1. Monthly archive
  2. November 2015

November 2015

The FCC needs oversight, and Congress is on the job

[Commentary] Congress, which currently has an approval rating of 11 percent, has historically been the most maligned branch of the American federal government. It may be that Americans don’t think Congress is doing its job. But while Americans may mistake the (very public) debates among senators and representatives for discord, it is also a natural and important part of the democratic process. The recent House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee hearing on Federal Communications Commission oversight was a great example of Article 1 (the section of the Constitution which defines the legislative branch) in action, and, importantly, it revealed a number of contentious issues within the FCC. Here are just three:

The FCC’s Enforcement Bureau has “gone off the rails”: A retroactive fine totaling $100 million, actions against Lyft and First National Bank, a war on Wi-Fi, and a process to review startups’ business plans are only a sample of the activities of an Enforcement Bureau which has “gone off the rails” according to FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai.

The FCC/FTC battle over authority on privacy issues: As a result of the FCC’s decision to classify broadband under Title II of the Communications Act, the regulation of online privacy has been moved from the FTC to the FCC. While this may appear to be a minor bureaucratic reassignment, it weakens protections for America’s consumers, deprives them of the FTC’s 20 years of expertise on the privacy beat, and divests consumers of the ability to get remuneration when actors are charged with wrongdoing.

The FCC’s pre-emption of state laws on municipal broadband: The Constitution guarantees states some autonomy, and accordingly, many states have voted to protect public money from being abused in ill-funded municipal broadband projects. The FCC’s gambit in the name of using public money to create broadband “competition,” where private providers can never get the favorable conditions government providers enjoy, was yet another example of the FCC acting on its own accord, something that Congressional oversight needs to rein in. Wisely, the Department of Justice has declined to support the FCC in an effort that may well prove unlawful.

[Roslyn Layton studies Internet economics at the Center for Communication, Media, and Information Technologies (CMI) at Aalborg University in Copenhagen, Denmark]

If We Don't See Beirut News, Is Facebook to Blame?

[Commentary] The recent bombings in Paris, and the outpouring of sympathy about those attacks, has sparked an ongoing debate about why there hasn’t been as much attention paid to similar events in places like Beirut. In particular, people seem concerned that “the media” hasn’t been doing as much reporting about the latter as it has about Paris, for a variety of reasons having to do with racism, cultural bias, etc. Is this really true though? The answer is: Yes and no. And the question of whose fault it is -- ours as news consumers, the media as information gatekeepers, or algorithm-driven news platforms like Facebook is even more complicated than that.

What many of the people who made this complaint seem to be saying isn’t “Why was there no news coverage of this,” but rather “Why didn’t I see any news stories about this?” There are a number of possible answers to that question. One answer is that those people either didn’t seek out the publications that reported on those incidents, or didn’t notice the stories that they published, for whatever reason. And that’s where Facebook and our disjointed and atomized experience of the news comes in. In order to help filter the noise, many people turn to platforms like Twitter and Facebook and Snapchat to show them what is important. A young millennial once said “If the news is important, it will find me” -- but what if it is important and it still doesn’t find you? Whose fault is that? In the current news environment, Facebook has to bear at least some of that blame. It is a massive platform for news, to the extent that a majority of younger users say they get their news from the social network. And the fact that its algorithm chooses what to show us and what not to show us means that it is exercising a very obvious editorial function, much like newspaper editors used to.

Romney 2012 strategist Stuart Stevens blasts Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, Barack Obama and the corrupt media

A Q&A with Stuart Stevens, political consultant and chief strategist for Mitt Romney's 2012 presidential campaign.

Stuart Stevens argued that Democratic campaigns are more adroit in dealing with super PACs than Republicans. And he explained how President Barack Obama has "radicalized" him on campaign finance reform. When asked, "Will super PACs overwhelm this election or are they overrated as a threat?", Stevens said, " I think that the way campaigns have become a huge funding mechanism for media is inherently corrupt. You have all this consternation about money in politics. But money in politics' primary beneficiary is the media. So I would try to look at FCC regulations for licensing [broadcast stations]. You have to carry debates free. No other developed countries have media charging to carry the debates. You don't have commercials in debates or an increase from $5,000 to $250,000 for commercials. It is corrupt. ... More regulation? Yes, in this case, my answer is: Damn straight, it's more regulation. It would be better."

Secret donors fuel Democratic political powerhouse

Democratic Party-aligned “dark money” powerhouse Patriot Majority USA collected half of the $30 million it raised in 2014 from five anonymous donors, according to a Center for Public Integrity analysis of a new tax filing from the group. Patriot Majority USA was a major player in the Democrats’ failed bid to retain control of the US Senate in 2014 -- a time when many Democratic candidates decried the influx of “dark money” in politics. Led by Craig Varoga, a staunch ally of Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), it was a particularly prolific force on television.

The group aired more than 15,000 TV ads in key Senate races, according to a Center for Public Integrity analysis of data provided by advertising firm Kantar Media/CMAG, which monitors broadcast and national cable TV ads. Not a single one was positive. In all, 40 percent of the $34 million Patriot Majority USA spent in 2014 went toward “direct and indirect political campaign activities,” according to the group’s new tax filing -- nearly $13.7 million.

Tech moguls shun Clinton super PAC

The main super PAC supporting Hillary Clinton’s White House bid is struggling to persuade Silicon Valley’s megadonors to cut the $1 million-plus checks it says it needs to lay the groundwork for what’s expected to be the most expensive general-election fight in history. The challenges facing Priorities USA Action, according to a dozen people closely involved in the PAC’s California efforts, are manifold: Some of these liberal Democratic tech moguls are more interested in their own self-funded political groups; others cite ideologically fueled distaste for super PACs; and more still point to residual bad blood after a messy Silicon Valley congressional race in 2014. No matter the reason, it all adds up to one thing: Priorities is simply not a priority for the Bay Area’s wealthy few who Democrats believe are necessary to fund a winning presidential effort.

Millennial Media' first offering after AOL acquisition targets TV Viewers Who See Competitors' Ads

Millennial Media is partnering with Rentrak to roll out a first-of-its-kind capability that lets TV advertisers retarget viewers on their mobile devices. It is the the company's first offering since AOL's $238 million acquisition of the mobile ad network, which reaches 190 million unique users across more than 65,000 apps, in September.

Rentrak, which aggregates data across cable and satellite providers, will measure commercial viewership and pass along digital audiences to Millennial Media's data management platform. Millennial Media will then anonymously match those audiences with smartphone and tablet users. (Viewers often have their mobile devices with them when they're watching TV.) Advertisers will be able to retarget viewers who've watched their TV ads but also those who've seen competitors' ads. Both types of campaign will be measured by Millennial Media's Foot Traffic and Brand Awareness studies to determine the true effectiveness of a multichannel campaign.

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