For upcoming media policy events, see http://www.benton.org
JOURNALISM
U.S. Military Covertly Pays to Run Stories in Iraqi Press
Congress, Rumsfeld Want Answers on Press Propaganda in Iraq
Bush=92s War on the Press
Anonymous Sources And a Known Quantity
If Old Journalism Dies...
Good Night and Good Luck
CABLE
Cable Rates To Increase As Much as 6%
AT&T Backs a la Carte Cable
Wall St. Unfazed by a la Carte
Let Viewers Pick and Choose
Don't Touch that Dial
NCTA Statement on A La Carte
INTERNET/TELECOM
BellSouth Wants to Charge for Web Speed
Familiar Ring: Landlines Tie Down Some Bells
Vying for Remote Control
MORE FROM DECENCY FORUM
AFTRA Testifies at Decency Forum
National Association of Broadcasters at Decency Forum
POLICYMAKERS
Kennedy a Driving Force on the PUC
New AT&T's Lobbying Operation Takes Shape
QUICKLY -- Media will be extinct soon; Like the Show? Buy the Book. And the=
=20
Earrings. And the ...; Wherever, whenever video in spotlight for 2006;=20
Equity Firms Buy Danish Phone Company; Alliance Weighs a Bid for Knight=20
Ridder; Cyberspace comes to aid of Kashmir quake survivors
JOURNALISM
US MILITARY COVERTLY PAYS TO RUN STORIES IN IRAQI PRESS
[SOURCE: Los Angeles Times 11/30, AUTHOR: Mark Mazzetti and Borzou Daragahi]
Since the model worked so well for crafting US education policy... As part=
=20
of an information offensive in Iraq, the U.S. military is secretly paying=
=20
Iraqi newspapers to publish stories written by American troops in an effort=
=20
to burnish the image of the U.S. mission in Iraq. The articles, written by=
=20
U.S. military "information operations" troops, are translated into Arabic=
=20
and placed in Baghdad newspapers with the help of a defense contractor,=20
according to U.S. military officials and documents obtained by the Los=20
Angeles Times. Many of the articles are presented in the Iraqi press as=20
unbiased news accounts written and reported by independent journalists. The=
=20
stories trumpet the work of U.S. and Iraqi troops, denounce insurgents and=
=20
tout U.S.-led efforts to rebuild the country. Though the articles are=20
basically factual, they present only one side of events and omit=20
information that might reflect poorly on the U.S. or Iraqi governments. The=
=20
operation is designed to mask any connection with the U.S. military. The=20
Pentagon has a contract with a small Washington-based firm called Lincoln=
=20
Group, which helps translate and place the stories. The Lincoln Group's=20
Iraqi staff, or its subcontractors, sometimes pose as freelance reporters=
=20
or advertising executives when they deliver the stories to Baghdad media=20
outlets.
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/la-fg-infowar30nov30,1,33...
67.story?coll=3Dla-headlines-frontpage
* U.S. Is Said to Pay to Plant Articles in Iraq Papers
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/01/politics/01propaganda.html?hp&ex=3D113...
9600&en=3D3af8aaf9fa1cb0bc&ei=3D5094&partner=3Dhomepage
CONGRESS, RUMSFELD WANT ANSWERS ON PRESS PROPAGANDA IN IRAQ
[SOURCE: Associated Press]
The U.S. military offered a mixed message Wednesday about whether it=20
embraced one of its own programs that reportedly paid a consulting firm and=
=20
Iraqi newspapers to plant favorable stories about the war and the=20
rebuilding effort. Lt. Col. Barry Johnson, a military spokesman in Iraq,=20
said the program is ``an important part of countering misinformation in the=
=20
news by insurgents.'' A spokesman for Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld,=
=20
however, called a report detailing the program troubling if true and said=
=20
he was looking into the matter. Members of Congress immediately called for=
=20
an investigation. Two other federal agencies have been investigated in the=
=20
past year for similar activities, leading Congress' Government=20
Accountability Office to condemn one, the Education Department, for=20
engaging in illegal covert propaganda.
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_con...
t_id=3D1001612485
BUSH'S WAR ON THE PRESS
[SOURCE: Free Press, AUTHOR: John Nichols & Robert W. McChesney]
[Commentary] With its unprecedented campaign to undermine and, where=20
possible, eliminate independent journalism, the Bush Administration has=20
demonstrated astonishing contempt for the Constitution and considerable=20
fear of an informed public. Over the past five years the Administrations=20
has: 1) corrupting public broadcasting, 2) issued fake video news segments,=
=20
3) paid off pundits, 4) turned press conferences into charades, 5) gutted=
=20
the Freedom of Information Act, 6) obscured coverage of the war in Iraq,=20
and 7) pushed for more consolidated media ownership. The Bush=20
Administration attack on the foundations of self-government demands a=20
response of similar caliber. Under pressure from media-reform activists=20
Congress has begun to push back, with a strong bipartisan vote in the=20
Senate Commerce Committee to limit the ability of federal agencies to=20
produce covert video news segments and to investigate Defense Department=20
spending on propaganda initiatives. But until the Administration is held=20
accountable by Congress for all its assaults on journalism, and until=20
standards are developed to assure that such abuses will not be repeated by=
=20
future administrations, freedom of the press will exist in name only, with=
=20
all that suggests for our polity.
http://www.freepress.net/news/12548
ANONYMOUS SOURCES AND A KNOWN QUANTITY
[SOURCE: Washington Post, AUTHOR: Tina Brown]
[Commentary] Now that everyone's a moralist, all mistakes are outrages.=20
It's born of the desperation of Big Journalism's realization that it has=20
lost control. Mainstream Media are trapped in the pincer assaults of the=20
fact-free ethical anarchy of the blogosphere and the cynicism of quarterly=
=20
profit-driven conglomerates enslaved to entertainment values.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/30/AR200511...
2399.html
(requires registration)
IF OLD JOURNALISM DIES...
[SOURCE: The Village Voice, AUTHOR: Sydney H. Schanberg]
[Commentary] Chattering oracles are telling us that newspapers will die=20
soon, as the Internet takes over. But the puzzlement is, where will the new=
=20
digital providers of information get their fresh news? serious journalism=
=20
is labor-intensive and time-consuming and therefore requires large amounts=
=20
of money and health benefits and pensions. The blogosphere has plenty of=20
time, but as yet none of the other items. So if and when newspapers fade=20
into darkness, as the all-seeing oracles foretell, what will happen?=20
Perhaps, in a future time of airborne pigs, altruism will suddenly infuse=
=20
our culture, and money will descend, like manna, on the Internet to pay for=
=20
the reporters to do the intensive journalism needed as a check on abusive=
=20
power. And if altruism or labor-friendly corporate ideologies don't=20
magically appear? The oracles are mostly silent on that eventuality.
http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0548,schanberg,70452,6.html
GOOD NIGHT AND GOOD LUCK
[SOURCE: Radio-Television News Directors Association 10/15/1958, AUTHOR:=20
Edward R Murrow]
[Commentary] If you haven't already seen the film, here's an excerpt of the=
=20
speech that serves as the its bookends.
"I am seized with an abiding fear regarding what [radio and television] are=
=20
doing to our society, our culture and our heritage. Our history will be=20
what we make it. And if there are any historians about fifty or a hundred=
=20
years from now, and there should be preserved the kinescopes for one week=
=20
of all three networks, they will there find recorded in black and white, or=
=20
color, evidence of decadence, escapism and insulation from the realities of=
=20
the world in which we live. I invite your attention to the television=20
schedules of all networks between the hours of 8 and 11 p.m., Eastern Time.=
=20
Here you will find only fleeting and spasmodic reference to the fact that=
=20
this nation is in mortal danger. There are, it is true, occasional=20
informative programs presented in that intellectual ghetto on Sunday=20
afternoons. But during the daily peak viewing periods, television in the=20
main insulates us from the realities of the world in which we live. For=20
surely we shall pay for using this most powerful instrument of=20
communication to insulate the citizenry from the hard and demanding=20
realities which must be faced if we are to survive. I mean the word survive=
=20
literally. One of the basic troubles with radio and television news is=20
that both instruments have grown up as an incompatible combination of show=
=20
business, advertising and news. Each of the three is a rather bizarre and=
=20
demanding profession. And when you get all three under one roof, the dust=
=20
never settles. The top management of the networks with a few notable=20
exceptions, has been trained in advertising, research, sales or show=20
business. But by the nature of the corporate structure, they also make the=
=20
final and crucial decisions having to do with news and public affairs. This=
=20
instrument can teach, it can illuminate; yes, and it can even inspire. But=
=20
it can do so only to the extent that humans are determined to use it to=20
those ends. Otherwise it is merely wires and lights in a box. There is a=20
great and perhaps decisive battle to be fought against ignorance,=20
intolerance and indifference. This weapon of television could be useful.=20
Stonewall Jackson, who knew something about the use of weapons, is reported=
=20
to have said, "When war comes, you must draw the sword and throw away the=
=20
scabbard." The trouble with television is that it is rusting in the=20
scabbard during a battle for survival."
http://www.rtnda.org/resources/speeches/murrow.html
CABLE
CABLE RATES TO INCREASE AS MUCH AS 6%
[SOURCE: Wall Street Journal, AUTHOR: Peter Grant peter.grant( at )wsj.com and=
=20
Dionne Searcey dionne.searcey( at )wsj.com]
Most cable-TV bills will continue to climb next year, with Comcast, the=20
country's largest cable operator, leading the way with a 6% increase for=20
its most popular service. Cable and satellite rates also are rising at a=20
time of renewed calls in Washington for legislation that would require=20
operators to sell channels individually instead of packaged together.=20
Advocates of so-called a la carte pricing argue that it is unfair to=20
consumers to make them pay steep price increases for channels they don't=20
watch. Consumer groups argue that imposing a la carte pricing on cable and=
=20
satellite companies would be one of the best ways to control prices. "If=20
you were to allow consumers to have real choice" of paying only for=20
programs they watch, says Mark Cooper, director of research at the Consumer=
=20
Federation of America, "that would have a tremendous discipline on everybod=
y."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB113339662180710783.html?mod=3Dtodays_us_...
sonal_journal
(requires subscription)
AT&T BACKS A LA CARTE CABLE
[SOURCE: USAToday, AUTHOR: Leslie Cauley]
AT&T is throwing its weight behind the push to give consumers a choice of=
=20
cable channels, telling the Federal Communications Commission that it wants=
=20
to offer a la carte programming to its video customers. AT&T plans to start=
=20
selling video services later this month. But to sell its TV services a la=
=20
carte, AT&T would need the cooperation of programmers -- who have so far=20
refused. Its decision to embrace a la carte follows the FCC's suggestion=20
that the cable industry stop forcing people to buy bundles that include TV=
=20
channels they don't want. The main obstacle for a la carte: programming=20
contracts. Programmers routinely bar cable operators from selling channels=
=20
a la carte. Why? Advertising rates. Cable programmers base ad rates on the=
=20
number of viewers they reach. The more they reach, the more they can=20
charge. If they allowed a la carte, viewership for many channels would=20
likely plummet. Gene Kimmelman of Consumers Union says: =93This is the=20
essence of how they squeeze extra revenues out of consumers.=94 The problem=
=20
could worsen, he warns, as cable operators -- as well as broadcasters and=
=20
satellite TV -- pack on more channels. =93The bundles get bigger, and price=
s=20
go up,=94 Kimmelman says. =93A la carte would blow this scam out of the wat=
er.=94
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/money/20051201/1b_att01.art.htm
WALL STREET UNFAZED BY A LA CARTE
[SOURCE: Multichannel News, AUTHOR: Mike Farrell]
The hubbub over the potential threat of a la carte pricing drew a=20
collective yawn from cable investors Wednesday. The investor indifference=
=20
to Federal Communications Commission Chairman Kevin Martin=92s comments at =
a=20
Senate hearing Tuesday, where he said a la carte was feasible, mirrored the=
=20
sentiments of several Wall Street analysts. In research reports in the past=
=20
two days, several analysts said the possibility of forced a la carte=20
pricing for cable networks was highly unlikely, with most adding that=20
Chairman Martin=92s comments could be a political ploy to push through his=
=20
longtime desire for a family-friendly tier.
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6288070.html?display=3DBreaking+News
(requires subscription)
LET VIEWERS PICK AND CHOOSE
[SOURCE: USAToday, AUTHOR: Mark Cooper and Gene Kimmelman]
[Commentary] Over the past 10 years, the average price of expanded basic=20
cable service has increased from just over $20 to well over $40. While it's=
=20
true that the number of channels has also increased, typical households=20
watch fewer than 20 of them. Consumers are forced to pay for 50 channels=20
they do not watch and may even object to. Many find the programming on some=
=20
of them objectionable and are rightfully annoyed they must pay for them.=20
Why not just pay for what you watch? Today, the cable operators, not=20
consumers, decide what channels must be purchased together. Because of=20
that, they're able to favor the channels they own. A mixed bundling policy=
=20
=97 in which consumers can choose the big bundles, or put together small=20
bundles, or even buy individual channels =97 would solve both the problem o=
f=20
price increases and offensive content. Consumers would determine what they=
=20
want and what they're willing to pay for it, thereby preventing cable=20
companies from overpricing. Exposing programmers directly to consumer=20
demand would also increase channel diversity. Consumers might finally get a=
=20
chance to see Faith TV, a Christian movie channel, and CoLours TV, a=20
diverse ethnic channel, in addition to channels owned by Time Warner and=20
Comcast. Though this would be a revolutionary change for the cable=20
industry, it is the way most markets work. Imagine Time Warner telling=20
consumers that to buy Time magazine, they also had to buy Time Warner-owned=
=20
Field & Stream. In the competitive publishing market they can't get away=20
with that, but in TV, they make more money by controlling how consumers get=
=20
cable and satellite programming. Bundling lets them squeeze consumers and=
=20
control content. They have no incentive to quit unless Congress makes them.
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20051201/oppose01.art.htm
DON'T TOUCH THAT DIAL
[SOURCE: USAToday, AUTHOR: Editorial Staff]
[Commentary] If you are like most people, you could probably do without=20
some channels offered by your cable TV provider. Some, with racy or violent=
=20
content, may be offensive. Others, such as those that feature people=20
playing poker or hawking costume jewelry, may simply be uninteresting. You=
=20
would probably jump at the chance to pick and choose. That day might be=20
coming. Cable television, to be sure, is not the most competitive industry.=
=20
But, in most places, it is no longer a monopoly. Viewers can opt for=20
satellite television, pay per view, on-demand movies, video downloads and,=
=20
increasingly, competition from what have traditionally been telephone=20
companies. This increasing competition, and not regulation, will benefit=20
consumers. Certainly, cable companies should make it easier for customers=
=20
to block any channels they find offensive. But telling any industry what it=
=20
must sell and how it should package its products is an action government=20
should take only in rare instances where competition is minimal or=20
nonexistent. Ultimately, if there's sufficient demand for individual=20
channel selection, the marketplace will find a way to supply it. In the=20
meantime, the heavy hand of government intervention in an industry in the=
=20
midst of technological change might be worse, even, than watching people=20
sell cubic zirconium jewelry.
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20051201/edit01.art.htm
NATIONAL CABLE & TELECOMMUNICATIONS ASSOCIATION STATEMENT ON A LA CARTE
[SOURCE: National Cable & Telecommunications Association, AUTHOR: Kyle=20
McSlarrow]
"We can't comment on any new FCC a la carte report until it=92s released an=
d=20
we've had a chance to review it, but previous and recent analyses were=20
consistent in their findings that government pay-per-channel regulation=20
would be likely to hurt consumers by increasing prices, decreasing choice=
=20
and reducing diversity in programming, and it would do so in a way that=20
violates the First Amendment. In addition, mandatory a la carte would be=20
potentially very troublesome for our goal of universal deployment of=20
broadband services. Such a massive government intrusion into how a=20
broadband service like video is marketed, offered, and priced would=20
undoubtedly chill the needed innovation and investment necessary to build=
=20
out capital intensive networks that rely on the marketplace to determine=20
the most economically effective way to provide a return on investment."
http://www.ncta.com/press/press.cfm?PRid=3D646&showArticles=3Dok
* The Pitfalls of A La Carte
[SOURCE: National Cable & Telecommunications Association Issue Brief]
http://www.ncta.com/issues/alacarte/
INTERNET/TELECOM
BELLSOUTH WANTS TO CHARGE FOR WEB SPEED
[SOURCE: Washington Post, AUTHOR: Jonathan Krim]
William L. Smith, chief technology officer for Atlanta-based BellSouth,=20
said yesterday that Internet service providers should be allowed to strike=
=20
deals to give certain Web sites or services priority in reaching computer=
=20
users, a controversial system that would significantly change how the=20
Internet operates. He believes BellSouth should be able, for example, to=20
charge Yahoo for the opportunity to have its search site load faster than=
=20
that of Google. Or, Smith said, his company should be allowed to charge a=
=20
rival voice-over-Internet firm so that its service can operate with the=20
same quality as BellSouth's offering. Several big technology firms and=20
public interest groups say that approach would enshrine Internet access=20
providers as online toll booths, favoring certain content and shutting out=
=20
small companies trying to compete with their offerings. "Prioritization is=
=20
just another word for degrading your competitor," said Gigi B. Sohn,=20
president of Public Knowledge, a digital rights advocacy group. "If we want=
=20
to ruin the Internet, we'll turn it into a cable TV system" that carries=20
programming from only those who pay the cable operators for transmission.=
=20
Consumer groups wonder, for example, how any Web start-up that might want=
=20
to challenge an incumbent could expect to outspend it to get top or even=20
equal performance over a network charging for the privilege. Ms. Sohn said=
=20
claims of bandwidth scarcity are overblown. The real agenda, she said, is=
=20
to put rival services at a disadvantage.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/30/AR200511...
2109.html
(requires registration)
FAMILIAR RING: LANDLINES TIE DOWN SOME BELLS
[SOURCE: Wall Street Journal, AUTHOR: Dionne Searcey dionne.searcey( at )wsj.com]
Trying to expand their businesses, telephone companies were making=20
multibillion-dollar acquisitions last winter. Verizon, for instance, picked=
=20
up a big long-distance company. AT&T Inc., then called SBC Communications,=
=20
did the same. Sprint bought Nextel Communications and became Sprint Nextel.=
=20
Alltel acquired Western Wireless. The moves, though, haven't always been a=
=20
ringing-off-the-hook success for shareholders in the Bell companies.=20
"Obviously, the analysts are concerned about the spending the Bells are=20
doing on fiber and the investors are listening," said David Ahl, who owns=
=20
shares of MCI Inc., which Verizon is acquiring. "The wireless business has=
=20
a higher growth rate, and that's why people like it," added Mr. Ahl.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB113340621586811016.html?mod=3Dtodays_us_...
ey_and_investing
(requires subscription)
VYING FOR REMOTE CONTROL
[SOURCE: Washington Post, AUTHOR: Steven Levingston]
The marriage of the television and the computer moved a step closer=20
yesterday when the giant chipmaker Intel unveiled its vision for using a=20
new technology that blends the two devices. Intel said it is working with=
=20
more than 40 companies around the world in the movie, music, television,=20
gaming and photo-editing fields to deliver content to computers using the=
=20
technology called Viiv (rhymes with five). Due out early next year,=20
Viiv-equipped computers are designed to control the overall entertainment=
=20
experience. They turn a television into a computer screen with the=20
capability of performing any computer task, including searching the=20
Internet. Operated by remote control, the system will be able to show a=20
movie on the television while downloading music for later listening. The=20
computer will turn on instantly like a television and with an add-on=20
feature will record, pause and rewind live television programs. An=20
entertainment center operated by a Viiv-platform computer will be able to=
=20
connect to other devices, such as DVD players and portable media players.=
=20
Yesterday's announcement intensifies the competition among cable companies,=
=20
game makers, computer manufacturers, software firms, retailers,=20
entertainment giants and Internet search engines that are all scrambling to=
=20
find a way to dominate -- or at least carve out a niche in -- the digital=
=20
home-entertainment hub. Companies have hurried to form alliances to=20
strengthen their positions.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/30/AR200511...
2118.html
(requires registration)
MORE FROM DECENCY FORUM
AFTRA TESTIFIES AT DECENCY FORUM
[SOURCE: American Federation of Television and Radio Artists]
The American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (AFTRA) today=20
testified before the U.S. Senate Commerce Committee=92s =93Open Forum on=20
Decency.=94 As a representative of broadcasters and recording artists, AFT=
RA=20
expressed grave concerns about certain provisions contained in the bill=20
addressing this subject that was passed by the House of Representatives.=20
Tom Carpenter, AFTRA=92s General Counsel/Director of Legislative Affairs,=
=20
told the Senate Committee: =93The airwaves belong to the American people. T=
he=20
government holds this valuable resource in trust in granting licenses to=20
private companies to use that valuable public resource, and to exploit it=
=20
for profit. Our telecommunications policy is predicated on the idea that=20
the quid pro quo for free access to exploit this public resource is that=20
the public interest should be served. This is an important distinction.=20
Licensees get access to a public resource and they should be expected to=20
serve the public interest. But individual citizens are not licensed; they=
=20
are employees who are hired to be the faces and voices on the air. They are=
=20
individuals who work for media companies, and are employed pursuant to=20
employment contracts. Those employment contracts provide that individuals=
=20
can be disciplined or fired for either failing to comply with the=20
employer=92s policies, or failing to comply with FCC regulations. But at th=
e=20
root of all this is the fundamental principle that licensees, not=20
individuals, are responsible for programming decisions. Individuals who do=
=20
not bear the public service obligations of holding an FCC license should=20
not be held liable for the programming decisions that their employers make.=
=20
It is one thing for the government to fine a licensee for failing its=20
obligations to meet the public interest. It=92s a very different matter, an=
d=20
one that raises serious First Amendment implications, for government=20
entities to fine an individual for the content of his or her speech, merely=
=20
because someone else chose to broadcast it.=94
http://www.aftra.org/press/pr_2005_11_29_decencytestimony.html
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS AT DECENCY FORUM
[SOURCE: National Association of Broadcasters, AUTHOR: Bruce Reese,=20
Bonneville International]
"it may be useful to remember that the vast majority of broadcasters have=
=20
never had the FCC take any action against them on the indecency issue. It=
=20
is also worth noting that many of the complaints that have been filed=20
originate with one or two well-organized interest groups. Now, anybody has=
=20
a right to lodge complaints. But, we should not mistake mass, Internet=20
generated complaints for an organic outpouring of citizen outrage. Another=
=20
fact to consider: the FCC is well equipped to mete out fines. . . as it=20
demonstrated in 2004, issuing 7.7 million dollars in indecency fines...=20
compared to just 48 thousand dollars in 2000. So, I hope these facts can=20
play a role as the Committee examines this issue. All that said, local=20
broadcasters recognize that we have an obligation to provide programming=20
that meets our communities' local standards. And our competitors have no=20
parallel constraints."
http://www.nab.org/Newsroom/PressRel/testimonies/112905_reese_decency_fo...
.htm
POLICYMAKERS
KENNEDY A DRIVING FORCE ON THE PUC
[SOURCE: Los Angeles Times, AUTHOR: James S. Granelli and Marc Lifsher]
Few who deal with the state Public Utilities Commission expect the agency=
=20
to veer substantially from its recent pro-business course after the=20
departure of hard-driving Susan Kennedy, named Wednesday as Gov. Arnold=20
Schwarzenegger's chief of staff. But many figure the agency will become=20
more collegial and, possibly, more effective as it tries to balance the=20
interests of consumers against those of power and phone companies. Kennedy=
=20
accomplished much of what she set out to do when Davis appointed her nearly=
=20
three years ago to swing PUC policy toward business. The commission=20
historically was split more between consumer and business interests than=20
along party lines. Last year, there were five Democrats; this year four,=20
including Kennedy, who describes herself as "a Democrat to the core." The=
=20
departures earlier this year of Loretta M. Lynch and Carl W. Wood =97 both =
of=20
whom generally favored consumers over industry -- shifted the balance on=
=20
the PUC in Kennedy's favor. Kennedy will have considerable sway over the=20
appointment of her replacement. Both business and consumer groups expect=20
Gov Schwarzenegger to appoint a candidate who, like Kennedy, believes in=20
taking regulatory shackles off big businesses and letting the markets=20
determine their fate. Names emerging Wednesday as successors to Kennedy=20
included Joseph Desmond, whose term as chairman of the state Energy=20
Commission ends this year; Robert Lane, an aide to PUC member John Bohn,=20
and former state Sen. Byron Sher, who has written several landmark=20
environmental bills.
http://www.latimes.com/business/printedition/la-fi-puc1dec01,1,216442.st...
?coll=3Dla-headlines-pe-business
(requires registration)
* Irking Conservatives, Schwarzenegger Replaces Top Aide With a Democrat
[SOURCE: New York Times, AUTHOR: Jon Broder]
California Public Utilities Commissioner Susan P. Kennedy, who was deputy=
=20
chief of staff and cabinet secretary to Gov. Gray Davis, has been named=20
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger new chief of staff. Ms. Kennedy, an advocate of=
=20
reproductive rights and gay rights, is a former executive director of the=
=20
California Democratic Party and communications director for Senator Dianne=
=20
Feinstein, a Democrat. As chief of staff, she will direct the governor's=20
staff and be responsible for carrying out his agenda. Ms. Kennedy was=20
appointed to the State Public Utilities Commission by Mr. Davis shortly=20
before he left office.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/01/national/01arnold.html
(requires registration)
NEW AT&T'S LOBBYING OPERATION TAKES SHAPE
[SOURCE: Washington Post, AUTHOR: Judy Sarasohn]
James Cicconi , who was AT&T Corp.'s general counsel and the bane of SBC=20
Communications on Capitol Hill, will become senior executive vice president=
=20
for external and legislative affairs at the merged SBC-AT&T, making him=20
responsible for managing the merged company's public policy operation. (The=
=20
expanded company has taken on the name of the venerable AT&T, but for the=
=20
sake of clarity here, let's give the players their old monikers.) He was a=
=20
major player in the White Houses of Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, as=
=20
well as a former lobbyist at the law and lobby firm of Akin, Gump, Strauss,=
=20
Hauer & Feld LLP . At AT&T, he was credited with turning the phone=20
company's lobby operation into a real force in Washington. He will be=20
joined by Tim McKone, senior vice president for federal relations at SBC,=
=20
who will be executive vice president for federal relations, overseeing=20
lobbying efforts on the Hill and with the administration for the merged=20
company. McKone, who was director of congressional relations for Republican=
=20
Robert J. Dole's presidential campaign and a fundraiser for Sen. John=20
McCain (R-Ariz.), will report to Cicconi. SBC's Dorothy T. Attwood , who=20
was an aide to then-FCC chairmen Michael K. Powell (R) and William E.=20
Kennard (D), will be senior vice president for regulatory policy and=20
planning. James C. Smith , who handles FCC advocacy will be retiring and=20
succeeded at the merged shop by Robert Quinn , who was with the old AT&T.=
=20
Quinn will be a senior vice president. Attwood and Quinn will report to=20
Cicconi.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/30/AR200511...
2022.html
(requires registration)
QUICKLY
MEDIA WILL BE EXTINCT SOON
[SOURCE: Ball State Daily News, AUTHOR: Sean Bueter]
Author and National Public Radio host Bob Garfield believes the media as=20
they exist are headed for extinction due to a fragmented audience and a=20
significant loss of advertising dollars. He believes that the corporate=20
media giants currently in operation will give way to less expensive=20
outlets. As advertisers look for new outlets to spend their money, small=20
specialized operations will become the dominant forces in media.
http://www.bsudailynews.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2005/11/30/438d3d67f10b7
LIKE THE SHOW? BUY THE BOOK. AND THE EARRINGS. AND THE...
[SOURCE: New York Times, AUTHOR: Stuart Elliot]
Although the "L" in "The L Word" stands for "lesbian," it seems that=20
Showtime, a division of Viacom, is hoping to make it mean "licensing." If=
=20
you like the TV show, why not buy the fragrance? Wear the jewelry? Read the=
=20
book? Join other fans online to help write an episode?
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/01/business/01adco.html?pagewanted=3Dall
(requires registration)
WHEREVER, WHENEVER VIDEO IN SPOTLIGHT FOR 2006
[SOURCE: Reuters, AUTHOR: Michele Gershberg]
The business of video programming is shifting rapidly, whether it is viewed=
=20
in the living room, on the Internet or in the palm of your hand. The most=
=20
cautious of U.S. media titans have entered the fray, crafting deals to=20
deliver programs according to a consumer's schedule and not their own.=20
While the promise, and threat, of video played across different devices has=
=20
been held out for nearly a decade, 2006 will see its fulfillment, media=20
executives and experts said ahead of the Reuters Media and Advertising=20
Summit this week.
http://today.reuters.com/summit/summitarticle.aspx?type=3DsummitNews&sum...
=3DMediaSummit05&storyid=3D2005-11-30T110221Z_01_HO039689_RTRUKOC_0_US-MEDI=
A-SUMMIT-PREVIEW.xml
EQUITY FIRMS BUY DANISH PHONE COMPANY
[SOURCE: New York Times, AUTHOR: Heather Timmons]
Private equity funds continued their bold march through Europe on=20
Wednesday, as a consortium including the Blackstone Group and Kohlberg=20
Kravis Roberts secured a $12 billion cash deal for Denmark's largest=20
telecommunications company, TDC.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/01/business/worldbusiness/01tele.html?pag...
nted=3Dall
(requires registration)
ALLIANCE WEIGHS A BID FOR KNIGHT RIDDER
[SOURCE: Wall Street Journal, AUTHOR: Dennis K. Berman=20
dennis.berman( at )wsj.com, Henny Sender henny.sender( at )wsj.com and Joseph T.=20
Hallinan joe.hallinan( at )wsj.com]
A trio of private-equity firms has formed an alliance to examine purchasing=
=20
newspaper publisher Knight Ridder. The alliance -- consisting of the=20
Blackstone Group, Providence Equity Partners Inc. and Kohlberg Kravis=20
Roberts & Co. -- is in early stages of preparation, these people say. But=
=20
the buyout firms remain wary that the $4 billion market capitalization is=
=20
too high for the publisher, which owns the Miami Herald, the Philadelphia=
=20
Inquirer and 30 other daily newspapers.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB113339822679310825.html?mod=3Dtodays_us_...
e_one
(requires subscription)
CYBERSPACE COMES TO AID OF KASHMIR QUAKE SURVIVORS
[SOURCE: Reuters, AUTHOR: Terry Friel]
The armies and emergency services of India and Pakistan were caught largely=
=20
off guard by the October 8 quake that killed more than 73,000 and made=20
millions homeless, but new technology is allowing ordinary people to step=
=20
in and help in a major way.
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=3DinternetNews&storyID=
=3D2005-11-30T145949Z_01_FOR030661_RTRUKOC_0_US-QUAKE-SOUTHASIA-BLOGS.xml
--------------------------------------------------------------
Communications-related Headlines is a free online news summary service=20
provided by the Benton Foundation (www.benton.org). Posted Monday through=
=20
Friday, this service provides updates on important industry developments,=
=20
policy issues, and other related news events. While the summaries are=20
factually accurate, their often informal tone does not always represent the=
=20
tone of the original articles. Headlines are compiled by Kevin Taglang=20
headlines( at )benton.org -- we welcome your comments.
--------------------------------------------------------------