“We’re adapting the expertise we have into a new customer experience” as AMC Networks plunges more deeply into streaming video projects, Joshua Reader, president, distribution and development at the company, explained in his opening remarks at the Digital Entertainment Group’s Direct-to-Consumer Expo. “We decided not to compete with subscription VOD,” he said, describing AMC’s plans to focus on some - but not all – of its program inventory. 

Reader’s outlook topped a wide-ranging session on the “Maturing D2C Landscape, which also included Deloitte’s latest data on the fast-churning audience attitude toward streaming channels along with the unveiling of DEG’s new “official” terminology for the growing roster of home viewing options, including PEST and PVOD services. The avalanche of information emerged during DEG’s streaming online Expo on Thursday (Feb. 25). 

Also Read: AMC Networks Touts Addressable Ad Capability Going into Upfront

Reader acknowledged that AMC’s “DNA is in B2B [business-to-business] delivery to cable operators.” But he quickly noted that its specialty networks such as Acorn and ALLBLK “give us the opportunity to offer D2C” services to specific audiences.

“We have those true consumer relationships plus the wholesale relationships,” Reader said, explaining the revised targeting strategy as AMC modifies its distribution arrangements. He said that the new AMC Plus service “lets us focus on how we’re going to market with partners.” Reader described the plans as including “more disciplined … marketing” without putting “immense funds into D2C.” He said the increased efforts help viewers “find other content on those platforms.”

“We are hyper-focused on serving those audiences,” Reader said, adding that, “We think there’s a robust future in offering fans an individual service and if they want something more, they will pay more for a bundle of programs such as AMC+.” He cited other AMC assets, such as Shudder and IFC Films, and emphasized his belief of the “good synergy” via D2C that will evolve if AMC exposes its viewers to shows they might “not have found on their own.” 

Also Read: Streamers Look Outside the Lines

Susan Agliata, director of business development and OTT partnerships at Samsung, echoed the expectation of more consolidation in the post-pandemic streaming world. 

She believes that viewers will remain fixated on linear TV, but she reminded webinar attendees that, “Our work has just begun to foster maturation of this industry.”

Churn and Consolidation Will Accelerate; Ad Acceptance Increasing, Deloitte Explains

Reader’s plans for AMC’s shift toward direct-to-consumer delivery offered an appropriate prelude to the research findings from Kevin Westcott, vice chairman, national Technology, Media & Telecommunications (TMT) Industry Leader of Deloitte. Using data from Deloitte’s latest consumer research survey, Westcott described how consumers bought more video subscriptions as the COVID-19 isolation continued, but that churn has increased during the pandemic’s later stages. He also predicted that consumers will accept more online advertising on streaming channels – depending on how it’s structured. 

“Consumers are telling us that they are overwhelmed by having multiple subscriptions,” Westcott said, noting that there are more than 300 streaming options. In the first six months of the pandemic, 46% of streaming video subscribers eliminated at least one streaming service. The Deloitte survey found that 28% of consumers intend to reduce the number of entertainment subscriptions they buy, which among millennials is an average of 17 services. 

By October, 28% of streaming customers said they were dropping a service because the free or discounted trial period had ended. 

For example, in May of 2020, only about 9% of streaming video customers were adding and cancelling streaming services, but by October 2020, about 24% of streaming viewers were churning like that – far more than the number who were merely adding or cancelling providers, according to Deloitte’s data. 

Westcott predicted that there will be a “reaggregation of content” with the largest platforms adding more options. He also pointed out that the reasons for cancellation are changing. The top reason (cited by 39% of subscribers) for dropping a service had been because viewers had “finished watching a show or series” that had caused them to sign up for the service. In addition, a basic “economic aspect” kicked in when “consumers recognized they were paying $60 or more per month, which was comparable to their old cable bills,” Westcott added.

Deloitte’s research showed that streaming viewers “are very willing to accept advertising, but they are deeply annoyed by constant repetition of the same commercials. It found that 43% of viewers during the COVID-19 era say they would like an ad-only format with no monthly fee and no more than 12 minutes per hour of advertising. About 35% would pay up to $12 a month for a service with no advertising, according to the Deloitte data. 

Nonetheless, Westcott’s study did not offer a specific roadmap into the D2C landscape. He said that “content is still king, but bundles [remain] the incentive to subscribe.” Citing the response to a question about “Why do you subscribe to a specific streaming service,” Westcott noted that the among the most recent responses, 55% of viewers said they want “to watch a broad range of shows and movies” (higher than in the pre-COVID-19 study) but that 43% said they signed up to see “new, original content not available anywhere else” (slightly lower than in the first months of the pandemic.)

PEST, PVOD Part of “Industry-Standard” Terms to Clarify VOD Variants

In addition to the executive perspectives and data about the move toward D2C services, DEG unveiled its new lexicon of the growing variety of on-demand services. 

Declaring that consumers – as well as some media companies and analysts who follow the video industry - are confused about the expanding viewing options, DEG’s D2C Alliance Steering Committee issued a list of “industry terminology.” 

In addition to defining familiar digital terms such as OTT (Over-The-Top), AVOD (Ad-supported Video-On-Demand) and new terms such as FAST (Free Ad-Supported Television, referring to Internet-delivered linear TV channels), the new lexicon seeks to specify neologisms. For example, PEST is “Premium Electronic Sell-Through,” described as a “one-time fee [for] a specific piece of digital content” available prior to its “traditional release window.” PVOD (“Premium Video-On-Demand) offers content for “limited-time access for a one-time fee.” TVOD (Transactional Video-On-Demand) services charge a one-time fee for viewing a specific piece of content for either a limited period (typically 24 or 48 hours) or an extended period.

DEG explains that some services may fall into more than one category, noting for example that Amazon Prime offers both TVOD and SVOD components and Peacock’s menu has both free AVOD to SVOD products.

“PEST and PVOD are generally offered through transactional services but may also be presented for added fees on subscription services, such as Disney+’s offering of Mulan,” according to the DEG nomenclature. 

“Establishing accepted industry terminology is an important early step in both industry relations and consumer outreach,” said Amy Jo Smith, DEG President and CEO. “This is an important milestone for the D2C Alliance as it moves forward with a strong base of support across platforms and services, device makers and content owners and distributors.”

DEG said the new terminology is “a first step in proactively addressing key issues” affecting future video distribution. 

Viewing time in 2020, fueled by COVID-19's distraction demand, surged at the fastest growth rate since 2015, which isn’t a surprise. But longer-term effects on viewing behaviors — and the shifting balance of ad vs. consumer payments — augur a major shift in video distribution, according to findings from the eighth annual PQ Media Global Consumer Media Usage Forecast 2020-2024.

The report, published last week, shows that viewing in 2020 reversed a five-year trend of decelerating growth in media usage. Consumer time spent with media, including all digital and traditional media, grew at an accelerated 2.8% to an average of 53.1 hours per week (HPW) with particularly strong usage increases in various age categories. PQ Media’s finding pose perceptive challenges about the growing acceptance of user-paid media compared to ad-supported platforms.   

“There’s no doubt that streaming media … were the hands-down winners in an otherwise loser of a year for many media stakeholders, particularly those dependent on advertising-driven media,” PQ Media president and CEO Patrick Quinn said. “Consumer-driven media usage continued a nearly 20-year pattern of snatching away market share from advertising and marketing-supported media.” 

The study showed that consumer-driven media accounted for more than 55% of all U.S. media usage while its share grew to nearly 35% globally in 2020.

“Not since the Great Recession has there been a 10-point differential between the growth of overall consumer media usage and that of total advertising and marketing spending,” Quinn explained. “But in the upside-down media economy of 2020 the pandemic drove down advertising and marketing spending 6.8%, while consumer time spent with media grew 2.8%, which was the fastest annual growth rate in five years.”

Also Read: CES Panels Highlight Streaming’s Growing Pains

Yet viewers at almost all age levels “have become overwhelmed by the choices,” Quinn told Multichannel News. He said many critically acclaimed streaming series have a short shelf life because consumers don’t have time to watch all the new programs and become immersed in the characters and plots “like we saw in the past with shows like The Sopranos and Seinfeld.”

Shifting Youth Movement

Mobile media usage was a primary driver of video usage, especially in younger age levels. Notably, so-called iGens (born 1997- 2012) use media much less than older generations (29 HPW in 2020), but nearly 40% of their media consumption is done via digital devices, Quinn said. In comparison, the Greatest Generation (born pre-1945) use media the most (89 HPW in 2020), but only 22% of their media consumption occurs on digital devices.

Only pre-teen “m-Gens” (born since 2013) have as low a digital viewing presence as the over-75 year olds.  The coveted Millennials and Gen-X categories tune into digital media for about 25% to 35% of their total consumption, according to PQ Media’s evaluation.

As for cord-cutting, it “softened during the pandemic,” Quinn told Multichannel News but will likely grow again in coming years “as more households shift to a streaming-only video experience.”

And the availability of new technology, such as ATSC 3.0 and 5G, “will have minimal effect on television usage other than enhancing the experience,” he said.

“Shifts in media usage are often about price points and content,” Quinn told me. “Pay TV fee increases forced some demographics to shift to the streaming-only households, while other demos shifted to streaming to binge watch cutting edge programming not found on broadcast and cable TV.”

The PQ Media study, which examines data from 20 global markets, concludes that the key growth drivers are “a slew of mobile media … as well as social media channels, podcasting and over-the-top streaming video services, all of which posted consumer usage growth rates exceeding 15%” in 2020, a pace likely to slow this year.

For example, despite the Tokyo Summer Olympics (assuming they actually take place) and other stunts, PQ Media expects global consumer media usage to rise only 1.4% this year.  PQ Media’s research look at media in four major global regions; three digital media platforms (online, mobile & other digital media); 22 digital media channels; eight traditional media platforms; and 11 hybrid (digital + traditional) media silos.

He acknowledged that technology has impacted video viewing, citing broadband access as very significant.

 “But in other instances, improvements to the quality of signals, such as ASTC 3.0 and 5G offer, hasn’t had a similar impact, most recently exhibited during the 2012-13 period when all households had to switch from analog to HDTV signals,” he said.  In a similar vein, the move toward broadband video platforms will be an extended process.

“I think it will be a long process for households to switch from HDTV to ASTC 3.0 TV sets,” he said. “SmartTVs, for example, are not yet in 50% homes as most lower- to-middle income households are not ready to upgrade if they paid $500+ for an HDTV set before the SmartTVs came out.”

PQ Media’s analysis presents a mixed view of the comparative outlook for traditional and digital media.

 “We projected last year that consumer media usage would likely reach a tipping point at which media consumption flattens by the end of 2023. And while the pandemic reversed some secular trends in 2020, we believe this was simply a short-term disruption of key long-term trends that will resume in 2021,” Quinn said.

Underscoring the policy uncertainty in Washington right now: there’s a dramatic drought of the usual think tank and lobbyist predictions that materialize between Election Day and the opening of the new Congress and/or Inauguration Day.  In most election years, policy wonks trot out forecasts (and/or wishful thinking) about what will fill Washington’s legislative and regulatory agenda, with telecom/media and tech prognostications often among the liveliest categories.  Their outlooks are typically mixed with policy recommendations and are frequently unveiled at hyped presentations as analysts and journalists look for a policymaking agenda for the new Administration and Congress (and nibble at the catering tables that accompany such events).   

For 2021: not so much.

Only a handful of seers and solons have offered their outlooks in recent weeks, and they have primarily been wan wonk-wise.  The predictable roster includes ideas about antitrust, copyright, privacy, cybersecurity, mending the digital divide and resolving broadband issues – depending on which side is offering solutions.  And of course, the sessions - if they existed at all - were virtual.  

The Brookings Institution kicked off the seer season with a Zoom seminar on “The Future of Tech Antitrust in the Biden Administration.” With recent lawsuits against Facebook and Google, much of the focus was on the possible breakup of those behemoths.  

Avery Gardiner, general counsel and senior fellow at the Center for Democracy & Technology, contended that the Biden team would dedicate more resources to antitrust than has been done in the past 20 years. She said the goal will be to see if new laws are “flexible enough to handle the digital economy.”  Gardiner also warned that it is hard to approach antitrust “from a regulatory angle, [since] we don’t regulate it.”

“It’s an enforcement issue,” she insisted, contending that competition policy “will be incredibly important for the new administration.”

Also Read: 'Landmark' Copyright Act Reform Proposed

The role of digital platforms (notably those of Google, Facebook, Apple and Amazon) quickly became part of the discussion. Matt Perault, director of the Center on Science & Technology Policy and Associate Professor at Duke University, said he expects that “antitrust [will] move beyond platforms,” expecting federal examinations to include more than those four firms.

“We should develop policies that apply to a broad set of companies,” he said, noting that the prospects for sweeping reforms such as Glass-Steagall legislation (the defunct financial separations laws) are “off the table, so specific reforms are more likely.”  Perault acknowledged that such restrictions become “more difficult as companies move into different categories.”

Nicol Turner Lee, senior fellow at Brookings and director of its Center for Technology Innovation, put the spotlight on Vice President-elect Kamala Harris, calling her a “dealmaker who will go behind the scenes” based on her background in California with some of the target companies. But Darrel West, also a Brookings senior fellow and Vice President added a political reality. He pointed out that if Biden serves only one term and Harris runs for President in 2024, “She’ll be careful about what she does to cover herself.”

In a document accompanying the seminar, Brookings cited what it expects to be the policy skirmishes for the coming year:

Recommendations Rather Than Predictions

Many of this year’s slew of visions took the shape of reports, such as the Next Century Cities’ case studies on broadband connectivity. NCC’s Executive Director, Francella Ochillo, summarized the findings as evidence of the need to use all available resources “to ensure that residents are able to get online.”  The NCC study found that communities recognize the importance of both “broadband access and adoption needs, not one or the other.”

“Addressing these persistent digital divides require meaningful investments from every level of government coupled with public and private partnerships that reflect the magnitude of the problem,” Ochillo said.

Several think tanks reverted to shopping lists, loaded with the reliable staples of policy reforms.  For example, the Technology Policy Institute, which focuses on the economics of innovation, technology and related regulation, issued “Ten Tech Principles for the Biden Administration,” half of which deal with broadband and regulatory reform. TPI’s roster calls for action to tackle the digital divide “through data-driven approaches” and employing market-based mechanisms for allocating spectrum. 

“Do not treat broadband as a public utility, as that is likely to slow investment and innovation and increase prices,” TPI urged, recommending that policymakers should “rethink positions on net neutrality, particularly with respect to paid prioritization…which may be useful for socially productive services such as telemedicine and education.”  TPI also warned that the Defense Department and other agencies should not be allowed to control spectrum policy.

The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation combined a video webinar with its recent “Analysis of U.S. Broadband Policy” report for its transition-season evaluation of “what has worked well and what has not.”  It found that much still remains to be done to remedy the digital divide, and that attempts at mandating facilities-sharing obligations or open-ended net neutrality rules have failed.   The ITIF webinar was also an approximate anniversary celebration (10 years for the National Broadband Plan and 25 years for the 1996 Telecommunications Act) – with nudges to reexamine and update both documents.

In particular, ITIF’s report offered the complex opinion that government has “a critical role to play in the broadband marketplace” – but it should be done carefully.  For example, it contends, “closing these digital divides does not even logically support a call for more intrusive regulation of the broadband industry. To the contrary, such regulation would, if anything, make the underlying problems worse by placing a thumb on the scale against additional broadband investment.”

Plus Gossip and Rumors

Several of the transition period reports and conversations touched on the overdue update of the 1996 Telecom Act. Even former FCC Commissioner Michael O’Rielly, in his swan-song news conference after his final Commission meeting in mid-December, said, “a rewrite is in order,” citing that “the marketplace has changed since ’96.”

Meanwhile, President-Elect Biden has begun to fill in the Plum Book, the legendary roster of political appointees beyond the usual high-profile heads of agencies.  As we await official announcements of Attorney General (and other Justice Department jobs), chairs of the FCC, FTC and other top regulators, gossip bubbles up about other jobs. 

The names of media moguls Robert Iger (longtime Disney chief) and Jeffrey Katzenberg (of assorted credentials) might become ambassadors, possibly to the United Kingdom and China, said The Hollywood Reporter.  It also mentioned that producer Matt Walden, husband of Walt Disney Television chairman Dana Walden, could be considered as an ambassador in Europe, citing his long friendship with entertainment attorney Douglas Emhoff, husband of Vice President-elect Kamala Harris.

Predictably, Biden’s office had nothing to say about such speculation.

The decline in cable viewing is “not because people don’t like it, but they are being priced out,” Matt Strauss, chairman of direct-to-consumer and international at Comcast-owned NBCUniversal, told a Digital Entertainment Group virtual meeting just before Christmas.

“There’s a lot of competition in the streaming space… a lot of it going after Netflix,” said the executive who oversees NBCU’s new Peacock streaming operation, which debuted in July. Strauss stressed that NBC (and parent Comcast) have a long-term strategy for operating in this competitive sector – although he did not disclose many specifics.

In his brief but wide-ranging remarks, Strauss pumped advertisers’ “pent-up demand” for ways “to participate in premium content” and he also waxed nostalgically for the nearly 20-year-old MagRack video-on-demand project that he ran at Cablevision Systems’ Rainbow Media Group.  

Also Read: Peacock Grows Signups to 26 Million, Says Shell Related:  Mag Rack Targets Micro Niche

Strauss reviewed the challenges of launching Peacock during the pandemic, especially without being able to piggyback the streamer’s debut onto NBC’s waylaid Summer Olympics juggernaut. Glowing with upbeat optimism, he explained that by spreading out the launch over “the back half of the year … [generated] an ongoing cadence and drumbeat that … was actually better than what we had initially planned.”

Strauss concentrated on what advertisers want, saying that they are looking for a way to participate in streaming content, which poses special opportunities and challenges for NBC.

“We saw that as a sweet spot for us,” he said, but the Peacock team was concerned about how to “shape a user-friendly ad load.” He emphasized that NBC wanted to avoid the constant repetition of the same ads in order to fulfill impression commitments to advertisers, an annoying factor on many other streaming channels. He said NBC was “really fortunate” to nail down 10 premium launch sponsors for Peacock.”

“They get an uncluttered environment,” he said. The initial advertisers also “have a seat at the table as we’re developing the product.” 

“Our ambition is really not just to look at this as a 15-second or a 30-second spot” but to find other creative ways through ad innovation that we can bring to advertisers, he explained.

Strauss, a former DEG chairman, characterized the challenge as finding “creative ways that brings advertisers to light but maintains a premium environment.”  Without disclosing details of Peacock’s plan, Strauss said, “We feel we’ve [found] other ways to bring advertisers into a premium user experience.”

Not NBC Plus

Strauss insisted that NBC deliberately avoided adding a “Plus” to its brand name, as Apple Plus, Disney Plus and other streaming providers have done. After evaluating the Netflix position, which he acknowledged was a “good price-value equation” NBC realized it didn’t want to be a “me-too” service.

“We want to position ourselves as an aggregator that goes beyond” traditional programming, he said, as part of a plan to “migrate customers to subscriptions.”

“We see it as an opportunity over time,” Strauss added, indicating that “early data [show] our strategy is resonating” because viewers are “looking for lower-cost alternatives” to cable. He said the company wants to position Peacock as an aggregator that can go beyond the boundaries of our catalog and our content, citing the “user friendly ad load” of no more than five minutes of ads per hour. But he stopped short of making a permanent commitment to such limited advertising.

“We all know the power of on-demand,” he said, noting that “the way people watch TV is broader,” across “a lot of different modes.” Strauss called the three-month Peacock trial runs with Comcast’s X1 and Flex (internet-only) customers a valuable process in refining the user interface.

“It was a really interesting sandbox,” he said.

He expects a bonanza of new programming in 2021, as Hollywood’s COVID-induced production slowdowns end and the Olympics momentum revives. In addition, Peacock will experiment with new pricing scenarios, such as its keystone series The Office, which will be offered “in a way that’s maybe a little bit more unique than what people have seen in the past,” he said.

The first two seasons (2005-2006) will be available for free with ads; there will also be “Superfan Episodes” on Peacock Premium for $4.99 monthly with ads or $9.99 without ads; the “Superfan” package also includes unseen footage, extended cuts and deleted scenes.

Strauss, a 16-year Comcast veteran, reflected that he has had “a front row seat in the evolution that we’ve gone through as a company.” He shared his enthusiasm that Peacock is fulfilling his video-on-demand dream dating back to the early 2000s when he was executive VP and general manager of Rainbow Media Holdings LLC's Mag Rack.

Strauss’ presentation was the centerpiece of a virtual DEG event that replaced the group’s annual social/business gathering, usually held on the first night of CES. Amy Jo Smith, DEG’s president/CEO, characterized the online evening as offering insight into, “the ways consumers are enjoying entertainment by transactional models or subscriptions.” That alone marked a diversion for an organization that was founded for – and still substantially focuses on - the shrink-wrapped world of DVDs and BluRay discs, an evolution from its original videocassette roots. Smith declared the holiday-themed online event (complete with beverage kits shipped in advance to participants) as a digital version of what “we would have done in Vegas.”

With an appropriate emphasis on broadband – especially 5G wireless technology – along with a timely focus on cybersecurity, streaming media and an expanded examination of content, the first-ever all-virtual CES 2021 is ready to roll next month. 

The Consumer Technology Association, producer of the electronic extravaganza, which is usually held in Las Vegas in early January, is still cobbling together details for the Jan. 11-14 online convention. It has not yet revealed details, for example, of its public policy program, which usually features top FCC, FTC, Transportation Department and Congressional officials and staff members.

However, in keeping with the current developments in cybersecurity – such as the alleged foreign hacking of U.S. government and corporate networks – CTA just announced a keynote presentation by Microsoft President Brad Smith, who has been a highly visible spokesman during recent weeks discussing the digital intrusion; Smith has also been Microsoft’s face for its push to convince the FCC to allocate broadcast white spaces for a “Rural Broadband Initiative.” 

Other cybersecurity speakers will include Damien Kieran, Twitter’s chief privacy officer, Keith Enright, Google’s chief privacy officer and Anne Toth, director-Alexa Trust at Amazon.

Verizon Chairman and CEO Hans Vestberg will deliver the CES 2021 kickoff keynote address, discussing 5G as the framework of the 21st century. Other sessions include “Broadband for All,” “Connected Cities” (examining smart cities, a favorite CTA objective) plus detailed sessions about 5G and mobile communications.

 Karen Chupka, CTA’s Executive VP, CES, calls “CES the hub for 5G” and characterizes 5G as “driving innovation.”

On the content front, Ann Sarnoff, chair/CEO of WarnerMedia Studios and Networks Group has just joined the CES line-up. On a separate program, iHeartMedia will run a conference session on how technology is enabling talent to continue to create and introduce music and immersive experiences during the pandemic. Ryan Seacrest (producer and on-air host) will run the session, which will include a “fireside chat” with singer/songwriter Dua Lipa and a special performance by Billie Eilish.

The “C Space” track of conference sessions will examine content development from both the advertiser/marketer viewpoint as well as “next-gen” consumers.

Also Read: CES 2021, a Work in Progress, Explores How Tech Is Reshaping Post-Pandemic World

Chupka along with CTA President/CEO Gary Shapiro and Jean Foster, senior VP of marketing and communications, explained the design of CES 2021, at an online news conference in mid-December. Microsoft has created the platform which will enable virtual booth visits, private meetings and a simulation of random corridor encounters. The “live” on-demand conference sessions and booth visits will be available from 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. ET daily. Recorded versions will remain available through Feb. 15.  Both time frames give global visitors more time to check out the array of CES “digital activations,” according to Foster.

Instead of bumping into friends in the convention center or hotel corridors and aisles, CTA and Microsoft said they have set up an attendee directory which will enable random encounters in hallways that are comparable to the live environment. In addition, the entire platform will be searchable by keywords.

The CES program will be produced as a combination of live and pre-recorded presentations, many of them to be produced during the coming week to make them as timely as possible before “show dates.” Using automated and real-time translation systems, the presentations will be available in 16 languages, including American Sign Language.

The CTA leadership team continually encouraged “early registration” (until Jan. 3).  The flat fee to attend all CES 2021 programs (including about 100 conference sessions plus access to exhibits and private meeting rooms) is $149, which will go up to $499.

No Sore Feet, But Scaled-Back Event

Reflecting the online environment, most CES sessions will be much shorter than at in-person events – often about 20 to 30 minutes long, even for panel discussions. 

CTA seems to be adjusting the expected turnout for the scaled-down virtual event.  Shortly after announcing initial plans, the association indicated that the online programs would attract about 150,000 attendees and 1,500 exhibitors (both numbers significantly smaller than the 180,000 and 4,500 comparables last January).

Recent announcements suggest about 100,000 virtual visitors and “more than 1,000” exhibitors.

The agenda calls for Monday Jan. 11 as a Media Day for reporters to receive new product briefings from about two dozen exhibitors. Virtual exhibits and conference sessions will be spread out over Tuesday through Thursday (Jan. 12-14) and most videos will remain available on-demand through Feb. 15.

The CES package will feature a live anchor desk with four tech journalists operating a “central command” to help attendees navigate the digital experience, hear the latest news and watch interviews.  The featured anchors are Justine Ezarik (iJustine), host and tech content creator; Rich DeMuro, tech reporter for KTLA-TV/Los Angeles; Naomi Kyle, actress, producer and host of Star Trek’s The Ready Room on CBS; and Brian Tong, tech host and content creator.

CTA said it made a “seven-figure investment” to develop the platform, which includes artificial/mixed reality components.   

“We wanted to invest in the value of the connections,” Chupka explained.  “You will see artificial intelligence enabling the platform, including streaming videos. We really wanted this to be an easy user experience, so we didn’t go into the technology that would be interesting to see” but may have been confusing.

Looking toward 2022, Shapiro predicted that “We’ll go back to Las Vegas,” but he also expects CES will continue as a hybrid digital event.

“The pandemic has demonstrated value of tech, especially broadband – not just for home office but for everything in your home that has to do with technology,” Shapiro said. During the video briefing session, he made several references to the need to develop public policies to support broadband, citing the nature of smart cities.

Shapiro acknowledged that this first effort “won’t be the best possible [but] we’ll learn from it. 

Exhibitors for CES 2021 include tech giants such as Canon, Hisense, Intel, Lenovo, LG Electronics, Panasonic, Philips, Sony, Samsung Electronics, TCL and Voxx, as well as non-traditional tech companies including Bridgestone, Caterpillar, Indy Autonomous Challenge, John Deere, L’Oréal and Procter & Gamble.

Disclosure:  I have been a paid consultant, managing CES programs for several years; I have no involvement in the CES 2021 agenda.

“We need to go back to the drawing board on Universal Service,” Dr. Nicole Turner-Lee of the Brookings Institution urged policymakers today (October 27), stressing that the value of guaranteed telecommunications access should be based on applications “not just infrastructure.”  She singled out objectives such as “No child left offline” as a way to re-evaluate the goal of the Universal Service agenda, adding that broadband access should be viewed in terms of issues such as food or housing insecurity.  

“We have failed at Universal Service in cases of need,” she said. “We have to migrate money in the U.S. budget to show that broadband is critical to the delivery of education, health” and other vital services, Turner-Lee told the Media Institute’s monthly “luncheon,” now a virtual presentation for Washington telecom and media executives.

Turner-Lee, who is also director of the Center of Technology Innovation at the Brookings think tank, suggested that current pandemic offers a good time for government and institutions to examine the role of platform companies, including whether – or more specifically how – they should be involved in the new Universal Service program, given their expanding role in providing access to applications.  She acknowledged the potential dangers that could arise from the massive amount of data that the platform companies collect and keep about individuals, citing differential treatment on issues such as housing or health care based on that data. 

Although she did not suggest a specific plan for extracting funding from platform companies, she indicated that policymakers should consider such revenue sources. 

“Digital Solutions”

Throughout her Washington career, Turner-Lee has focused on “digital divide” problems, but she told the Media Institute audience that the pandemic has demonstrated that the digital divide is “not binary and is more complicated than we actually thought.”  She urged that the examination be focused on urban/rural “solutions” rather than “divides.”

“We need to think radically and push harder for the kind of economic data that will help us make decisions, such as what technology will work” to solve those challenges, she said.

Touting her upcoming book Digitally Invisible: How the Internet is Creating the New Underclass (Brookings Press, 2021), Turner-Lee cited her research about the pandemic’s effect on education.  She pointed out that underprivileged adults who need a computer for telework are often using the laptops issued to their school-age children for school work.

She also presented preliminary recommendations for a “Technology New Deal,” that will include policies for infrastructure and applications plus input from other community sectors, including banks, retailers and other organizations and groups affected by the impact of unserved and underserved broadband areas.

“We’ve got to rethink what it looks like, including who else has to be added to the ecosystem,” she said, urging that the list of topics should include affordability and a technology plan.

Although Turner-Lee’s presentation was not billed as an official political roadmap for the 2021 Congress and White House, Brookings – like other think tanks - typically rollout policy sessions in during late November and December in preparation for the post-election process.  She steered away from specific policy proposals, but in response to a question about what kind of support is needed to implement the ideas she had described, Turner-Lee uttered a single word: “bipartisan.” 

“Global technology adoption is in fast forward” thanks to the pandemic, according to Steve Koenig, vice president-market research at the Consumer Technology Association. At a virtual “CES Unveiled” program at which he previewed Tech Trends that will be presented during the virtual CES in January, Koenig cited the Disney+ streaming service (which reached the 50 million subscriber level in five months compared to Netflix, which took seven years to hit that mark) and the explosion of e-commerce deliveries (eight weeks this spring equal to growth during the industry’s first 10 years). Similar usage velocity is going on in telemedicine (especially virtual appointments) and remote learning, Koenig said.

A new CTA study, “Content in the COVID-19 Era,” previewed at the “Unveiled” program, found that 24% of U.S. homes added at least one paid streaming video subscription during summer, and 65% of homes watch video content “more often since the COVID-19 pandemic began.”

Koenig’s presentation, drawn from recent CTA field research, was part of a parade of pre-CES developments during the past week – including the announcement that Microsoft will provide the platforms and underlying technology for the virtual exhibits and presentations of CES 2021, Jan. 11-14.

The week’s activities included a four-hour online media showcase of 45 exhibitors – most of which usually have CES floor booths – including TiVO, Roku, TCL and Lenovo. That event, run by marketing agency Pepcom and structured as a Holiday tech-shopping preview, offered a glimpse of the mixture of pre-recorded materials, live Zoom segments and links to each exhibitor’s website plus other resources that may become part of the January electronics extravaganza.   

CTA’s virtual “CES Unveiled” program replaced the European tour of previous years at which the Association’s top executives visited Paris, Amsterdam and other cities, where locally-based exhibitors (who are headed to Las Vegas) display and describe their ’wares while regional industrial development officials talk up innovation and high tech in their counties. This year’s virtual “Unveiled” condensed all those events into a three-hour program (mostly pre-recorded) with enthusiastic explanations from CTA officials, national economic development or political figures and corporate executives from France, Germany and the Netherlands. Each of them discussed encouraging outlooks for technology products as global innovators transform their businesses for operations after the pandemic ends.

The presentations by Koenig and CTA Research Director Lesley Rohrbough emphasized the scale of post-pandemic development in tech-related sectors. Drawing on the inspiration of British economist Christopher Freeman (“Innovation accelerates … during economic downturns” which ushers in “powerful new waves of technical change” during recovery), the CTA researchers focused on “Intelligence of Things” products and services, including smart cities, digital health, robotics and artificial intelligence/machine learning.

Using data from CTA’s new report “COVID-19 Impact on Innovation” (completed last month), Koenig cited the development of public safety services, public information dashboards and alert systems as well as virtual health projects (especially telemedicine) that have been rapidly implemented during the past six months.

Many of them will require telecom connections.

For example, CTA concludes that devices such as “sanitizing robots” (which clean and disinfect public and business/home spaces) will encourage a return to work at “smarter, safer buildings.” Koenig also pointed to quicker acceptance of virtual and augmented reality collaboration tools “to facilitate live events and meetings.”

Adding Home Content Sources

The new CTA reports include comparison with 2018 data, showing the growth of paid streaming video services (up from 52% of U.S. households in 2018 to 71% now) and the decline in cable/satellite/fiber homes (73% two years ago and 58% now).  DVD/Blu-ray and over-the-air TV usage remained relatively constant during the two years.

Not surprisingly, CTA’s study found that “remote working is changing the global workforce”. Although the U.S. shift (4% work from home before COVID-19; 52% during COVID) was dramatic, the Netherlands went from 14% to 58% while France went from 5% to 25%. 

Microsoft To Supply Virtual CES Platform

Although CTA didn’t disclose its full program plan for the virtual CES on January 11-14 during the “Unveiled” event, a few days later it announced its major platform decision. On Thursday (October 22), CTA said it will create an “event experience” using a package of technologies from Microsoft (a member company), including Microsoft Azure, Microsoft Teams and Microsoft Dynamics 365 to deliver “an exhibitor showcase, media events, conference programming, networking events and more.”

CTA president/CEO Gary Shapiro said it selected Microsoft “after a rigorous search process … because of its technical expertise, global scale and experience.”  The virtual show – which substitutes for the annual Las Vegas electronics-palooza attracting about 180,000 attendees – will be structured differently this year:

• January 11 (Monday): Exclusive media-only access.
• January 12-13: Exhibitor showcase and conference programming.
• January 14: Conference programming.

Registration will open on December 1. CTA said it will disclose more details of the program in coming weeks.  So far it has announced keynotes from Verizon chairman/CEO Hans Vestberg, AMD president/CEO Dr. Lisa Su and General Motors chairman/ and CEO Mary Barra.

As more details of the program and exhibition set-up are developed, there was a preview of what’s to come at a media-only “Holiday Preview” online showcase on Wednesday (October 21), run by Pepcom, a marketing promotion agency that sets up a showcase for a couple hundred exhibitors on one night during CES in Las Vegas. 

For this week’s four-hour event, about 45 companies – ranging from video companies such Roku, TiVO and TCL to computer makers (Lenovo) and an eclectic mix of smart home, health, communications accessories and gizmos such as vaping gear – showed their ’wares. The virtual exhibits had links to product videos, private chat rooms, spec sheets and other limited exhibit options, with a few live product demonstrations. Since this was not an official CTA event, it is unclear how this format is a harbinger of how (or if) the companies will participate in the virtual CES. 

Several exhibitors told me they haven’t yet decided how to structure their roles at CES.

Disclosure: I have had an editorial, conference and exhibit tour management relationship with CTA for many years.

Although broadcast TV — national and especially local — remains the dominant electronic political advertising avenue, and digital platforms have become the next most-used format, cable has a solid #3 role in campaign marketing this year. Steven Passwaiter, VP/general manager of Kantar CMAG, the agency’s campaign marketing and advertising intelligence unit, unveiled updated political spending data in a presentation on Thursday (Oct. 1) at the Television Bureau of Advertising’s TVB ALT Forward conference.

Passwaiter’s analysis showed that in the presidential race, the Trump campaign is earmarking 6.86% of its total spending on network cable and 1.29% on local cable and satellite ads. In comparison, the Biden campaign is putting 2.95% of its money into network cable and 17.17% into local cable/satellite. That adds up to about 8% by Trump and 20% from Biden.

Passwaiter did not specify the cable networks or local spot cable placement channels for either campaign’s spending. Nor did he identify the amounts of money out of the estimated $7 billion going into campaign advertising this year.

More From TVB ALT Forward: Emily Barr to Local Broadcasters: ‘We Must All Do Better’

For the presidential race, Republicans are spending $594 million, Democrats are spending $580, Passwaiter said, listing several other major Political Action Committee donors and then singling out the $595 million that Michael Bloomberg said he will spend on the general election contributions.

The cable buys are dwarfed by the sums devoted to local broadcast TV this year:  49% of the Democrats’ budgets and 46% of the Republicans spending. Both parties are spending about 3% of their ad budgets on national broadcasting time, he said. The Trump and Biden campaigns are devoting about the same share of their buying to local broadcast:  53.7% from Trump and 49.6% from Biden, according to Passwaiter.

Kantar's summary tallies that within the TV spending category, 70% of spending goes to local broadcast TV, 18% to local cable, 7% of national cable and 5% to national broadcast.

Passwaiter's data about the partisan differences in the presidential race jibed with Kantar CMAG’s overall findings for platform preferences in all campaigns: Democrats are putting 18% of their spending into local cable, while Republicans have allotted 7% to local cable. For national cable ads, it’s the reverse formula: 3% for Democrats, 8% for Republicans.

“It’s surprising that so little Republican spending is on cable,” Passwaiter said in prerecorded remarks to TVB’s virtual event. He called the rapid growth of targeted digital advertising on online platforms (including connected TVs) an example of the popularity of “the cool kid in school.”

“Over-the-top and connective TV is now showing up on nearly every political buy,” he said. His assessment is that Facebook “is having a better year than Google.

Related: ‘September Is the New October’ for Political Advertising

Two other TVB sessions on political campaign advertising drew universal agreement that 2020 has shaped up as the most unusual campaign ever. Republican strategist (and Fox commentator) Karl Rove acknowledged that 1968 and 1992 were also complicated races because of conditions at that time, while Democratic strategist (and CNN analyst David Axelrod) focused on the volatile style of the President this year.

Another session featuring executive directors of Republican and Democratic campaign committees cited the complexity of current issues (especially COVID-19, health care and the economy) this year, although local candidates are taking “very individual” approaches based on the conditions in their jurisdictions.   

All of the political speakers cited the importance of data — which media companies usually can supply — to tailor political messaging this year.    

“We have different tactics for buying TV and digital platforms,” explained Parker Poling, executive director of the National Republican Congressional Committee. She also cited the evolving plans for using mobile and other platforms to meet quick-changing ad creation and placement needs. 

Lucinda Guinn, executive director of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, pointed to the new Disinformation Task Force that her organization has established and invited Poling to join in the commitment to stop such phony content. Poling responded with a polite/political non-committal acknowledgement that they can discuss such a mutual plan when the occasion arises.

Political advertising in 2020, like many other factors in this unprecedented campaign season, will be very different. It’s not just about the mail-in ballots brouhaha or result report challenges on the night of Nov. 3.

Cable, broadcast and advertising executives plus seasoned political tacticians and analysts are gearing up for constant revisions in how campaigns advertise during the coming six weeks. They are trying to determine how to schedule messages in a year where up to 50% of voters may cast their ballots well before Halloween weekend, when (in a “normal” year) we’d see a deluge of last-minute campaign commercials.

“September is the new October,” Republican ad strategist Evan Tracey told me.

Democratic media expert Mark Jablonowski said he expects that “the typical binge right at the end … will be smaller since campaigns will begin spending earlier.”

Like other political operatives and media executives, rivals Tracey and Jablonowski agreed that the early emphasis is “get-out-the-vote” messages, both by candidates and political action committees. They said that COVID-19 has forced everyone to “focus early” on political advertising. Moreover, constant polling throughout the coming weeks will drive campaigns to buy commercials in locations where they identify still-undecided voters who have not yet cast early ballots.

Dan Sinagoga, head of political sales at Effectv, the advertising sales division of Comcast Cable (formerly known as Comcast Spotlight) expects that the commercial flow during September and October will be front-loaded more than usual. 

“Early spending for the General Election is up by 14% in Effectv markets this cycle compared to 2018 and 20% over 2016,” he told Multichannel News.  

“States like California, Colorado and Oregon have always been traditional heavy mail-in states in the Effectv footprint, but you will see more early voting in battleground states like Pennsylvania, Michigan and Florida than ever before according to our agency partners,” Sinagoga explained.

As for sufficient ad-time inventory, he acknowledged that availability has “become a challenge” to some non-political clients, leading to a “delivery strain” as the amount of campaign advertising increases.

“Had it not been for the slow ramp to the retail business due to COVID-19, August’s political uptick would have caused greater spot clearance issues for non-political advertisers,” he said, noting that August felt “very much like the General Election window started already.”

He cited the growth of multi-platform advertising, which Sinagoga calls “a pivotal part of Effectv's sales efforts with VOD and IP inventory pitched along with linear TV on every avail.” He expects video-on-demand (or Connected TV) to become the “#1 or #2 reach channel available – on broadcast or cable – regardless of the market.”

“We are seeing a sweeping change in 2020 as it pertains to media allocations,” he said. “We are seeing political agencies and their clients planning for up to 25% of budgets towards OTT resources.”

Sinagoga points out that more than 70% of all digital political advertising is being placed programmatically.

“Effectv launched a programmatic offer in July and is pacing far ahead of where we had hoped at this point, with the General Election spending still to go,” he said.

Like others who are monitoring campaign spending, Sinagoga observes that media outlets in swing states are already seeing political ad growth – especially ones where early voting is widely used.

“The elongated voting season was a big driver in the record-setting political ad spend [Effectv] saw in August,” Sinagoga said, citing a FCC public file which showed that other companies also “benefitted from that heavy up.” 

Singagoga observes that “viewership data being used more holistically” in political ad buying.

“We averaged between eight to 12 networks on political buys during the primary season this year, where we typically see between one to four networks,” with the biggest growth coming on cable news channels. He noted that there were “Fox News-only executions in heavily Republican states.”

Effectv’s data shows that viewers are spending more than 77% more time with cable news, mainly MSNBC and Fox News. Moreover, political ads are going to female-skewing networks such as HGTV, USA, TLC and the Food Network, which he calls “voter-rich environments.”

More Automotive, Retail Competition for Ad Avails

This year’s political advertising playbook is complicated by competition for channel inventory as beleaguered retailers begin their pre-holiday marketing campaigns earlier than ever in an effort to recoup sales lost during the early days of the COVID-19 lockdown. Now is also prime season for automotive advertising as car companies introduce new models with aggressive TV campaigns.

In addition to candidates’ commercials, this year’s political line-up will be overwhelmed by Political Action on Committees ads, which are not subject to the “lowest unit price” (LUP) rates that candidates must be offered for broadcast and cable TV buys.   

Steve Lanzano, president and CEO of the Television Bureau of Advertising, has observed variants of the early-advertising movement in many states. "It started earlier," he told me with a nod to the "agility" of political media buyers, who are buying time dynamically.

“Their money moves on a daily and weekly basis, based on the polls,” he said.

At Gray Television Inc. (which owns or operates TV stations in 94 markets), Kevin Latek, executive VP and chief legal and development officer, also acknowledges that “early voting [puts] pressure on campaigns to ramp up advertising earlier than October.”

“We saw some 2020 Senate candidates start advertising last summer,” he said, noting that, “Political advertising displaces traditional advertising to varying degrees.”

Like Sinagoga at Effectv, Latek cited the increasing role of political ads on digital platforms, including ones each company operates.  He pointed to the growing role of targeted political ads on connected TV/over-the-top ad platforms, which are sold through the company’s ad representatives.

Political Gurus See “Everything Happening Earlier”

Steve Passwaiter, VP/general manager at Kantar Media’s Campaign Media Analysis Group (CMAG), which monitors political advertising, characterizes 2020 as “very unfamiliar territory.” He observes that political action committees – which are not entitled to the LUP rates that candidates pay – are outspending candidates. 

 “This year we’ll get a flood of ads early,” Passwaiter told me.  He cited the “passion that’s in the mix this year,” although he still expects 40% of campaign funds will be spent on ads during October – probably early in the month. 

Kantar envisions $7 billion in national, state and local political advertising in this election cycle, including $1.2 billion for local and network cable TV and $3.5 billion for local and network broadcast TV. Digital platforms will garner $1.8 billion of the total, with the balance going to radio, print and other media.

PQMedia, a Connecticut firm that has been analyzing election spending since 2004, expects total political advertising to top $9.3 billion this year.

Dr. Leo Kivijarv, executive VP and research director at PQMedia, also expects “October will be a bigger month than normal.”

“Spending will not be concentrated in the last two weeks before Election Day,” he told me. Like other researchers, Kivijarv expects ad-buying decisions will be made dynamically as campaign strategists track voter polls – especially in swing states – in order to throw money to lure voters who are still making up their minds.  He is especially focused on radio, which over-indexes on Black and Hispanic voters

Republican and Democratic party strategists also are evaluating how mail-in and early voting processes are affecting ad tactics. Most acknowledge that COVID-19 has curtailed traditional campaign procedures – especially for local races – such as neighborhood events or door-knocking appeals.

Jablonowski, managing partner & CTO of DSPolitical, a digital advertising company for Democratic candidates and progressives causes, said “everything is happening a little earlier.”

"Ad buys are beginning earlier than ever for the more competitive races," he told me. "Peak spending will start a bit sooner and last a bit longer than is typical," although campaigns for down-ballot races may be delayed because of fund-raising problems, he said.

“There are likely to be more buys than previous years – and they will be aligned to several key dates on a state-by-state basis,” Jablonowski added. “We’ll also see get-out-the-vote buys starting earlier and running longer in more states. But this isn’t about the number ad buys; it’s about the amount of money that is behind the buys.”

“This election requires a much larger voter education and get-out-the-vote effort to help those who are unfamiliar with new voting processes and important dates to remember in addition to Election Day. That means multiple flights, targets, and creative strategies,” Jablonowski said.

Republican political consultant Tracey agreed that early advertising to get-out-the-vote will be a prime GOP goal this year. Beyond seeing September as “the new October,” Tracey described the increased importance of get-out-the-vote efforts plus the newfound attention to over-the-top and connected TV this year.

People are learning how their smart TVs work with all their time at home,” he said. “It will be a more challenging buying environment as we move toward November.”

Tracey expects PACs as well as candidates to put funds into early voting promotions.  And ultimately he acknowledges that since 80% of Americans have already made up their minds on which Presidential candidate they favor, the big push is to get out the vote and sway that “undecided” cadre of 15% to 20% of votes to swing your way.

Tracey noted that historically early voting has been a way “to bank your base.” Now, he said, the message to everyone is, “Don’t wait for Election Day.”  He called it a tactical move to “get your base voters to bank their votes early, then concentrate on the undecided.”

As a result, ad spending is coming early “because it’s that kind of year.”

“This is the only business where you spend the most amount of money when you have the least number of prospective customers left,” Tracey said.

In what could be a preview of Biden administration technology policy, three former Democratic policymakers are recommending the creation of a new independent federal regulatory agency - the Digital Platform Agency (DPA) - to oversee Big Tech’s expanding presence in American business and life. The agency would focus on promoting interoperability and “responsible data practices,” according to the “New Digital Realities” proposal by Tom Wheeler, Philip Verveer and Gene Kimmelman, published last week by the Harvard Kennedy School’s Shorenstein Center think tank.

Although the 62-page paper makes scant reference to “communications” or “media, its implicit message – especially coming from three men who spent most of their careers around the telecom industry – carries strong signals about the impact that Silicon Valley’s new technology giants have on telecom.  They cite “the enormous power of data control in the hands of a limited few tech platforms” and focus on the limited competitive landscape that is evolving. Their report envisions DPA as a “federal agency agile enough to handle the oversight of data abuses and gaps in competition policy, while being capable of establishing corporate duties that promote fair market practices.”

Acknowledging concern about creating a new federal regulatory regimen, the authors explain that “digital technology has become critical to address many of the challenges our nation faces.” The report contends that a new agency is needed, rather than just “bolt on authority to an existing agency” because old agencies are saddled with “cultural commitments” and “legacy precedents.”  

DPA would be built upon a “new congressionally established digital policy” that would avoid rigid utility-style regulation.” It would supersede the “existing regulatory agencies [that] … bring with them decades of operational and jurisprudential precedent that inhibits the ability to address the dynamics of the new digital marketplace.”  The authors contend that an “agile approach to oversight built on risk management rather than micromanagement” would lead to an “enforceable code of conduct for specific digital activities.”

To validate the need for a new oversight agency, the authors charge that the “dominant digital companies” have made their “own rules and imposed them on consumers and the market.”  

“Internet capitalism" should be grounded in "public interest expectations,” they argue, suggesting that DPA would be able to sue companies – similar to the role performed by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

'Not a Replay of Industrial Era'

The “New Digital Realities” report is laden with tech-centric examples, such as how Artificial Intelligence could blow away traditional industrial and operating models, which filter throughout the economy.

“American policymakers’ reluctance to impose regulatory oversight has, in large part, been the result of the digital companies’ successful campaign to portray government regulation as stifling their ‘permissionless innovation’ and the wondrous products that have resulted,” the report contends. “At the federal level there has been no meaningful legislation addressing new technology since the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which principally dealt with networks, not platforms. Regulators are stuck with statutes that not only are from a pre-platform era but also are based on industrial era assumptions rather than policies that reflect internet era realities.”Wheeler, Verveer and Kimmelman insist that, “It is time to assert that there must be governmental oversight of the digital platforms. It is no longer acceptable for the companies to make their own rules.”

And they emphasize that public oversight of digital platforms “cannot simply be a replay of what worked in the industrial era.”

The report laments that, “For the last two decades digital companies have successfully sold the notion that government oversight of their activity would stymie innovation. The success of this lobbying has allowed the companies to maximize benefits to investors through the denigration of personal privacy, consumer rights, and the supposedly all-American concept of competition and competitive markets.”

“The failure to protect the public interest in such matters has added to the destruction of the public’s trust in government as Americans observe the inability of their representatives to do anything about obvious harms,” the report concludes.

It accuses the dominant digital platforms of becoming “governments unto themselves with the ability to impose their own set of rules on economic activities and consumer choices.” It also laments “the Silicon Valley mantra ‘move fast and break things.’”  That approach has “failed to take into consideration the consequences of such actions.”

No Sense Yet of Where Proposal Goes

Despite the blue-ribbon Democratic credentials of the authors, there is no buzz yet on how or if it will play in Washington’s turbulent, unknown 2021 landscape.  As such, it is a passionate, fact-laden trial balloon with high powered professionals pulling its strings.  

Wheeler was the former FCC Chairman and an advisor for the Obama Presidential transition; earlier in his career he served as CTIA and NCTA president and a venture capital executive. 

Verveer was Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for International Communications and Information Policy in the Obama administration; earlier he served as Chief of the FCC’s Cable TV, Broadcast and Common Carrier Bureaus and prior to that was the first lead counsel in the Justice Department team that led to the Bell System break-up; he also worked at the FTC and in private practice. 

Kimmelman, currently a Senior Advisor at Public Knowledge, an activist policy group, had been president/CEO of Public Knowledge and prior to that was Legislative Director for the Consumer Federation of America.  He also served as chief counsel for the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division and as Chief Counsel and Staff Director for the Antitrust Subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

They acknowledge that the “dominant digital platforms have and will continue to oppose the imposition of competition in the digital market.”

Their report characterizes such stances as “opposition to the creative dynamism that produces economic growth and good jobs.”

“The dominant companies that grew out of dorm rooms and garages today choke off the ability of new innovators to do the same thing.”

The report contends that a new agency is needed, rather than just “bolt on authority to an existing agency” because old agencies are saddled with “cultural commitments” and “legacy precedents.”  

“The DPA should have a ‘digital DNA,’” they insist, rather than the “analog DNA” that pervades existing regulatory units.  This would require commissioners and staff “with specialized technological experience and capabilities.” It cites the early days of the FCC, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Commodity and Futures Trading Commission as historical precedents of agencies built with special skills and talents. The report envisions hiring computer scientists and appointing commissioners with demonstrated expertise in the management of the digital environment.

They even go into details about the potential structure of DPA: it would be headed by three presidentially appointed, Senate-confirmed commissioners, one of whom will be Chairman. The Commissioners should have staggered five-year terms and no more than two commissioners may be members of the same political party.

“The prevailing practice of appointing former congressional staffers to commissioner posts should be avoided absent the appointee having digital experience beyond Congress,” the report argues.

“’Digital DNA’ also means that in establishing oversight of the internet platforms it is insufficient to repurpose statutory expectations established in the industrial era,” the report emphasizes.  “Digital market activities require marketplace expectations built around digital technology and its capabilities.”

“We should blow up the franchise model for cable regulation,” FCC Commissioner Michael O’Rielly said on Wednesday, adding that the “mind-boggling … over-regulation of broadcasting needs to be shredded.”

And he was just getting started as O’Rielly described his goal “to deregulate legacy industries” as part of the sweeping process reform he has championed during his seven years as a commissioner. In remarks to the Media Institute's monthly Communications Forum in Washington on July 29 (speaking from his home via a webcast), O’Rielly also criticized the Department of Justice for “repeatedly and inexplicably” failing to evaluate the competitive landscape in the new digital ecosystem. He denounced the lethargic status of broadcast ownership diversity. He lamented slow decision-making to release additional spectrum. And, in an upbeat riff, he lit up when describing NextGen TV, emphasizing how “implementation of ATSC 3.0 can significantly update over-the-air products and services.”

“Notably, the NextGen TV process has been one of the few opportunities for broadcasters to make their own decisions about deployment without constantly looking to the regulator for permission,” O’Rielly enthused.

Focusing on the FCC's extensive process reform agenda, which includes industry realignment, O’Rielly said, “I remain hopeful we can close out all open media modernization proceedings by the end of the year.”

Related: Bezos Predicts Fire TV Deal for HBO Max 

He reminded the audience that he has been urging new rules to dispense with the cable attributable interest record keeping requirement and fix a loophole in the timing of program carriage complaints.

“However, from my conversations with members of the industry, these types of changes merely help around the edges and do not significantly reform the underlying regulatory framework,” O’Rielly said, complaining that “even such modest proposals receive pushback within and outside the agency.”

Lambasting entrenched industry interests as well as regulators, the commissioner lamented that “despite all the changes in the marketplace that are widely agreed upon, we still have great difficulty making even the smallest of reforms.”

“Grasping for relevance, backward looking officials and stakeholders refuse to lessen their grip on the remaining regulated industries,” O’Rielly said. He criticized the “thinly veiled guise of ‘local control’” that franchise authorities continue to use to “extract undue bounties” from cable operators.

“Amazingly, in some cases, local officials have even campaigned on promises of mandated network builds, additional tax revenues, and higher franchise fees, superficially promising the ‘preservation’ of local jobs,” O’Rielly explained, emphasizing his belief that these fees prevent operators from “using those funds to lower consumer bills and deploy new services.”

“It’s time to get local officials out of the business of harassing cable companies,” he said, suggesting that the process can start with removal of some “burdens,” such as ending local review of transactions, requiring common accounting practices, preventing rights-of-way discrimination, reducing PEG and INET mandates, and standardizing customer service requirements.

O’Rielly observed that the cable rules are “completely contrary to promoting network efficiencies and economies of scale, both of which are features that high-tech companies possess and use to compete head-to-head with legacy providers.”

Moving on to broadcasting, O’Rielly said current rules are “outdated” and don’t account for certain mergers “that are in the public interest and would provide increased local and live programming.”

Broadcasters Must Choose How to Use NextGen TV

O’Rielly repeated his enthusiasm for NextGen TV during the online Q&A session, emphasizing that it’s “inherent upon broadcasters” to determine what features and services to offer via the new digital platform. “There are lots of different basic directions they can go [to assure] stickiness and encourage audiences to stay with them."

Earlier in his prepared remarks, O’Rielly acknowledged, “We don’t yet know which NextGen business models will ultimately prevail” citing options such as broadcast targeted advertising and OTT-like functionality.

“The point is, here’s a real chance to let the market decide how a flexible standard can be utilized, based on what consumers prefer.”

In response to a later question about collaboration between broadcasters’ NextGen TV and wireless 5G development, O’Rielly envisioned - without details – possible partnership between 5G providers and TV station operators “to reach viewers during the pandemic.”

Embarrassing Diversity Record

Turning to ownership diversity in the broadcasting industry, O’Rielly confessed that, “Make no mistake: the dearth of African American ownership of local broadcast properties is beyond embarrassing, resting in the low single digits.”

“No one should be able to say with a straight face that our rules meant to promote diversity have been anything but a complete failure,” he said, contending that “removing our limitations would set the stage for more minority investment and ownership.” He cited FCC Chairman Ajit Pai’s effort to adopt a radio incubator program that would entice existing broadcast owners to partner with minority small business entrepreneurs. But he admitted that the initiative “was upended by a few squabbling industry participants” when the effort was expanded into television ownership.

“Absent Supreme Court intervention, it will be years before any action is even considered again at the Commission,” he said. “This represents a huge disappointment for the agency and a lost opportunity for society.”

O’Rielly declined to describe his plans to reevaluate the Ligado approval, which has led Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) to hold back his Senate confirmation for another term as an FCC Commissioner. The Senate Commerce Committee approved O’Rielly’s re-appointment last week, but Inhofe has protested that the seven-year commission member’s support of the Ligado plan to use L-Band spectrum to support 5G and other internet of things services.

“I’ll work with his staff,” O’Rielly said, referring to Inhofe’s office. Emphatically, he insisted that “our job is to reform the rules to be in line with the marketplace.”

Related: Ligado to FCC: NTIA's Petition Fails on All Counts

During a wide-ranging Q&A session, O’Rielly fielded queries about 5G (which he had barely mentioned in his formal remarks), the escalating Communications Decency Act (“Section 230”) controversy, the post-pandemic regulatory outlook, diversity and payola.

In response to a Multichannel News question about Wednesday’s House hearings on high-tech, O’Rielly shrugged that, “The FCC doesn’t have a great deal of authority over high tech companies,” but he acknowledged that “sometimes they go into our space,” citing Amazon’s satellite project.

He briefly alluded that hearings would entail Silicon Valley’s opposition to Section 230 requirements, but dropped the topic saying that he has just begun to read the last documents from NTIA and other entities.

Related: Study: FCC Needs to Double Licensed Midband Spectrum for 5G

As for 5G, which he barely mentioned in his prepared remarks, O’Rielly acknowledged there is “No doubt that the pandemic has slowed development,” but he voiced confidence that the growth will evolve. He contended that this is “not just a race against China” for 5G dominance, citing a few other countries which intend to be very active 5G developers. He said he expects Open Standards to emerge for 5G.

“U.S. wireless providers are doing a wonderful job,” he said, “I believe they’ll continue to rollout 5G.”

Although U.S. broadband networks have weathered the COVID-19 traffic surge better than most technically advanced nations, the "shortcomings of competitive networks [that] don't adequately" serve customers "should galvanize policymakers to ensure broadband can serve as an essential lifeline for everyone, including low-income and rural residents," according to the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation. ITIF issued its "Lessons From the Pandemic" report on Monday (July 13), showing that home broadband traffic is up by between 20% and 40%, compared to a year ago. It concludes that, "reliance on facility-based competition and light-touch regulation set the stage for the consistent, above-average private investment that sustained U.S. broadband networks through this crisis."

But the U.S. needs "a more robust subsidy program for low-income broadband users that can swell with crises like this one," said the report's author Doug Brake, who directs the Washington think tank's broadband and spectrum policy program. "Most households with school-aged children have broadband available to them, but some lack the resources to subscribe or purchase computers."

"Congress should support, through general funds, a program whereby schools are able to purchase computing devices," the report suggested. "At the same time, tools within the FCC’s E-Rate program could be expanded to reimburse schools for Wi-Fi hotspots or wired broadband installation kits to provide connectivity for students in their homes." ITIF says that that the FCC has such authority today, "but Congress should clarify and put the funding source on surer footing."

Related:  COVID-19-Related Broadband Funding Bill Introduced

"Despite the increased importance of broadband during the COVID pandemic, many still have not adopted a fixed broadband network in their home. This is for a variety of reasons, but usually stems from a combination of affordability, lack of perceived relevance, and the option for close substitutes such as mobile broadband through smartphones."

ITIF's study endorses plans at the FCC and in Congress to meet the "urgent, short-term need for a subsidy that helps Americans pay their broadband bills including the commitment by hundreds of broadband providers not to disconnect consumers when they are unable to pay.

Related: NCTA: Cable Broadband Handling COVID-19 Load

Related: FCC's Pai: Congress Needs to Take Up Keep Americans Connected Pledge

"That current networks so well accommodated the jump in both download and upload traffic indicates there is no need to over-invest public resources to subsidize ultra-fast networks where broadband infrastructure already exists," ITIF said. "The remarkable resiliency of U.S. broadband networks during the pandemic should give us confidence that the basic regulatory framework is sound."

Critique of Capacity Measurements

Unsurprisingly, the ITIF report noted that COVID-19 broadband traffic increases are largely due to more streaming, pointing to studies showing that video constitutes more than 60% of internet traffic, with video game downloads consuming another major chunk of capacity.

At the heart of the capacity evaluation is the data collected from various analytical sources such as the Ookla Speedtest, SamKnows and a BroadbandNow gauge. The Ookla and SamKnows tests show about a 1% drop in U.S. broadband speeds compared with speeds before the stay-at-home orders. It also cited M-Lab’s Network Diagnostic Tool (NDT), calling it "not a reliable measure of network speed" because it is based on a measurement that uses a single TCP connection, which cannot reliably saturate an entire ISP access link.

IITF contended that a variety of factors, such as poor Wi-Fi performance and complaints when viewers sense a slowdown, may contribute to the appearance of network latency. But it dismisses the slight drop as negligible and says they are far lower than the speed declines in most other countries, according to an Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) report. In particular, ITIF noted that the speed drops in many countries stemmed from peering arrangements that were difficult to change on the fly - which is not a factor in most U.S. network architecture.

Citing an array of sources, ITIF acknowledged that "the United States has relatively affordable broadband," but that "the relatively strong price discrimination of U.S. broadband" means that "low-end slower broadband is cheap while high-end faster options are relatively more expensive." The study pointed to "specialized low-cost products tailored to qualifying low-income users," such as Comcast’s Internet Essentials and Charter’s Spectrum Internet Assist, but recommended that because of extensive poverty pockets in the U.S., "the federal government must ensure everyone who wants a broadband connection is able to afford one."

But much work remains to be done to fill in the gaps such a system does not address," ITIF said.

The report characterized COVID-19 as "a cautionary tale highlighting the need to strengthen our public health-care system" and also as "a warning to strengthen and make more resilient a variety of sectors through better use of technology." It cited the value of "investments in technology and digital transformation would ...[create] better and more-efficient education, health care, manufacturing, transportation ... while making the economy and society more resilient should we face another similar crisis."

The ITIF report also cited the absence of messages to reduce internet usage as evidence of the current U.S. broadband strength. Pointing out that politicians in other countries have asked their citizens to cut broadband usage, ITIF humorously included in its report a 1918 advertisement during the Spanish Flu era in which the Bell Telephone company, "the nation’s predominant telephone provider at the time," encouraged customers not to use the telephone. 

Television advertising could “see a quick recovery” - especially in the spot market - “if the economic recovery is V-shaped,” Wells Fargo Securities analyst Davis Hebert said Tuesday (June 30) in an outlook on the post-COVID-19 media financial landscape.

Media economics, especially ad sales, should be "back to stability in the fourth quarter and may be back to normal in 2021," Hebert said during the first-ever webcast version of The Media Institute think tank's monthly luncheon in Washington.

But he also acknowledged that the growing use of streaming media - especially producers' direct-to-consumer (DTC) digital platforms such as HBO Max and Disney+ - will rearrange viewers' consumption patterns, with ripple effects on cord-cutting. Indeed, Hebert pointed out that "stackers" - a new breed of consumers who subscribe to three or four digital platforms - are creating their own virtual bundles, which is helping to offset cord-cutting losses to some operators who have content alliances.

"That's where things are going," he said. "Broadband growth should power through any concerns" about video cord-cutting, Hebert added, although he contended that factors - such as the return of sportscasts on broadcast and cable channels - may also curtail cord-cutting.

Also on the positive side for cable operators are cost-saving factors such as self-installation, which have seen growing acceptance during the lockdown. He said he's waiting to see the impact of cable's reach into small/medium businesses - an expanding category, although cable may fail to win business customers if those SMBs stumble themselves during the economic recovery and hence do not sign up for cable broadband service.

Hebert, a frequent speaker at media financial events,  also responded to a question about the fate of AT&T's media investments - especially DirecTV - with expectations of further changes in the direct broadcast satellite sector. He spoke from his home near Charlotte, N.C., where he is a Wells Fargo Securities director and senior high yield analyst.

Voicing optimism about ad-supported video-on-demand (AVOD) services, Hebert focused on appealing streaming options such as NBCUniversal's upcoming Peacock and ViacomCBS's Pluto TV as well as the new line-up of studio-backed streaming services, such as HBO Max and Disney+ along with YouTube's AVOD offerings, seeing them continue to "gain traction."

"Digital will continue to grow, but it was already growing at double digits," he said.

Related: COVID-19 Could Squeeze Networks More in Q2

Hebert also expects traditional media to thrive, especially over-the-air broadcasting which has a 6% CAGR over the next four years, according to Wells Fargo estimates. He is monitoring categories such as auto sales, which typically indicate economic recovery. He is also upbeat about the impact of political advertising, especially in the upcoming 3rd and early 4th quarters, which he expects to be vigorous this autumn.

He acknowledged that the forecasts for autumn advertising "are all over the map."

In a lengthy summary of pre-pandemic conditions, Hebert pointed out that the media industry has been seeing "leakage" for a considerable time, which is why "the stock market has not been kind to media companies." He stressed that "the pandemic accelerated the trend...perhaps permanently."

Risk Losing Young Viewers Entirely

Echoing an oft-voiced fear, Hebert warned that traditional media companies "risk leaving a whole generation [of young adults] behind" - audiences under the age of 34. "This is where the world is tilting," he said.

Hebert admitted that the DTC migration "happened much faster than expected."

Asked about the outlook for AT&T and its beleagured media empire, Hebert observed that, "we've seen the strategy change after the Warner acquisition," including retiring of some brands and moving away from DirecTV satellite broadcasting.

"AT&T has had the worst video subscriber losses in the industry," he reminded the online audience. Invited to speculate about future developments such as a DirecTV merger with rival Dish, Hebert quoted Dish founder Charlie Ergen's view that, "It makes a lot of sense." But Hebert acknowledged that such a satellite merger would face lengthy scrutiny, especially if the Democrats take control in Washington in January. He cited the recent two-year ordeal to merge Sprint and T-Mobile as an example of the challenge in eliminating a competitor. He added the prospect of Ergen's effort to get into the terrestrial wireless business and abandoning satellites might further complicate that process.

"There are a lot of hoops to jump through if we ever see consolidation," Hebert said.

Although he cited 5G wireless service as a major factor moving ahead, he characterized it as a "2020 to 2030" development, not an immediate widespread service. "We’ll see investment for a long time.

About 76% of global wireless bandwidth will be used for video delivery by 2025, according to the new annual Ericsson Mobility Report. The monthly use of 164 exabytes (equivalent to a billion gigabytes) compares to video's current level of 63% (33 EB) and reflects greater use of Fixed Wireless Access (FWA) and the continuing expansion of 5G technology, the report says. Ericsson's forecast expects 2.8 billion global 5G subscriptions by the end of 2025, compared to 190 million at the end of this year.

Ericsson's report acknowledges that it has "slightly decreased our 5G subscriptions forecast for 2020 and 2021 in North America," compared to previous estimates, although it offers no reasons other than "LTE will remain the dominant mobile access technology" for the next few years and "is projected to peak in 2022." Ericsson predicts that "5G subscription uptake is expected to be significantly faster than that of LTE" after its 2009 debut.

Video traffic in mobile networks will grow by around 30% annually during the next five years, Ericsson says, driven "by the increase of embedded video in many online applications, growth of video-on-demand (VOD) streaming services ... and viewing time per subscriber." It also cites "the evolution towards higher screen resolutions on smart devices" and "the increasing penetration of video-capable smart devices."

The growing impact of wireless video becomes even more significant when compared to the forecasts of exactly 10 years ago this month, when Cisco's Video Network Index for the year 2020 predicted that video would consume 79% of internet traffic -- almost entirely using wireline facilities.

The primary drivers for video traffic growth include the growing role of video in online content such as news, advertising and social media as well as video streaming and sharing services, according to Ericsson's analysis. It also cites:

• Changing user behavior

• Increased segment penetration, not just early adopters

• Evolving devices with larger screens and higher resolutions

• Increased network performance through evolved 4G deployments

• Emerging immersive media formats and applications, such as high definition and ultra HD, 360-degree video, augmented and virtual reality

The report also cites that decades-old visionary goal: "video being consumed anywhere, any time" (although it overlooked the "any device" trope).

Ericsson expects that video streaming via wireless networks will rely on higher resolution quality than the current 480p format.

"With smartphones and networks improving constantly, streaming in HD (720p) and Full HD (1080p) is becoming more common," the report says. "More immersive media formats and applications are expected to become a significant factor contributing to mobile data traffic growth, as 5G networks will provide the performance needed for a good user experience. For example, watching a streamed e-sports event in multi-view would consume about 7GB per hour, while a high-quality AR/VR stream with a media (bit) rate of 25Mbps would consume as much as 12GB per hour."

This year's forecast slightly ups the outlook that Ericsson predicted a year ago, when it expected 5G to account for 55% of North American mobile subscriptions by 2024.

Related: Ericsson Predicts Billion-plus Sub Boom in 5G

COVID-19 Impact

Ericsson's report begins with an examination of the role of networks and digital infrastructure during the COVID-19 pandemic, described by Fredrik Jejdling, Ericsson's executive VP and head of business area networks. He cites the impact of novel coronavirus starting early this year, including lockdown restrictions and new work-from-home "digital behaviors."

The report explains that, "in markets with limited penetration of fixed residential networks, the mobile data demand increase was especially high" and that in some markets "service providers made temporary changes to data plans [such as]... unlimited data for a certain period of time." The report also cites, "up to 90% increase in Voice over Wi-Fi (VoWiFi) calls for some service providers" and an "increase of 20% to 70% in voice due to more and longer calls. Data traffic increased due to more bidirectional and streaming services."

Expanded Role for Fixed Wireless Access

FWA connections are forecast to reach nearly 160 million by end of 2025 – totaling about 25% percent of global mobile network data traffic. At the end of 2019, global FWA data traffic was estimated to have been around 15% of the global total. It is now projected to grow nearly 8 fold to reach 53 exabytes in 2025, representing 25% of the global total mobile network data traffic.

"FWA delivered over 4G or 5G is an increasingly cost-efficient alternative for providing broadband," says the report, citing factors that are driving the FWA market, including growing demand for digital services and government-sponsored programs and subsidies in some countries.

As if defining the "digital divide" weren't fraught with enough complexities, the United Nations has stepped up its commitment to resolve access inequities worldwide. The U.N.'s "Roadmap for Digital Cooperation," which is being unveiled this week, lays out key global issues such as digital connectivity, human rights, trust and security that are necessary for making digital services available worldwide. The plan envisions the creation of new global coalitions and alliances, while acknowledging the challenges of unveiling the project during a global health and financial crisis.

"Digital divides reflect and amplify existing social, cultural and economic inequalities," the Roadmap report says. "The gender gap in global Internet use is a stark example – in two out of every three countries, more men use the Internet than women."

U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres is unveiling the "Roadmap for Digital Cooperation" in a series of virtual events. He describes it as the output of a two-year-long project to establish concrete steps and potential mechanisms for global digital cooperation. The Report also identifies critical gaps in the way global technology governance is developed, including a lack of common metrics and definitions.

Mastercard Chief Executive Officer Ajay Banga, who is also First-Vice Chair of the International Chamber of Commerce, is among the global corporate executives evangelizing the U.N. digital plan this week.

“In the next 2-3 years, the continued deployment of 5G, the proliferation of [Internet of Things], the expansion of cloud and edge technology and the explosion of Artificial Intelligence will have tremendous impact on the ways we conduct business, educate our youth and secure our borders, both physical and virtual," Banga said in remarks accompanying the Roadmap release. "But we can’t have an Internet of Everything without the Inclusion of Everyone. And we won’t achieve that unless we work together to build the system, foster use, offer access, protect it and support its growth.”

Related: New Bill Expands Access to USF Subsidies 

At a global livestream video conference today  (Wednesday, June 17), global telecom policymakers will focus on new financial models to provide affordable, universal connectivity to the Internet by 2030, in keeping with the "Roadmap"'s goal. Today's event is run by the UN High-Level Panel on Digital Cooperation, the International Chamber of Commerce and Chatham House. Speakers include Marietje Schaake, International Policy Director, Cyber Policy Center at Stanford University (and a former Member of European Parliament), Maria Fernanda Garza, Chair; Executive Board Member of Global Networks Committee and Regional Coordinator for the Americas of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), plus Fabrizio Hochschild, Special Adviser to the U.N. Secretary-General.

An International Chamber of Commerce spokesperson said that, "The global health crisis has fast-forwarded digitalization across all sectors as well as amplified its core challenges. It has also further accentuated the gaps in connectivity and digital access within, and between, countries as participation in social, political and economic activities are now mainly facilitated by digital infrastructures and internet access."

In a preview event late last week, World Wide Web inventor Tim Berners-Lee said that the COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated “the gross inequality” of a world where almost half the population is unable to connect to the internet, emphasizing that "our number one focus must be to close the digital divide.” Berners-Lee focused on the 3.5 billion people who have "missed out on the lifeline that the Internet has provided" to enable work, education and social connections online.

Gates, Ma Led Two-Year Analysis

Secretary-General Guterres convened a 20-member "High-level Panel on Digital Cooperation" in July 2018, co-chaired by Melinda Gates of the U.S. and Jack Ma of China, with participants from the private sector, government agencies, academic institutions, the technical community and other relevant stakeholders. The Panel submitted its “The Age of Digital Interdependence” preliminary report a year ago, offering five sets of recommendations on how the international community could work together to optimize the use of digital technologies and mitigate risks.

In addition to governments and non-government organizations, corporate participants in the project included Cisco, Google, Microsoft and Facebook.

In particular, this week's final report emphasizes the need for "digital inclusion" to "ensure that the voices of those who are not fully benefiting from digital opportunities are heard." It also sets forth plans for the U.N. Secretariat and other U.N. entities to begin a "mapping exercise of digital inclusion initiatives, mechanisms and programmes ... to develop action plans to improve digital inclusion." It also proposes efforts to increase "digital capacity"

Despite its lofty visions for global connectivity and the services it will provide, the U.N. Roadmap has scant details about how the expansion will be financed. The U.N. says it "is ready to serve as a platform for multi-stakeholder policy dialogues on the emerging technologies."

"Member States, the United Nations and other stakeholders can amplify these global initiatives by deploying digital public goods as part of their immediate efforts to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic," the Report says in a timely acknowledgement of current conditions.

"To accelerate this movement," Secretary-General Guterres said, "I welcome the formation of the Digital Public Goods Alliance and ask it to continue to work closely with other emerging digital public goods initiatives."

Ever see an actor and wonder who he or she is or where you've seen them before? Or did you want to find a specific family member or friend in your personal video collection?

Real Networks claims that its two facial recognition products, being launched today (June 3), can find the face, using the Secure Accurate Facial Recognition (SAFR) software developed by a subsidiary unit. Initially the visual search technology will be available for shows on Netflix and YouTube; Real Networks Founder/CEO Rob Glaser told Multichannel News that the company is exploring relationships with other streaming video service to enable the Real browser plug-ins to support "as many platforms as possible." He declined to identify the next target systems or a timetable.

The new cloud-based products are StarSearch, which can identify thousands of actors in films and TV shows and provide pop-up information about them, and RealPlayer 20/20 to identify videos of personal friends/family.

An additional new feature can identify public figures who are in the news. Real's Discover web destination indexes popular news videos across the web, providing up-to-date information on the current events. It allows users to explore content through people in the news, as exemplified by this link to an MSNBC program on Tuesday night (June 2).

StarSearch is a free web extension that instantly identifies celebrities appearing on Netflix and YouTube programs and can pinpoint the scenes where celebrities appear in movies and TV shows. RealPlayer 20/20 is a redesign of the company's media player which uses a similar facial recognition algorithm to identify individuals, thus enabling consumers to browse, search, organize, and watch downloaded or local videos from their media collection.

According to Real Networks' research, more than 80% of consumers frequently ask themselves, "Who’s on the screen they’re watching" and often turn to a web search to figure out who it is.

StarSearch identifies famous people with one-click, using a redesigned RealPlayer user interface and downloader. The information and links appear on the viewing screen. The updated AI system enables viewers to organize video libraries by people, "a wholly intuitive way to search and experience content in your media library," according to Real executives.

Real Networks' facial recognition system is the latest in a series of efforts to use AI to help viewers do customized personal visual searches. Amazon’s X-Ray, available on Prime Video, similarly lets viewers get bios, filmographies, facts, trivia, character backstories, photo galleries, bonus video content by recognizing images during a program. X-Ray only works with Amazon Prime content - not on other platforms.

Related: FTC Issues Guidelines for Facial Recognition

Real Networks says it developed StarSearch and RealPlayer 20/20 as it was seeking to productize its SAFR research, which has been underway for several years. The computer vision technology scans and indexes videos for faces, and Real applied it to create a celebrity database, which automatically tags and labels personalities found in videos thus making video libraries searchable.

The company acknowledges that the search feature may be more valuable on YouTube and other services which feature programs with long-established stars with extensive on-screen credentials. Since many of the programs on Netflix, Amazon Prime and other streaming services feature young performers, the library of performances may be less extensive, hence with fewer links to video database references.

For Real Player 2020, the system will recognize faces and list them altogether; users will have to identify and label the family member or friend on at least one image, and the AI will then match the face to other videos in the collection; the systems will gather all the videos in which that person appears.

The company says that both systems can process factors such as age changes, which would enable to find movies with a "younger" and "older" performances of the same actor or videos of a child as a kid or a grown-up son or daughter. Glaser said it could also identify, for example, a bearded or clean shaven young or older actor such as Brad Pitt.

Converging Video and Data Applications

Real Networks declined to identify how many celebrity images are in its initial database - and the split between familiar stars and interesting character actors. The search process starts with clicking on a video frame that includes a visible face, which triggers StarSearch and RealPlayer 20/20 to identify famous people with a name, photo, current age, and "fun facts."

Real Networks says that its SAFR AI technology "has one of the lowest rates of bias" for skin tone and gender, according to National Institute of Standards and Technology tests of more than 100 algorithms. It also notes that SAFR has "99.87% accuracy [and] is three to five times faster than competing facial recognition algorithms, according to a July 2019 NIST analysis. 

SAFR can detect a face moving through live video, and then recognizes it, in under 100 milliseconds.

StarSearch by Real is available as a free web extension for Mac and PC through the Google Chrome store. RealPlayer 20/20 for Windows is available for free in the US and Canada, with plans to expand to other regions later this year.

Once upon a time - until four years ago - May or June was Cable Show season. At about this time of year, for three or four days, cable operators and vendors conferred and cajoled and congratulated each other on the industry's successes.

For the past few years, many cable veterans have lamented the loss of the annual convention which ran for more than 50 years. Although the final INTX convention - the re-renamed National Cable TV Association annual gathering - unfolded then folded in 2016, there are plenty of memories of the people and especially the parties of bygone years. When I posted about a dozen of my photos from 2010 through 2016 conventions on the Facebook "Cable Old Timers" page  last week, the comments and the deluge of others' personal memories was overwhelming.

The following pictures, a few of which were on the social media page, are from my personal snaps. I tried to emulate the tradition of the late Burt Harris , who was notorious for taking and sharing friends' pictures back in the film era. I've included one selfie: an in-flight picture with a former NCTA President plus a photo from my earliest days at an NCTA convention - a reminder of how cable old timers spend their lives in and around the industry. There are plenty more where these came from in my film collection.

Related: INTX 2016: Cable Icons Take Aim at Trump

For today's memories, let's focus on people-at-parties and in deals, , not panelists on platforms or products in booths. After all, what we really miss about those Cable Shows is seeing old friends (sadly some of them no longer with us).

This photo from the 2011 show generated the most responses on Facebook, and it's from a truly memorable moment on the show floor in Chicago. Jim Chiddix (left), the retired Time Warner Cable top techie, and I were strolling when we bumped into Sid Topol, former CEO/President of Scientific-Atlanta (2nd from right), who was doing booth duty for a start-up in which he had invested. As the three of us were chatting, along comes Julian Brodsky (right) and Mark Coblitz (between Chiddix and Topol) - the investment guys at Comcast. What ensued was a classic moment of showfloor drama. The booth's sales chief, seeing the Comcast badges but not knowing Brodsky and Coblitz's roles, went into a standard pitch about the qualities and capabilities of the product. Topol quickly shut him up and summoned the company's president, who recognized the opportunity to plunge into a much higher-level spiel about this technology's value to Comcast. I never heard the ending of that story (whether Comcast put up any funding or even whether the company survived), but it was an incredble meeting of great minds and leadership amidst the hubbub of the convention floor.

At the 2010 Convention in Los Angeles, the Chairman's Reception was awash with cable celebrities enjoying the sundown on the terrace near the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion. Don't we wish we could know what some of these executives were discussing - or trying to learn from each other.

The L.A. convention always brought out a lot of familiar faces - and no one know if they were just being friendly or cooking up deals.

In 2011 in Chicago Linda Brodsky reminisced with her original CATV mentor Selman Kremer at the Pioneers banquet. He hired her at Jerrold Electronics and they both went on to varied careers in the MSO and technologies worlds (and I was fortunate to keep up with both of them until their deaths a couple years apart in different parts of the country).

At the Boston Cable Show in 2012, leaders of the current C-SPAN braintrust gathered momentarily: Bruce Collins, Susan Swain and Rob Kennedy, with attorney Mark Palchick photobombing in the right corner.

Legendary MSO and investor John Evans hobnobbed with scrivener Pat Gushman. Always-ebullient NCTA Senior VP Barbara York was ecstatic at the Vanguard luncheon on the last day of the Boston Show.

In 2013 in Washington, DC, Kay Koplivitz (who had already moved on to consulting and investment projects, especially encouragement of women in business) huddled with Larry Kramer, who had recently become President/Publisher of USA Today after a long career in electronic and print media.

By then, there were already signs of the changes in the cable industry operations: the once overflowing publication bins of free magazine samples were virtually empty and the message boards were irrelevant as the texting era evolved, and no need for printed press release handouts in the Media Room.

At the Los Angeles Show in 2014, former NCTA President Tom Wheeler (at top) was not warmly greeted, but current President Michael Power enjoyed himself playing futuristic videogames in the Internet of Things showcase on the convention floor.

By showtime in Boston in 2016, it was obvious that exhibitors didn't need the Show anymore, evidenced by the acres of empty space in the convention hall.

There were pleasant reminders of eternal creativity from tech veterans Ted Hartson and Walt Ciccoria, who donned QR emblem sweatshirts from their latest brainchild SymbolShifters, which sought to embed  interactivity into older DTV receivers.

I flew home that year from the Boston convention with Robert Schmidt, who was NCTA President while I was on the association's staff.

It was another good reason to remember one of my first NCTA conventions circa 1978 when Brian Lamb (before C-SPAN) and Robert Luff (before his Scientific-Atlanta and NBC gigs) were aboard the paddle-boat party in New Orleans.

And finally, here's a memory of the last photo from the last event at the last NCTA gathering - the Vanuard Awards ceremony at the 2016 Boston convention. I had already headed to the airport, so I inveigled the NCTA staff to help me find this appropriate final memory photo.

NCTA's Wyatt Barnett, senior director of Industry & Association Affairs, acknowledges that this photo of the 2016 Vanguard winners "was never posted for reasons that have been lost to the sands of time." So here is the first appearance of the last photo from the conventions of the past decade.

Many happy memories to all.

The COVID-19 crisis "is shining a light" on five "critical gaps" in broadband and national emergency policies, including issues raised in the 9/11 Commission Report and the National Broadband Plan, according to Blair Levin, who headed the FCC group that produced the NBP a decade ago. He summarized the challenges as:

• Performance gaps.
• Coverage gaps.
• Security gaps.
• Utilization gaps.
• Information gaps.

Levin, who is now a nonresident senior fellow with the Metropolitan Policy Program at the Brookings Institution, proposes that a "new initiative should take what we’ve learned, both from the current crisis and otherwise, and use it to address" these critical gaps.

In a recent interview, Levin expanded on the points he addressed on the 10th anniversary of the release of the FCC National Broadband Plan in mid-March, which coincided with the beginning of the national COVID-19 lockdown.

Related: Levin: Coronavirus Will Expose Broadband Successes, Shortcomings

Wordsmith Levin rhetorically asked "Will We Mind the Gaps?" as he focused on using COVID-19 lessons to implement new broadband solutions in the health and communications infrastructure.

"There are urgent tasks for network operators that include ensuring peak capacity remains available, expanding coverage where possible and keeping customers on-line, by, for example, voluntarily suspending disconnections for late or non-payment," Levin said.

He cited the immense changes since 2010, notably the average broadband download speed of 4.1 Mbps a decade ago - totally inadequate for today's needs - which has now increased to nearly 140 Mbps, used by "tens of millions" of customers. Levin also mentioned FCC policies that have reallocated underused wireless frequencies for National Public Safety networks, which have been valuable in the current situation. Levin (with characteristic humility) contended those developments, stemming from the NBP, are bellwethers of what must be done in the next of phase of policy making.

The major challenges will come "after the crisis," when public and private authorities must collaboratively and "rationally" analyze the results of the stresses of the COVID-19 crisis and "take whatever action they require." He told me that, as with the NBP, policy development will involve Congress, the White House, local governments and "particularly ... private enterprises," with a nod to the need that companies understand and align the incentives in a structured plan.

Related:  Let’s Get America’s Internet Nonusers Online Now

Finding Footing Across the Gaps

Levin's analysis and recommendation lay out paths across each of the gaps he has identified that are being spotlighted through the COVID-19 crisis.

Performance gaps. "We’ll need a deep data dive to determine whether bottlenecks occurred, and if so, where and why? Actual usage data should also inform a fresh look at how we allocate spectrum between licensed, unlicensed and shared regimes." He cites the "the voluntary lending of unutilized spectrum," and asks if such policies should be adopted for other situations?

Coverage gaps. "The current crisis underscores [that] problems remain both in terms of access—sparsely-populated areas with no high-speed providers—and adoption—households that, for different reasons, do not subscribe to broadband even when it is available." Levin believes that his proposed initiative should collect accurate data from the COVID crisis to update, recapitalize, and improve universal service programs, which would support the goal of offering broadband services to unserved and underserved communities.

Security gaps. "As we move more office work, education, and socializing to the home on a permanent basis, we need to reevaluate network security." Although Levin acknowledges that individual companies should determine their own security requirements, some services - especially telehealth and public education - may require national standards. He also contends that small businesses would benefit from detailed best practices, using experiences learned during the COVID-19 crisis.

Utilization gaps. There's an unspoken digital divide between the possibility and reality of "how our communications networks could be used to improve outcomes in education, health care and other public services, and what we are actually doing," Levin contends. He expects that the COVID crisis "is likely to unleash ... innovation, particularly with telehealth, telecommuting, and online education," adding that, "Evaluating what worked and what didn’t can help close the divide between our current reality and the potential benefits broadband can bring."

Information gaps. "We need to learn how, in any future crisis, our society can reduce the pollution of misinformation," Levin concludes, then adds a political zing: "We need to understand why the federal government, at least initially, did such a poor job of providing needed, trusted, and relevant information about the pandemic itself." He suggests that there should have been a website available in February or March where a person "could put in one’s zip code and immediately learn the status of the infections in the surrounding area, as well as where to be tested and treated."

Although Levin declined to reveal his own plans for being part of any follow-up initiative to analyze the COVID telecom after-math, he emphasized that, "We’ll need similar evaluations of hospital systems and other strategic national assets."

"It’s already clear that we must do even more to bring affordable, abundant bandwidth to all," he concluded, refraining his decade-old plea. "We must assess anew, based on new facts and new realities, how we safeguard life-saving communications technologies, improve key applications in government, health care, education, and other industries."

Two updated forecasts from the Consumer Technology Association paint a mixed outlook for digital media consumption in the coming year. Collectively, the reports offer perspectives for both the hardware and the content that Americans will embrace as the entertainment and work-at-home worlds recalibrate their positions following the current financial and health upheaval of the coronavirus era.

Based on two separate consumer field studies , CTA has updated its semiannual Industry Forecast, which shows declining sales in most home technology categories except for video streaming, and also has published its 22 Annual Consumer Technology Ownership and Market Potential Study, which acknowledges tenuous short-term technology spending but nonetheless concludes that "tech is indispensable in our lives," pointing to "smart home" and wireless products that will thrive.

"Thirty-one percent of households indicated they were more likely to purchase technology within the next 12 months due to COVID-19," CTA said in its Ownership study.

In its 2020 Industry Forecast Update, the Association revised - mostly downward - predictions issued at its Consumer Electronics Show in January. Now, in "Assessing COVID-19 Impact," CTA acknowledges that "the financial health of consumers and their willingness to spend presents the biggest swing factor to the outlook."

Nonetheless, the updated forecast finds that consumer spending on streaming services such as Netflix and Amazon Prime will rise amid lockdown conditions, performing better than expected. Its updated study during the first weeks of the COVID-19 "shelter-in-place" orders found that 26% of those surveyed said that they had tried a new video streaming service.

CTA had already expected that consumers would spend $24.1 billion on video streaming services in 2020, nearly 30% above 2019 levels. Its revised April worst-case scenario still sees $24.1 billion spent for video streaming, but it envisions that the COVID-19 impact could push that revenue up to $25.3 billion, about 35% greater than in 2019. Music streaming will see no major change, growing at a 15 to 17% rate above 2019 -- in to a range just over $9 billion this year, according to the CTA updated analysis.

Related: COVID-19 Could Squeeze Networks More in Q2

CTA's survey found that nearly half of respondents say they are watching live TV and online streaming video more often now than they typically do.

"Budget-minded viewers may accelerate the cord-cutting trend in recent years, cancelling cable or satellite service in exchange for a stack of video streaming services," the report contends.

The study acknowledges that the economic downturn "will dampen" the expected demand for 8K Ultra HD and OLED TV display technologies. It foresees a decline of between 8% to 14% in 2020 compared to its earlier forecasts. Spinning a positive conclusion, CTA suggests that "near-term opportunities for TV sales include households looking to add screens to accommodate more in-home video demand and upgrades in the commercial market, as businesses enhance video conferencing capabilities."

The revised forecast also envisions that Artificial and Virtual Reality sales may decline and that drone sales may suffer because of closed public spaces, fewer events and stay-at-home rules that will lower drone sales this year. Overall, CTA acknowledge that primary technology devices, including smartphones, TV sets and laptops "will decline in 2020 as consumers struggle with economic uncertainty."

CTA will publish its next semi-annual "Industry Forecast" in July.

Ownership Intent Expected to Persist: The Cloud's Role

CTA's latest annual Consumer Technology Ownership & Market Potential Study, unveiled shortly after the COVID impact special report, shows a more upbeat outlook . Based on a survey of more than 2,600 adults, findings indicate that 67% of respondents say they were unaffected or more likely to purchase by the economic downturn and continue to plan tech purchases within the next 12 months.

"The data on purchase intent exposed year-over-year consistencies across product categories, strengthening the hypothesis that the desire for technology in the face of strong economic headwinds remains strong or, at a minimum, steady," CTA said.

Video products - including new LCD/LED and HDR TV sets as well as streaming video receivers - ranked high on CTA's "purchase intent" survey. About 12 million homes plan to buy at lest one TV set of 70-inches or larger in the coming year, CTA found. Three-quarters of customers who already own a digital streaming device plan to replace or supplement products in that category. CTA attributes the grow to the expanding content libraries beyond entertainment, including productivity, health and educational content.

“As the pandemic carries on, the impact on technology spending will remain in question, however, it’s clear that tech is indispensable in our lives,” said Steve Koenig, CTA's VP of research.

CTA also sees continuing growth in "smart home" products, although "with consumers forced to watch their budget, many will opt for ‘non-smart’ home tech," the report concludes. It found that this year for the first time there will be more repeat purchases than first-time purchases "as people who already own the devices ... add smart peripherals to their home networks."

On the other hand, "Luxury custom installs are also expected to decrease as the economy enters a recession," the study says, although it points out, "Exceptions may include smart speakers and displays, which add ‘smarts’ to the home for relatively low cost."

"Cloud-based services and technologies are seeing an influx of demand," CTA says, citing the health crisis which, it says, is "accelerating an existing uptrend." It expects "many new behaviors and attitudes will likely stick once contagion is contained. For example, the uptick in online ordering is unlikely to retreat," with implications for physical stores.

CTA acknowledges that "Disruption to supply chains and logistical networks add to the disruptive threats facing the outlook, not only for product inventory on the retail-side, but for device manufacturing due to shortages of components and raw materials."

When the stock price of Zoom Video Communications zipped past $160 per share late Monday (March 23), up from $107 a week earlier and $68 at the beginning of this year....

And when I watched newscasts that were not only about working from home (WFH) but also featured anchors, weather, sports and news reporters who were themselves WFH...

And when I saw how DJ D-Nice's Instagram Live Saturday night (March 21) #ClubQuarantine online party (virtually attend by Oprah Winfrey, Michelle Obama, Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, Naomi Campbell, among others) almost crashed the internet with more than 100,000 viewers...

And when I read a Brookings report that nearly 48 million K-12 students are studying from home because their schools are closed ...

And when our local high school invited us to a Zoom "Stressbusters" session...

And when I realized I was tuning into far more streaming meetings than I attended just a few weeks ago...

...several historic moments flashed through my mind. They all dealt with capacity management, well-intentioned efforts to deliver electronic home services and also human preferences for virtual connections versus pressing actual flesh. Among the potent memories:

• Cisco's annual Visual Network Index, now renamed "Annual Internet Report (AIR)." Just 18 months ago, Cisco's forecast predicted that video content would account for about 80% of Internet traffic. (It does now, up from about 60% three years ago.)

• "Cable in the Classroom," which debuted in 1989 and ceased operations in 2014, and the nearly 70-year legacy of "educational TV."

•  My own experience running a teleconference in 1970 (50 years ago!) at the "old AT&T" before satellites and way before internet delivery. Regional general managers appreciated the efficiency but preferred in-person meetings.

Related: Small Cable Operators Beef Up Broadband to Battle Coronavirus

In addition to Zoom, WFH platforms such as Cisco's WebEx, StreamYard, Microsoft Teams, Uber Conference, Google Hangout, Apple Facetime, YouTube, Facebook Messenger Video Calling have all surged as millions of self-incarcerated people around the world find the need to work, study or socialize-at-a-respectable-distance. The booming streaming entertainment audience market has suddenly been augmented - possibly eclipsed at times - by the WFH market.

Although providers are coy about revealing actual usage statistics, a few datapoints have materialized.

Cisco CEO Chuck Robins told CNBC last week that WebEx customers spent 5.5 billion meeting minutes on WebEx during the first 11 days of March. Cisco has also said that WebEx traffic in parts of Europe soared by as much as 80% compared to a year earlier. Its February traffic in China was 22 times greater than normal, and other Asian markets saw spikes of three and four times usual levels as COVID-19 spread during the past month, the company said.

Zoom has merely revealed that its monthly, weekly and daily "active user" base numbers are "at all time highs." Zoom's Cloud Meetings free app climbed to the top spot at Apple's App Store, ahead of Netflix and YouTube. KeyBanc analyst Alex Kurtz expects Zoom's revenue to see a 35% year-over-year boom based on the comparison between the first two weeks of March this year versus 2019, according to TheStreet.com.

On Monday, Zoom CEO Eric Yuan, who grew up in eastern Shandong Province of China, issued his "business continuity commitment." It included expanded support for online education (primarily in China for now) and telemedicine enablement. Yuan said that doctors from more than 1,000 public hospitals in China are using Zoom’s high-definition video meetings to conduct online consultations, remotely diagnose patients and provide treatment during the coronavirus epidemic.

Is WFH a Fad .. or Here to Stay?

Before the COVID-19 ordeal, about 16% of the U.S. workforce spent some time working remotely, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, which did not specify how much of that WFH time actually involved video connections.

Charles Wilsker, president of the Telework Coalition,  told Multichannel News that the current surge in WFH reflects companies' recognition of the need for a business continuity process. He also cited the network capacity challenges that emerged.

"This won't be gone overnight," he said, adding that "It's foolish to think something like this won't happen again. When it happens again, you don't want to be in the same situation."

TelCoa, which was established 20 years ago but has kept a low profile in recent years, has revived its activities in response to what Wilsker calls "the desperate need" of companies seeking to support WFH activities. Its research finds that up to 40% of the work force prefers the option of working from home.

"When companies bring everyone back into the office, people are going to recognize that some of these things worked very well with employees" who have operated remotely, he added.

Former FCC chairman and NCTA and CTIA president Tom Wheeler questioned whether the current telecom infrastructure is up to the job for the expanded WFH usage.

"What is sufficient bandwidth for a couple of home computers for a husband and wife may not be sufficient when you add students who are going to class all day long operating from home,” Wheeler fretted to the New York Times last week. "We just don't know."

Related: Senate Dems: Coronavirus Bill Needs Billions for E-Rate 

As for my own first teleconference experience when I was an AT&T newcomer, it was ultimately discouraging. Since Ma Bell owned/operated the nationwide terrestrial network that carried ABC, CBS and NBC video programs to local affiliates, and since every regional office in the Long Lines division where I worked was developing a closed circuit TV project, we had an idea. We could use the network time for a few hours between the end of the morning game shows and the start of the afternoon soap operas to run a video teleconference to replace the monthly headquarters meeting when the regional general managers all went to New York monthly for a two- or three-day gathering. In addition, their staffs could see the process and "virtually" meet their counterparts in other regions. That live participation also eliminated the need for a local staff debriefing in each city when the GMs returned from New York.

After the successful videoconference, the feedback was universal: they achieved as much in a few hours as they did in a day-long meeting. "Do you want to do it again next month?" "No, we prefer the trip to New York." We interpreted that as meaning they liked dining, drinking and rubbing shoulders in person - at rate-payers expense. (Disclosure: I quit Ma Bell a few months later rather than take a promotion to headquarters - and because I had an opportunity to get into the CATV business.)

My youthful takeaway from that experience was that business executives - at least in that era - were more comfortable at face-to-face meetings than on video. Obviously that hesitancy had eroded, and today's video-savvy executives seem to have little reluctance to use video. Yet I still wonder if the need to press-the-flesh (after the current no-handshake restrictions are lifted) will overcome the value and efficacy of video teleconferencing.

Endless analyses will emerge after this COVID-19 ordeal. The role of video in WFH business, education and medicine may finally find its position alongside entertainment.

That is a strong signal to build and market infrastructure that is up to "the job."

UPDATE: On Friday afternoon, March 6, the South by Southwest conference was canceled. The City of Austin (home of the 34-year-old event) declared "a local disaster" that will prevent the event from taking place; it was due to start next Friday, March 13. Citing the coronavirus threat, Austin Mayor Steve Adler announced the cancellation of the music-and-media extravaganza although he acknowledged that there have been no confirmed cases of the virus in the Austin area. The private company that operates SxSW said it is "devastated” by the cancellation.

No, this screed is not about this weekend's clock shift from “standard” to “daylight savings” time. Although I do have a problem with that, since so many people never figure out when to use "EDT" versus "EST" or "PST" versus PDT. Let's just leave out the middle letter and (assuming we know which part of the map we are in), just say ET, CT, MT or PT. It works year-round.

Actually the current obsession with time involves the media's dramatic revision of "when" things happen, starting with distribution policies. Last month's Oscar competition again brought forth the question of timing, along with the decision about "where" content first appears. Specifically, Netflix released The Irishman and Les Misérables (a French film in the Best International Feature category) theatrically a few weeks before they went online. The goal was to build Oscar buzz before streaming them. (Neither film won its Oscar.) Netflix's tactic mirrored that taken by Amazon Studios in 2017 for Manchester by the Sea, which debuted in theaters before appearing online (and did win three Oscars that year - a first for a streaming production).

And next month you'll hear yowls from broadcasters when Peacock - the new Comcast NBCUniversal comedy streaming service - overhauls traditional timing by running its late night broadcast stalwarts several hours earlier than their historic time slots. The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon and Late Night with Seth Meyers will stream shortly after they are recorded each evening (at 8 and 9 p.m. ET, respectively) - well before the shows are telecast via broadcast affiliates at about 11:35 p.m. and 12:35 a.m. ET.

All of this is unfolding during a period when timing is being disrupted by countless and unexpected factors. South by Southwest (SxSW) is still scheduled to start in Austin in the next few days. But Apple, which was planning to bring some of its new streaming productions to the fest, has pulled out of the agenda, as has Netflix, Amazon Studios and Facebook. Separately, the annual MIPTV (Marché International des Programmes de Télévision) video programming market in Cannes (scheduled to begin in late March) has been canceled completely. COVID-19 coronavirus was blamed for those decisions.

Related: Everything You Need to Know About Peacock

Too bad the virus's arrival coincided with the events' timing. These cancellations portend significant changes in future distribution schedules for some shows.

What makes the timing and release scheduling even more important is that it comes amid the growing crossover between theatrical and made-for-video distribution. That represents a separate topic for constant debate, especially among the various Academies (TV and Motion Picture) and unions. Implicit in all of these discussions is the uncertainty of how, where and when viewers will consume their preferred programming.

The Peacock plan to air NBC late-night shows marks the first time that new "live" TV programs will stream before their linear airing - a point of serious contention for local TV affiliates who not only face potential viewership loss but also ad revenue if late-night ratings decline. Viewers who are watching the streamed "late night" shows during prime time will NOT be watching regular TV schedules. In addition, Peacock availability comes smack against YouTube viewing, where the shows are freely available, with other ads. (Early streaming may only be available to Peacock Premium viewers.)

Dealing With Minutes and Hours, Not Months and Years

Both the streaming services' Oscar stunts and the NBCU late-night show plans underscore that timing has become a much more precision process. In the earliest days of pay TV and home video, it was all about "windows," a rigorous scheduled process to make shows available sequentially (months apart) on pay-per-view, on-demand, videocassettes or discs well before release on linear networks such as Home Box Office or Showtime eventually on free over-the-air channels. At one time there were even regulatory timetables for pay TV carriage.

Then, as now, it was all about maximizing revenue during each window. With the rise of digital media consumption, Nielsen has deemed that "appointment viewing" is now rare, except for live sports and special events (such as the Oscar telecast). The ratings seer says that screen time largely represents a shift of attention between platforms - since most viewers cannot add much to their current media consumption capacity, now often totaling about 12 hours per day (including audio and social media as well as video in all its formats).

So - if you have a moment - let me add one more "grumpy old man" complaint: why do people still put parentheses around area codes? We live in a 10-digit phone number country. The extra key strokes for typing (202) 456-1111 are irrelevant. Just call 202 456 1111 if you have a complaint. That number is in the ET zone.

Just remember to spring ahead, although the digital clock in your handset will save you the trouble. And your DVR will record your shows - at whatever times they appear.

The prospect that "third parties [could] undercut...federal enforcement decisions" - such as the pending T-Mobile/Sprint merger - is one of the greatest concerns in the new antitrust environment, Assistant Attorney General Makan Delrahim explained in remarks to the monthly luncheon of the Media Institute in Washington on Wednesday (Feb. 5). He reminded the policy-centric audience that the Federal Communications Commission, the Department of Justice and many states approved the merger last year. But then attorneys general from 10 states and the District of Columbia sued to prevent the alliance; a decision is still pending.

"So, we have two specialized federal agencies reviewing the T-Mobile/Sprint transaction" and deeming it legal, Delrahim said. "Yet, we have a minority of states and the District of Columbia trying to undo that relief across the entire country. If you find this situation odd, you’re not alone."

"We often work closely with our state attorneys general partners in enforcement actions," he continued. "Here, however, a small group of state attorneys general did not reach consensus." Delrahim contended that such actions are "incompatible with the orderly operation of our antitrust merger laws and telecommunications regulations. It creates the risk that a small subset of states, or even perhaps just one, could undermine beneficial transactions and settlements nationwide."

Delrahim fretted, "That any state, or even any individual, can undo the nationwide relief secured by the federal government and approved by a federal court."

"That would wreak havoc on parties’ ability to merge, on the government’s ability to settle cases, and cause real uncertainty in the market for mergers and acquisitions," he added, noting that "Permitting states to undermine federal enforcement also would be contrary to congressional intent."

The AAG's passionate example emphasized the core of his remarks, which focused on DoJ's efforts to "reform" and "modernize" the Antitrust Division's merger review process.

"As a benchmark to measure success, we committed that we would aim to resolve most merger investigations within six months of filing," Delrahim said. After about 18 months of efforts, he said current initial merger reviews take about 5.4 months, and for cases that involve any challenge "the average time to notification is 5.7 months."

Steering Clear of Tech Examination and Media Issues

Delrahim ducked questions about DoJ's broad antitrust investigation of major digital platform firms (Google, Amazon, Apple and Facebook), announced in July. Initially, the agency expected to complete that probe by the end of 2019.

Early this week, Delrahim was recused from the Google portion that probe because of a potential conflict of interest. Before joining DoJ, Delrahim in private practice represented Google in its 2007 acquisition of DoubleClick, an ad-tech firm.

Separately, Delrahim touched briefly on the long-pending examination of the 1941 consent decrees affecting BMI and ASCAP music licensing agreements. Last year, he said that DoJ expected to decide by the end of 2019 whether those restrictions should be amended, eliminated or maintained as is.

On Wednesday he would only say that the agency's review is not comparable to its November 2019 termination of the half-century-old Paramount consent decree affecting studio ownership of exhibition facilities.

Although the need for a national privacy policy -- rather than evolving patchwork of state-by-state rules -- and the role of artificial intelligence permeated the dense discussions at the annual State of the Net conference, sessions on streaming media growth and the evolving role of media platforms put attention on current business issues that may have more immediate impact.

With its usual line-up of policymakers and its self-described position as "America's Premiere Internet Policy" event, SOTN2020 offered its usual array of telecom and media status reports during a day-long program in Washington on Tuesday, Jan. 28.

The "Video Streaming" session generated a forecast that after the inevitable shakeout of over-the-top providers, a new ecosystem will emerge that will be a reverse mirror image of today's structure, with ad-supported streaming services taking the role of today's "free" broadcasters and bundles of paid OTT channels replacing today's cable TV bundles.

Kannan Venkateshwar, a Barclays managing director focused on media/telecom research, predicted that "Netflix becomes the traditional broadcast network" because it carries a variety of program categories while other OTT services concentrate on specific audiences (such as Disney+ for families, NBC's Peacock for comedies).

Venkateshwar also examined the shifting global nature of streaming content. With such international expectations, "the scale of spending has gone up," he said. Although Netflix and other firms are creating specialized content in some countries or languages, most OTT content is intended for worldwide distribution. He said the only example of largely domestic content is sports (except for global soccer).

The SOTN discussion took place just as a consultant's analysis emerged, envisioning 50% global OTT revenue growth by 2024, surpassing $200 billion by then.

Another of the panelists, Daniel Ornstein, co-founder and CEO of Bundler Inc., said that a viewer's future collection of streaming channels is not like cable.

"You can pick and delete something" at anytime," he said, underscoring the problems that process will create for broadband pricing, especially if carriers continue to package some OTT channels, such as the current Verizon and Disney+ combination. Ornstein, who heads the new California aggregator and marketplace for media subscriptions, was on the FCC chairman's staff about 10 years ago and later worked at Warner Bros. Entertainment and Warner Bros. TV. He predicted that "companies are going to overlap" and eventually the ecosystem will settle into a combination of new streaming structures.

"There will not be a total revolution of everything direct-to-consumer," he said, opining that "exclusivity is here to stay." He added: "Once you focus on content investment windows, carriage rights are a good way to generate revenue."

Larry Downes, an analyst, pointed to the different ways that Generations X, Y and Z (millennials) embrace streaming media, contending that the youngest cohort sees no difference between "professional" productions and self-produced content (such as small YouTube videos). He insists that these variations will require new business models, which will complicate the evolution of streaming channels.

DeShuna Spencer, founder and CEO of kweliTV, a black-focused streaming service, expects that the "streaming wars" will open opportunities for specialized content channels such as her service. While the major OTT companies are "fighting for the same content," ventures such as kweliTV can develop targeted audience. Spencer also pointed out that her company pays for programming as it runs, not up front as the major streamers do.

"Over time, maybe five years, spending will dry up," she predicted.

The Future of Platforms: Not Just Antitrust

With the evocative question of whether Tech Platforms will "Reign or Get Reined In?" the session on what will happen to the major platforms during the next 10 years generated a predictable range of responses. Most of the panelists agreed that in this volatile category, it's hard to predict whether Google, Amazon, Apple, Facebook or other currently dominant players will continue their juggernauts -- or how upstarts might plunge into these roles.

Their fates will proceed "completely irrespective of what [happens] with antitrust," said Ben Sperry, associate director-legal research at the International Center for Law and Economics. "If we move away from consumer welfare, you'll see a different kind of economy -- not necessarily good for consumers."

Steve DelBianco, president/CEO of NetChoice, warned that antitrust actions could affect innovation, since small companies often build strategies with expectations of being acquired by a major provider, such as the platform companies.

Privacy also plays a major role in the outlook for platform providers during the coming decade, the panelists agreed.

Katie McInnes, policy counsel at Consumer Reports, characterized "privacy as a luxury good." She and other panelists joined the chorus urging a national privacy policy to avert confusing state-by-state laws.

DelBianco also predicted that by 2030, "Government will still be trying to figure out how to regulate artificial intelligence," which will continue to be a major initiative of all the platform providers.

Privacy Focus, Including New Protections for Teens

Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.), who chairs the House Subcommittee on Consumer Protection and Commerce, said she is preparing legislation that will restrict digital messages including some advertising to older children (presumably ages 13 to 17). The expansion of the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (which covers children 12 years and younger) is expected to be introduced later this week. (Update: Democratic Rep. Kathy Castor of Florida introduced the PRIVCY Act on Jan. 30.)

"We think it's important to put protections into the law to protect older kids," she said, citing it as part of "baseline privacy law." Although the proposed legislation will primarily be aimed at online social media, it may affect other media platforms. Schakowsky cited the need for such legislation because of the "propaganda of fake news" that will emerge during the upcoming election campaign.

“I feel a sense of urgency that we could have a complete fantasy of a message campaign in this election,” she said.

Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.) emphasized the problems that are taking shape as many states -- notably the new California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) -- that have the potential to wreak havoc on national policy.

"It's easy to see a patchwork of laws that will be confusing to consumers and difficult for businesses," she said. Rodgers, the ranking member of the House Consumer Protection and Commerce Subcommittee, also pointed out that the parent Commerce Committee is still focusing on mapping of broadband in order to resolve lingering issues about the digital divide, which affects her semi-rural district.

Artificial intelligence was the sole theme of a final keynote by Dr. Lynn Parker, deputy U.S. Chief Technology Officer. She described the pending AI regulatory plan to "consider AI on a use-by-use perspective." She also addressed the emerging controversy about over-reliance on AI, insisting that it "is unethical not to use AI if it can be beneficial."

"Global leadership in AI matters," she said, but admitted that it is "not reasonable to believe every country will have the same approach to AI."

"We're still a ways away from defining" U.S. policy, Parker said.

FCC Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel, in a passionate keynote speech to the State of the Net annual conference, focused on growing political challenges to internet freedom. Acknowledging the long run of "rosy propositions" about the internet's value, she warned that "this formidable tool can not only bring us together but can divide us, too." She voiced special concern that government-directed internet shutdowns "can stunt the democratic process, threaten human rights, batter economies, and disrupt modern life" - and emphasized that the U.S. President could institute an internet shutdown under current regulations.

Without ever mentioning the incumbent U.S. President by name during her Tuesday, Jan. 28 speech to the annual SOTN conference of policymakers, Rosenworcel's political invective concentrated on what she sees as a potential threat to American free speech similar to actions that have been implemented globally.

"We have discovered what is ugly—that outrage can travel online with a greater velocity than veracity," Rosenworcel said, citing the "terrifying [ways] that this tool for global collaboration can be used to disrupt democracies as surely as it can be used to destabilize dictatorships." She focused on overseas examples, quoting reports that 21 countries shut down the internet 122 times last year.

After a lengthy tale of overseas internet shutdowns, she brought the story to the U.S.

"You might think this is at some distance from what could happen in the United States. But you might want to think again," Rosenworcel said, trying to avoid alarmist rhetoric as she outlined a scenario in which the President could use World War II- era regulations to stifle the web.

She pointed to 1942 revisions of the 1934 Communications Act, known as Section 706.

"Section 706 allows the President to shut down or take control of 'any facility or station for wire communication' if he proclaims 'that there exists a state or threat of war involving the United States,'” she explained noting that wireless communications could be suspended "merely if there is a presidential proclamation of a 'state of public peril' or simply a 'disaster or other national emergency.' There is no requirement in the law for the President to provide any advance notice to Congress."

Rosenworcel acknowledged, "These are .... different days."

"Section 706 has not been directly applied to the internet," she said, but quoted a 2010 Senate report that concluded Section 706 “gives the President the authority to take over wire communications in the United States and, if the President so chooses, shut a network down.”

"If a sitting President wants to shut down the internet or selectively cut off a service, all it takes is an opinion from his Attorney General that Section 706 gives him the authority to do so," she said. Citing current "unspoken norms," Rosenworcel contended "that past practice may no longer be the best guide for future behavior. Norms are being broken all the time in Washington and relying on them to cabin legal interpretation is not the best way to go."

With bold political inference, she said, "We should be straightforward."

"We should acknowledge that internet shutdowns can stunt elections and the democratic process, threaten human rights, batter economies, and disrupt modern life," the Democratic Commissioner said, calling for a "modern assessment of this language" in Section 706, reflecting "what it should mean in the digital age."

"The United States should develop a formal policy on government-directed internet shutdowns, informed by the experience of the State Department, National Telecommunications and Information Administration and Federal Communications Commission," she proposed.

"We need to have this discussion if we are committed to an open internet for all," Rosenworcel concluded. "Because without it our own laws could be contorted to support such outages. Because without it we can expect the number of government-directed internet shutdowns to grow."

Government support - especially at the state level - is vital to achieve the objective of universal broadband availability, with a special focus on "unserved" areas, Comcast senior executive vice president David Cohen said at the monthly luncheon program of the Media Institute in Washington. He emphasized that low-population rural areas, Indian reservations and other territories with no high-speed internet access - accounting for about 7% of the U.S. population - need service, not just the "underserved" urban areas where potential customers opt not to buy broadband access.

Cohen's wide-ranging remarks also emphasized the "need for a real federal standard" on digital privacy, rather than allowing state-by-state rules (such as the looming California Consumer Privacy Act) create nationwide policy chaos.  He cautioned against the "classic mistake" of legislating privacy based on past situations. Cohen encouraged a "design for a privacy framework" that looks ahead two to five years.

"Consumers deserve one set of fair, understandable federal legal protections that apply to the entire internet ecosystem," Cohen said, calling for "rules that are consistent in every part of our country, rules that are uniform, transparent, and easily understandable."

As for net neutrality, Cohen deemed that "this debate is now over -- even outdated."

"There’s almost universal consensus that we need binding federal legislation that prohibits blocking, throttling, and paid prioritization," he contended. "But we haven’t been able to get to the goal-line because the issue has become an ideological football."

"We need to move past the small ball politics of these issues, pass laws to protect consumers, and move on to bigger things," he added, without prognosticating on any legislative game plan that would accomplish those goals.

The lobbyist-turned-corporate executive warned at the start of his prepared remarks that he was "not going to dwell on a litany of public policy minutae" at the Nov. 14 gathering. He focused instead on high-minded global issues such as international competition, China's ambitious artificial intelligence agenda and the value of STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) in modern education. But during a lively Q&A session after his formal speech, Cohen confronted timely topics about high-tech antitrust suits and privacy.

Regarding antitrust or other actions to restrict high-tech companies such as Google, Amazon and Apple, Cohen said, "I prefer not to look at it in the old computer dynamic but in the new internet ecosystem dynamic."

"It's a matter of whether tech companies should be subject to antitrust [rules] as we have been forever," he said, adding that there should be no exemptions. Cohen expressed the belief that competition will help to increase access to services.

Broadband to the 'Unserved'

Wearing his hat as Comcast's chief diversity officer, Cohen emphasized that building broadband to the totally unserved should be a higher priority than boosting penetration in "underserved" communities.

"The cruel irony of the digital divide is that the more the internet advances, the further behind it leaves people without home internet connections - the very people who would most benefit from its equalizing potential," Cohen said. Frequently citing Comcast's Internet Essentials program to help low-income Americans get online access, he stressed the value of broadband for delivery of education, workforce development and other services.

"Federal money will be important, but not essential," Cohen said. He suggested that state funds - possibly bolstered by "partnering with private entities" could extend broadband's reach into the unserved areas. He expects that state funds cold be "leveraged and extended" via partnerships with the private sector, but he offered no specific examples of commitments by his firm to such ventures.

Much of Cohen's speech explored issues such as the lack of civility in the policy arena, where he himself fought enthusiastically in recent years. He also discussed at length how taken he was with Kai-Fu Lee's new book about artificial intelligence, AI Superpowers: China, Silicon Valley, and the New World Order. Cohen cited the Chinese encouragement of STEM education, which has led to 4.7 million recent college graduates in STEM in China, "nearly 10 times as many as we have graduated in the United States." He quoted a Pricewaterhouse Coopers prediction that AI will add $15.7 trillion to the global GDP by 2030.

"That’s almost the size of the world’s largest economy – ours! – today," he said, and then brought in AI's significance:

"Kai-Fu Lee foresees that artificial intelligence will replace 40% to 50% of all existing jobs in the U.S.," Cohen said.

Diversity Success

Cohen praised Comcast's role in promoting diversity and inclusiveness, noting that only five of the S&P 500 companies have someone with his new title, chief diversity officer. He said that last year, 71% of Comcast's new hires were women or people of color.

"At the level of vice president or higher, more than half are diverse – 21% people of color and 39% women," he said, adding that "my new favorite" diversity datapoint is that 53% of Comcast’s workforce reports to a diverse leader.

"We know that diverse leadership attracts more diverse talent," Cohen said.

Beyond the seven "primetime" Emmys for Amazon Prime Video and the four for Netflix, the looming role of streaming media permeated the least-watched Emmy telecast in history on Sunday. Let's start with the commercials for yet-to-debut Apple TV+ and Disney+, both eagerly awaited by digerati but barely on the radar of most video watchers. At least the Disney+ commercial teased the library of Mouse House classics plus the other brands (Marvel, Lucasfilm, etc.) that Disney has absorbed.

Even the commercials for existing over-the-top services, such as Netflix and Amazon Prime Video raised questions about the outlook for this competitive category of content. A Netflix ad promoted the forthcoming El Camino, a spinoff of Breaking Bad. While that Emmy-winning series ran originally on the AMC cable network (as did its earlier spinoff Better Call Saul), "El Camino" is not only a Netflix original, but the two-hour movie will open simultaneously on Oct. 11 in movie theaters, hence qualifying it for Oscar contention.

If nothing else, the move from AMC to Netflix is a (hoped-for) indication that viewers will follow the show, not the platform on which it appears.

Meanwhile, the so-called "Primetime Emmys" skirted a more fundamental conundrum. Since the streaming programs can be viewed on-demand at whatever hour is "prime" for an individual, the term - a legacy of broadcasting's evening hours - is increasingly irrelevant in modern life.

Is Everything Old Really New Again?

Just before the Emmy telecast, a series of published reports pointed out that many of the streaming TV juggernauts (with the exception of Apple TV+) are spending heavily on old (or ancient) broadcast TV series. Reportedly Netflix has bought Seinfeld streaming rights for $500 million; Comcast/NBC's new "Peacock" service will pay a comparable sum for The Office; and WarnerMedia's HBO Max is paying $600 million for 279 episodes of The Big Bang Theory.

"Big Bang" will also run on WarnerMedia's TBS linear network during its HBO Max availability. Of course, for Comcast and WarnerMedia, it means moving funds from one corporate pocket to another.

Related: Emmys 2019: Stars, Nets Happy Over Nods

Yet skeptics rightly wonder if these prices are right for shows which have already lived through years of syndication. Will they really attract viewers to the streaming platforms - or even bring in a next generation of audiences as youngsters age into the users of the technology?

Will any of the shows have the perennial appeal of I Love Lucy? Or will they merely look dated?

Some cynics also question whether quirky Seinfeld is now worth more than double what TBS paid for the same show ($200 million) in the late 1990s.

It all comes down to the unknown question of how much is too much "repeatability"?

These challenges about the value of old TV shows take on great meaning in the context of the Emmycast, which is all about new and original programs.

When several of the Emmy presenters pontificated about today's "platinum age" of television (the "golden age" isn't bright enough anymore), they were alluding to the creativity and range of the vast line-up of streaming content. Of course, cable's contribution to the creative age is significant, based on the number of creative Emmys to HBO, National Geographic, CNN and others. But Netflix gleaned almost as many trophies as HBO, and Hulu's tally (three) was equal to VH1, FX and Sundance.

Perhaps most significantly for the so called Primetime Emmys, among the aging broadcast networks, only NBC won any awards - and they were both for Saturday Night Live, which runs in a timeslot that pushes the meaning of "primetime."

A Lot of Progress in Six Years Plus ACEs and Old Jokes

The Academy of Television Arts & Sciences (ATAS) only allowed streaming video into the Emmy competition in 2013, so the sizeable showing (nominations as well as actual awards) demonstrates a remarkable growth - and recognition about what viewers want to watch.

It brought back memories of the Cable ACE Awards ("Award for Cable Excellence," which became redundant with the extended acronym). The cable industry created the ACEs in 1978, and they survived until 1997, after ATAS finally bowed to reality and allowed made-for-cable programs into its Emmy competition.

And that brought to mind another recent concept bouncing around Hollywood with no obvious support. As the walls between cinema and television crumble even further, why have separate Oscar and Emmy awards? Maybe the Golden Globes has it right: a glam party where trophies for all types of media are handed out. Of course, the film vs. television infrastructure won't allow such a cross-platform statuette-fest. Yet.

So let's see what El Camino and its multiple distribution successors do to that model?

All the promises and blather during the Emmycast - especially in the vague promotional commercials for upcoming streaming services - reminded me of a sexist, almost-dirty "joke" that was heard often during the 1970s. Its set-up was about a mission not accomplished, and the punchline was, "He was a cable franchise promoter, and all he did was talk all night about how great things were going to be."

Amid the hype and bravura of the Emmy show, I could only wonder about the future of television, especially how great it's going to be.

Let's acknowledge that the next wave of TV - platforms, distribution, content - will not necessarily resemble the past 70 years in which ATAS gloried on Sunday night. The awkward introductory remarks by Bryan Cranston lauded TV's history and bright future.

“Television has never been bigger; television has never mattered more; and television has never been this damn good," Cranston intoned properly from his script.

But I couldn't help thinking that the actor was selected for this speech because of his recent portrayal of Howard Beale."the mad prophet of the airways," in the Broadway adaptation of the ever-more credible 1977 movie "Network."

And in that film, the mad-as-hell Howard Beale character (played by Oscar-winner Peter Finch) offered an even more impassioned and sobering outlook of what television will become.

Ultimately, it's all about "the promises" and will they be fulfilled.

Two new reports underscore the growing challenges of fragmented news viewing preferences and increased media concentration.

A Pew Research Center study, unveiled on Wednesday, showed that nearly a third of U.S. adults (31%) follow local news very closely, but various demographic groups have widely different media preference. Few Americans ages 18 to 29 (15%) follow local news very closely, according to Pew, compared with 28% of those 30 to 49 age bracket and 39% of those 50 and older.

"Older Americans, black adults and those with a high school education or less show considerably more interest in local news than their counterparts," the Pew report concluded. Those categories prefer getting their local news via the TV rather than online.

Meanwhile, a Gallup Panel survey issued on Thursday concluded that more than nine out of ten Americans are "very" or "somewhat" concerned that the consolidation of news organizations will mean that owners' political views will influence coverage of local and national news. The Gallup study also found that 77% of viewers are concerned that new owners would cover less local news.

The Gallup analysis is part of the Gallup-Knight Foundation series on trust, media and democracy that seeks to better understand Americans' evolving opinions of the media.

Pew: TV's role is solid, but its audience is aging

According to the Pew assessment, news consumers older than 50 years primarily turn to the TV set, while those younger than 50 mostly prefer online pathways to local news. Black Americans and those with a high school diploma or less education also express a far greater preference than their counterparts for getting local news through the TV set rather than online, in print or on the radio, Pew found. About half of those with a high school diploma or less prefer the TV set (52%) compared with 29% of those with a college degree and 39% of those with some college education.

Those groups who are less likely to prefer TV tend to express a greater preference for the internet, Pew said. It found that 60% of people ages 18 to 29 prefer the internet, along with about half of 30- to 49-year-olds (47%).

Among the questions in Pew's survey was a question about how much influence local news media have within a community. Thirty-seven percent said "a lot" and 61% responded "not much."

The Pew research also delved into the emerging preference among digital news consumers, distinguishing between social media and "news websites. Not surprisingly, about 30% of audiences in the 18 to 29 year old age group prefer both digital formats to legacy delivery systems (print, radio, TV). But the differences become very distinct in the 30 to 49 age bracket, when 17% favor social media versus 30% choosing news websites. For audiences older than 65, only 3% go to social media compared to 11% who use news websites.

Not Interesting Enough to Pay for News

Pew also found that younger Americans are less likely to pay for local news, which is tied to their explanation that they are not interested in it. Overall, very few U.S. adults (14%) pay for local news, but among younger age cohorts the willingness to pay is even lower: 7% for ages 18 to 29 and 9% for ages 18 to 29. Pew noted that 29% of people above age 65 have paid a local news organization either via subscriptions, donations ore membership.

Black and Hispanic Americans are more likely than white Americans to say they want to see/hear or read about local topics such as crime, schools, jobs/employment, sports, traffic/transportation, prices and government/politics, Pew said. For example, Black and Hispanic adults are about three times as likely as white adults to say they want to be informed about jobs and unemployment for their daily lives. These minority audiences are about twice as likely as whites to call schools and local events important, according to the Pew survey. The Pew Research Center is allied with the Pew Charitable Trusts, which received support from the Google News Initiative, the Silicon Valley company's effort to work with the news industry to help journalism thrive in the digital age.

As usual, Pew did not offer analyses or recommendations to accompany its findings - but it is clear that there is still sizable, albeit dwindling, interest in and support for local news. Pew's findings augur the drastic changes in the ways people want to obtain it.

The new Gallup research for the Knight Foundation (which backed the recent Knight Commission report on democracy, media and trust) focused on another aspect of the same issue: the credibility of media companies in a consolidating world. In addition to last week's Gannett/ Gatehouse newspaper merger, Knight's report cites the scuttled Sinclair Broadcasting Group effort to acquire Tribune Media. During that failed merger process, critics assailed Sinclair's policy to broadcast its conservative political commentaries via local stations.

Related: FCC Investigating Sinclair Over Tribune Deal

The Knight Foundation, in a statement, said that the Gallup poll confirmed that local news consumers are aware of this "very real trend in local news" in which local outlets are covering more national stories than in the past.

"But this shift appears to stem from decisions made by local news organizations, rather than a response to increased consumer demand for such news," according to the Knight Foundation. It cited a recent Pew study that found that most Americans think their local news media are doing well financially, despite evidence to the contrary.

"The results are similar among all relevant demographic subgroups of Americans, including party, age and education, as well as by different levels of attention to local news," Knight said. It emphasized that all categories of news consumers "express concern over ... [the] risks of national news ownership of local news" and emphasized that there is "particular concern about the potential for political bias."

Taken together, the Pew and Knight research projects recognize the fragmenting local news opportunity at a time when many local media operations are struggling to find a role in the evolving mediascape.

It took 40 years for the FCC to find a way for TV and wireless to coexist in the spectrum, proof that "regulators are not good futurists," Federal Communications Commission General Counsel Thomas M. Johnson Jr. acknowledged as he opened his remarks to the Media Institute's monthly luncheon in Washington on Wednesday (May 15).

 His otherwise optimistic remarks -- which ranged from the value of telecom reform legislation to his belief that the FCC will prevail in "Prometheus 4" (the fourth review of the cross-ownership case PrometheusRadio Project v. FCC) -- included support for the emerging ATSC 3.0 next-gen broadcast standard and enthusiasm for Chairman Ajit Pai's Media Modernization efforts.

He also lauded Pai's efforts to create "more flexible use of spectrum," an effort driven by the race to 5G.

"We are on the precipice of developing a next-generation wireless, mobile communications network that will grow our GDP by billions and add millions of jobs to the American economy," Johnson said. "We’re going to need smart regulations to clear the red tape and incentivize the deployment of new infrastructure. This will be the future of connectivity."

Johnson cited Pai's newly drafted Report and Order dealing with the "Modernization of Media Regulation Initiative," which updates the commission’s 1990s leased-access rules. 

The order has been teed up for a vote at the FCC's June 6 meeting.

He said that the cable access rules, originally intended to "promote diversity and competition in the video programming marketplace," are no longer valid.

Johnson explained that the FCC's 2008 proposed new leased access rules made "leased access more onerous, not less." Those rules never went into effect due to a judicial stay and other administrative barriers. As a result, Johnson pointed out, "the operative rules remain those that the commission passed nearly a quarter-century ago." He said that the new draft order "cleans the slate by vacating the commission’s troubled 2008 order [and] acknowledges the explosion in available platforms to distribute programming." Most significantly, Johnson added, "We will also seek comment on whether our leased access requirements can withstand First Amendment scrutiny today in light of changes in the video programming marketplace." 

One of the proposals, FCC Chairman Pai blogged Wednesday, is "to eliminate the requirement that cable operators make leased access available on a part-time basis since there are plenty of other avenues for content creators to make available short-form programming."

'Humility' in Regulatory Approach; Vision for New Ventures

Johnson's speech was entitled "Humility Is the FCC's Primary Regulatory Virtue," which became his tongue-in-cheek way of acknowledging the agency's missteps through the decades, including policies that limited wireless expansion as long ago as the 1960s. But he quickly turned it into a self-congratulatory explanation that the current commission "has updated old rules to match the realities of today’s marketplace and has worked hard to enable the deployment of new communications technologies that will improve the lives of all Americans."

Johnson cited the creation last year of the FCC's Office of Economics and Analytics, which does cost-benefit analyses of the FCC's major rulemakings "to ensure that any new regulation is justified ... including the alternative of not regulating at all."

"By establishing this office ... the commission has injected humility into its organizational structure," Johnson said.

As for the FCC's review of children's TV rules (KidVid), he emphasized that "children’s educational programming is available not only on broadcast television, but also through over-the-top providers, cable channels, and the Internet." The FCC's rules -- last updated in 2006 -- require an examination to determine if they "still make sense in today's media marketplace," he said.

In response to a question about the competitive opportunities for ATSC 3.0 in non-broadcast services [data transmission, wireless backaul], Johnson said that he expects that Pai's "light-touch approach" to next generation services will mean that "new and traditional media can compete" against each other.

On another topic -- regarding the FCC's ability to handle so many diverse regulatory functions -- Johnson pointed out that several of the commissioners and many other top agency officials have previously held the post of general counsel, giving them a sound background in the policies that they are now deciding, including topics that are "likely to get challenged." He did not address the in-breeding hurdles of such career paths within the agency.

As for potential Telecom Act reform, Johnson said, "There's always room for Congress to be clearer about how to delegate authority to the Commission." Replying to a Multichannel News question about a possible update to the 1996 Telecom Act, he said that the law "reflects what we had then" and noted that it "has produced a lot of litigation."

Johnson said he savored the idea of "flexibility" and that the commission would welcome a "fresh look" that "would make it easier for the FCC to do its job." But he did not speculate on the prospects for near-term Congressional action to revise all or parts of the existing law.

"All of our infrastructures are starting to look very similar," said NCTA executive VP James Assey during the first panel discussion of the Free State Foundation's 11th annual telecom policy forum in Washington (agenda) on Tuesday (March 26). His remark set the stage for much the day's perspective -- if not for total consensus -- throughout the day as industry and academic experts plus federal officials examined the need for new regulatory policies in an era of converging technologies, competing platform players and urgent privacy and security demands.

Assey also said that current conditions, including the emerging role of 5G wireless technology, augur the need to revise "Title VI" (rules in the 1984 Cable Communications Policy Act) that may no longer be valid.

"That type of hybrid architecture requires greater similarity" in policies, Assey said. "Any future approach to spectrum needs more coordination. Congress could speed that change."

Expanding his remarks to include the growing presence of platforms -- that is, non-telecom providers, such as Google and Apple -- Assey insisted that, "We're very confident in our path...and on keeping focused."

Fellow panelist Kathleen Ham, senior VP, government affairs at T-Mobile USA, endorsed Assey's view.

"We're at a crossroads," she said. "There's definitely a convergence going between cable and wireless," and in a predictable puff about the next generation wireless service, she added, "We don't know what 5G will bring, but it's going to be good." She acknowledged that new competitive policy-making should be part of the legislative agenda.

Further supporting the need to prepare for the shifting environment, Verizon senior VP Kathleen Grillo focused on her "concern" about state laws on platform accountability as well as rules on privacy and issues such as 5G tower siting that are "confusing for consumers." She stressed that such complications underscore the "value of a national framework."

An FSF panel of academic experts further set the stage for new policies, which also happened to be the subtitle for FSF's seminar: "Getting Law and Policy Right."

"The distinction between the web and the edge are becoming indistinct," said University of Pennsylvania Law Professor Christopher Yoo, noting that it is "harder to justify net neutrality," and proposing that a future evaluation will involve "device neutrality."

FCC's O'Rielly and FTC's Simons Weigh In

FCC commissioner Michael O'Rielly agreed that the policy "structure should be changed."

"How we define the marketplace is so important in the video space," he said, emphasizing that this is no longer "just about cable, broadcast or satellite.

"Many of the FAANGs are fighting for the same space," O'Rielly said, using the popular acronym for Facebook, Apple, Amazon, Netflix and Google. "The silos we've lived with for so long are no longer appropriate. We have to take that to the legislature. Title VI no longer makes any sense."

In an on-stage dialogue with former Congressman (and retired Verizon lobbyist) Tom Tauke, O'Rielly also said that he is not "squeamish" about pre-empting state or local regulations on issues such as wireless tower siting or other factors.

"Absolutely not," he said. "Wireless spectrum does not respect [local] boundaries. The internet is interstate in nature, and I'm willing to preempt" whatever is necessary.

Federal Trade Commission chairman Joseph Simons, in the concluding keynote of the FSF program, focused on paid prioritization and the FTC's newly launched data handling review of internet service providers, which was unveiled that day.

"Paid prioritization is a type of price discrimination, which is ubiquitous in the economy" and not illegal, Simons said. He cited loyalty cards, coupons, senior discounts and frequent shopper deals as comparable legal price preferences.

But he warned that the FTC "could take action against ISPs if they block applications without adequately disclosing those practices or mislead[ing] consumers about what applications they block or how."

"Our consumer protection authority could also apply to throttling," Simons added. "We would consider whether the alleged throttling had countervailing benefits, and whether there were reasonable steps consumers could have taken to avoid it."

Simons also joined the call to seek more direction from Congress on how to handle privacy and data security issues.

"I have urged Congress to enact legislation that would give the FTC three tools," he told the FSF audience, citing civil penalties for privacy and data security violations; targeted rulemaking authority involving technological developments; and jurisdiction over nonprofits and common carriers.

"The process of enacting federal privacy legislation will involve difficult policy tradeoffs that I believe are appropriately left to Congress," Simons said.

As for its latest enforcement of ISP privacy practices, he said the focus will be on how ISPs are collecting, using, combining and disclosing personal information about consumers that they collect via fixed and mobile internet, advertising platforms and analytical services.

Simon's remarks summarized an underlying theme of the FSF conference: the growing recognition that converging technologies and overlapping services require a new approach to regulatory policies.

After congratulating the New America think tank for running "the most unbalanced panel in the history of panels," C-Band Alliance lobbyist Preston Padden accused the American Cable Association of demanding a $200,000 per system payment to "go away" from the current FCC plan allowing private sale agreements for use of the C-band spectrum, especially for 5G wireless ventures.

Ross Lieberman, ACA's senior vice president of government affairs, dismissed Padden's charge.

"It's just a lie," Lieberman said. "You've never suggested any number. You weren't even in the room the last time we met. You said there was no harm. That was the end of the discussion. I have no idea what you're talking about."

The FCC is contemplating allowing wireless carriers to compensate incumbent satellite operators for giving up spectrum, as the C-Band Alliance has proposed, but ACA says cable ops should get a piece of that pie if that is the way the commission goes.

Charter Communications vice president of regulatory affairs Colleen King, another panelist at the Feb. 5 session, offered that, "We think the best way for us to get access to spectrum ... is through an FCC auction." She acknowledged that Charter "will continue to meet with you" because "we like 5G. We'll talk to everybody."

Veteran lobbyist and TV exec Padden is now executive VP, advocacy and government relations for the C-Band Alliance, a new association representing four European-based satellite carriers -- Intelsat, SES, Eutelsat and Telesat -- that control large swaths of the spectrum used to transmit network programming to cable headends and TV stations. Padden was the first to grab a microphone during the Q&A session after the panel presentation; he directed his comments to Lieberman.

"We have told you a hundred times that we'll cover all of your members' costs. We put it in writing," Padden said. "You came to see us and said you'd go away for $200,000 per cable system. "There's a word for that. It's 'shakedown,'" Padden said with a flourish.

His accusation triggered Lieberman's adamant reply.

In response to another question about a possible FCC auction, Lieberman added, "Parties involved in the process have made it incredibly difficult for the FCC to find a path forward. There has not been a coalescing of support for the private sale."

Incendiary Title But No Easy Solution

The New America program, provocatively titled "The Great Airwaves Robbery II," featured four speakers: Lieberman and King plus spokespersons for Google and Citizens Against Government Waste. All of them questioned the current FCC plan to reallocate the C-band spectrum in ways that could -- as New America's organizer put it -- send "$15 billion-40 billion" to the four companies that now control that spectrum.

Michael Calabrese, director of New America's Wireless Future Project and moderator of the panel session in Washington, explained that he put together the session because of growing attention to the underutilized C-Band (3700-4200 MHz), which is widely sought as a resource for emerging 5G wireless services. The FCC proposed last July to reallocate at least the bottom 200 MHz of C-Band for exclusive licensing to mobile carriers and others triggered a wave of criticism about who will benefit financially from the sale.

"The comment cycle is completed," Calabrese told Multichannel News. "Presumably an initial staff recommendation and Chairman’s input could occur soon [although] we don’t really expect an Order before May or June at the earliest."

"But now that they have a record, the Chairman will likely chart a course forward for the staff," he continued. "All the groups on stage (and others) are also encouraging Congress to get interested. ... That has been the case in parallel situations in the past when this much revenue is at stake."

During the panel discussion, Thomas Schatz, president of Citizens Against Government Waste, insisted that the carriage license "is not a property right" and that funds from any sale "belong to taxpayers, not broadcasters." He urged that, "Congress must decide where proceeds should go."

In his opening remarks, Lieberman opined that the situation requires FCC action soon to achieve "full optimization of capacity." He warned that the C-Band Alliance members "will act as if they are monopolists" if they control and benefit solely from the spectrum sale.

"Their only restraint is that they [could] drive prices so high that programmers go to terrestrial," that is to non-satellite distribution, Lieberman said. He noted, however, that high-capacity internet distribution is not currently an option to many rural and small-town cable headends, ACA's member base.

Charter's King concurred that the FCC should make a decision about spectrum sale. "Not the private satellite companies," she said. "The FCC should focus on the easiest, quickest way" to resolve the reallocation.

But Lieberman's last word was that, "It will take a lot longer than anyone expects."

Aside from a promise that net neutrality will be the focus of the House Communications Subcommittee's first hearing this year, nary another word was spoken at Tuesday's State of the Net conference about the controversial access issue. 

Indeed, federal and local policy-makers and industry advocates shunned traditional concerns about network infrastructure and telecommunications policy, which had been dominant issues at the 15th annual event of the Internet Education Foundation, with the cooperation of the Congressional Internet Caucus.

Rather, the focus was on the platforms — especially Google and Facebook — which have become gatekeepers for the expanding range of online services and transactions. 

Along with the concerns over platform dominance came an array of calls for strong policies to protect privacy and to quash anticompetitive maneuvers. FCC commissioner Brendan Carr offered predictable cheerleading for 5G (Fifth Generation) wireless services, and demands for tight cybersecurity in the evolving digital ecosystem were woven through the conference. 

House Antitrust chairman David Cicilline (D-R.I.) opened the program with strong words about Google's perceived anti-competitive behavior, both as a gatekeeper and for its buying splurge in which it has gobbled up smaller firms. This "concentration of power" creates "pernicious impacts on a free and diverse press," Cicilline said, especially "in the absence of a competitive marketplace." He cited reports on Google's ability to manipulate traffic on its ad networks as well as with its readers and users. All of this affects "legacy news companies and digital publishers alike," Cicilline said. "The free and open internet ... is incompatible with this trend toward centralization online."

"It's vital that the House Antitrust Subcommittee takes up these matters in a top-to-bottom investigation [to determine] whether use of market power harms the competitive process online," he said. "We cannot have a democracy without a free and diverse press"....one that gives publishers "a level playing field to negotiate with dominant platforms."

Cicilline used the attack on Google as prelude to announcing that he is reintroducing the “Journalism Competition and Preservation Act," which he had submitted last year. The bill would create safe harbor for news publishers to negotiate business arrangements collectively with Google, Facebook and other platforms. Cicilline said his subcommittee's hearings will "build a record to document anti-competitive behavior to develop a deep understanding of these markets in exploring every tool for preventing" abuses by platform operators.

The News Media Alliance (formerly known as the Newspaper Association of America, and prior to that as the American Newspaper Publishers Association) quickly commended Cicilline's plan, calling it an effort toward assuring "fair compensation for use of news content" from publications.

FCC Preps for 5G, FTC Ready to Take on Vertical Integration

Carr opened his presentation praising 5G by noting that, "Some carriers are telling us we already have it" -- a line that drew a bemused, knowing chuckle from the audience. Carr said, "We're now beginning to see" the long-promised convergence of services "in practical ways." He predicted that 5G "will unleash...new waves of innovation."

Much of Carr's speech focused on the "real challenge" from China, which he said has deployed 5G at five times the pace of the U.S., a timely comment in the midst of the Huawei controversy. He stopped short of promising special consideration for U.S. 5G projects, but he cautioned against establishing policy barriers.

"I want to let the private sector compete" without restraints from local government agencies, on topics such as tower deployment, he said. Carr stressed that, "2019 will be the year of 5G," which will trigger "massive infrastructure" construction and "lots of new jobs."

FTC commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter used her time in the spotlight to refute the "prevailing belief" of recent years that vertical mergers are good.

"We have to look skeptically at all the claimed benefits of vertical mergers," she said. Federal review of merger plans should make "parties substantiate the benefits... and we should bring enforcement actions if we believe" actual performance does not match the promises.

Assistant Attorney General Makan Delrahim, who heads the Justice Department's antitrust activities, also acknowledged the need for new ways to evaluate mergers. He cited recent Google acquisitions, especially those involving advertising programs. Delrahim sought to align it with the current Department of Justice evaluation of broadcasting mergers, and how they may affect advertising operations.

Delrahim indicated that future examinations could assess online and broadcast advertising within a local market as direct competitors, despite the platform differences. He said, "New entrants are important" and emphasized that "light regulation" is vital, although, "We have to be very careful" about each. In response to a question about "How did tech get so big?" the antitrust chief replied, "Big isn't necessarily bad" — especially if it creates a product that consumers want, he said.

Delrahim also opened the discussion of privacy, cautioning that his "biggest concern" about privacy legislation is that the legacy companies will be able to shape the discussion and eventual policy-making. Based on his experience with their skills, they could create barriers that will impede start-ups and maintain privacy regulations from which the existing companies will benefit.

Data Privacy: National or State Protections?

Rep. Suzan DelBene (D-Washington), a member of the House Ways and Means Committee and the Internet of Things Caucus and co-chair of the Women's High Tech Caucus, said Congress "has a responsibility" to assure that consumers have a clear understanding of what happens to their data.

Her remarks followed a series of SOTN presentations about the fragmentation of privacy policies, with very strict ones emerging at the state level, such as the California Consumer Privacy Act. Panelists could not agree on whether such rules will put excessive burdens on companies and whether the standardized measures can be enforced. Several speakers urged Federal action lest conflicting state privacy rules create a diametric dilemma for companies that operate in multiple jurisdictions.   

As for the allied matter of cybersecurity, Rep. Jim Langevin (D-R.I.) called for a national framework for assuring the safety of all segments of the network infrastructure, from artificial intelligence to weapons security. Langevin, a member of the House Armed Services Committee, the Cybersecurity, Infrastructure Protection and Innovation Subcommittee and co-chair of the Congressional Cybersecurity Caucus, emphasized the need for training and expanding the cybersecurity work force and for coordinating government/private sector activities.

Eighty different committees and subcommittees on Capitol Hill now have some jurisdiction over cybersecurity, he explained. "As Congress, we will have to move with greater agility, including oversight and reform" to stave off the growing potential attacks.

Brett M. Kavanaugh has won Senate confirmation to become an associate justice of the Supreme Court and will take his seat on Tuesday, October 9.

In a rare and contentious Saturday session, the Senate voted 50 to 48 to approve Kavanaugh, a federal District Judge, for the seat previously held by Anthony Kennedy. Within hours after the confirmation vote, Chief Justice John Roberts administered the oath of office to the 53-year-old Kavanaugh after President Trump signed the appointment commission.

The new Justice -- 114th in the Court's history -- will take his seat on the far right side of the bench when the Court opens for business after the Columbus Day (also known as "Indigenous Peoples Day") weekend, establishing a solid 5-4 conservative majority on the Court for the first time in decades.

Although Kavanaugh has discussed his dissent on Network Neutrality, the Supreme Court's agenda for the coming term now has very few cases dealing with technology, telecommunications or media. Several cases scheduled to come before the Court may produce decisions that affect these sectors though -- especially the regulatory aspects. Kavanaugh's background has spurred speculation on how he will vote, but at this point there is no way to know how the court will rule on these cases.

Most notably, Gundy v. United States, will examine how Executive Branch Departments and independent federal administrative agencies -- such as the FCC or FTC -- handle powers that, it is argued, should be retained by Congress. Although the case does not involve current telecom/media or technical issues, the Court's decision may be a sign of a crackdown on excessive federal agency actions.

Similarly, in Apple, Inc. v. Pepper the Court will determine how to treat iPhone users who buy apps from Apple’s App Store. More broadly, the case could affect the rights of customers who purchase a good or service from a third party if allegedly abusive monopolist practices are involved..

Other SCOTUS cases this term involve property rights, the Fifth Amendment’s Double Jeopardy Clause and abusive class-action settlements. The Court is also expected to hear an unusually large number of appeals seeking to overturn legal precedents in a variety of fields.

Key Senators are Not Directly Involved in Commerce Issues

The unusual 50 to 48 vote to confirm Kavanaugh came as Senators used a legislative loophole to assure that the new Justice won by two votes. Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), the only Republican not to vote for Kavanaugh, voted "present" rather than "no." That tactic offset a missing "yes" vote from Sen. Steve Daines (R-Montana) who could thereby skip the voting to attend his daughter's wedding on Saturday.

After an impassioned speech on Friday in which Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) said she would support Kavanaugh, extensive attention focused on Murkowski and Sen. Joe Manchin (D-West Virginia), the only Democrat to cross party lines and vote for Kavanaugh. These key Senators (Murkowski, Collins and Manchin) coincidentally all serve on the Senate Appropriations Committee. None of them currently is involved with the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee.

When it comes to 5G (fifth generation) wireless deployment, "Being first matters. It's a big deal," FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr said repeatedly during remarks to the monthly Media Institute luncheon in Washington on Thursday. He acknowledged that when the Commission addresses 5G at next Wednesday's monthly session, the needs of state and local agencies will be thoroughly considered - especially complaints that the profusion of small towers are a gift to the big wireless carriers with insufficient compensation to local governments. The goal is to "reduce barriers to build 5G infrastructure," he said. 

Carr estimated that the FCC's upcoming rule revision "will cut $2 billion in red tape" regulatory costs for the industry. And he expects that well over 90% of 5G investment will be in rural and suburban areas. He repeatedly said that FCC actions "will cut the cost and [accelerate deployment] of wireless broadband in rural areas." 

"I want to make [sure] the U.S. is the [world's] first 5G economy," said Carr, who has crusaded for 5G expansion during the past year. He stressed that encouraging development of U.S. technology is a major goal of the FCC's plan, which faces the immense growth of 5G in China - an unusual hint of government-led industrial policy.

"They [China] have been much more aggressive in 5G," Carr said, noting that about 460 5G cell sites are erected every day in China, which is 12 times the number of sites installed in the U.S. daily.

"We need to get more spectrum and infrastructure," he said, citing the value of 5G to "unleash a new wave of apps" including rural broadband delivery and telehealth services. He especially acknowledged the benefit to U.S. technology providers if the American 5G industry grows more quickly, becoming the basis for next generation wireless in other countries, rather than allowing China to pick off those opportunities. 

"There's a limit of how much we can do with 4G," said the commissioner, who - as has become his fashion forte - spoke (wearing a casual open-necked shirt) from notes, but not prepared text, to the buttoned-down audience. "To truly scale 5G, we've got to press forward."

Carr explained that 5G needs more low towers than the 200- and 300-foot high towers of previous technology. 

"We've heard from dozens of local governments," some of which are fretting that FCC policy will reduce their revenue opportunities as 5G towers proliferate. "We will put reasonable caps on fees..., so that applications can be acted on in a reasonable manner," Carr said. He said the FCC "wants to make sure" that local authorities are reasonably compensated. 

Keeping the FCC's national broadband standard at 25 Megabits per second is "insufficiently audacious," Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel charged as the FCC issued its Notice of Inquiry for the 14th annual broadband deployment report (due in early 2019) on Thursday. She urged that the standard be set at 100 Mbps.

"It is time to be bold and move the national broadband standard from 25 Megabits to 100 Megabits per second," the senior Democratic Commissioner said, criticizing details of the inquiry, which "sets the stage for an unfortunate repeat of last year’s Broadband Deployment Report." She challenged last year's report that found "clear evidence of 24 million Americans without high-speed service," suggesting that the Commission was wrong to consider that level to be "both reasonable and timely."

Rosenworcel also lamented that the 25 Mbps benchmark means that "the United States is not even close to leading the world."

Related: Innovation, Reliability, Connectivity Drive Broadband

"We need both a more powerful goal and a plan to reach it," she said in her lone dissent about launch of the Inquiry.

In its Notice of Inquiry, the FCC said that the 2019 Report will refocus its analysis on the deployment of fixed and mobile services.

The FCC reiterated the finding of its 2018 Report that 25 Mbps (with a 3 Mbps backpath) was "the appropriate measure to assess whether fixed services provides advanced telecommunications capability." In the mobile environment, the Commission said the minimum advertised speeds of 5 Mbps/1 Mbps were not fast enough to be called advanced telecommunications services. It said it will seek more input on these definitions.

Related: Microsoft, RTO Wireless Team on Rural Broadband Initiative

The NoI also seeks suggestions on more ways that the FCC can help to close the Digital Divide, including reduced barriers to investment and access to funding to build broadband facilities.

Comments on the Inquiry (GN Docket No. 18-238) are due by Sept. 10, with reply comments due on Sept. 24.

Sales of 4K Ultra High Definition TV sets will climb 21% during the coming year, and revenue for subscription video streaming services will jump by 24% during the same period, according to the Consumer Technology Association's mid-year update of its "U.S. Consumer Technology Sales and Forecast," published Tuesday (July 31).

The semi-annual industry-wide update puts overall consumer technology sales up 6% by the end of this year compared with 2017, significantly higher than the annual growth rate of 3.9% predicted in CTA's January forecast.

CTA's January 2018 Report: Consumer Spending on Streaming Services to Reach $19.5B

The expected home technology growth is being spurred by a strong economy, low unemployment and the tax cut, according to CTA's analysis.

CTA foresees expansion in smart home and whole-home WiFi systems, which, along with streaming video, potentially affect cable operators and programmers' activities in those sectors. The rapid acquisition of 4K TV sets will offset the continuing flat sales for traditional HDTV receivers, possibly spurring networks to accelerate UHD delivery. CTA predicted that nearly 22.5 million 4K UHD sets will be sold in 2019, compared with 18.5 million this year and 16.7 million in 2017. 

The sales pace of smart TVs will slow down: 33.8 million units last year, 35.2 million this year, 36.6 million in 2019, according to the CTA analysis. But that widespread penetration of Internet-accessible TV sets will be accompanied by continuing growth in sales of streaming media players (including sticks and set-top boxes): 17 million units last year, 18.6 million units this year and 19.7 million units next year, according to the CTA forecast.

Related Study: 74% of U.S. TV Homes Have at Least One Connected TV Device

CTA foresees consumer expenditures on streaming video services to reach $13.4 billion this year, and $16.6 billion in 2019, compared with about $4 billion in 2014.

"These services are expected to sustain healthy, double-digit growth rates for the foreseeable future as consumers explore the various content delivery platforms available to them," the report concluded. "Live TV streaming options are becoming more widely available this year, potentially attracting traditional pay-TV subscribers that have until now avoided cutting the cord for fear of losing their sports programming. With plentiful streaming options available, it is expected that viewers will continue to cut the cord to explore their ideal blend of streamed content."

Related: 'Consumer Reports' Guides Subscribers on Cord-Shaving

At the same time, home networking devices -- especially smart speakers as forerunners of the Internet of Things juggernaut -- will fly off retail (and online) shelves. And their presence will raise new competitive issues, especially as fifth-generation (5G) wireless technology is deployed.

“The new Internet of Things is the ‘Intelligence of Things’,” said Steve Koenig, CTA vice president of market research.“Connected products tap artificial intelligence to enhance services, especially in categories including smartphones, connected cars and smart home devices. And with 5G on our doorstep – the first 5G products will hit the market this year – we’re crossing into a new phase of faster and smarter connected devices.”

Rick Kowalski, CTA senior manager of market research and business intelligence, focused on the "huge shift in how people consume content." He emphasized the value of live streaming, which has "more consumers exploring their over-the-top video options." "This remarkable growth in streaming services shows us that the phrase ‘content is king’ is more relevant than ever,” Kowalski said.

CTA said it expects U.S. consumer technology revenue overall will reach $377 billion in 2018. CTA said that this year will mark the first time that whole-home WiFi products and artificial/virtual reality headsets hit the $1 billion wholesale revenue milestone.

Among the other hot categories, with expected wholesale revenue levels, are voice-controlled smart speakers ($3.2 billion) and smarthome devices such as thermostats, detectors, locks and doorbells ($4.6 billion). CTA acknowledges that "multi-year projections cannot account for unpredictable factors such as changes in tariffs, trade laws, interest rates and federal policy."

The CTA report is available for $2,000 to non-members of association.

Follows CTA/NCTA Agreement Extension

CTA's forecast came just days after the organization and NCTA – The Internet & Television Association announced a four-year extension of the "Voluntary Agreement for Ongoing Improvement to the Energy Efficiency of Small Network Equipment." They said the cross-industry initiative has improved the efficiency of home internet devices such as modems and routers by 20%.

Although the agreement is unrelated to CTA's sales forecasts, it exemplifies the co-dependency of the industries.

The Small Network Equipment (SNE) Voluntary Agreement was initially adopted in 2015 to build upon the success of a similar award-winning voluntary agreement for set-top boxes endorsed by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) in 2013. The extension of the voluntary agreement raises the bar for signatories by committing to meet new, more rigorous energy efficiency levels by 2020 that are on average 11% lower than the agreement’s current levels.

"The four-year extension of the voluntary agreement demonstrates our industry's commitment to approaches that assure our customers benefit from energy efficiency measures while maintaining our ability to develop new services and equipment which they demand,” said Neal Goldberg, NCTA’s general counsel.

Agreement signatories include the major broadband internet services providers serving 95 million U.S. households (89%of the market) -- AT&T, Cablevision, CenturyLink, Charter, Comcast, Cox Communications, Frontier and Verizon -- as well as leading device manufacturers Actiontec, ARRIS, D-Link, NETGEAR, Technicolor and Ubee Interactive.

"Laws and regulations intended to promote privacy may build protective moats around large companies ... making it more difficult for smaller companies to grow, for new companies to enter the market, and for innovation to occur," Federal Trade Commissioner Noah Phillips told the Internet Governance Forum USA conference in Washington on July 27. 

Phillips indicated that communications and technology companies, "some of which already possess significant amounts of data about people," will be of special interest when the FTC begins its extensive probe into privacy and other digital business practices starting in September.

"Competition must be part of ... our conversation about privacy," said the new commissioner in one of his first the public presentations since taking a Republican seat at the FTC in May. Echoing the words of FTC chair Joseph Simons, who also was sworn in two months ago, Phillips warned that, “If you do privacy in the wrong way ... you might end up reducing competition. You might create a situation in which you entrench the large tech platforms [and] make it very difficult for ... new entrants and smaller firms to get the attention of the consumers that they’re trying to reach.”

Related: Trump Taps Simons for FTC Chair

Phillips's prepared remarks were laden with objectives from both sides of the regulatory spectrum, ranging from pro-business protections to concerns that lobbying by incumbent technology providers could shut out innovative upstarts. Citing arguments about the risks inherent in “leveling the playing field” among firms doing different things with different kinds of data makes sense, Phillips insisted.

"We do not want the regulatory burden to be so onerous that it excludes potential market entrants or inhibits innovation," he said.

But Phillips also emphasized the "brand effect" advantage that big companies have in the marketplace, because consumers "are likely to trust the companies they know." That leads to "another, more insidious, effect that any regulatory regime can have: Large companies can manipulate legal requirements to their own benefit more easily than smaller competitors or new entrants."

"The benefit to incumbents is not just lobbying for laws that favor them; it is also implementing seemingly neutral laws or regulations in ways that benefit them at the expense of their would-be competitors," Phillips added.

Phillips' focus on privacy reinforced the opening keynote that morning by David Redl, assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information, and head of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration.

"We will be looking to strike a balance between prosperity and privacy that is in line with American values – and we’re listening to a broad cross-section of stakeholders to find that balance," Redl said. 

Redl cited NTIA's plan to publish the high-level principles along with a Request for Comment in order to "begin engagement on how to move forward to reach the goals set out in the document." He did not specify a timetable for this process.

Redl also summarized NTIA's cybersecurity and ongoing Intellectual Property projects, including its triennial review process under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

Learning from Europe's GDPR

Acknowledging the kerfuffle about Europe's recently imposed General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Phillips contended that for Europeans, it represents an expression in law of their view that the protection of personal data is a fundamental right.

"For the U.S., it may provide a test case for how a different privacy regime than our own might work," the FTC commissioner continued. "My concern is that early signs point to precisely the effects on competition that I fear." 

Phillips said that as U.S. regulators consider the potential benefits of new privacy protection, "We must consider the costs, too, on competition and innovation."

"GDPR provides us with a great opportunity to see how a large-scale privacy regime works in practice, and for us in the United States to learn from Europe’s experience."

Related: Sen. Blumenthal Preps U.S. Version of EU Privacy Framework

Phillips also used the IGF-USA platform to plug the FTC's multi-day, multi-part hearings that will explore privacy and other "broad-based changes" in the economy. The FTC expects its hearings, announced last month, to consist of up to 20 sessions from September through January 2019. Topics will include evolving business practices, new technologies and international developments that "might require adjustments to competition and consumer protection enforcement law, enforcement priorities, and policy."

In announcing the comprehensive investigation, the FTC said it seeks initial input by Aug. 20 on factors such as the competitive effects of corporate acquisitions and mergers and analyses of monopsony power. It also invited comments about the role of intellectual property and competition policy in promoting innovation and implications about the use of big data, artificial intelligence and predictive analytics.

Consumer Reports magazine and its advocacy affiliate Consumers Union are ganging up this month on cable fees and bundling.

They've launched a "What's the Fee" (WTF) online assault on system operators, with Comcast as its first target. Meanwhile, the 12-page cover story, "Take Control of Cable TV," in Consumer Reports's August issue, lays out an eight-step plan for cord-cutting, or at least cord-shaving. The section includes advice on "cable replacement services," including streaming media.

The core element in the magazine report is a section on "Cable TV's Sneaky Fees," which is step one in Consumers Union's attack on extra fees that "inflate the costs" for purchases across industries ranging from utilities and airlines to entertainment and banks. The non-profit organization said a couple of weeks ago that it delivered "more than 110,000 petition signatures to Comcast ... calling on the company to address the issue" of extra fees.

In its tally of fees -- most of which CR contended should be included in the core bill -- the magazine totaled up to $71 in monthly fees, including sports surcharges, digital video recorder service, set-top boxes and "High Definition Technology" charges. In addition, cable bills include broadcast retransmission fees which, CR said, should be "baked into the advertised price."

“It’s time for Comcast and the cable industry as a whole to ditch these fees, and advertise the full price of their service so that consumers aren’t left asking ‘WTF?’ when they get their bill,” according to published reports of the comments by John Schwantes, senior policy counsel for Consumers Union.

Comcast responded, in a corporate statement to the Philadelphia Inquirer, that its "Xfinity bill was designed ... to make it simple to understand.” It insisted that “broadcast television and regional sports network fees are itemized" so that subscribers can "clearly see those costs." A company spokesman also told the local newspaper that consumers receive "a complete list of charges and fees ... as part of our sales process.”

Consumer Reports said it started its WTF campaign because complaints about cable fees are so frequent. It said that more than 25,000 of the petition signers identified Comcast as their biggest problem -- approximately reflecting the company's share of the total U.S. Multichannel Video Programming Distributor subscriber base.

The campaign and the August cover story continue a decades-long look at cable by Consumers Union and Consumer Reports. As long ago as 1987 the magazine ran a "Cable TV" cover story, focused on questions such as, "Are the service and the programming worth the money?" In 2004, Consumers Union presented to policymakers the results of a nationwide survey that found two-third of cable subscribers wanted an à la carte "option to select the channels in their plan" and 30% "would pick fewer channels even without proportionate savings." When the Senate was deliberating cable legislation in 2009, CU pushed for unbundling channels so that decisions about what to buy "would be best left to consumers themselves."

Related: Roku Hits Back at ‘Consumer Reports’

Consumer Reports, which has about six million members/subscribers, has been the name of the parent membership organization since 2012, when it reorganized and made Consumers Union its political advocacy subsidiary. Prior to then, CU was the parent non-profit, with CR the monthly magazine and buyer's guide.

The August CR articles encourage viewers to consider a move to "free" over-the-air broadcasting, and includes a list of 10 recommended TV antennas to receive that service. It lays out packages of skinny bundles and over-the-top services (e.g., Netflix, Hulu, SlingTV and DirecTV Now) that separately or collectively could shave $100 or more from a monthly cable bill. 

It also recommends that customers who want to move to a lower tier of cable TV service should "bypass regular customer service and ask to speak to a customer retention specialist" when they contact their local provider.

Another sidebar in the long report recommends "The Best Streaming Media Players." The report acknowledges that customers would still need to buy a broadband access service (probably from the cable carrier) and could be subjected to future price or packaging revisions.

The Trump administration's judicial appointments are the "flipside" of its deregulatory policymaking, and both factors are part of its effort "to get back to fundamentals," Donald F. McGahn, White House counsel and assistant to the president, explained at the Media Institute's monthly luncheon on Thursday (July 12).

"We're trying to establish core regulatory and budget" systems that have "often been ignored in rulemakings," he said, emphasizing that federal regulatory agencies have become a fourth branch of government, often building rules based on their previous rulemaking that ignore fundamental statutes.

"When agencies promulgate new rules, they must justify it on a statutory basis," he insisted.

McGahn rushed through his informal remarks, explaining that he had taken a break from the day's main task of escorting Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh around Capitol Hill to meet senators. He said that he could not refuse an invitation from Media Institute chair and Washington legal legend Richard Wiley to speak at the luncheon, but neither could he spend time taking questions from the audience of media executives.

Related: Fix the Court Presses for Kavanaugh Documents

He added that the speech was only his third such presentation since he joined the White House staff at the beginning of the Trump Administration. 

McGahn stressed that his remarks wouldn't deal with communications-related agencies, such as the FCC or FTC. Rather, he sought to explain the administration's role in the "sea change going on" at agencies and the courts.

Related: Pai, Rosenworcel Spar Over Changes to FCC's Formal Complaint Process

He characterized the effort as a process that will eliminate the ways in which agencies now both legislate and adjudicate policies. In particular, he focused on the "unfortunate" ways that agencies perpetuate policies by building on their previous decision "rather than on what Congress adopted."

Although he did not offer specific examples of such actions, McGahn stressed that "statutory activity is vital" and that policy-making should adhere to the Administrative Procedures Act, rather than a series of "dear colleague" letters and sub-procedures that skirt basic legislative practices.

"It is essential for agencies to reduce the regulatory burden," McGahn said. "Over-regulation can get in the way of economic growth."

Shifting gears slightly, McGahn sheepishly laughed that one part of this process would not sit well with his friends at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think-tank.

"Let's be honest: You need some degree of regulation," he said, recognizing a baseline but quickly adding that regulators "should make sure" that their policies make sense in the marketplace.

That where the role of federal judges will become more important to assure that agencies adhere to the statutory limits of their actions, McGahn said. Noting that, typically, "agencies look inward to the usual interest groups," he urged that regulators "must look beyond the Beltway" when they adopt policies.

McGahn promised that the administration's ongoing judicial selection process would focus on recruiting individuals who have "administrative experience," noting that the courts have "never been clear enough" on how they address the Chevron rule, which gives deference to "expert agencies" in setting regulatory policies.

"That's an area that's evolving," he  said.  

In this period of extraordinary low unemployment, the supposedly ascendant "gig economy" is not all it seems to be.

In fact, "contingent and alternative employment arrangements" have remained amazingly level during the two decades since the Labor Department's Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) began compiling statistics on temporary and contract workers, according to a new analysis of that data.

Altogether, about 22 million people work on a "gig" basis, the BLS said. The new report, issued earlier this month, found that the total number of gig workers has changed very slightly in the past 20 years. They constituted 9.9% of total U.S. employment in 1995; 10.7% in 2005 and 10.1% in 2017 (see chart). Independent contractors represented the largest group within the gig labor force: 6.7% in 1995; 7.4% in 2005 and 6.9% last year.

Although "gig" jobs are often generalized as freelance projects, or new-economy opportunities such as driving for Uber or Lyft, the BLS categories also include on-call workers or people brought in from temporary-help agencies to supplement permanent staffs or for seasonal staffing. But the BLS report conceded that the definition of gig jobs is vague, and hence its data may not accurately reflect the full labor situation.

"The concept and measurement of contingent work hinges both on the temporary nature of a job and on workers' perception of their job security," according to the BLS summary. "Some workers have been in jobs for a short time and do not expect these jobs to last. Others have been in jobs for many years yet still sense that their continued employment is tenuous."

Frustratingly, the current BLS gig jobs report does not break out industries or categories for such work; neither does it delve into whether gigs are a second source of income for people employed full-time elsewhere. The BLS said it expects to gather and reveal more data later this year about the gig job marketplace.

The BLS study has been challenged by outside analysts and other recent reports. For example, renowned analyst Mary Meeker of Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, in her 2018 "Internet Trends" report last month, predicted that the gig workforce would climb 26% this year over 2017, adding 7 million people to the gig pool.

An Edelman Intelligence analysis late last year, commissioned by Upwork and the Freelancers Union, concluded that 57.3 million Americans -- 36% of the U.S. workforce -- are freelancing.

Separately, a Treasury Department study last year, using administrative tax records, estimated that gig work represented less than 1% of the economy, but a Federal Reserve Board report put gig employment at about 30%, according to published summaries.

Predictably, millennials represent the largest pool of gig workers. Still other data showed that minority workers are a large share of the ill-defined gig workforce.

What It Means to Media/Technology Providers

Beyond the confusion about what these conflicting analyses mean, employers should be interpreting the role of gigs in both their job planning and (for media companies) their market outlook. Gig workers may be less dependable as potential customers if their chosen lifestyle keeps them on the move -- less likely to put down roots and subscribe to wired services.

Separately, as potential employees, they pose challenges for training and other requirements of "regular" workers. The category of "contractors" itself poses secondary employment factors since, for example, operators of wired and wireless systems have long relied on third parties to build and maintain infrastructure. Now those companies may also be relying on gig workers to handle or at least supplement their workforces.

The chattering class (many of us relegated to the gig world ourselves) quickly pounced on the BLS study as an indicator of either (a) the over-hype about gig jobs or (b) the looming changes in the American job scene. These observations add to the confusion about how important gig jobs will be.

Ultimately, the BLS report and its eventual update represent snapshots worth watching to identify where employees are coming from, and how to leverage the (slightly) shifting options in labor trends to match the (often) shifting needs to keep operations running.

Looking for some beach reading that's both entertaining and informative (and tax deductible since it is work-related)? Here are three new tomes that offer insights and very different perspectives into various segments of the fast-shifting world of digital media.

'Frenemies' Starts With the New Personalities of Media/Marketing

In a talk about his book Frenemies: The Epic Disruption of the Ad Business (and Everything Else), New Yorker media writer Ken Auletta cited s evidence of the rapid changes, the situation of Sir Martin Sorrell, the former chair/CEO of global ad firm WPP plc. 

Sorrell (who was in the headlines again this weekend amid new allegations of personal misconduct and misuse of company assets) told Auletta earlier this year that he would "never" retire from WPP. But he was shoved out in April, too late to change the text in the first edition of Frenemies. Auletta promised that the e-book version and future print editions will update Sorrell's status.

During the book talk at the Aspen Institute's Washington office on June 8, days after Frenemies was published, Auletta explained why his approach to the shifting advertising landscape can be seen as a leading indicator of the entire media ecosystem overhaul. He described why he chose Michael Kassan, the CEO of MediaLink and "arguably the supreme power broker in the advertising and marketing industry" as a centerpiece of Frenemies. 

Although Kassan and his company are not widely recognized outside his target turf, MediaLink's role in connecting digital media operators and marketers has made a major dent in the traditional ad agency role. Hence the title conveys the urgency for all players to find ways to work together in the shifting relationships among collaborators (friends) or competitors (enemies).

As Auletta attests in the book's introduction, Frenemies "is populated by characters who represent the points of tension within this world." He describes them as "passionate and creative people" operating in "a world roiled by anxiety."

The "mad men" of advertising lore have been replaced by "math men" working in a world of artificial intelligence, algorithms and big data, which raisex questions about whether the "science of advertising can replace the art," he said.

In a chapter entitled "Good-Bye Advertising Axioms," Auletta plunges into ways in which President Trump has "injected more uncertainty into the marketing and media industry," beyond tax breaks for ad expenses, fake news and merger approvals. He summarizes the net neutrality imbroglio, but focuses on the "existential threats" that digital giants such as Facebook and Google, as well as mobile phones, can wreak on the traditional marketing and the new e-commerce juggernaut.

Frenemies makes just a single reference to Comcast (in a riff about the personal data collected and stored by set-top boxes and other technology) and spends only a few pages on cable TV in general, mostly about broadcasters' reliance on retransmission-consent fees. But its overarching messages emphasizes how the quickly evolving media landscape is forcing every company to examine the way it operates.

Recommendation: Detailed, gossipy, thorough. Perceptive insights into the new world of advertising, but no specific predictions about what the future looks like. You just know there will be changes and now you know more of the major players.

'Broad Band' Continues the 'Hidden Figures' Story 

Despite its cheeky, saucy title, "Broad Band" by Claire Evans doesn't say much about broadband. It does, however, fulfill its subtitle: "The Untold Story of the Women Who Made the Internet," and is particularly strong about the role women have played throughout the computer age. 

 Although far from a feminist manifesto, Evans' introduction emphatically announces that, "This is a book about women" and declares its intent to show how "Women built empires in the dot-com era." Evans (a VICE reporter, tech journalist and Yacht lead singer) reminds us that the women she profiles are "some of the brightest programmers and engineers in the history of the medium."

After a thorough chronicle of early women in tech (such as the "computers" in the book-turned-movie Hidden Figures about the vital, unseen NASA human calculators), Evans gets into the online world about halfway through the book. 

 Her "Communities" chapter starts with the earliest online services, featuring profiles of early developers such as Stacy Horn, who created "ECHO" (East Coast Hang-Out) in the 1980s as a "place to flirt, gossip and argue" about literature, film, culture and sex. It was fundamentally a New York-based bulletin board system that used the methods of California's emerging BBS's. Significantly, when she created ECHO, Horn was a student at New York University's legendary Interactive Telecommunications Program. ITP was part laboratory/part think tank - and a notable breeding ground (under long-time director Red Burns) for cable, video and other projects. Evans dives deeply into Horn's efforts to bring women online.

"At the time...., the entire Internet was only about 10 to 15 percent female," she wrote, "but women made up nearly half of ECHO's user base." Horn's process for building a system, which still exists as a BBS hence not a web service, is an inspiring lesson in how to be an early Information Superhighway player and maintain a role for three decades.

Chapters profile the founders of Women's WIRE, women.com and other online sites. Examples include familiar cable industry names who delved into the online sector such as Geraldine Laybourne, "a television executive [who] announced Oxygen Media, a cable channel with an accompanying web presence" in 1998, and Candice Carpenter, a "scandalously interesting" media executive who parlayed relationships into iVillage, which expanded its online reach into TV.

There are lengthy descriptions of "girl gamers," electronic Hollywood and other ventures in which women pioneers jumped into the XY-chromosome dominated industry. Evans concludes with recommendations that female digital venturers should not accept "the prevailing myths .... [about] alpha nerds and brogrammers," and that they should "learn all the strategies ... from our forebears."

Recommendation: A valuable history lesson and pep talk about successful women in the digital industries, albeit with nary a mention of the current bold-face executive names such as Sheryl Sandberg (Facebook), Marissa Mayer (formerly Yahoo!) or Susan Wojcicki (YouTube). It's loaded with tactics and examples for technology management, albeit not specifically (or even substantially) about the communications operations sector.

'Media 2.0(18)' Updates Game Plan for Suppliers 

Media 2.0(18) begins with author Peter Csathy's lofty promise that this book offers "an Insiders' Guide to Today's Digital Media World and Where It's Going."

Csathy not only fulfills his objective, but also provides specific assessments of the current dominant companies and offers recommendations on how to work with them. 

The new edition, which updates last year's Media 2.0(17), focuses on over-the-top and on-demand ventures in the video and music sectors. Csathy expanded his insights into emerging categories, such as virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR) and eSports plus extensive analyses of artificial intelligence and blockchain technology, focusing on how they will transform the media business. (Csathy said significantly, but it may take a while.)

Csathy -- who is founder/chair of CREATV Media, a Los Angeles business development and investment firm, and has been a senior executive at Universal Studios and New Line Cinema -- includes updated profiles of big and small companies in each category of content creation and delivery. Not only do we get his views on the OTT concepts at Netflix, Disney, HBO and traditional media companies, but we see how social media, games and music are transforming the new environment.

The book strongly advises media companies to accelerate their efforts to establish pertinent ways to use AR, VR and MR. "Stakes are high....[and] the VR market opportunity is even higher," Csathy wrote, although he acknowledged that AR will see widespread market presence much sooner than VR.

The book concludes with "10 lessons" about success in the digital ecosystem. Csathy cited the need to collect and use pertinent data and the requirement to recognize that "we now live in a multiplatform world" that includes mobile delivery and social media applications.

Recommendation: A detailed industry status overview, which pushes the urgency for decision-making. The corporate profiles are valuable, and they build to Csathy's final word of encouragement that successful companies must act, not merely react, to the new competitive forces.

The Association of National Advertisers will acquire the Data & Marketing Association (formerly the Direct Marketing Association), forming a coalitionthat, thanks to other recent mergers within both organizations, will create a powerhouse lobbying organization with deep interests in privacy and data security as well as advertising taxes and other media issues.

The merger expected to be completed by July 1. Financial details were not disclosed, although published reports suggested a "fire sale" price as DMA has seen declining revenue and membership in recent years.

One topic that is not on the merged group's agenda right now is net neutrality. Although some ANA members have questioned the FCC's rollback of net neutrality rules, neither ANA nor DMA "has taken a stance on net neutrality," Daniel Jaffe, group executive vice president for government relations at ANA's Washington office, told Multichannel News.

ANA's members include Comcast Cable, Charter Communications, Cox Communications, AT&T, Verizon, the National Football League, Time Warner and many other media and telecommunications organizations. DMA's members include Google, Facebook and Twitter. eBay is among the companies that are members of both organizations.

Jaffe added that the ANA-DMA combination will "substantially increase the reach of both groups" in areas involving privacy and data security.

"We have always believed that the Federal Trade Commission should have the primary jurisdiction over privacy," Jaffe said, citing a major policy concern of both groups.

The merger, announced May 31, will create the largest advertising/marketing trade group in the U.S. Its combined membership will include 2,000 corporations representing 20,000 brands and engaging 150,000 industry professionals, including major national advertisers, ad agencies, media operators, law firms. ad tech firms and technical consultancies.

ANA CEO Bob Liodice, who has headed the organization since 2003, will remain as the merged group's top officer. DMA will become an ANA division to be headed by DMA CEO Tom Benton. The combined leadership team will "focus on identifying and implementing data-driven initiatives to advance the industry and drive growth," the companies said.

Among the benefits of the merger that Liodice and Benton cited is "advancing the development of new technology platforms to energize brand and business building efforts in the marketing ecosystem."

Their emphasis on that topic underscores the growing significance of digital, targeted advertising in the overall marketing environment.

The ANA-DMA alliance is the latest step in the ongoing integration (some may say fight for survival) of specialized lobbying entities in the marketing category.

ANA, founded in 1910, has in recent years acquired the Word of Mouth Marketing Association (WOMMA), the Business Marketing Association (exclusively B2B members) and the Brand Activation Association.

DMA, established in 1917, has changed its name several times in recent decades, reflecting the shift toward digital marketing. In the 1970s it was known as the Direct Mail and Marketing Association, changing its name to Direct Marketing Association 1n 1983 and then to Data + Marketing Association in late 2016.

Feeling lonely without a National Cable Show to attend about this time of year?

Check into the "Cable Old Timers" page on Facebook, and you'll see familiar faces and convention memories without the bother of sales pitches, new product frenzy, sore feet or frazzling flights.

This online adventure in nostalgia has attracted nearly 3,000 members in the few weeks since it went sort-of-viral, said Mark Solow, who set up the page several years ago but "never did anything with it."

In late April, he and other cable veterans in the Dallas area attended the funeral of "Cable Pioneer extraordinaire Tom Soulsby" (as Solow calls the late executive from Sammons and other cable systems and a former Texas Cable TV Association president). Some friends suggested that Solow revive an old local event -- a periodic lunch of Dallas-Fort Worth cable TV personnel.

Instead, Solow went home and "stayed up until 2 in the morning" making a list of about 80 local people to join his moribund Facebook page called "Cable Old Timers."

"When I woke up the next morning, there were 200 people, and within two days, it was more than 1,000," said Solow, whose day job is vice president of Uplifttv. People invited other old colleagues, and the network effect kicked in as friends invited more friends. Within days, people from all over the country were in the group, with many listing their cable career stops and posting pictures from old conventions and their favorite keepsake souvenirs.

READ MORE:Fifty Years of Cable Camaraderie | Big Names Head 50th Class of Cable TV Pioneers | Cable Pioneers: 50 Facts for 50 Years | The Legend of 'Cable TV Pioneer' George Spelvin

One of Solow's original requirements to join the private group was that "part of your cable career was in DFW," but he has since thrown it open to people who have 20-plus years of cable experience. Anyone meeting that criterion can ask to join the group. (Disclosure: I have resurrected a few photos from the 1970s and '80s and have invited a few geezers to join the memory-fest.)

Meaningful Careers

Cable Old Timers include a mix of operations, programming and technical/engineer experience. Many of the participants focus on the importance of cable in their lives, often citing -- with substantial passion -- how great it felt to be part of a growing business in the '70s and '80s.

In the typical, telescoped Facebook fashion of older users, they reminisce about important memories, such as:

"Cable was very exciting at that time, and I was lucky to be a part of it."

"Many friends along the way became my cable family, a wonderful career."

"Great seeing everyone else’s amazing achievements within this group!"

"I couldn’t have picked a better career... 39 years, 2 months and 27 days... the greatest times, memories and people."

"@Home, RoadRunner and HSA [High Speed Access Corp.] among others...changed the world: Broadband for the better."

"This industry's people are Awesome."

"I've made so many friends made through the years. ...I have evolved with the industry. ... I have been blessed knowing you!"

"Great career; always loved the business. Miss the people."

There is extensive photo sharing, including lots of pictures of people with '80s big hair and rakish mustaches. Many participants reminisce over memories of their entry into the cable business, drop names of influential industry executives and laud colleagues and mentors; they offer memorials to those who have died. Some of the entries offer history lessons, such as this:

"Jerrold was one of the largest MSOs ... until the operators and owners put their foot down and told the manufacturers to stop getting franchises and to just make equipment."

And there are countless references to early career stops, including long-defunct operators and networks, ranging from Teleprompter Cable, Jones Intercable and Group W Cable to Z Channel, Satellite News Channel and Graff Pay Per View, among many others.

Several participants have encouraged others to chronicle their first cable jobs, which generated an avalanche of memories and confessions:

• Installer making $4.25 per hour
• Sold cable door-to-door while in college
• Strand-mapping
• Learned how to climb poles 

Inevitably, amid all the photos from decades of NCTA conventions, Western Shows and state association conferences, many participants have called for some kind of mass reunion.

Jana Henthorn, president/CEO of The Cable Center, quickly responded.

"I've got just the place. ... We're in Denver and accessible to both coasts," she posted. "Plus, that's what the Center is here for! To be a gathering place for the cable industry. I'd love to see all my cable peeps!"

Related: Jana Henthorn Named WICT Rocky Mountain’s ‘Woman of the Year’

No concrete plans have emerged, but Solow said that he's still amazed at the intense involvement.

"I wasn't trying to do that," he told me. "I was trying to use Facebook like I do with my bicycling group," for keeping local friends in touch about local activities.

He isn't predicting what will happen next, although if the typical social media faddish cycle plays out, the current enthusiastic banter on Cable Old Timers will eventually peter out. It may be sustained by some new members, albeit the growth has diminished in the past week.

Nonetheless, the frenzy of activity underscored the enthusiasm of cable old timers -- and (since many seem to be retired) gave them something to do at this time of year when they thought they should be attending an industry convention.

A new Parks Associates study that found 27% of pay TV homes say "sports programming is the primary reason" they subscribe comes at a time when sports content is preparing for a distribution overhaul.

Parks' figures fall toward the high end of the long-held range of households that watch televised sports on a regular basis -- about 15% to 30%, depending on which research study you believe. Subscribers' appetite for sports may be encouraging to cable executives -- for now.

Operators have often cited the modest viewing levels to fend off high-priced sports packages, although as the Parks study affirmed, devoted sports fans buy whatever it takes to see their preferred programming. And that's where the looming appeal of streaming enters the picture.

Brett Sappington, Parks' senior director of research, cited the shifting trends in sports carriage.

"While broadcast and pay TV remain key sources for live sports, OTT streaming options have become an important part of the live sports landscape," Sappington said. "Increasingly, leagues and networks are offering direct-to-consumer options. These services offer access to content that would otherwise not be broadcast and subscription options to those not subscribing to pay TV."

He pointed out that CBS and ESPN recently launched their own streaming services for sports content, and noted that these services will "both compete with and complement major services such as WWE Network and MLB.TV."

Related: CBS Sports HQ Service Hits the OTT Field | One Small Step for ESPN+

Sappington predicted that "over time, pay TV providers will likely partner with these types of services in order to round out their existing channel packages."

Migration Already Underway

One indicator of the shift to different platforms is the paucity of baseball games on over-the-air broadcast channels -- making it impossible for fans, for example, in Washington, D.C., to see games of the nearby Baltimore Orioles or for Los Angeles viewers to see any games without a pay TV subscription.

This year, only 199 Major League Baseball games will air on broadcast channels, compared with 338 games in 2013, according to data compiled by John Mansell, an independent sports business analyst. That means only 4.3% of local games appear on OTA TV; five years ago it was 7.3% of games. Mansell's data show that regional cable sports networks are carrying 4,420 baseball games this year compared with 4,270 games five years ago.

Just as broadcast TV -- once a staple of local sports fans -- has shifted to cable, there are many indicators of sports' looming move to streaming platforms. But that move is not without challenges.

"What's happened now for cable is extremely predictable," said a former sports network executive who requested anonymity. 

"If technology takes us to streaming, then the programs will go there," he added, calling it "the evolution of the economics."

"If streaming becomes the way we consume media, then the rights will go there," he said.

Viewing habits are changing, especially among millennials, who are already a problematic audience for sports producers and distributors. The leagues and some individual teams that control media rights to games are looking deeply at streaming options. In some cases, the streaming rights (for now) are bundled with cable rights, although that connection is likely to be a major negotiating point in future contacts, according to lawyers who are involved with the process.

Major League Baseball's emergence as a leading streaming technology provider (using tech it developed for its own MLB Network) is an indicator of the emphasis that sports producers are placing on the potential of that distribution platform, which eliminates the middleman (conventional networks).

Amazon last month nabbed the U.S. Open Tennis championship streaming telecasts in the United Kingdom for the next five years, a deal which analysts believe is the opening volley in Amazon's next wave of sports deals. Amazon's package will include live coverage plus on-demand highlights and other enhanced features.

Related: Greenfield Says Amazon Poised to be Most Disruptive Tech Giant

Social media platforms are also accelerating their sports programming line-ups. For example, Twitter recently unveiled plans with Disney's ESPN to create live sports programming and other content, including carriage of SportsCenter Live, with viewer participation. Twitter will also live-steam ESPN's fantasy sports podcast.

Related: 'SportsCenter' Expanding on ESPN’s New App

Facebook began live-streaming baseball games on its MLB Live page in March, carrying about one game per week. Although usage data so far is not available, a report this week indicated that latency glitches have annoyed viewers: 34% would cancel a service if they encountered such technical problems, the study found.

Twitter recently published its own research to show advertisers that the social media platform "makes live sporting events more engaging and memorable." The study emphasized fans' experience during live events when they use Twitter "as their second — and primary — screen to learn what’s happening in real time." 

The study, which used comScore data, showed an average 4.1% lift in unique visitors during sportscasts, and the "difference is even more pronounced with tentpole sports events" such as the Super Bowl or other championship games.

Judges on the Copyright Royalty Board completed their periodic hearings this week in anticipation of their upcoming allocation to program suppliers of the copyright license fees paid by cable and satellite operators. 

Just prior to the review, the latest figures (as of March 31) on annual deposits appeared, showing that cable operators paid about $203.5 million in license fees in 2017, down 0.61% from the previous year, which was 5.31% lower than in 2015.

The Copyright Royalty Board determines the distribution of statutory license royalties collected by the U.S. Copyright Office of the Library of Congress.   

Overall, fees are down about 15% from the peak in 2014. The start of the diminishing license fees, in part, was attributed to the WGN's shift in 2015 from a Superstation to WGN America, which unlike its predecessor WGN-TV, doesn't carry sports or syndicated programming subject to license payments.

The hearings that concluded this week played out over the course of several months, the first time in nearly a decade that the Board (formerly known as the Copyright Royalty Tribunal) has thoroughly evaluated the allocation process. This year it focused on how operators "value" the programming they carry that is subject to a compulsory license. In particular, they looked at whether the time devoted to a program or the popularity/audience size should affect the value.

The Board also looked at receipts from satellite carriers, which have dropped even more precipitously - a steady decline in year-to-year receipts since 2011:

Multichannel News obtained the latest unaudited data (and hence "not for public release") from a copyright expert who asked for anonymity. About one-third of the license fees represent payment to sports rights holders, the expert said.

The Copyright Office also tracks "DART" (Digital Audio Recording Devices and Media) receipts from "parties who manufacture and distribute or import and distribute any digital audio recording devices or media," as established in the 1992 Audio Home Recording Act. Payments in this category, which does not involve streaming media, have also fallen dramatically in recent years: just $4,829.83 last year, off 38.13% from 2016, which was down nearly 95% from 2015. At its peak in 2000, the category generated about $5.3 million in licensing fees, and it has been in steady decline (except for a couple upticks) ever since.

The swings in cable license fees are a legacy of 1976 rules on cable retransmission, which included a provision that cable operators had to pay for at least one distant signal equivalent (DSE).

According to the Copyright Royalty Board's summary, the cable industry has paid about $5.8 billion in license fees in the 40 years since the rules have been in effect. The $1.8 billion paid by the satellite industry since 1988 (when its rules took shape) reflects the fact that satellite regulation did not include a compulsory license to require DBS to carry distant signals.

This week's Copyright Royalty Board proceeding involves payments made by cable companies from 2010 to 2103. Although partial distributions have been made annually, about $355 million from those years has not yet been allocated, which is what the Board is now determining.

Copyright analysts contend that the Board's judges have never established a formula to gauge criteria for allocating funds based on factors such as the amount of airtime or the size of audience for programs subject to the fees. 

 Since 1978, a continuing argument presented to the arbitration panel has been, "What is the value to cable operators, and how do you show the value of a compulsory license?" Over the 40 year period, the judges have tried to find a way to determine who cable operators "value" the programming, whether it is a long (three-hour) sports event or a highly viewed, but short, syndicated show.

As an example, sports programming occupies only a small percentage of total programming hours, but it generates relatively high viewership.

The Board will dole out funds to several established categories of program suppliers, including movies, sports, commercial TV, religious TV, public broadcasting and Canadian TV suppliers. The Board faces a June 30 deadline for concluding this allocation phase, after which financial distributions will be made.

Cyber-attacks on "critical infrastructure" and theft or espionage involving commercial intellectual property remain the top concerns of the global cybersecurity community, Robert L. Strayer, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Cyber and International Communications and Information Policy at the U.S. Department of State said Thursday (April 19).

In remarks at the Media Institute's monthly luncheon in Washington, Strayer emphasized, "No business is unaffected by cybertheft" and warned that "we will continue to see threats to the digital ecosystem."   

Strayer declined, when asked by MCN, to specify media or telecom operators, including cable TV, as part of the "critical infrastructure." But he acknowledged that the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and other federal agencies are constantly examining ways to foil "bad actors" who could disrupt or hack into the operations of American companies.

He said U.S. and global partners "have to think of all the misuses" of cyber systems. He emphasized the growing role of the digital economy and noted that international groups such as the G7 and G20 nations "are increasingly looking at technology issues" such as blockchain, that are affecting traditional global systems.

"As we look around the world, we want to assure an open flow of data," Strayer said, but at the same time "it is absolutely critical to preserve a decentralized model." He emphasized that many countries want to regulate the internet, but that U.S. policy will continue to "push back against that." 

Strayer acknowledged that in the U .S. and most democracies, the digital infrastructure is in the hands of the private sector.

"We should not expect companies to operate in cyberspace any differently" than they do in conventional environments, Strayer said, but he warned that the task - including public/private collaboration - may be very challenging.

New cybersecurity standards will be "voluntary," he said, adding that "industry is driving the solution." He cited the need "to achieve maximum economic value" as companies battle cyberattacks.

Strayer cited Europe's "General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)" that goes into effect on May 25, restricting many ecommerce and digital media practices in an effort to assure consumer privacy. He did not offer an opinion about whether such restraints may eventually emerge in the U.S., especially amid the current furor over activities at Facebook, Google and other companies that collect personal data.

He focused, instead, on ways that federal enforcement agencies are developing systems "to improve our defenses" and create a "cyber-posture" to fight cybercrimes. He said that systems are now "so interconnected that these threats can race around the world" almost instantly.

To battle such scourges, Strayer explained that the State Department and other U.S. agencies have about 150 "digital economy officers" at embassies and other locations worldwide to identify potential cybercrimes and to development enforcement tactics, often in collaboration with host countries.

Strayer also cited forecasts that estimate about 200,000 people will be needed to handle America's cybersecurity requirements in the coming years - a significant job creation stimulant.

Maybe it's the onslaught of Comcast X1 ads for voice-activated remote controls. Perhaps it's the success of this week's hit movie "The Quiet Zone" about a world where people must remain as silent as possible, communicating non-verbally. Possibly it's the general malaise about thought control. Or maybe it's because I've seen so many prototypes of "telepathy" projects that convert brainwaves into actions.

Whatever the reason, this week's announcement from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Medi Lab about "Alter Ego," a "wearable, personal silent speech interface," seemed well-timed.

This short video demonstrates how it could be used, and includes an example of cross-platform video navigation. When the viewer decides which channel to watch, he thinks (actually sub-vocalizes) the word "Select," and that video feed appears on the screen. The developers call it an "intelligence-augmentation (IA) device” and foresee applications in Internet of Things and other human-machine situations.

Brain-controlled devices have been around for years, and not just in science fiction. At trade shows, I've tried on funny-looking devices, such as the neuroheadset from Emotiv, a San Francisco bio-informatics and technology company. In a related vein, at an NCTA convention a few years ago, Affectiva, an emotion-measurement technology firm (that also grew out of the MIT Media Lab) demonstrated its technology to recognize human emotions via physiological responses. Although it relied solely on brainwaves, the system was promoted for its value in gauging viewers' responses to what they were watching - sort of emotional ratings.

Back to Alter Ego: The 11-page technical paper describing it, delivered recently at the 23rd International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, explains how a viewer's thoughts "using natural language, without discernible muscle movements and without any voice" can communicate into a computing devices, such as a video monitor.

The project, from the MIT Media Lab's "Fluid Interfaces" group, involves a device which recognizes words as you silently speak them. The paper's authors, Arnav Kapur, Shreyas Kapur and Pattie Maes, explain how the aural output (bone conduction headphones) allows you to conduct a bi-directional conversation with a computing device. They describe how the system captures neuromuscular signals from the surface of the user's skin; hence unlike other proposed brain/computer interfaces (BCIs), it does not have access to private information or thoughts. They said that in their current research, the system has a 92% median word accuracy level.

In addition to controlling a TV set and other potential entertainment devices, MIT's video shows a student shopping in a store (adding up the prices on a shopping list), playing games (video and board games) and interacting with other humans on campus. The authors explains that silent speech interfaces with telecommunications devices, speech-based smart assistants and social robots eliminates the stigma - i.e., weirdness - of talking aloud to a machine or allowing others to overhear what you're saying.

The video also shows that the current version of the "headset" involves a large - let's admit it: dorky - contraption that fits over the ear and runs down the cheek and onto the chin. Peripheral devices such as lapel cameras and smart-glasses could directly communicate with the device and provide contextual information.

Over the decades, I've been on the MIT campus and seen students (like the one in this video) walking around wearing or using futuristic gear (predecessors of Google glass and wireless communicators). Although first attempts don't always lead to actual, mass products, Alter Ego exemplifies the early-stage thought process for evolving technologies.

As the authors explain in their paper, "We seek to ... couple human and machine intelligence in a complementary symbiosis."

"As smart machines work in close unison with humans, through such platforms, we anticipate the progress in machine intelligence research to complement intelligence augmentation efforts," they conclude, "which would lead to an eventual convergence - to augment humans in wide variety of everyday tasks, ranging from computations to creativity to leisure."

For system developers, their final message is particularly relevant: "We envision that the usage of our device will interweave human and machine intelligence to enable a more natural human-machine symbiosis that extends and augments human intelligence and capability in everyday lives."

That's worth thinking about for a minute - preferably sub-vocally.

Although the U.S. ranks No. 1 in 10 of the 38 categories in a new global "Net Vitality" study, American broadband systems often fall into the middle range in many factors when compared with those in other countries, according to the report, which the Telecommunications Research and Policy Institute unveiled on Wednesday (March 7).

Nonetheless, the "Net Vitality 2.0" report puts the U.S. among the five top-tier countries for global broadband internet ecosystem leaders; but that ranking is based on factors beyond actual Internet operations.

The new study updates a 2015 report. Both reports were intended to help policymakers develop appropriate rules to encourage broadband expansion, according to the reports' author, Stuart Brotman, a University of Tennessee professor and long-time policy official.

The U.S. and United Kingdom made the Top Five in both the 2015 and the new Net Vitality reports, but this year China, Germany and Canada have replaced South Korea, Japan and France as leading broadband Internet ecosystem countries. Brotman said he believes that Australia and Singapore are candidates for a future Top Five list, "thanks to their innovation and competitiveness."

The five leading countries for Broadband Communications Infrastructure are South Korea, Denmark, Ireland, Iceland and the Netherlands. The U.S. is #18, according to the new study. As for Broadband Access and Affordability, the top five are South Korea, Denmark, Finland, Estonia and Norway; again the U.S. is #18. In Average Fixed Broadband Connection Speed, the top five are South Korea, Norway, Sweden, China and Switzerland, with the U.S. coming in at #13.

U.S. systems rank highly in Internet "market attractiveness," "technology efficiency" and IPv6 adoption, according to the report (see chart). In key categories such as Fixed Broadband Subscriptions per 100 inhabitants, the U.S. ranks 24th, well behind relatively small countries such as Monaco, Switzerland and Denmark (ranked 1-2-3) , but also below France, South Korea, Germany, U.K., Canada and China.

The U.S. also scores poorly in categories such as "inherent cyber risk" (#41) and "information and communications technology development" (#27).

The study found that all of the most widely used personal computer operating systems and the top web browsers (Apple Safari, Google Chrome, Microsoft Internet Explorer) originated in the U.S.

Policymaking Tool
As a former National Telecommunications and Information Administration official, a telecom policy advisor to the U.S. State Department and veteran academic (with relationships at Harvard, Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Stanford), Brotman insists that one value of the comparative analysis is to put broadband and Internet policies into a global matrix.

He contends that the widespread reliance on using service and operations data to compare broadband deployment in different countries "has become too narrowly focused on raising these metrics nationally." Calling such comparative analytic approaches "flawed," he said mixing and matching data that measure different things, such as advertised versus actual broadband network speeds, leads to faulty conclusions.

Against that problematic background, Brotman said he believes that the Net Vitality analysis is a more pertinent document because it uses "more timely, reliable, and comprehensive data reflecting the broadband Internet ecosystem, along with relevant macroeconomic forces that help shape it," such as eCommerce and eGovernment utilization.

In many countries, the regulatory structure provides "too narrow a foundation for Net Vitality," Brotman said. "Rather, the Wide Open Internet is what the United States and other countries around the world should be trying to achieve." He characterized "the Wide Open Internet" as one that "encompasses the broader goal of an efficient ubiquitous broadband Internet ecosystem with virtually unlimited applications and content available on multiple devices."

The new analysis is based on data from the United Nations (including the International Telecommunications Union,) the World Economic Forum, the World Wide Web Foundation plus academic and corporate research. It includes material on more than 130 countries, although not every nation has been ranked in every category.

Brotman characterizes the five leading countries as sharing "one commonality: they have benefitted the most when government challenges companies to raise their aspirations, increase the pace of innovation, and expand the scale of investments.”

Speaking alongside other panelists at a Capitol Hill luncheon briefing earlier this month, Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) reiterated his concern that IoT stands for "Internet of Threats."

Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) insisted that consumers should know a so-called smart device can be hacked after they install it at home, but that government protections should have a "very light touch."

Chris Calabrese, VP-policy at the Center for Democracy and Technology, emphasized that the approval seal proposed in the Markey-Lieu Cyber Shield legislation is merely a way "to figure out if we can trust these devices."

And they all acknowledged that any such law will have to be dynamic because of the rapidly changing factors in the Internet of Things.

Shane Tewes, a visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, organized and moderated the "Securing the Internet of Things" seminar Feb. 14. She characterized it as a good way "to get people's attention" even though some parties "are not going to be happy about it." In particular, she told Multichannel News after the event, manufacturers "don't want to put this in a box and get sued."

"You have to find the middle ground," Tewes said, adding quickly that AEI is not endorsing the legislation, but rather acknowledging that "something is going to happen" and the group doesn't want to "shy away" from the process.

Although it was unusual for a right-leaning think-tank such as AEI to showcase legislation by two liberal Democrats, the event hit a topic of interest to cable operators and other carriers as well as equipment makers -- all of whom are concerned about the assigned liability if home IoT devices are hacked. Markey is a member of the Senate Commerce Committee and its subcommittees handling communications and consumer protection. Lieu sits on the House Judiciary Committee. They introduced the Cyber Shield Act of 2017 (S.2020 and H.R.4163) in October.

Their proposal calls for a voluntary cybersecurity program for the Internet of Things, with input from a public/industry/academic advisory committee; one objective is to create product labels (physical or digital) that identify IoT devices that meet strong cybersecurity standards. The seal would show consumers that devices -- ranging from baby monitors to phones, laptops and other networked items -- are safe from intrusions. The voluntary self-certification program in the legislation would put the program into the Department of Commerce, also home of the National Institute of Standards and Technology and the National Telecommunications and Information Administration.

Dangers and Dynamic Solutions
Markey, in his opening remarks at the AEI session, warned, "We're here to talk about the sinister side of cyberspace: the harm that can be inflicted."

He emphasized that every IoT device is "something that can be compromised ... in ways that people don't think about but they should." He said the Cyber Shield "seal" would "enable consumers to make informed decisions" when they buy and install devices on a home network and "reward businesses that offer best practices." In the process, the legislation would "create a roadmap of improvements for manufacturers and their devices," Markey added.

Lieu concentrated on the "living, breathing process which would change over time as tech continues to change."

"The reason we're not very specific in this statute is [because] when it comes to technology, government should have a very light touch," Lieu added, emphasizing his expectation that that industry will "self-regulate." He explained that the voluntary program established by the proposed legislation would rely on a commission of diverse experts to set standards.

Industry-wide self-regulating standards, however, became the first matter addressed during a follow-on panel.

"We haven't seen a lot of coordination behind the standard," said CDT's Calabrese. "A lot of private entities have tried to put out standards, and the result has been a jumble."

Nonetheless, he agreed that certification of some sort is valuable "to figure out if we can trust these devices." He cited the recent BITAG report on technical aspects of IoT security and privacy as a model for such cross-industry collaboration. (The Broadband Internet Technical Advisory Group's members include Comcast, Charter, AT&T, Dish Network, Cisco, CableLabs, NCTA and Level 3.)

Rena Mears, head of consulting at DLA Piper law firm, pointed to the role of communications companies as devices are added to home networks.

"The level of data sharing is immense and going to get bigger," she said. "The risk with IoT is that each individual product is so small ... but taken together, it is immense." That will lead to "supply chain issues" which will put the burden "back to industry," Mears added.

"Even in an organized system, it's hard to find where the vulnerability or breach is," she said, stressing that liability "sits thick and heavy" in complex networks, such as IoT relationships.

"When I look at a home that has become a platform, and I look at the immense possibilities for IoT," Mears said, she envisions both values and dangers.

She called the ecosystem for IoT liabilities "just mind-boggling."

"There will have to be some set of rules that apply at some broader level rather than the traditional way of [managing] every little piece," Mears said.

Robert Stein, VP-government and regulatory affairs at InterDigital, a research and development company that provides wireless technologies for mobile devices, networks and services, acknowledged that, "We haven't thought that far ahead about who oversees" the integration of IoT connections.

The panel agreed that the Cyber Shield legislation is forcing the industry to examine specifics about digital security. Beyond the integrated role for carriers and hardware providers, there are "complicated realities" such as locked passwords. If a manufacturer installs a digital lock that a consumer cannot update, they wondered how it would affect the future interoperability with other home devices -- especially if a device is compromised or discarded.

The discussion echoed an early remark by Calabrese, who characterized the proposed legislation as an interim measure.

"No one should mistake it for a solution," he said.

Pictured (from left): Chris Calabrese, Rena Mears and Robert Stein, panelists at AEI's IoT security briefing Feb. 14.

Establishing an integrated first-responder communications system is all about the details, not just the big picture overview and goals.

That reality became obvious as Michael Poth, CEO of The First Responder Network Authority (FirstNet), explained the agency's objectives to a Media Institute monthly luncheon in Washington on Feb 15.

Poth (pictured) cited "improved situational awareness" as a keystone of the FirstNet project, but also acknowledged that the near-term requirement is "getting technology to first responders using the technology that now exists."

"Our biggest concern is that it [the FirstNet system] gets built out and the technology gets into the hands of first responders," Poth said. His short presentation listed the value of a nationwide, uniform, interconnected service to assure that police, fire, emergency medical crews and military units are congruently aware of situations they are resolving. FirstNet is a nationwide public safety broadband network for local, state, regional, tribal, and federal first responders.

After describing the 25-year agreement that FirstNet contracted with AT&T last March, Poth issued what he called "an appeal to all" in the audience -- mostly media and telecom lawyers and lobbyists. He pointed out that there are more than 60,000 public service agencies in the U.S., with historically fragmented communications capabilities. Congress established FirstNet after the 9/11 attacks as an independent authority within the Commerce Department's National Telecommunications and Information Administration.

"We have to push our organizations to solve these problems" of interconnection, Poth said. He emphasized that AT&T has committed $40 billion over the next 25 years to manage and operate the network.

Poth also acknowledged the value of "integrating the core AT&T network with other facilities," such as public TV spectrum after a public television executive in the audience pointed out that public TV stations have committed 1 MHz to public safety service.

Poth also offered an overview -- but no details -- about the equipment that will be used by local first responders, saying merely that the scale of the project will encourage hardware suppliers to enter the market. He cited collaboration with 24 other countries that are also expanding their emergency service networks, thus adding to the global opportunities for hardware suppliers.

Poth cited the value of an integrated First Response system for situations such as the recent California wildfires, where firefighters from dozens of distant jurisdictions converged at the fire sites, but brought their own non-compatible equipment. He said that a top FirstNet objective -- as part of the AT&T agreement -- is to assure that such problems are eliminated. He did not offer a timetable.

In December, AT&T announced that all 50 states plus the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico have opted into FirstNet. In exchange for managing the project, AT&T will get 20 MHz of wireless spectrum plus $6.5 billion to build the initial network. Poth explained that AT&T will be able to use the spectrum at times when it is not needed for emergency communications. AT&T has said it expects its invest up to $40 billion in the network during the coming 25 years.

Congressional action to update the Telecommunications Act will be incremental, according to Rep. Greg Walden (R-Ore.), chair of the House Energy & Commerce Committee.

"We're looking at it piece by piece," Walden said at the 2018 State of the Net conference on Monday, Jan. 29. He added that Congress also "needs to look at the FCC operation" overall, acknowledging that "we live in a different era" than when the 1996 Telecom law was enacted. Walden said he expects a "program-by-program" evaluation, but did not suggest any timetable or urgency for the review.

More From SOTN: Rosenworcel Seeks Wider Investigation of Fake Comments

Walden's outlook on piecemeal telecom reform legislation echoes the view of his Senate counterpart Sen. John Thune, chairman of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee. At the SOTN conference last year, Thune also avoided any expectation that an omnibus revision of the Telecommunications Act is likely.

Walden also addressed net neutrality and broadcast spectrum issues in his remarks. He blamed the FCC's 2015 Open Internet ruling for creating an unnecessary barrier, but stopped short of promising any Congressional lawmaking on the topic either, as others have suggested.

"We ought to be able to find common ground to prevent bad behavior," such as paid prioritization, Walden said. But he contended that the issues are "not fully understood," saying, "We need to get certainty on what will drive more investment."

Related: Walden Says House E&C Will Hold Hearing on Paid Prioritization

Walden said he believes that lawsuits about the issue "will force America further back" in Internet development. He did promise that his committee will hold hearings on the topic, but did not specify a schedule.

In addition to his vow to find more money for the broadcast channel repack, required after last year's incentive spectrum auction, Walden vowed "a continuing effort to find more spectrum" and indicated that he expects that the FCC will "proceed with more spectrum auctions."

Related | broadcastingcable.com: Walden Says $3B Needed for Auction Repack

Asked about white space uses in the broadcast spectrum, Walden said he'd like to "maximize spectrum use but not interfere" with current operations.

"I'm not opposed so long as there is no interference," he explained.

A subsequent SOTN session on "The Fragmentation of Communications Policy" focused on privacy. Former Federal Trade Commission chair Jon Leibowitz, now in private practice at Davis Polk and Wardell law firm, said that the FTC is a "muscular agency" in this category and warned that state oversight of the issue is unacceptable.

"A federal solution - not a patchwork of state rules" is needed, Leibowitz said.

Another panelist, former National Telecommunications and Information Administration Director Larry Irving, now a telecom consultant, responded that the "FTC is not the right agency to regulate privacy over the Internet." At that, Chris Lewis, VP at Public Knowledge, insisted, "There is no reason why you can't have multiple cops on the beat," saying such an arrangement would provide "robust power" for enforcement.

Irving characterized the "likelihood of legislation in the near term is de minimis."

DOJ's Views of Security
Deputy Assistant Attorney General Rod Rosenstein focused on security in his remarks at the final SOTN session. Attendees were cautioned that he would not talk about or respond to questions about that day's revelations relating to the Russia allegations involving White House and Congressional activities.

Nonetheless, Rosenstein plunged into the fray, warning that, "We'll probably have more [cyber attacks] in the future with people protecting themselves" against such incursions.

He also said the DOJ is seeking "responsible encryption."

"We favor encryption but not to the exclusion of legitimate law enforcement concerns," he said. "We need to continue to improve our cyber defenses so we can help private sector protect themselves.”

He urged that "federal agencies work with industry to combat threats."

"We need to improve our cyber defenses to help protect the sector," he said.

In response to a question about intellectual property protection, Rosenstein said it was a "top priority for us," citing global coordination of efforts to fight piracy.

Public Dismay/Confusion
Earlier in the day, Sally Shipman Wentworth, vice president of Global Policy Development at the Internet Society, described an ISOC study which found that the user-centric vision of the Internet "has been lost." Commercial providers and government involvement now is dominant in Internet operations, factors that users don't understand, she said.

Wentworth also noted the "enormous explosion of threat vectors," singling out the massive role that government agencies will play in the Internet of Things, such as sensors for traffic, local security and other public services. She said that such activities will involves organizations that "have not necessarily been part of the Internet discussion so far," suggesting potential problems as new ventures and services emerge.

Her concerns were reinforced by findings from another new research report, unveiled at the SOTN conference.

Eighty-five percent of Americans said that the Internet has had a positive impact on their lives, but 56 percent said they believe it has weakened American democracy, according to the study by the Internet Education Foundation www.neted.org , which produces the SOTN conference. The "Society Under Strain" report found that Americans are "skeptical about the ability to secure the Internet" and about financial innovations that many don’t understand.

“Americans have high hopes for what the Internet can mean to their lives, but as technology advances it creates new concerns that ultimately end up before Congress and regulators,” said Tim Lordan, executive director of the Internet Education Foundation.

"Americans look to policymakers for answers," he added. "A majority (53%) believe that the laws and regulations that we have today aren’t working to deal with the issues that arise due to the Internet."

The study, conducted by Vrge Strategies, found that Americans are mixed on whether artificial intelligence and virtual assistants enabled by it will be beneficial or harmful. Thirty-seven percent said it will benefit them by making their life and work easier; nearly the same amount (36%) said it will be harmful by creating security and privacy issues.

According to the report's analysis, Americans overwhelmingly expect Internet companies to protect customers from cyberattacks: 52% cited Internet companies, 19% said the government and 18% expect consumers themselves to be responsible for protecting their Internet uses.

Nearly half of respondents (48%) said that while some incidents can be prevented, the “Internet cannot be protected from most cyber attacks.”

Pictured: Rep. Greg Walden speaking at the 2018 State of the Net conference.