August 2015

COMPETITION

WHAT IS ‘UNFAIR’ COMPETITION?
[SOURCE: Benton Foundation, AUTHOR: Kevin Taglang]
[Commentary] Benton’s Headlines mainly track developments at the Federal Communications Commission, but major telecommunications and media policy news also comes from the Federal Trade Commission. That was true when the FTC released the Statement of Enforcement Principles Regarding “Unfair Methods of Competition” Under Section 5 of the FTC Act on August 13. This is just the kinda summer reading that DC wonks long for. Now two or more firms or even industries battling to win customers’ business is almost universally seen as a good thing, generally leading to lower prices, new and better products and services, and expanded consumer choice. A competitive market, it is believed, promotes innovation by rewarding producers that invent, develop, and introduce new and innovative products and production processes. But as is the case with every silver lining, there can be a touch of gray. What if some players cheat? What if their methods are not fair? Well, that’s why we have the FTC.
https://www.benton.org/blog/what-unfair-competition
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

CUTTING THE CORD TO GAIN CHOICE, PAY LESS
[SOURCE: New York Times, AUTHOR: Editorial staff]
[Commentary] In recent years, a lot of media and telecommunications executives dismissed the idea that Americans would stop subscribing to cable and satellite TV services. But the cord-cutting phenomenon can no longer be ignored. On the whole, cutting the cord with cable should benefit consumers. It will help people save money and gain more control over their entertainment by allowing them to pay only for what they want to watch. That said, many people won’t want to cut the cord, while others simply won’t be able to, at least not completely. Families with children may want the broad selection of channels traditional cable TV packages offer. And most consumers will still need a high-speed Internet connection to use online services like Netflix. Although Americans now have more choices than ever for how they watch TV, about seven in 10 American households can only get broadband Internet service from one or two providers, usually cable and phone companies. In other words, the big telecom companies will still have plenty of leverage. That’s why it is important that Congress and the Federal Communications Commission push for more choices in the broadband market. Among other things, they should override laws some states have passed that make it difficult or impossible for municipalities to invest in broadband networks. Customers are clearly saying that they want to watch and pay for TV in a different way. Regulators and media executives ought to heed and respond positively to that message — policy makers by encouraging more competition in the broadband market, and media businesses by making more of their content available online.
benton.org/headlines/consumers-are-cutting-cord-gain-choices-and-pay-less | New York Times
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

PRIVACY/SECURITY

THE MESSY BATTLE TO PROTECT YOUR DATA FROM YOUR OWN INTERNET PROVIDER
[SOURCE: Washington Post, AUTHOR: Brian Fung]
The Federal Communications Commission is planning to develop new privacy rules for Internet providers in Fall 2015, an outgrowth of its network neutrality decision earlier in 2015 that could have big implications for companies like AT&T, Verizon and Comcast. The long-awaited effort began quietly with an FCC workshop a few months ago, but as it gains steam, it's raising concerns among conservatives about whether the policy will go too far. And the discussion is already causing friction between Democrats and Republicans. FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler has declined to say when the agency might formally launch a rulemaking process. But if the FCC ultimately approves its new privacy policies for Internet providers, it could powerfully affect the industry's business model -- and even how consumers buy their Internet packages. AT&T, for instance, recently rolled out a broadband plan in Kansas City (MO) and Austin (TX), that gives customers a discount in exchange for allowing the company to track their Web history, the links that they see and click on and the amount of time they spend on a site. Mining this data would allow AT&T to serve better targeted ads. Under a more stringent privacy rule, the FCC could move to limit practices like these. Whether it should is going to be the subject of the next big battle in Internet policy.
benton.org/headlines/messy-battle-protect-your-data-your-own-internet-provider | Washington Post
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

WELCOME TO THE TERRIFYING POST-ASHLEY MADISON INTERNET
[SOURCE: Washington Post, AUTHOR: Caitlin Dewey]
The trove of hacked user data from Ashley Madison -- unlike virtually every large-scale hack before it -- didn’t just involve e-mail addresses or credit card numbers or other things one can fix with a phone call to the bank. It included full names, birth dates, marital statuses and, perhaps most damningly, intimate details about its users’ kinks and sexual preferences -- the sort of dirt that, depending on your circumstances, can easily become grounds for firing, divorce, jail time or even execution. In a few keystrokes, an anonymous, ideologically motivated group managed to torch the careers, friendships and marriages of millions of people. That’s not “vandalism,” to use a term that Ashley Madison itself has lately resorted to. That’s terror. And it should terrify you. None of this is a revelation, of course: Much like terrorist events of other, more violent sorts, the Ashley Madison hack hasn’t exposed anything we didn’t already know. Hackers have managed more than 75 high-profile, large-scale corporate breaches in the past 10 years. If you somehow survived the past decade believing yourself immune, you’re either some sort of security expert or you live in an Internet-free commune. But post-Ashley Madison, the Internet feels fundamentally less safe than it did before. You can smell the tang of anxiety in the panicked rush to build tools that can search the hacked data; in the crunch of people flooding 4chan and Reddit and Pirate Bay for more and dirtier details on the hack; in the bottomless gloating of the people who know, with self-righteous certainty, that they won’t be in it. The post-Ashley-Madison Internet is a paranoid, disquietous place. But don’t worry: You’ll get used to it. If you haven’t already.
benton.org/headlines/welcome-terrifying-post-ashley-madison-internet | Washington Post
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

WHAT THE ASHLEY MADISON HACK COULD MEAN FOR NATIONAL SECURITY
[SOURCE: GigaOm, AUTHOR: Nathaniel Mott]
The release of information stolen from Ashley Madison, a site devoted to helping married individuals cheat on their spouses, could harm many people. But there is one group in particular -- members of the military -- that might suffer more than their civilian counterparts if they’re implicated by the data dump. An estimated 32 million Ashley Madison users were affected by the company’s hacking. Their e-mail addresses, partial credit card information, and IP addresses were revealed over the weekend. For most people, the release of this data could be a problem. But for military members, being outed as adulterers could ruin their lives. The Uniform Code of Military Justice is explicit about its stance on cheaters: they should be punished. Adultery itself rarely leads to a court-martial, but the charge is often added to other accusations against a serviceperson to increase their punishment, and could lead to much more severe disciplinary actions. How severe? Well, adulterers could be punished with a year in confinement and a dishonorable discharge, which would lead them to lose all veteran benefits. Some, like former President George W. Bush, have advised against taking all adulterers to the court-martial. But still, the rule remains a part of the UCMJ.
benton.org/headlines/what-ashley-madison-hack-could-mean-national-security | GigaOm
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

SPOTIFY JUST GOT REAL CREEPY WITH THE DATA IT COLLECTS ON YOU
[SOURCE: Forbes, AUTHOR: Thomas Fox-Brewster]
Music streaming market leader Spotify has decided that it wants to know a lot more about you. It wants to be able to access the sensor information on your phone so it can determine whether you’re walking, running or standing still. It wants to know your GPS coordinates, grab photos from your phone and look through your contacts too. And it may share that information with its partners, so a whole load of companies could know exactly where you are and what you’re up to. This has all been made apparent by a rather significant update to the Spotify privacy policy, pushed out to users Aug 20. Why does Spotify need your photos? And your contacts? It gets worse. Another update includes a provision to collect voice commands where users have given permission (it’s unclear what form of permission). And whilst Spotify could always track your requests and searches, its updated policy permits it to get the date and time of your queries. What’s equally perturbing is that it does not appear to matter whether you’re a paying customer or a freemium user. It should now be apparent to most that no web service is free -- if you’re not paying in money, you’re paying in personal data. But Spotify doesn’t believe those who pay deserve a more private service. It seems there’s little option either to quit Spotify or accept the conditions of a company that has not only been questioned over its ethical treatment of musicians but will now face questions over its respect for customers’ private lives.
benton.org/headlines/location-sensors-voice-photos-spotify-just-got-real-creepy-data-it-collects-you | Forbes
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

WIRELESS/SPECTRUM

VERIZON; SPRINT SHOULD BUILD OUT ITS OWN NETWORK IN RURAL AREAS
[SOURCE: Wireless Week, AUTHOR: Andrew Berg]
Verizon says Sprint needs to buck up and build out its own network in rural areas rather than asking the Federal Communications Commission to consider changing its rules with regards to acceptable roaming rates. In an ex parte filing with the FCC, Verizon said Sprint was relying on "tired arguments" as part of a campaign to achieve "artificially low roaming so it can avoid building out its own network." Verizon is asking the FCC to reject Sprint's proposals and maintain its current roaming policies, which Verizon argues encourage carriers to expand their own networks. Verizon contends that Sprint is relying a business model that sees it invest most of its capital in high-return urban areas, while providing a "lowest cost service" in rural and suburban areas where it doesn't have coverage. For its part, Sprint says that it and T-Mobile haven't built out their networks in the five most rural states in the country because it simply isn't economically feasible. "In many rural areas, where it is note economically feasible or rational to install duplicative network facilities given the unique challenges associated with overcoming low population densities, incentives are not the issue," Sprint argued. "Less densely populated areas do not generate the revenue necessary to sustain the high cost of installing and operating multiple networks."
benton.org/headlines/verizon-sprint-should-build-out-its-own-network-rural-areas | Wireless Week
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

OWNERSHIP

AUTHORS GROUPS SEEKS DOJ PROBE OF AMAZON
[SOURCE: Wall Street Journal, AUTHOR: Greg Bensinger, Jefrey Trachtenberg]
A group of prominent authors says Amazon has “unprecedented power” over the book publishing market and wants the US Department of Justice to begin an investigation of what it claims is a monopoly. On Aug 20, the Authors United group submitted a formal request to the DOJ’s top antitrust official. The group formed in 2014 in response to Amazon’s bruising negotiations with publisher Hachette Book Group, primarily over pricing. Led by author Douglas Preston, the group sent a letter to the DOJ that said Amazon has repeatedly blocked or limited the sale of thousands of books on its website, sold some books below cost to gain market share, and attempted to compel customers to buy books from its own imprints rather than from other companies. “We respectfully request that the Antitrust Division investigate Amazon’s power over the book market, and the ways in which that corporation exercises its power,” Authors United said in its letter. Authors United had been working on its formal appeal to the agency since at least September. A Justice Department spokesman said the agency will review the group’s materials.
benton.org/headlines/authors-group-seeks-doj-probe-amazon | Wall Street Journal
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

TELEVISION

CAN YOU TELL ME HOW WE GOT HERE, FROM SESAME STREET?
[SOURCE: Huffington Post, AUTHOR: David Kleeman]
[Commentary] The past week has seen much outrage and hyperbole in the wake of Sesame Workshop's announcement that Sesame Street will have a first window on HBO, nine months ahead of its PBS broadcast. Still, we never adequately funded US public broadcasting, not just to educate every child but to provide all audiences with content commercial TV can't or won't provide. Most producers of PBS Kids' series have to raise the lion's share of their needs; articles on Sesame Street estimate that PBS provides just 10 percent of the annual cost of new production. So, we have no one to blame but ourselves for the situation that precipitated Sesame Workshop's difficult choice. Or perhaps no blame is necessary, because for Sesame Street's target audience the new arrangement is irrelevant. To say that any toddler will be harmed by the nine-month delay between HBO's debut and PBS' window is akin to saying that babies born in September are disadvantaged compared to those born in January. Sesame Street episodes are neither sequential nor time-sensitive; a child can arrive on the Street on any day, and can view that day's episode (which, most weeks of the year, will be old) on PBS or HBO or from a digital recorder or a DVD. Most important, will Sesame's migration to HBO spark Americans to stand up for public broadcasting? Right now, no one is neglecting kids' TV -- it's all over TV, newspapers and magazine, blogs and social media. So, let's use this moment to defend media content (not just TV) that delivers flexible, proven, cost-effective, equitable and engaging teaching and learning.
[David Kleeman is SVP of Global Trends for Dubit and a member of PBS Kids' Next Generation Advisory Board.]
benton.org/headlines/can-you-tell-me-how-we-got-here-sesame-street | Huffington Post
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

ACCESSIBILITY

FCC PLANS OPEN SOURCE ACCESSIBILITY PLATFORM
[SOURCE: Federal Communications Commission, AUTHOR: Press release]
Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler announced that the agency will offer an open source video access platform that will enable Americans who are deaf, hard of hearing, deaf-blind or who have a speech disability to communicate directly with federal agencies and businesses in American Sign Language (ASL). The platform will provide open source applications for mobile and desktop operating systems which -- along with direct video calling -- will allow for text and high-quality voice communications. In addition, the FCC will provide applications that relay service users can download on their smartphones or desktops in order to communicate directly with agency representatives. An ASL-user will be able to click on who they want to talk to and the call will be connected directly to a customer service center staffed by, most commonly, another person who is deaf or hard of hearing who is fluent in ASL. The FCC plans to roll out a beta version later in 2015 with final release schedule for spring of 2016. The FCC’s platform will provide the basic building blocks that are common to any IP-based application. The platform also will establish a set of interoperability standards to be used by today’s two-way video communications providers, ensuring seamless usability while maintaining freedom of choice for all ASL users. Giving applications developers open access to source code will enable them to provide apps with easy interoperability for those receiving calls.
benton.org/headlines/fcc-plans-open-source-accessibility-platform | Federal Communications Commission
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

REMARKS OF CHAIRMAN WHEELER TDI CONFERENCE
[SOURCE: Federal Communications Commission, AUTHOR: FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler]
The theme I want to highlight today is the power and importance of using broadband-enabled technology to attack the challenges facing an individual with a disability. With the broadband revolution, we have an opportunity to get in on the ground floor as technologies are being developed. Accessibility must be a first thought, not an afterthought. The Federal Communications Commission is taking the concept of open platform and applying it to accessible communications. As a first step, we are building a platform of open source, standards-based applications working on mobile and desktop operating systems, which will allow for text, voice and high quality video calling into existing TRS providers. For step two, we are using the platform to make it easy for any entity, to provide direct video communications. Step three is what has me really excited. This new platform -- this new software -- is open source. That means anyone with know-how will be able to build to it in ways that can expand and enhance access. In other words, it will be publicly available for anyone to expand on the platform with new and innovative applications. No doubt, the possibilities of an accessibility platform are truly astounding. But here’s the final point: If we want to seize these opportunities and take full advantage of this platform, it’s up to you. At a minimum, we are rolling out an open source platform that will enhance video and text communication. But this can be so much more. This needs to become a living, breathing thing that continually opens new doors of opportunity. For that to happen, we need you to use this platform and the applications it enables. We need you to develop to this platform, using your insight as users to develop the most impactful apps. We need you to see this platform as your future. This must be the place where you can explore solutions to meet your needs. This platform must belong to you, the public community.
benton.org/headlines/remarks-chairman-wheeler-tdi-conference | Federal Communications Commission
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

ELECTIONS AND MEDIA

HOW GOOGLE COULD RIG THE 2016 ELECTION
[SOURCE: Politico, AUTHOR: Robert Epstein]
[Commentary] America’s next president could be eased into office not just by TV ads or speeches, but by Google’s secret decisions, and no one -- except for me and perhaps a few other obscure researchers -- would know how this was accomplished. Research I have been directing in recent years suggests that Google, Inc., has amassed far more power to control elections -- indeed, to control a wide variety of opinions and beliefs -- than any company in history has ever had. Google’s search algorithm can easily shift the voting preferences of undecided voters by 20 percent or more -- up to 80 percent in some demographic groups -- with virtually no one knowing they are being manipulated, according to experiments I conducted recently with Ronald E. Robertson. Given that many elections are won by small margins, this gives Google the power, right now, to flip upwards of 25 percent of the national elections worldwide. In the United States, half of our presidential elections have been won by margins under 7.6 percent, and the 2012 election was won by a margin of only 3.9 percent -- well within Google’s control. There are at least three very real scenarios whereby Google -- perhaps even without its leaders’ knowledge -- could shape or even decide the election in 2016. Whether or not Google executives see it this way, the employees who constantly adjust the search giant’s algorithms are manipulating people every minute of every day. The adjustments they make increasingly influence our thinking -- including, it turns out, our voting preferences.
[Robert Epstein is senior research psychologist at the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology]
benton.org/headlines/how-google-could-rig-2016-election | Politico
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

LOCAL MEDIA MUST PUSH BACK AT FACEBOOK FOR 2016 ELECTION
[SOURCE: NetNewsCheck, AUTHOR: Matthew Davis]
[Commentary] Media outlets across the country project vast sums of advertising money changing hands during the 2016 election cycle. The Cook Political Report expects $3.3 billion of political advertising to be spent on local broadcast TV for the elections. Borrell Associates anticipates just over $1 billion in digital ad spend with a whopping 50 percent going to social. While it’s fair to consider digital as an ad-on for now, it’s share and impact will continue to increase with each election cycle. Facebook sees this coming, and wants that political spend, and badly. After its 2011 hire of Kate Harbath, the former chief digital strategist for the National Republican Senatorial Committee, Facebook has grown its DC office to over 100 employees. Facebook’s power lies in its ability to target sought-after political audiences, who then willingly post and share these updates with their friends. Paired with its relatively cheap cost and superior ad formats (digitally speaking), and it is pitching itself as a wholesale alternative, not an add-on, to TV spend. Facebook doesn’t have TV, but it possesses the most sophisticated first-party data audience targeting system on the planet today. Facebook has a solid head start in capturing digital ad spend in politics. But working in local media’s favor, digitally speaking, is the time people spend consuming their content and the ability to cross-promote across digital and TV. But if a digital team can’t parse the demographics, behaviors and political leanings of that audience, don’t expect to earn meaningful digital revenue from politics in 2016. Local media has options, but the first step is recognizing who and what they are competing against.
[Matthew Davis is the VP of product marketing at Reveal Mobile, a Raleigh (NC)-based company that provides mobile audience analytics for local media]
benton.org/headlines/local-media-must-push-back-facebook-2016-election | NetNewsCheck
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

CONTENT

SOCIAL BIAS
[SOURCE: Wall Street Journal, AUTHOR: Elizabeth Dwoskin]
Software tags our photos, recommends products to buy online and serves up ads based on our interests. Increasingly, it also plays a role in more consequential decisions, such as who gets a job or loan, or who pays surge pricing in a ride-sharing app. But computer programs that crunch immense amounts of data to render decisions or predictions can go embarrassingly, sometimes troublingly wrong. Such errors can go beyond insensitivity and insult to arbitrarily limit people’s opportunities. While automation is often thought to eliminate flaws in human judgment, bias—or the tendency to favor one outcome over another, in potentially unfair ways—can creep into complex computer code. Programmers may embed biases without realizing it, and they can be difficult to spot and root out. The results can alienate customers and expose companies to legal risk. Computer scientists are just starting to study the problem and devise ways to guard against it.
benton.org/headlines/how-social-bias-creeps-web-technology | Wall Street Journal
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

EDUCATION

WE'RE SPENDING $10 BILLION ON KIDS' CLASSROOM TECHNOLOGY—BUT DOES IT HELP THEM LEARN?
[SOURCE: Fast Company, AUTHOR: Aisley O'Connell]
Companies that aspire to transform old-fashioned reading into an interactive media experience are on the rise, and they are increasingly looking to schools as a promising market. But experts caution educators to consider whether technology solutions are simply screen-based versions of long-standing classroom strategies. "When you buy technology for schools, are you using it to digitize, or to create a new learning experience?" asks Rob Mancabelli, cofounder and CEO of BrightBytes, which provides 20,000 US schools with data and research designed to improve their return on investment (or in the company's terms, "return on learning") in educational tools, resources, and professional training. "Over $10 billion is spent on technology every year in the US, and the majority of it does not benefit learning outcomes." It's promising to see schools and app developers start to speak the same language around evidence, he says. But data on the effectiveness of multimedia reading experiences remains incomplete at best: "Every company in the e-reader market is looking for the silver bullet research that will allow them to make those claims."
benton.org/headlines/were-spending-10-billion-kids-classroom-technology-does-it-help-them-learn | Fast Company
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

OPEN GOVERNMENT

CLINTON E-MAILS
[SOURCE: New York Times, AUTHOR: Michael Schmidt]
Federal District Court for the District of Columbia Judge Emmet G. Sullivan said that Hillary Rodham Clinton did not comply with government policies in her exclusive use of a personal email account while she was secretary of state, challenging her longstanding position that she abided by the rules. At a hearing for a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the State Department, Judge Sullivan said that “we wouldn’t be here today if the employee had followed government policy.” Judge Sullivan also opened the door for the FBI, which is investigating whether there was classified information on Clinton’s account, to expand its inquiry to pursue emails that she may have deleted. The judge ordered the State Department to ask the FBI to give it any emails recovered from Clinton’s private server that were not already in the State Department’s possession or that may be related to the lawsuit.
benton.org/headlines/judge-says-hillary-clinton-didnt-follow-government-email-policies | New York Times | Financial Times
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

STORIES FROM ABROAD

GOOGLE ORDERED TO FORGET 'RIGHT TO BE FORGOTTEN' STORIES
[SOURCE: Revere Digital, AUTHOR: Mark Bergen]
A Google by any other name still can’t catch a break in Europe. The search engine is locked in a lengthy battle with regulators across the Atlantic over the “right to be forgotten.” The latest twist: Even after Google complies by removing results from its search page, it is told it must do more. After a European Court ruling in 2014, Google removed selected news articles that mentioned a 10-year-old criminal case after the person named in it filed a petition. Turns out, that makes for good copy. And plenty of news outlets published the story about the removal. On Aug 19, the Information Commissioner’s Office, a watchdog agency in the United Kingdom, ordered that Google remove those news articles about the removal of the original news articles. The IOC gave Google a 35-day deadline. The agency’s deputy commissioner, David Smith, seemed aware of the bizarre implications. “Let’s be clear,” he said in a statement. “We understand that links being removed as a result of this court ruling is something that newspapers want to write about. And we understand that people need to be able to find these stories through search engines like Google. But that does not need them to be revealed when searching on the original complainant’s name.”
benton.org/headlines/google-ordered-forget-right-be-forgotten-stories | Revere Digital
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

Benton

Search

Benton

Daily Digest

Analysis

August 2015

Next Steps on the Road to the Incentive Auction

Ken Howard Re-Elected SAG/AFTRA President

Trump Is A 'Ratings Machine.' Does That Justify The Media's Binge?

Donald Trump's latest business idea: Get paid for interviews?

Yes, Donald Trump will make money for CNN

Spotify Tries to Put Out a Privacy Fire

August 21, 2015 (Competition, Competition)

What Is ‘Unfair’ Competition?

Consumers are Cutting the Cord to Gain Choices and Pay Less

Judge Says Hillary Clinton Didn’t Follow Government Email Policies