Thursday, May 25, 2006

Benton Headlines on NSA surveillance of U.S. citizens' phone use: ACLU REQUESTS WIRETAPPING PROBE [SOURCE: Reuters, AUTHOR: Daniel Trotta] The American Civil Liberties Union launched a 20-state campaign on Wednesday to stop warrantless eavesdropping by the National Security Agency and prevent telecoms firms from providing it with phone records. The rights group was appealing directly to the states because it said the U.S. Congress had failed to exert its oversight role over the White House and because the Federal Communications Commission had chosen not to pursue complaints. The ACLU and its affiliates are petitioning utilities regulators and attorneys general in 20 states to demand investigations and public hearings with a goal of stopping the domestic spying or revealing more about it. "The NSA data mining program is just the latest example of what we believe is a longer-term abuse of power by the executive branch," ACLU Executive Director Anthony Romero told reporters on a conference call. "It's an effort to undercut judicial review, to seize law-enforcement powers that it should not have and that Congress did not grant to it, and an effort to hide information from public scrutiny and public involvement on important issues that affect the basic rights of ordinary Americans," he said. * A.C.L.U. Seeks States' Help on Phone Records Inquiry http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/25/us/25phone.html GONZALES'S RATIONALE ON PHONE DATA DISPUTED [SOURCE: Washington Post, AUTHOR: Walter Pincus] Civil liberties lawyers questioned the legal basis that Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales used Tuesday to justify the constitutionality of collecting domestic telephone records as part of the Bush administration's anti-terrorism program. While not confirming a USA Today report May 11 saying the National Security Agency has been collecting phone-call records of millions of Americans, Gonzales said such an activity would not require a court warrant under a 1979 Supreme Court ruling because it involved obtaining "business records." Under the 27-year-old court ruling in Smith v. Maryland , "those kinds of records do not enjoy Fourth Amendment protection," Gonzales said. "There is no reasonable expectation of privacy in those kinds of records," he added. Noting that Congress in 1986 passed the Electronic Communications Privacy Act in reaction to the Smith v. Maryland ruling to require court orders before turning over call records to the government, G. Jack King Jr. of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers said Gonzales is correct in saying "the administration isn't violating the Fourth Amendment" but "he's failing to acknowledge that it is breaking" the 1986 law, which requires a court order "with a few very narrow exceptions." Kate Martin, director of the Center for National Security Studies, said, "The government is bound by the laws Congress passes, and when the attorney general doesn't even mention them, it is symptomatic of the government's profound disrespect for the rule of law." (requires registration) * NSA, the FCC and White House Martin’s, and Sen. Stevens: Beyond Cover-up http://www.democraticmedia.org/jcblog/?pB MAKE NO LAW [SOURCE: Washington Post, AUTHOR: Editorial Staff] [Commentary] The Senate Judiciary Committee is scheduled today to mark up legislation dealing with the National Security Agency's program of warrantless domestic surveillance. What kind of bill it will report out is anyone's guess. Three different bills are floating around -- one by Chairman Arlen Specter (R-PA), one by Mike DeWine (R-OH) and one by Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) -- and they would do wildly different things. What the committee should do now is clear: nothing. Any legislation is premature, because most members of the committee still have no firm sense of what the NSA surveillance program consists of. The goal of legislation should be to legitimize important surveillance by requiring judicial review, limiting the use of material collected to counterintelligence purposes and ensuring that irrelevant material is not retained. The best way for the Judiciary Committee to move toward this goal is to hold off on a markup and insist that it receive more information about the program -- so that it's not shooting in the dark. (requires registration) 5:40:12 PM    comment []

More Benton Headlines: THE INTERNET'S LONG WAR [SOURCE: TomPaine, AUTHOR: Dawn Holian, Common Cause] [Commentary] telephone and cable companies would like to transform our Internet from a medium that allows people to connect to one another, engage in debate, and learn about the world into little more than a portal to sell goods and transmit television programs, films and games. And they’re likely to get their way unless Congress acts. On Thursday, the House Judiciary will be voting on a key piece of legislation to protect the Internet we know it, an Internet that is in jeopardy because of recent decisions by federal regulators. Why is Common Cause so concerned about a seemingly obscure telecommunications issue? Because we care about the potential of the Internet to spur citizen engagement in their democracy. We know how democratic discourse has benefited from this technological marvel. In 2004, according to the Pew Internet and American Life Project, 63 million Americans went online for political news. An estimated seven million individuals asked for e-mail updates from candidates, and four million donated money online to parties and campaigns. That involvement is only growing. Millions of citizens access information from advocacy web sites ranging from Amnesty International to the National Rifle Association. And e-activists are transforming the way citizens communicate with their elected officials and have their opinions heard on the most pressing issues of the day. But this Renaissance will be cut short if access to the Internet is determined by corporations more interested in selling goods and entertainment than in encouraging democratic discourse. The Internet Freedom and Non-Discrimination Act is critical to protecting our digital future. * Consumer Groups: Network Neutrality Is an Antitrust Issue http://www.freepress.net/press/release.php?id7 * Pending Internet neutrality legislation is vital to preserving independent Web content and expression http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/editorial/3883948.html * House Judiciary Committee Mark-up Today http://judiciary.house.gov/markup.aspx?ID2 'RECOUPING AN INVESTMENT' MEANS 'HOLD ON TO YOUR WALLET' [SOURCE: Paul Kapustka's Blog] [Commentary] When the telcos argue against network neutrality, one central theme is that without tiered pricing plans, they won't be able to "recoup their investment" in all these great new services they plan to build. The question to ask is, from where will that "recouping" come? The answer can be found in your wallet. In a conference call this morning with reporters, proponents of network neutrality are finally coalescing behind this idea, and it's a powerful one: The battle is not (as the telcos want you to believe) between them and the Googles of the world, but between telcos and customers -- with customers the ones who will have to pay the freight for the telcos' new shiny networks. Why? Even I can figure this one out. If the phone companies are allowed to charge for tiered Internet services -- much like how cable companies charge for channel plans -- their "partners" in the deals (for video, music, gaming, whatever) are most likely NOT going to "share the costs." On the contrary: just like cable, the telcos are going to have to PAY EXTRA to host specialized content. Just like cablecos pay ESPN a few bucks per customer, so will phone companies have to pay for their content. And who will pay the vig? That's right, you and me. 12:39:28 PM    comment []

Also from Kevin Taglang, at Benton: STUDY SHOWS HOW KIDS' MEDIA USE HELPS PARENTS COPE [SOURCE: Kaiser Family Foundation press release] Electronic media is a central focus of many very young children’s lives, used by parents to help manage busy schedules, keep the peace, and facilitate family routines such as eating, relaxing, and falling asleep, according to a new national study released today by the Kaiser Family Foundation. Many parents also express satisfaction with the educational benefits of TV and how it can teach positive behaviors. The report, The Media Family: Electronic Media in the Lives of Infants, Toddlers, Preschoolers, and Their Parents, is based on a national survey of 1,051 parents with children age 6 months to 6 years old and a series of focus groups across the country. According to the study, in a typical day more than eight in ten (83%) children under the age of six use screen media, with those children averaging about two hours a day (1:57). Media use increases with age, from 61% of babies one year or younger who watch screen media in a typical day (for an average of 1:20) to 90% of 4 to 6 year-olds (for an average of 2:03). In many homes, parents have created an environment where the TV is a nearly constant presence, from the living room to the dining room and the bedroom. One in three (33%) children this age has a TV in their bedroom (19% of children ages 1 year or younger, 29% of children ages 2-3 years, and 43% of those ages 4-6 years). The most common reasons parents give for putting a TV in their child’s bedroom is to free up other TVs in the house so the parent or other family members can watch their own shows (55%), to keep the child occupied so the parent can do things around the house (39%), to help the child fall asleep (30%), and as a reward for good behavior (26%). * Who's Watching the Kids? TV http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6337463? display=Breaking+News * Parents Making Use of TV Despite Risks http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/25/us/25crib.html * Toddlers' TV Habits Run Counter to Medical Advice http://online.wsj.com/article/SB114847544019661809.html? mod=todays_us_personal_journal * Kaiser Stirs Debate Over Kids and Media Exposure http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/recent_display.jsp? vnu_content_id02575246 12:39:22 PM    comment []

Tons of valuable Benton Headlines today. I'll break 'em up in bits. DNS TRANSITION [SOURCE: National Telecommunications and Information Administration] The United States Department of Commerce’s National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) seeks comment on the continuation of the transition of the technical coordination and management of the Internet domain name and addressing system (Internet DNS) to the private sector. In June 1998, the Department issued a statement of policy on the privatization of the Internet DNS, which among other things articulated four primary functions for global Internet DNS coordination and management, the need to have these functions performed by the private sector and four principles to guide the transition to private sector management of the Internet DNS. On June 30, 2005, NTIA released the U.S. Principles on the Internet’s Domain Name and Addressing System further elaborating on these issues. The Department of Commerce seeks comment regarding the progress of this transition and announces a public meeting to be held on July 26, 2006, to discuss issues associated with this transition. Comments are due on or before July 7, 2006. The public meeting will be held from 2:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. on July 26, 2006. RURAL CELLPHONE FIRMS PINCHED [SOURCE: USAToday, AUTHOR: Paul Davidson] Rural cellphone carriers say their bigger national competitors are squeezing them out of the wireless market by charging them exorbitant roaming rates or by refusing to allow them to roam at all. 11:39:13 AM    comment []