June 2015

INTERNET/BROADBAND

LAWMAKERS INTRODUCE LEGISLATION TO MODERNIZE LIFELINE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
[SOURCE: US Senate, AUTHOR: Press release]
Sen Chris Murphy (D-CT), Sen Cory Booker (D-NJ) and Rep Doris Matsui (D-CA) introduced legislation to reform and modernize the Universal Service Fund (USF) Lifeline Assistance Program -- which currently subsidizes basic landline and mobile phone services for low-income Americans -- by making subsidies for broadband Internet services also available to eligible households. The Broadband Adoption Act of 2015, which is cosponsored by Sens Ron Wyden (D-OR), Ed Markey (D-MA), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), and Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), will instruct the Federal Communications Commission to establish a broadband Lifeline Assistance program and will help bridge the digital divide by making in-home online services more affordable across the country. The introduction of the Broadband Adoption Act comes just days after the FCC announced a new effort to usher the Lifeline Program into the Internet Age. Sens Murphy, Booker, and Rep Matsui praised the FCC’s proposal, and hope that the FCC, which has the authority to update the Lifeline Program on its own, makes subsidized Internet access available to tens of millions low-income Americans. Key Provisions of the Broadband Adoption Act of 2015:
The bill directs the FCC to establish a broadband Lifeline Assistance program that provides low-income Americans living in rural and urban areas with assistance in subscribing to affordable broadband service.
The proposal would require the FCC, in calculating the amount of support, to routinely study the prevailing market price for service and the prevailing speed adopted by consumers of broadband service.
The bill is technology neutral to promote competition from broadband service providers under the program.
The bill allows eligible consumers to choose how they would like their Lifeline support -- whether for broadband, mobile, basic telephone services or a bundle of these services. The bill clarifies that eligible households will qualify for only one lifeline support amount for one of those functions, not for multiple purposes.
The bill requires the FCC to establish a national database to determine consumer eligibility for Lifeline and to prevent duplication.
The bill encourages the FCC to consider providing a preference to participating broadband service providers that include components involving digital literacy programs as part of their offerings.
In response to the recent GAO report on Lifeline, the bill requires the FCC to perform annual performance reports of the Lifeline broadband program. It also requires the GAO to conduct another analysis of the Lifeline program one year after the date of enactment of the bill.
Eligible households must meet federal low-income guidelines or qualify for one of a handful of social service programs including, but not limited to: SNAP, Head Start, WIC, National School Lunch Program, Tribal TANF or Medicaid.
benton.org/headlines/lawmakers-introduce-legislation-modernize-lifeline-assistance-program | US Senate | Broadcasting & Cable
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

WHY HELPING THE POOR PAY FOR BROADBAND IS GOOD FOR US ALL
[SOURCE: Wired, AUTHOR: Julia Greenberg]
The suggested Lifeline program updates would allow low-income households to use the same subsidy to help cover the cost of broadband -- meaning more families could afford Internet at home.The catch? The subsidy is just $9.25 per month. The proposal shows that federal regulators are finally beginning to acknowledge what many of us already know -- the Internet is a crucial gateway to economic opportunity. But broadband tends to be costly, even with discounted plans. Will such a seeming pittance be enough to make broadband affordable for families strapped for cash? Advocates for bridging the so-called digital divide, it turns out, say it might be. Not only that, they say that expanding the Lifeline program to broadband could open up a whole new competitive marketplace for low-cost Internet access. Non-profits working to expand broadband adoption hope that if Chairman Wheeler’s proposal is approved, the FCC itself could encourage more providers to offer a subsidized rate to qualified low-income families, encouraging more competition with the current plans. Some say the government could even pay subsidies directly to broadband providers to get a better deal than low-income families could get on their own. “We’re building a nation of more consumers for broadband,” says Angela Siefer, the executive director of the National Digital Inclusion Allilance. “We’re actually creating new customers for them.”
benton.org/headlines/why-helping-poor-pay-broadband-good-us-all | Wired
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

PARTIAL STAY OF OPEN INTERNET RULES WOULD UNDERCUT THEM ENTIRELY, FCC, INTERVENORS SAY
[SOURCE: Bloomberg, AUTHOR: Lydia Beyoud]
Telecommunications companies seeking a stay of the Federal Communications Commission network neutrality rules are using their tailored request to stay part of the rules as a way to undermine them entirely, the Federal Communications Commission and a group of intervenors said in separate May 22 filings. “Petitioners’ stay motion is not what it seems,” the FCC said in its filing. “It asks the Court to halt the application of Title II of the Communications Act to broadband, while allowing three bright-line rules to go into effect. But those bright-line rules are precisely the kind of regulation this Court held could not be applied until and unless broadband was reclassified as a ‘telecommunications service,' ” the FCC said. The intervenors supporting the FCC rule made similar arguments, stating that the potential harms of a stay would be significantly greater to them than to the groups opposing the FCC rules. The intervenors include 22 online video and voice over Internet protocol (VoIP) telephone providers, competitive Internet service providers (ISPs), Internet backbone operators, venture capitalists and advocates for privacy, accessibility, consumers and social justice. “Many Intervenors depend on the pipes controlled by Petitioners for their customers to access Intervenors’ services, even as they compete with Petitioners themselves in the provision of those services,” they said. The intervenors also said examples of harm provided by smaller ISPs in the petitioners' motion for stay were a smokescreen for the “shrug with which the majority of the industry has greeted the Order.” Intervenors added that petitioners' “litigation-driven rhetoric is belied by what many of their members have represented to the capital markets.” They and the FCC cited statements by Comcast and Cablevision Systems that indicated that Title II-based rules wouldn't significantly impact their businesses.
benton.org/headlines/partial-stay-open-internet-rules-would-undercut-them-entirely-fcc-intervenors-say | Bloomberg
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

ELECTIONS AND MEDIA

A MOST UNVIRTUOUS CIRCLE
[SOURCE: Benton Foundation, AUTHOR: Michael Copps]
[Commentary] It’s shaping up as a great political year ahead -- if you are a billionaire with an axe to grind or a broadcast or cable operator. In recent years, special interests and ideologues of both the right and the left have dumped billions of dollars of unaccountable advertising onto the airwaves and cables that we rely on for our news and information. In fact, by most estimates, the majority of campaign money nowadays goes into advertising. It’s great for broadcast and cable. When I was a Commissioner at the Federal Communications Commission and I would ask these industry executives how business was doing, they always had an extra-wide grin as we were entering a new election cycle. For many of them, these ads comprised their largest revenue stream. It’s a virtuous circle for them and the billionaires, but not so virtuous for the rest of us -- or for our democracy.
https://www.benton.org/blog/most-unvirtuous-circle
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

MILLENNIALS AND POLITICAL NEWS
[SOURCE: Pew Research Center’s Journalism Project, AUTHOR: Amy Mitchell, Jeffrey Gottfried, Katerina Eva Matsa]
When it comes to where younger Americans get news about politics and government, social media look to be the local TV of the Millennial generation. About six-in-ten online Millennials (61 percent) report getting political news on Facebook in a given week, a much larger percentage than turn to any other news source, according to a new Pew Research Center analysis. This stands in stark contrast to internet-using Baby Boomers, for whom local TV tops the list of sources for political news at nearly the same reach (60 percent). At the same time, Millennials’ relatively low reliance on local TV for political news (37 percent see news there in a given week) almost mirrors Baby Boomers’ comparatively low reliance on Facebook (39 percent). Gen Xers, who bridge the age gap between Millennials (ages 18-33 at the time of the 2014 survey) and Baby Boomers (ages 50-68), also bridge the gap between these news sources. Roughly half (51 percent) of online Gen Xers get political and government news on Facebook in a given week and about half (46 percent) do so on local TV. Even looking just at members of each generation who are on Facebook, Millennials still stand out for seeing somewhat more political content on the site. Roughly a quarter (24 percent) of Millennials who use Facebook say at least half of the posts they see on the site relate to government and politics, higher than both Gen Xers (18 percent) and Baby Boomers (16 percent) who use the social networking site. This occurs even though Millennials express less interest in political news. Roughly a quarter of Millennials (26 percent) select politics and government as one of the three topics they are most interested in (out of a list of nine). That is lower than both Gen Xers (34 percent) and Baby Boomers (45 percent). Millennials also are less familiar with many of the 36 sources asked about in the survey, which range from USA Today to Rush Limbaugh to Slate.
benton.org/headlines/millennials-and-political-news | Pew Research Center’s Journalism Project
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

OWNERSHIP

INTEL TO BUY ALTERA
[SOURCE: New York Times, AUTHOR: Quentin Hardy, Chad Bray]
Intel, the world’s largest maker of chips, said it would pay $16.7 billion for a chip company called Altera. Computers stuffed with superfast chips are going everywhere: home appliances, cars, smartphones and giant data centers. This creates rich opportunities for makers of semiconductors, vastly increasing the number of places they can sell ever-smaller chips. But even as the demand for chips expands, the business has become ruinously expensive for all but the biggest players, and that is causing a multibillion-dollar frenzy. Intel hopes to pick up customers, flexibility and a way to keep its manufacturing going at full speed. Altera was losing profitability, in part from higher development and sales costs. It was the latest in a series of big mergers in the business, pointing to a consolidation, particularly among American manufacturers that came up making chips for things like personal computers and basic networks.
benton.org/headlines/intel-agrees-buy-altera-167-billion | New York Times | San Jose Mercury
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

CHARTER 'DESPERATE' FOR TWC, ENTERS DEAL WITH NO PLAN B, ANALYST SAYS
[SOURCE: Fierce, AUTHOR: Daniel Frankel]
Desperate to deliver the scale it has promised its investors for several years, Charter Communications enters the regulatory process for its proposed $56.7 billion purchase of Time Warner Cable with serious exposure and no "plan B" in the very possible event that federal regulators shoot the deal down. So says media analyst Richard Greenfield, who posted a rather critical analysis of the proposed merger. TWC, he says, has "nothing to lose" with Charter paying a much higher price than it originally wanted, and agreeing to a $2 billion breakup fee. "If the Charter deal ultimately fails, Time Warner Cable will have spent another year improving operations without the normal 'focus' from investors, with Altice waiting in the wings for 'round three,'" Greenfield writes. Charter, however, is in a very different position, he contends. "You might initially say the $2 billion breakup fee is a sign of confidence in regulatory approval," Greenfield writes, "but this is more likely a sign of just how desperate Charter, and their largest shareholder, Liberty, is to achieving the industry scale they promised investors. With Altice starting to buy up smaller cable operators, Charter's only path to consolidating the industry among two key players is to complete the Time Warner/Bright House transaction. There simply is no plan B to achieving the scale [Charter president and CEO Tom Rutledge] predicted two years ago."
benton.org/headlines/charter-desperate-twc-enters-deal-no-plan-b-analyst-says | Fierce
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

SPECTRUM/WIRELESS

WIRELESS CARRIERS MAY HESITATE TO PARTNER WITH FIRSTNET, ANALYSTS SAY
[SOURCE: Fierce, AUTHOR: Nicole Blanchard]
Despite public-safety officials' praise of commercial wireless options as potential partners for FirstNet, the country's first nationwide broadband first-responder network, analysts believe wireless network providers like Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile and Sprint may be hesitant to take on the responsibility. While a partnership with FirstNet would mean access to the network's 20 MHz of 700 MHz spectrum, Ken Rehbehn, an analyst with 451 Research, said that wireless providers will likely have reservations. Rehbehn said that's largely due in part to the need to prioritize FirstNet's traffic over commercial customers, as well as a loss of company flexibility and potentially increased criticism. "Now, a failure of a Tier 1 network in a region of the United States may be noticed by users--they may tweet about it or complain about it--but the operator really doesn't have to say much about it," Rehbehn said. "When the FirstNet network is co-mingled, there may be some very negative publicity that flows from a network failure." Instead, regional carriers could be an alternative for FirstNet, which has faced problems trying to accommodate the nation's 6,000-plus counties it's hoping to serve. Rehbehn is optimistic that the smaller size of a regional carrier's network could mean faster, more tailored adjustment to the needs of FirstNet, as well as the opportunity for small players to access valuable spectrum.
benton.org/headlines/wireless-carriers-may-hesitate-partner-firstnet-analysts-say | Fierce
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

EDUCATION

FCC COMMISSIONER MICHAEL O'RIELLY ISSUES E-RATE WARNINGS
[SOURCE: Education Week, AUTHOR: Michele Molnar]
Commissioner Michael O'Rielly of the Federal Communications Commission delivered a cautionary message to districts, libraries, and companies in his opening remarks for a workshop about building fiber with E-rate funds for school and library connectivity. At the FCC-sponsored event in Washington, Commissioner O'Rielly said that the FCC "will not hesitate to do everything within the law to recoup any excesses or abuses of the program, and prosecute those that push the program boundaries -- no matter how well-intentioned they may be." Then, for anyone seeking funding for fiber build-outs to get connectivity in unserved areas, he recommended that they be "extremely cautious." "Before you declare an area to be unserved, please double check with nearby providers or with the FCC to find out whether it's truly unserved," he said. "It would be a terrible misuse of scarce [E-rate funding] dollars...to overbuild." Notably, Commissioner O'Rielly is one of two Republican commissioners who in 2014 voted against modernizing the E-rate program, and increasing the cap on its funding for schools and libraries by $1.5 billion annually to $3.9 billion. The FCC's three Democratic members voted in favor of both proposals, and they passed.
benton.org/headlines/fcc-commissioner-michael-orielly-issues-e-rate-warnings | Education Week
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

DIVERSITY

GOOGLE'S NEARLY STATIC DIVERSITY NUMBERS POINT TO LONG ROAD AHEAD
[SOURCE: USAToday, AUTHOR: Jessica Guynn]
In 2014, facing mounting criticism from civil rights leaders, Google took a major step to address gender and racial imbalance in its workforce: It publicly divulged that lack of diversity. Major technology companies soon followed suit, leading to a more open dialogue about diversity in an industry dominated by white and Asian men. On June 1st, Google released an update on its efforts to close the gender and racial gap. The update shows the Internet giant is moving the needle but very slowly. At Google, seven out of 10 employees are still men. Most employees are white (60 percent) and Asian (31 percent). Latinos made up just 3 percent of the work force, African Americans 2 percent -- a far cry from fulfilling the mission of Google founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin to have their company reflect the diversity of its customers in the USA and around the world. But Nancy Lee, Google's vice president of people operations, said that the company is seeing "a lot of positive trends." "I think we are getting better and we are hoping that ultimately we are able to accelerate the improvement," Lee said. Women made slight progress in technical roles at Google since 2014, rising one percentage point to 18 percent, but African Americans and Hispanics were unchanged at 1 percent and 2 percent respectively. Among non-technical employees, African Americans gained ground, making up 4 percent versus 3 percent a year ago. Women lost ground, representing 47 percent versus 48 percent. Hispanics didn't budge at 4 percent. In Google's leadership ranks, women now account for 22 percent, up from 21 percent, but Hispanics and African Americans made no progress in climbing the corporate ladder at Google. The diversity report hints at the enormity of the task ahead for Google and the industry overall.
benton.org/headlines/googles-nearly-static-diversity-numbers-point-long-road-ahead | USAToday
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

SECURITY

WHAT PATRIOT ACT DEBATE MEANS
[SOURCE: Washington Post, AUTHOR: Amber Phillips]
Since June 1, the record of any call you made was not nor will be automatically stored in the government's enormous database of logs of all Americans' phone calls. Here are six things you need to know about the debate:
1. This was the first time Congress has openly debated bulk collection of our phone records.
2. Now that the news it out there, Congress has three options: Extend the law untouched. Approve a compromise delicately mapped out by privacy advocates, members of Congress and Obama administration officials. Find some sort of other deal that makes privacy advocates and libertarians like Paul happy.
3. It's unclear how the NSA is operating now.
4. So, are we less safe now because of that? The Obama administration certainly think so.
5. In Congress, the battle's not over, either
6. Sen Rand Paul (R-KY) upset pretty much everyone in Congress — and he's happy about that.
benton.org/headlines/government-cant-collect-our-phone-records-heres-what-means | Washington Post | WashPost – The Switch
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

Benton

Search

Benton

Daily Digest

Analysis

June 2015

How A New Wi-Fi Standard Could Reshape The Future Of Gadgets

WikiLeaks Puts $100,000 Bounty on TPP

House Spending Bills Leave Digital Service Funding High and Dry, So Far

CBO Scores the Integrated Public Alert and Warning System Modernization Act of 2015

CPB analysis shows bright spots for public television

Study: Nearly third of teens changed health habits based on online search

Analysis

Federal Funding Fosters Senior Digital Learning

June 2, 2015 (Lifeline News)

The government can’t collect our phone records. Here’s what that means.