Category: Media Mergers

FCC Chairmen and the Revolving Industry Door: A Higher Standard is Required

The list of former FCC chairs working in the media and communications business–either as lobbyists, consultants, or investors–is in illustration of why the commission is badly in need of reform. One day a chair is overseeing a media company–or a policy directly affecting it. The next day–after they leave office–they are working for the company or the industry. We really require FCC commissioners who are independent of the media and communications industry–before and after they leave the commission.

Michael Powell took a job as senior advisor at the buy-out firm Providence Equity Partners. Since he joined the firm, they have acquired–in whole or part–TV stations, a spanish language network, other media properties. Take a look at this report from the Los Angeles Times about the Orange County Register and note the role of Powell’s Providence. The deal was made prior to Powell joining the firm, but he’s there now, while these layoffs are happening [my italics]:

“Newsroom staffers described a morose — and tense — newsroom. Dragging out the layoffs for a week, they said, seemed particularly cruel and stressful.

“The way they’re doing this is just horrible,” one longtime staffer said. “It’s like, ‘Thanks for everything. Get out. Here’s some boxes, start packing.’ ”
…In 2004, privately held Freedom Communications Inc., parent of the Register, worked out a $1.3-billion buyout deal that saw more than half of the members of the founding Hoiles clan cash out their holdings and private equity firms Blackstone Group and Providence Equity Partners purchase nearly 40% of the shares. At the time, insiders said the investors borrowed a little less than $1 billion and provided about $400 million more in private capital to finance the deal.”

Then we have former Clinton appointed chair Reed Hundt engaged in his favorite twin occupation of media industry guru/investor. Hundt had been helping lead the effort by his Frontline Wireless company to have the commission approve policies compatible to his interests. Even former Reagan-era FCC chair Mark Fowler is working with Hundt’s Frontline.

FCC reform should be at the top of the public interest policy agenda, esp. with the future of democratic communications at stake.
source for Powell/Provide/OC Register story: “O.C. Register lays off workers: The newspaper will also trim news space to reduce costs as its revenue decline.” Kimi Yoshino. Los Angeles Times. Aug. 7, 2007.

Yesterday, the FTC sent out a release announcing its November town meeting on online advertising and privacy. The hearing is in response to the formal complaint my group Center for Digital Democracy and the USPIRG filed last November.

It’s clear that the FTC is fearful of really tackling the privacy and consumer-manipulation problems intrinsic to the online ad field. Behavioral targeting, which we also address in our complaint, is just the tip of the proverbial data collection and target marketing iceberg. Policymakers at the FTC, the Congress, and state A-G’s must do a better job in addressing this problem. Chapter seven of my book covers the topic, along with recommendations. As we noted in our statement yesterday, CDD has given the staff at the FTC a ton of material since November, further making the case for immediate federal safeguards. There is so much at stake regarding the future of our (global) democratic culture and its relationship to online marketing. We hope others will join with us and raise the larger societal issues, in addition to the specific online ad marketplace concerns.

porn dominican shootsxxx dominican porn picschico donavan phillips porndonita dunes pornlist porn donkeyshow porn donkeydonky clip porn punchdonna star porn bella Map

Ad Age’s Perceptive Piece on Murdoch and WSJ Future

We think this point by Matthew Creamer deserves a highlight:

“A News Corp.-owned Wall Street Journal begs a question: In a world where the attention of consumers and hence advertisers is divided among video games, “American Idol” and LOLCats, can a business built solely to deliver news — especially long, serious articles about complicated topics — remain independent and successful? … The nation’s leading purveyor of business information, still an agenda-setter for the planet’s biggest economy, becomes a cog in a vertically integrated, multinational creator and distributor of entertainment, a machine engineered to pump out synergies such as “The Simpsons” movie or, more scarily, that aborted O.J. Simpson extravaganza, rather than Pulitzers… Sure, Mr. Murdoch will pump capital into the paper, allowing it to build out its international operation, but some are predicting that one effect of that bulking up could be to further his business goals, especially in China. And Journal reportage, now a means to the purist end of watchdogging the business community, will be called upon also to add more grist to that massive multimedia content mill, in the form of the Fox Business Network — which is already being positioned as more pro-business than CNBC, absurd as that sounds.”

from: “Stand-Alone News Brands Are Doomed.” Matthew Creamer. Advertising Age. Aug 6, 2007 [sub may be required]

As Murdoch-run WSJ Plans to compete with NYT, FCC Must Review its status as “national” newspaper

We have urged several FCC commissioners to support a review of the Wall Street Journal and its relationship to the New York City DMA. We believe that News Corp.’s plans to have the Journal compete with the New York Times, among other factors, require serious scrutiny by the commission. The broadcast-newspaper cross-ownership safeguard, we suggest, may apply in this case.

As the Journal reported on August 1, 2007:

“Just as vulnerable could be the New York Times, published by New York Times Co., and Pearson PLC’s Financial Times. In a May letter to Dow Jones’s controlling shareholders, the Bancroft family, Mr. Murdoch said he would want Dow Jones properties to “reach a broader domestic audience by expanding the content base.” He emphasized yesterday he “would not want to step back from any of the business coverage” but he would “like to add more general news,” repeating comments about plans to expand the Journal’s Washington bureau. He said that to accomplish his goal there “could be another four pages a day” for news coverage. A person with knowledge of his plans said Mr. Murdoch believes more general news and political coverage would make the Journal a stronger rival to the New York Times, which has a bigger share of consumer advertising.”

Ad Age reported [listen to Nat Ives video] that News Corp. is even considering adding sports news to the Journal, as it competes “head-to-head” with the Times.

As for calls for a national cross-ownership safeguard, we point to the recommendations in our new book which describe a new model for measuring media diversity in the digital era. But if new safeguards are to be enacted, foremost should be policies supporting sustainable community and national services that provide for both diverse expression–and news gathering/reporting–in the digital and multi-platform interactive era. In other words, we should be focused on adding what is missing and will still be ignored by the mainstream. They haven’t got it right so far–and won’t in the future.
Source for Wall Street J. quote: “Deal Will Test a Media Titan’s Instincts:
Rupert Murdoch’s Long-Sought Purchase
Of Dow Jones Could Change Business Journalism”
By MARTIN PEERS, SUZANNE VRANICA and STEPHANIE KANG
August 1, 2007; Page B1

Google Exec. Helps Define Online Ad Market

excerpt: “Google gets nearly all of its revenue from selling text-based
ads that appear near search results. But about half the market is made up
of graphical display ads, also known as banner or branding ads. The
display ad market is too big for Google to ignore, said Susan Wojcicki, a
Google product manager, during the meeting.

“We are focused on the branding market,” she said.

The online ad market is “search and display — and there isn’t a lot after
that,” she said.”
from: Video, Cell, Display Ads Get More Google Focus. Investor’s Business Daily. Aug. 2, 2007.

excerpt from a Q and A on online ad exchanges:

“8. How can advertisers target their ads?
The DoubleClick Advertising Exchange service has one of the most
sophisticated and broad set of targeting options available. The exchange
supports standard online targeting elements including time of day, day of
week, user location, et cetera. In addition, buyers can target using
DoubleClick’s proprietary solutions including a three-tier content
categorization, site genre and site maturity. Buyers can target
participating sites by name or, alternately by using IDs, target sites
that are participating anonymously. The exchange also allows buyers to
leverage their own data by targeting based on their own user information.

9. What differentiates your ad exchange from other ad exchanges?

* Seamless integration: DoubleClick Advertising Exchange is tightly
integrated with DoubleClick’s existing DART ad management platform,
enabling yield maximization across sales channels for sellers, as well
as shared creatives, advertisers, Spotlight Tags and audience
targeting for buyers…

12. Can your ad exchange service be integrated with other ad management
platforms?
DoubleClick Advertising Exchange is tightly integrated with DoubleClick’s
existing solutions. Integration with DoubleClick’s ad management platforms
— including DART® for Publishers and DART® Enterprise — enables it to
deliver unique benefits such as dynamic allocation, which helps publishers
automatically determine how to generate the highest return for every
impression. In addition, DoubleClick Advertising Exchange is integrated
with DART® for Advertisers, allowing for shared campaign management
elements including creative, advertisers, user-lists and spotlight
tracking tags.”

accu mp3 h3010 targaxanax 5mg much tooformat accuface mp3mp3 accursed sealconvert mp3 adpmp3 accused tomaccute trouble mp3acdg tecktonik tepr mp3 Map

What Google should have said about “Why we’re buying Doubleclick”

Why can’t Google admit to its real reasons for acquiring Doubleclick? It’s not truly candid recent post (by Group Product Manager Alex Kimmier) dodges the key issues. If Google can’t be more honest—and at least admit to real public policy concerns—it’s a strategic blunder (let alone an example of a corporate culture where candor isn’t truly valued). So first, this “official” Google blog should have admitted that there are real privacy concerns with the merger. When you merge the number one online ad search firm (Google) with a leading provider of cookies for display advertising (Doubleclick), in a medium where revenue generation is all based on the collection and targeted use of personal information, the deal rings five-alarm privacy alarm bells. It’s unbelievable—and frankly disquieting—that Google can’t admit this is an serious issue with its proposed $3.1 b takeover of Doubleclick.

Google is also being disingenuous when it discusses the online ad business. For example, in the post it lumps itself together with Yahoo! and MSN when discussing the 40% market share search ads have in the overall online ad market. But the official blog should admit that it’s far and above the dominant force in the search market, both in the U.S. and abroad (with a 64% market share in US search, leaving Yahoo and MSN trailing at 22% and 9% respectively.) It should acknowledge that the one part of the online ad market they don’t yet dominate is display advertising. Through it’s acquisition of Doubleclick, Google will be able to quickly expand its dominance to the rest of the market. It’s not about, as its blog suggests, creating a more “open” platform that can “improve online advertising for consumers, advertisers and publishers.” It’s about tapping into Doubleclick’s blue-blooded client list of Fortune-type companies so Google can better digest that vital part of the online ad market.

But beyond online ad consolidation, we wish to return to privacy and targeting. No matter how useful Google is helping to identify key sources of information, it’s not in the best interests of a democracy to permit a private gatekeeper of so much (continually updated) personal data. Google’s business is advertising: it will do what it must to collect information about each of us so it can personally target us wherever we are. Online advertising is a very powerful medium, utilizing technologies designed to affect our behaviors [pdf] in a variety of ways (including so-called immersive targeting). Google’s expansion—and its apparent inability to acknowledge key civil society concerns—should be part of the media reform debate.

Google Buys More Lobbyists and Influence

excerpt from Washington Post: “…Google went on a hiring spree and now has 12 lobbyists and lobbying-related professionals on staff here — more than double the size of the standard corporate lobbying office — and is continuing to add people. Its in-house talent includes such veteran government insiders as communications director Robert Boorstin, a speechwriter and foreign policy adviser in the Clinton White House, and Jamie Brown, a White House lobbyist under President Bush.

Google has also hired some heavyweight outside help to lobby, including the Podesta Group, led by Democrat Anthony T. Podesta, and the law firm King & Spalding, led by former Republican senators Daniel R. Coats (Ind.) and Connie Mack (Fla.). To help steer through regulatory approvals in its proposed acquisition of DoubleClick, an online advertising company, Google recently retained the law firm Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck.”

from: “Learning from Microsoft’s Error, Microsoft Builds a Lobbying Engine. Jeffrey H. Birnbaum. June 20, 2007

PS: And that’s before Johanna Shelton, former aide to Rep. John Dingell and FCC Commissioner Adelstein, starts working for Google on Monday!

Google Loves Our Data! Let Us Count the Ways…

As admirers go, Google is definitely of the secret variety. From its highly guarded formula for generating search results, to the shroud of mystery that surrounds its plans “to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful,” to a complex privacy policy that is spread over 20 separate pages on the Web, the search giant invariably raises more questions than it answers. “Don’t be evil,” reads the company’s motto, but apparently it’s OK to be evasive. “It’s somewhat of a paradox,” financial analyst Jordan Rohan told the Los Angeles Times last year. “Google’s whole purpose is to make information easier to access—unless, of course, you want to know information about Google.” As the Times added, “Google’s unwillingness to disclose little more than the legally required basics of how it does what it does—and where it’s headed—has left advertisers puzzled, partners confused, competitors nervous and investors frustrated.”

Make no mistake, however, this secret admirer really does care about us. Why else would Google give us so much—lightning-fast search results, interactive maps, email service (with plenty of storage space to archive our communications), online calendars, word processing programs, spreadsheet applications, and more—all free of charge?

The answer, of course, is that Google actually gets plenty in return, in the form of massive amounts of data that it compiles on consumer interests, tastes, and behavior. For all of its variations on the search engine theme—from Google News to Google Video to Google Product Search—the company remains above all else an advertising engine, one whose $500 stock price and $700 billion revenues are testaments of its success.

So how does Google love us? Let us count the ways, with a sampling of the kinds of user data to which Google currently has access:
1. The keywords and phrases we use in the searches we perform.
2. The time and date of these searches.
3. Our Internet IP address and browser configuration.
4. The websites we visit as a result of these searches.
5. The amount of time we spend on those sites before returning to Google.
6. Our patterns of navigation as we travel away from and back to Google.
7. The addresses and directions we enter in Google Maps.
8. The messages we send and receive via Gmail or Google Talk.
9. The schedules we create on Google Calendar.
10. The documents we create and edit in Google Docs.
11. The figures we enter in Google Spreadsheets.
12. The sources we subscribe to in Google Reader.
13. The accounts we create and the information we post to Google’s far-flung Web properties, including Blogger, Orkut, and YouTube.
14. The activities we carry out using a variety of Google-branded “helper” applications, including Google Desktop, Google Toolbar, Google Checkout, Google Web History, and Picasa.

“Google has been aggressive about collecting information about its users’ activities online,” observed Adam Cohen in the New York Times. “It stores their search data, possibly forever…. Its e-mail system, Gmail, scans the content of e-mail messages so relevant ads can be posted. Google’s written privacy policy reserves the right to pool what it learns about users from their searches with what it learns from their e-mail messages, though Google says it won’t do so. It also warns that users’ personal information may be processed on computers located in other countries.”

The lynchpin in Google’s vast data-dragnet is the small text file placed on the user’s hard drive, known as a “cookie,” stamped with a unique user ID and passing information back and forth between one’s PC and a particular website. “Google was the first search engine to use a cookie that expires in 2038,” explains Google-Watch.org. “…This cookie places a unique ID number on your hard disk. Anytime you land on a Google page, you get a Google cookie if you don’t already have one. If you have one, they read and record your unique ID number.”

As if Google (with its billions of searches and millions of users it serves every month) doesn’t already know enough about us, its proposed $3.1 billion acquisition of DoubleClick will bring online consumer surveillance to an entirely new level. DoubleClick might not be the household name that Google is, but in its field—online advertising—it is perhaps even more dominant, reaching an estimated 80 to 85 percent of all Web surfers with some 720 billion ads a year. Its consumer analysis, profiling, and behavioral targeting technologies, carried out on a vast network of affiliated websites, are extraordinarily thorough. “Without a doubt, DoubleClick’s historical data is very valuable,” says Jupiter Research analyst Emily Riley. “Every time you’re online, every page visit, and every ad you see comes with the possibility that a cookie is placed on your machine. DoubleClick has all the data.”

And soon Google will have access to all of that data as well. DoubleClick’s DART system, for example, will provide Google with a complete set of applications—and data access—to allow it to extend its more linear search advertising business into the third-party and rich-media advertising market. Another of DoubleClick’s key technologies, called Motif, is used to track user interaction with video content. As the search and online video markets converge, the ability to identify and assess user response to interactive media environments will be central to online advertising. Google’s interest in such technology was no doubt fueled by its $1.65 billion acquisition of YouTube in 2006. Google is now in the process of “data-tagging” all of the videos on YouTube in order to make the site a much more effective platform for advertisers.

A combined Google and DoubleClick, clearly, will be a potent force in the online universe. As the New York State Consumer Protection Board recently declared, the Google/DoubleClick “merger presents significant privacy implications. The combination of DoubleClick’s Internet surfing history generated through consumers’ pattern of clicking on specific advertisements, coupled with Google’s database of consumers’ past Internet searches, will result in the creation of ‘super-profiles,’ which will make up the world’s single largest electronic repository of personally and non-personally identifiable information.”

movies full length pornsex movies violentmovie adult postalien ant movies farmanal moviemovies nudity disneymovies enemasex movie samples Map

Bancroft Family & Dow Jones Staff Beware:

Does the Bancroft family really want the Journal to be part of the show-biz style media business? That’s what will happen to the fine editorial staff at WSJ and the news service once the Bancrofts’ take Mr. Murdoch’s $5 B (okay, if they take GE/NBC’s and Microsoft’s money almost the same thing will happen. But at least Fox News won’t be the editorial model). Here’s a chilling excerpt about Mr. Murdoch and News Corp.’s digital data-mining and targeting operation over at MySpace and Fox Interactive (via Forbes):


“Soon MySpace’s ad salesmen will use software that sifts through its members’ profile pages and sorts them based on the often piercingly personal information they pin up on their pages. Then they’ll compile ‘buckets’ of its members and offer them up to advertisers. Looking for married men who live in the U.S. and own dogs? Single women with college degrees who drive pickup trucks? For a fee, MySpace will deliver you directly to their cyber doorstep.”

imediaconnection says “[C]onsider what this means. If Murdoch’s vision for the digital ad world of tomorrow can be reconciled with his power plays of today, he can revolutionize the way marketers approach me when I sit down to watch the next Super Bowl… think how much Anheuser-Busch might pay Murdoch to know that I prefer an import like Tiger beer (another of their fine brews). Now, imagine a media buy where Murdoch can serve up everything the beer-maker wants to know about me and the rest of the people on MySpace while we all tune in to watch the big game. I’ll get the Tiger ad, my neighbor will get the Bud ad, Anheuser-Busch will get a huge ROI, and Murdoch will make money every step of the way. “


Murdoch’s News Corp. will eventually have the Fox Interactive model shape its entire editorial landscape. Such a system will see the Journal’s vaunted news operation reduced to being considered sticky content for online marketers. Surely, the Bancroft family can broker a deal that truly preserves editorial integrity for this key news resource.

line on bachelor degrees accreditedretirement specialist plan accreditedcapital activate credit problems oneand and credit loan no 5000in central accredited florida collegesaccreditation and russiainstitutions education post-secondary accredited ofaccredited iso training Map