Reporting

In job ads, some employers have begun listing “digital native” as a requirement for the position. The term, many say, is a “code word” for young workers who have grown up with technology and will be able to use new systems with ease. This term plays into stereotypes that “digital immigrants” — usually older workers who came of age before the Internet — will be slow to adapt to technology, reluctant to learn and costly to train.

Older workers are sometimes labeled as “technophobic,” said Sara Czaja, director of the Center for Research and Education on Aging and Technology Enhancement. But contrary to stereotypes, research does not show a correlation between age and work performance. If tasks are based on speed and accuracy, Czaja conceded that age may play a factor in an employee’s productivity. A 2010 study of adults aged 65-85 found that the majority of participants had a positive attitude toward using technology.

Brussels plans to hit Google with a fine of more than $1.2 billion for abusing its dominance in search, a decision that is likely to inflame already strained transatlantic relations. European Union antitrust officials have formally recommended that the search giant be found in breach of competition regulations for using its near-monopoly in online search to steer customers unfairly to its own Google Shopping service. The final decision is expected to be made on June 28 by the EU college of commissioners, the collective decision-making body, apparently. The decision relates to one of three competition claims against the company being investigated by EU authorities and would be the first sanction by a leading competition regulator on the way Google operates.

Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-NY) called on the Federal Communications Commission to block telemarketers from leaving ringless voicemails, a new technology for sales calls. "With billions of robocalls made to cellphones each year, the feds should be doing more to rein in annoying telemarketers, not throw gas on the problem and add fuel to cellphone spam," said Sen Schumer.

Robocalls, or automated calls to consumers soliciting their information or business, have increased in recent years. Lawmakers and the federal government have taken note and ramped up efforts to curb them. In 2016, Schumer railed against the practice, noting that in two New York ZIP codes alone consumers had received 50 million robocalls in a single month. Ringless voicemails, unlike traditional calls, go straight to a recipient's voice mailbox. “Even though these voicemails may be quieter than what we traditionally think of as cellphone spam, they are no less intrusive or annoying to consumers,” Schumer wrote in a letter to FCC Chairman Ajit Pai on Sunday. “Ringless voicemail would be yet another way for consumers to feel that their phones are not their own. Unsolicited, spam robocall voicemails could flood mailboxes, clogging out legitimate messages.”

A petition to exempt ringless voicemails from anti-robocall rules has been withdrawn after heavy opposition. In March, a marketing company called All About the Message petitioned the Federal Communications Commission for a ruling that would prevent anti-robocall rules from applying to ringless voicemails. But the company withdrew its petition without explanation in a letter to the FCC last week, even though the commission hadn't yet ruled on the matter. As the name suggests, a ringless voicemail is the delivery of a voice message to a voicemail box without ringing the recipient's phone.

The now-withdrawn petition asked the FCC to declare that this type of message does not count as a "call" under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), which prohibits non-emergency calls made with auto-dialers, artificial voices, or prerecorded voices without the "prior express consent of the called party."

Free market group Consumer Action for a Strong Economy (CASE) says according to its analysis of the Federal Communications Commission's open internet docket, a majority (65%) favor repealing the Title II-based Open Internet order, as FCC Chairman Ajit Pai has proposed to do. But it also points out that a vast majority, 75%, of those comments are from "letter campaigns" coming from both sides of the issue.

In addition, nearly 6% of the comments have been submitted by self-identified international filers. The group said it looked at the 4,990,000 filings as of June 20 and said it would do similar assessments in the future. Of those, it said, 3,237,916 support repealing the order, while 35% (1,752,084) oppose repeal. It said that assessment was based on analysis of "clear language" one way or the other—including the language encouraged by HBO's John Oliver—mostly on the form letters that make up the 75% of comments, though it said the percentage might actually be more since it was looking at varieties and permutations of the same language, and there could be more.

Apparently, an item Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai has circulated for a vote on "Protecting the Privacy of Customers of Broadband and Other Telecommunications Services" essentially clarifies that the telecommunication customer proprietary network information (CPNI) privacy rules that were in effect before the Tom Wheeler FCC adopted a new broadband privacy regime are still in effect after that regime was nullified by Congress. It is a way to remind carriers that they are still responsible for submitting an annual certification of compliance with those CPNI privacy rules.

The item was described as administrative in nature and focused on voice privacy, rather than providing any new guidance on broadband privacy, apparently. In addition, the item dismisses petitions to reconsider the Wheeler-era rules, since they were mooted by the Congressional Review Act resolution. Chairman Pai has proposed reclassifying ISPs as information service providers, rather than telecoms, after which the Federal Trade Commission would reclaim its authority over broadband privacy, which it lost when ISPs were classified as common carriers in the 2015 Order. The FTC is prevented from enforcing regulations on common carriers.

President Donald Trump on June 26 said former President Barack Obama took no action against Russia for its actions in the 2016 election because he expected Hillary Clinton to win. President Trump concluded that Obama had not "choked" in taking no action against Russia. Instead, President Trump said Obama had "colluded" or "obstructed." "The reason that President Obama did NOTHING about Russia after being notified by the CIA of meddling is that he expected Clinton would win.....and did not want to 'rock the boat,' " President Trump tweeted. "He didn't 'choke,' he colluded or obstructed, and it did the Dems and Crooked Hillary no good." “The real story is that President Obama did NOTHING after being informed in August about Russian meddling. With 4 months looking at Russia ... under a magnifying glass, they have zero ‘tapes’ of T people colluding. There is no collusion & no obstruction. I should be given apology!” he added.

Republican National Committee chair Ronna Romney McDaniel put her signature to the latest e-mail that uses attacks on the media to try and raise money for the party and its candidates. Taking a page out of President Donald Trump's divide to conquer strategy of trying to delegitimize negative stories, the e-mail cites a "fake news" headline from arguably the president's favorite target—CNN—to illustrate what the party claims is "fake news" that is "far more powerful than the Democratic Party." "[T]hey have the power to trick American voters into believing they're unbiased—all the while they peddle hateful and deceitful rhetoric about our President," she said. She makes it clear that CNN and the New York Times are two of those "they," saying: "They call themselves 'The Most Trusted Name in News.' They claim to cover 'All the News That’s Fit to Print…" Curiously, she suggested, after calling mainstream media outlets hateful and deceitful, that Trump supporters win when "we rise above their attacks" and deliver a positive message.

Twenty years ago, on June 26, 1997, the Supreme Court issued a landmark decision and unanimously overturned congressional legislation that made it unlawful to transmit "indecent" material on the Internet if that content could be viewed by minors. The justices ruled that the same censorship standards being applied to broadcast radio and television could not be applied to the Internet.

"The record demonstrates that the growth of the Internet has been and continues to be phenomenal," the high court concluded. "As a matter of constitutional tradition, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we presume that government regulation of the content of speech is more likely to interfere with the free exchange of ideas than to encourage it." The legal wrangling over the Communications Decency Act happened when the commercial Internet was primitive compared to today. The ACLU says it didn't even have a website when the CDA was signed into law in 1996. And the ACLU's lawyers on the case had never even used the Internet, either.

A planned municipal broadband sale of BVU Optinet is in jeopardy, thanks to a disagreement regarding wireless tower assets. One of the early pioneers in municipal broadband, Bristol (VA) based BVU Optinet was put up for sale back in February 2016 for $50 million to Sunset Digital Communications. That deal may now be in trouble.

A government oversight board, the Virginia Coalfield Coalition (VCC) approved the sale of BVU Optinet to Sunset Digital, but with conditions that Sunset now objects to. The board wants operational control of the wireless tower network currently operated by BVU Optinet transferred to a different service provider, Scott County Telephone Cooperative. BVU operates 22 wireless towers throughout the region, and is valued at $14 million. There is a difference of opinion between the VCC and Sunset as to whether the tower network was a part of the original $50 million deal. Sunset Digital is calling foul, and says that condition could kill the deal. “Those are conditions that we [previously] said were not acceptable,” said Jeff Mitchell, an attorney for Sunset Digital.