net-neutrality-debate | New York Times
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

ACA, NCTA PUSH POLE POSITION
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
The National Cable & Telecommunications Association and the American Cable Association have both called on the Federal Communications Commission to act on a petition on pole attachment rates before the Feb. 26 vote to reclassify Internet service providers as telecommunications services under Title II. Cable operators argue that if the FCC does reclassify broadband access under Title II regulations, as FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler has said it will do, that could translate into higher pole-attachment rates, especially for smaller and medium-sized operators. The telecommunications rate was traditionally higher than the cable rate. The FCC voted in 2011 to harmonize the rates, but the opportunity remained for pole owners to charge higher rates under some circumstances. The NCTA, Comptel and others sought to resolve that situation in a petition for reconsideration filed back in 2011, asking the FCC to insure that broadband providers can attach at the lowest rate available under FCC rules.
benton.org/headlines/aca-ncta-push-pole-position | Broadcasting&Cable
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

OWNERSHIP

COULD THESE 25 CONDITIONS DERAIL COMCAST'S ACQUISITION OF TIME WARNER CABLE?
[SOURCE: Benton Foundation, AUTHOR: Kevin Taglang]
On February 13, 2014, Comcast announced it had entered into an agreement to buy Time Warner Cable for approximately $45 billion. A transaction of that size requires, by law, approval by federal regulators. In the Comcast-Time Warner Case, both the Department of Justice and Federal Communications Commission and reviewing the acquisition in a process outlined by Andrew Jay Schwartzman in the Digital Beat in 2014. With the lobbying power of Comcast, the nation’s largest cable provider, helping to drive the review, one might suspect relatively easy approval for the deal. But as the one-year anniversary of Comcast’s announcement passed, we saw instead headlines like “A year later, is the huge Comcast-Time Warner Cable deal doomed?”, “One year later, Comcast’s megamerger faces unknown fate, dubious public”, “Skies darken over Comcast merger”, and “Comcast's customer service incidents jeopardizing $45 billion deal”. Clearly, it is time to check in on the merger review. But California regulators -- not the Department of Justice or the FCC -- are the first to show their hand on the prospects of the deal gaining approval.
https://www.benton.org/blog/could-these-25-conditions-derail-comcasts-ac...
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

JUDGES QUESTION FCC'S NEED FOR CONTRACTS IN COMCAST-TIME WARNER CABLE DEAL
[SOURCE: Revere Digital, AUTHOR: Amy Schatz]
Judges for the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit questioned government lawyers about why media companies’ confidential programming contracts and related documents should be made available to some parties in the government’s ongoing review of Comcast’s acquisition of Time Warner Cable and AT&T’s deal to acquire DirecTV. A three-judge panel heard arguments in the case and questioned a Federal Communications Commission lawyer about why the agency needs to share thousands of confidential media company documents -- including contracts, emails and other documents describing contract negotiations -- with outside parties, including lawyers for other media companies and public interest groups. CBS, Disney and 21st Century Fox are among the media companies that asked the appeals court to overturn a Federal Communications Commission decision to allow outside parties involved in the government’s review of the Comcast-Time Warner Cable deal to see programming contracts. Although those parties would be required to sign confidentiality agreements, the media companies are worried that details of their contracts could leak out to competitors anyway.
benton.org/headlines/judges-question-fccs-need-contracts-comcast-time-warner-cable-deal | Revere Digital
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

JOURNALISM

HYPING MYTHICAL INTERNET TAXES, NEW YORK TIMES LEGITIMIZES A NET NEUTRALITY STUDY LONG DEBUNKED
[SOURCE: Media Matters for America, AUTHOR: Craig Harrington]
The New York Times legitimized a discredited study from the Progressive Policy Institute claiming that net neutrality could cost American consumers up to $15 billion annually -- a claim that has been widely debunked for relying on "fuzzy math" and "significant factual error[s]." In a Feb 20 Bits blog, the NYT reported that a bipartisan group of senators "presented legislation that would permanently ban taxes on high-speed Internet service to American homes," under the Internet tax Freedom Act of 1998. Buried in a single paragraph at the bottom of the blog, the NYT noted that Federal Communications Commission spokesperson Kim Hart has asserted FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler's plan "'does not raise taxes or fees. Period.'" Left unsaid was the fact that PPI's net neutrality cost estimate has been thoroughly discredited. In a January 16 blog, The Washington Post's Fact Checker shattered PPI's net neutrality cost estimate, awarding the claim that utility-style net neutrality regulation could cost $15 billion "Three Pinnochios," for what it called "significant factual error[s] and/or obvious contradictions." And as the nonpartisan Internet advocacy group Free Press pointed out, PPI's claim is based on a critically flawed methodology that overstates the worst-case scenario tax burden by nearly 75 percent. Furthermore, Congress passed a moratorium last year banning states from imposing new taxes on internet access through October 2015, regardless of any new FCC regulations.
benton.org/headlines/hyping-mythical-internet-taxes-new-york-times-legitimizes-net-neutrality-study-long | Media Matters for America | New York Times
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

GOVERNMENT & COMMUNICATIONS

REP CHAFFETZ (R-UT) WANTS UNREDACTED EMAILS FROM FCC
[SOURCE: The Hill, AUTHOR: Mario Trujillo]
House Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) fired off his third letter in February in his probe into whether the White House had an improper role in the Federal Communications Commission's development of network neutrality rules. Chairman Chaffetz requested a set of unredacted emails that date back to April 2014, shorty before FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler unveiled his initial draft net neutrality plan. The heavily redacted April emails show an unnamed official alerting the White House about an upcoming New York Times article. John Podesta, an adviser to President Barack Obama at the time, described it as a “brutal story” and asked if someone planned to respond on the record. The Times article reference an increased lobbying push by advocates who were disappointed that Chairman Wheeler’s plan was not stronger. Chairman Chaffetz wants a copy of the unredacted emails by Feb 23.
benton.org/headlines/rep-chaffetz-r-ut-wants-unredacted-emails-fcc | Hill, The | Broadcasting&Cable
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

TOP AIDE TO FCC COMMISSIONER PAI SAYS PRESS RELEASE WAS BLOCKED
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
Matthew Berry, Chief of Staff to Commissioner Ajit Pai of the Federal Communications Commission, took to Twitter to suggest "FCC leadership" was attempting to prevent the Commissioner from posting a press release excerpting critics of network neutrality regulation. Asked what Berry meant by a Feb. 18 tweet saying "FCC leadership now trying to block Commissioner Pai's press releases from FCC website. So much for Open Internet!," Berry said that the FCC's Office of Media Relations "told us that the Office of General Counsel had directed that our statement be removed from the website." FCC spokeswoman Kim Hart suggested that, rather than "blocking," the FCC was "clarifying."“The FCC’s Office of Media Relations serves the entire agency -- including all Commissioners," she said in a statement. "In this specific incident, OMR promptly posted a release from Commissioner Pai to the website as received, according to standard practice. Once the release was live, it became apparent that the release, as crafted, appeared to represent that it was from the entire Commission, not just Commissioner Pai. Commissioner Pai’s office agreed to clarify the release, and OMR worked to post the replacement as quickly as possible.”
benton.org/headlines/top-aide-fcc-commissioner-pai-says-press-release-was-blocked | Broadcasting&Cable
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

LOBBYING

NET NEUTRALITY LOBBYING
[SOURCE: Politico, AUTHOR: Tony Romm]
Whether you view network neutrality rules as a government takeover of the Internet or the only way to save the Web from corporate meddling, one thing is certain: The issue has been a boon to Washington lobbyists, lawyers and activists -- and they’re poised to continue cashing in for years to come. The fierce debate has proven to be a prime business opportunity for K Street, as some of the biggest US companies and their trade groups try to sway opinion at the agency and on Capitol Hill. Lawmakers and consumer groups also have seized on the issue -- and the passion it evokes -- to drum up cash and support. “Every time we’ve had something like this before, whether it’s in telecom or banking or health care, it becomes a lobbying and fundraising extravaganza, and net neutrality is no different,” said Bill Allison, senior fellow at the Sunlight Foundation. “When Congress gets going, that’s when you’re going to see the fundraisers … off specific issues like this.” Major Internet service providers AT&T, Comcast and Verizon have spent a combined $44.2 million to lobby Washington on a host of issues in 2014, with net neutrality among their top agenda items, according to company disclosures. Executives like AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson, Comcast CEO Brian Roberts and Verizon CEO Lowell McAdam have personally met with FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler to press their views. Silicon Valley giants like Google and Facebook have backed strong net neutrality rules, primarily via their trade group, the Internet Association. But the debate has also drawn in fresh-faced tech players like Wordpress.com operator Automattic, crafts website Etsy and funding platform Kickstarter. The firms have taken an active role, working closely with groups like Engine Advocacy to press the case for robust open Internet protections in Washington.
benton.org/headlines/net-neutrality-lobbying-bonanza | Politico
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

STORIES FROM ABROAD

GOOGLE AGREES TO SPOT CHECKS BY ITALIAN PRIVACY REGULATORS
[SOURCE: Wall Street Journal, AUTHOR: Alistair Barr, Sam Schechner]
Google’s latest agreement with a European privacy regulator includes spot checks at its US headquarters to monitor how Google is complying with an order to improve its privacy policy, add new opt-outs for targeted advertising, and disclose how long it keeps users’ data. The Italian data-privacy authority outlined a process for Google to comply with the country’s privacy laws and an order imposed on the company in July. Google has until Jan. 15, 2016 to comply. A spokesman for the Italian authority said this is the first time in Europe that Google will be subject to regular checks to monitor progress. The regulator will get quarterly updates from Google and the ability to send a privacy officer for “on-the-spot checks” at Google’s Mountain View (CA) offices. The regulator hasn’t decided yet how often it will visit the campus, the spokesman said.
benton.org/headlines/google-agrees-spot-checks-italian-privacy-regulators | Wall Street Journal
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

Benton

Search

Benton

Daily Digest

Analysis

February 2015

Local TV's Best Friend? The Kochs

Embrace the Internet for Equal Employment Opportunity "Widely Disseminated Rule"

Transparency reports on trial: New front for free speech?

How the San Francisco Giants Use Social Media to Score with Fans, Tame the Trolls

Mark Cuban Vs. the World: The Full Code/Media Interview

Telecommunications law primer: The Federal Universal Service Fund

Title II, Robert McDowell, And They Boy Who Cried 'Black Helicopter.'

February 23, 2015 (Seniors and the Internet; Net Neutrality; Comcast-Time Warner Cable)

A Deeper Dive into the Data: Seniors and the Internet