July 2016

NBCUniversal Executive Is Denied Entry Into Russia

An executive with NBCUniversal said he had been denied entry into Russia and detained for several hours July 13, raising the prospect that a growing spy and diplomatic confrontation could now be tipping into the world of business. The executive, Jeff Shell, who oversees the motion picture unit, said he was traveling to Russia on business when he was detained briefly and ordered out of the country. Shell said NBCUniversal had a movie operation in the country. He is also the chairman of the Broadcasting Board of Governors, the federal agency that oversees Voice of America, Radio Free Europe and other government broadcasters that are not well liked in the Kremlin.

Shell said he had arrived in Moscow around 11:30 pm and was making his way through immigration when he was pulled out of the line. “I was then taken to a small room and left alone for about a half-hour before someone came back with a document in Russian that they wanted me to sign,” he said. Shell said he refused, telling the Russian authorities that he would not sign something he did not understand. He said he was then given a translation of the document, which explained that he had been barred from the country. He said he was then escorted to another room at the airport and that he was locked inside for nearly three hours, until a flight to Amsterdam was arranged.

The FCC Sets the Ground Rules For Shutting Down The Phone System — And Sets the Stage For Universal Broadband.

[Commentary] Here’s the funny thing about the world. The two Orders the Federal Communications Commission will vote on July 14 probably have more impact on the future of our communications infrastructure than the Title II reclassification of broadband. But like most momentous things in technology, no one notices because they are technical and everyone’s eyes glaze over.

In particular, no one notices the sleep inducing and incredibly vaguely named item “Technology Transitions,” we are talking about the conclusion of a 4 year proceeding on how to shut down the legacy phone system and move all our national communications platforms to a mix of digital platforms. The old phone system still provides the backbone of our communications system of shiny digital thingies we take for granted. The old copper line phone system is also the workhorse of most ATMs, retail cash registers, and thousands of other things we take for granted every day. The Federal Communications Commission made this a values driven transition. In a bipartisan unanimous 5-0 vote back in January 2014, the FCC rejected the idea of making the Tech Transition a “get out of regulation free zone” and adopted four basic principles to guide the transition: Universal Access, Competition, Consumer Protection and Public Safety. As a result, for once, for once, we actually have a chance to prevent the inequality before it happens. It took 100 years, but if there is one thing Americans took for granted, it was that we all had the same phone system and could all communicate with each other on equal terms. The rules the FCC adopts will make it possible to preserve this principle of universal access. Because this network forms the backbone of the broadband network, if we work together and don’t blow it, we can achieve the same success with broadband that we achieved with basic telephone service.

Live Streaming Breaks Through, and Cable News Has Much to Fear

Cable news has functioned as the harrowing background soundtrack to much of 2015 and 2016. In covering terrorist attacks, protests against the police and a presidential election whose daily antics seem tailor-made for the overheated ethos of cable, Fox News, CNN and MSNBC have all won huge increases in viewership. But as they say on cable, we’ve just gotten word of some breaking news — and it’s not pretty.

Recently, the biggest story in the country was dominated by live-streaming apps made by Facebook and Twitter. Historians of television news often cite the 1991 Gulf War as the breakthrough moment for cable — a conflict that proved there was a market for round-the-clock coverage of the sort that CNN was offering. For most humans, the recent police shootings, the subsequent protests and the mass assassination of police officers in Dallas (TX) were a tragic commentary on modern American race relations. But for that subspecies of humans known as television executives, the events might also have functioned as an alarming peek at a radically altered future. What we saw was live streaming’s Gulf War, a moment that will catapult the technology into the center of the news — and will begin to inexorably alter much of television news as we know it. And that’s not a bad thing. Though it will shake up the economics of TV, live streaming is opening up a much more compelling way to watch the news.

President Obama's Legacy: The Trashing of Free Speech

[Commentary] No administration in memory has more thoroughly undermined freedom of speech and of the press than that of President Barack Obama. From the White House itself, as well as the independent and executive branch agencies, have come a steady stream of policies, initiatives, and pronunciamentos that have threatened or compromised both of these constitutional rights. Indeed, the Administration’s example has inspired like-minded actions outside of the White House. For example, those Democratic members of Congress who actively encouraged IRS action against conservative nonprofit organizations before Lois Lerner turned to the task. And the 16 state attorneys general, Democrats all, who have recently embarked on a campaign designed to silence people who are skeptical of the evidence of anthropogenic global warming and/or its effects and remediation. But it’s the example of the Administration itself that is most notable. Who could forget the performance of then-UN ambassador Susan Rice who, five days after the Benghazi attack that took the life of the American ambassador, went on national TV and blamed the attacks on an anti-Islam video shown on YouTube?

In 2016, the United States is a country riven by deep political and cultural divides, which is perhaps why we are seeing things today that even a short time ago would have seemed preposterously illiberal and outside the country’s revered traditions. Things like the growth and nurturing of identity politics and a grievance culture, and the imposition, especially on campuses, of a virulent form of political correctness, are both a symbol and a cause of our national angst. It is in this state of affairs that the most precious thing we have in our national heritage is the Bill of Rights, and the First Amendment especially. If, as some people fear, things in the USA go from bad to worse, history will not treat kindly those people who have not honored that plain truth.

[Maines is president of The Media Institute.]

Survey: European Union Needs Trade Deal Privacy Regime

Digital rights and privacy groups are launching a campaign to pressure trade deal negotiators to look at privacy and data protection differently. The vanguard of that effort is a new report released July 13 and commissioned by the Center for Digital Democracy (CDD), BEUC, the European Consumer Organisation, European Digital Rights, and the Transatlantic Consumer Dialogue (TACD). The EU and US just launched a new cross-border data flow privacy shield regime, which the groups have issues with. The report says the EU undermines personal data and privacy rights in trade agreements, citing the EU/US TTIP trade deal, for one. The study says the EU should:

  • Keep rules on privacy and data protection out of trade agreements, by means of a legally-binding exclusion clause. This is also recommended by the European Parliament.
  • Include an exception that allows any signatories to regulate cross-border data transfers. This should apply to any sector that deals with the processing and transfer of personal data, such as financial services, within a trade agreement.
  • Insert a clause into trade agreements that prevents an EU measure from becoming automatically invalid or inapplicable.
  • Prevent clauses in trade agreements which would oblige the EU to submit forthcoming rules on privacy and data protection to trade ‘tests’ in order to see if they are more burdensome than necessary.
  • Treat all trade partners the same way when granting ‘adequacy status’ for data transfer purposes to prevent the EU from being vulnerable to potential challenge under trade rules.
  • Require the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) to issue an opinion on the texts of free trade agreements.