|
|  |
|
Politics
The YouTube Debates: Just How Innovative Are They?
by K. Daniel Glover
CHARLESTON, S.C. -- Old media stalwart CNN and new media upstart YouTube will break new politics and technology ground here Monday evening by hosting an Internet and voter-driven presidential debate. But before the first video question is put to the Democratic candidates on the stage, observers are asking their own questions about the process behind the debate.
The organizers of the debate -- and another one like it for Republican candidates on Sept. 17 in Florida -- bill it as a "history-making" event. The CNN/YouTube debates take to a new level the "town hall" concept introduced to presidential debates in 1992.
Since June 14, anyone with access to a computer and a webcam has been able to submit videotaped questions to the candidates via YouTube's Internet file-sharing service. By Sunday's deadline, 2,989 questions were submitted. CNN journalists screened the questions and decided which ones to ask when the cable network airs the debate live at 7 p.m.
Lee Rainie, director of the Pew Internet and American Life Project, called the approach "a logical evolution of the marriage of new media and old media" that has been occurring in recent years. He added that it has made the Internet the "center focus" of politics just 11 years after its "coming-out moment" in the 1996 presidential race.
"This solidifies the notion that the Internet is a prime marketplace [of ideas], the commons of politics," he said.
People in the online politics world agree -- but they said they were hoping for more of a revolution than the evolution Rainie described.
Blogger Jeff Jarvis, who tracks the role of video in the presidential campaigns at PrezVid, lauded CNN and YouTube, which is owned by Google, for moving beyond the "Twinkie, dutiful and dull" questions of past debates. But he added that citizens should have been given more input about what will transpire on the air.
"They should have let go of the controls here and let us pick at least some of the questions," Jarvis said.
Colin Delany, who blogs at e.politics, said the problem with CNN picking all of the questions is that the debate could reflect the same conventional wisdom as traditional media-organized sessions. "I would like to see more so-called stupid questions" instead of the same tired questions repeated on journalism shows like NBC's "Meet The Press," he said.
At a luncheon with reporters in Charleston on Monday, a Google official said CNN made the call on not allowing Internet users to pick the questions the candidates will be asked and held out the possibility that future debates could evolve in that direction. Steve Grove, the news and politics editor at YouTube, added: "We would never say that's a bad idea. ... It's just not the direction we chose to go with this time."
Andrew Keen, author of a new book called "Cult Of The Amateur" that decries the Internet's impact on culture, criticized the CNN/YouTube debates for different reasons. He praised the involvement of CNN as a "formal gatekeeper" that acts as a "talent scout." But he said the "older, wiser, more traditional, authoritative" network should have done the debate alone.
Keen lambasted YouTube as a "self-interested," non-journalistic company whose only goal is to make money by driving traffic to its Web site. He said YouTube is "using the concept of the public interest to pursue its private interests."
"These are not responsible people," Keen said. "They're not the people I want to trust politics with."
For live-blogging from the debate, visit Tech Daily Dose and Hotline On Call.
| |
|
Politics
Grilling The Presidential Wannabes About Tech Policy
by Theresa Poulson
None of the Democratic presidential candidates will know until Monday evening which voters' questions they must answer in the CNN/YouTube debate. But there were dozens of technology-related questions in the mix that CNN journalists reviewed.
Internet maven Jeff Jarvis, for instance, submitted a video question about ensuring high-speed Internet access for all Americans. And one computer programmer used the tools of her trade to make a computer-generated character who asked how the candidates would protect her vocation from becoming a lost art in the United States because of outsourcing and H-1B visas for skilled foreign workers.
More videos posed questions about outsourcing jobs to other countries, immigration and a proposed guest-worker program.
On the telecommunications front, "The Resident" from New York City asked candidates for their positions on network neutrality, a concept to describe regulation aimed at ensuring equal treatment of broadband content. Other questioners wondered about the regulatory impact of net neutrality.
Sarah from Atlanta asked how the Democrats plan to strengthen U.S. leadership in science and technology, while Tim Miller from Massachusetts questioned the distribution of research and development spending. Another person asked about China's growth as an economic power.
Kyle Hogan from Boston asked if candidates will promote the use of technology and e-learning in education. Others wanted to know the candidates' views about the No Child Left Behind Act or increased funding for the 2002 education law.
Melissa Compagnucci from San Luis Obispo, Calif., noted recent controversies over the lack of paper receipts to audit electronic votes and asked: "If I can go to any state and get the same triple grande non-fat no-foam vanilla latte from Starbucks, why can't I go to any state and vote the same way?"
Depending on what questions make the CNN cut, voters also could be asked about:
-- The anti-terrorism law known as the USA PATRIOT Act, and protecting constitutional freedoms while fighting terrorism;
-- Executive privilege, presidential "signing statements" and passport delays;
-- Digital privacy;
-- Broadcast "indecency," and regulating talk radio and the media;
-- Copyright law;
-- Campaign and lobbying reform;
-- And the political impact of online video and technologies.
Some questioners had a little fun at the expense of the candidates. One asked Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois for his opinion of the "Crush on Obama" video, which features a pretty model pledging her allegiance to Obama. Another poked fun at the "I Feel Pretty" mash-up featuring John Edwards primping before the cameras.
Then there are the questions that promote YouTube, the video-sharing site at the center of the debate. Rick Seno from Plano, Texas, asked if the candidates had heard of YouTube before the debate. And Steven Marcuswondered all the way from Murcia, Spain, "If you were elected president, would you be interested in continuing your relationship with the people through YouTube?"
| |
|
Spectrum
AT&T, Google Spar Over Rules For Spectrum Auction
by David Hatch
AT&T has reacted strongly to Google's insistence that additional conditions be imposed on an upcoming spectrum auction as a prerequisite for the search engine's participation.
The "all or nothing" demand came in a letter Friday to FCC Chairman Kevin Martin. Google insisted that his proposed conditions governing a portion of the airwaves don't go far enough, but AT&T countered with allegations that Google is trying to rig the bidding in its favor.
The rhetoric sets the stage for more heated dialogue at a Tuesday FCC oversight hearing before the House Energy and Commerce Telecommunications and the Internet Subcommittee. All five agency regulators will appear for the second time before the panel, headed by Rep. Edward Markey, D-Mass.
In an effort to strike a compromise, Martin recently proposed that unaffiliated devices and applications be permitted to function on a large chunk of the so-called "700 megahertz" spectrum. The frequencies, to become available as analog television broadcasters switch to digital, must be auctioned by Jan. 28. The airwaves are viewed as a rare opportunity to create a major high-speed Internet access competitor to telecom and cable incumbents.
At first, Google appeared encouraged by the chairman's plan, but on Friday, it reaffirmed that open access also must include mandatory interconnection by other carriers and wholesale leasing of capacity. Its willingness to bid $4.6 billion or more is contingent on adoption of four principles with "specific, enforceable and enduring rules," Google said.
"This is an attempt to pressure the U.S. government to turn the auction process on its head by ensuring only a few, if any, bidders will compete with Google," Jim Cicconi, a top lobbyist at AT&T, said in a statement released late Friday.
"And in a display of dissembling rarely seen, even in Washington, Google claims that this attempt to foreclose any competition in the bidding process must be done in the name of, stunningly, competition," he added. Cicconi argued that if Google is serious about fostering competition, it can achieve the goal with the chairman's proposal.
In a Monday blog posting, Rick Whitt, Washington telecom and media counsel for Google, dismissed the argument that his company should impose its own conditions after securing spectrum. "It is the current auction system that skews the results away from potential new entrants and in favor of existing incumbents," he wrote. "The prevailing imbalance can be corrected most effectively by introducing license conditions based on open platforms."
"I think Google overplayed their hand with that letter," a wireless industry lobbyist said, noting that Google left itself open to brickbats by demanding conditions on behalf of itself. Nevertheless, he said FCC regulators will take Google's demands seriously because the company could provide fresh competition. "It is tantalizing for the FCC and Congress to see that Google is willing to spend $4.6 billion."
Markham Erickson, executive director of the Open Internet Coalition, whose members include Google, said the firm wisely clarified its position. "You're going to be smart before you spend $5 billion," he said in an interview. Erickson said Google sent the message that true open access is not what Martin proposed.
In a July 19 letter, House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Henry Waxman, D-Calif., urged Martin to adopt an "open access and wholesale model" and endorsed a public-private partnership to spur construction of a nationwide, first responders' network, an idea being pushed by Frontline Wireless.
| |
|
Business
Satellite Radio Firms Promise A La Carte Channels
by Andrew Noyes
Satellite radio providers Sirius and XM will offer subscribers programming on an a la carte basis if the rivals' proposed merger is approved by federal regulators, Sirius CEO Mel Karmazin said Monday at a National Press Club luncheon.
The offering would "give consumers the power to choose satellite radio packages, channel by channel to suit their tastes and their budgets," he said. The firms, whose union is valued at $13 billion, will provide details of the pricing to the FCC on Tuesday.
Under one plan, subscribers could choose 50 channels for $6.99 a month -- a 46 percent decrease from the current base subscription rate of $12.95. Customers also would be able to add channels for as little as 25 cents each.
A second option would allow Sirius or XM subscribers to pick 100 channels from one provider and a limited number from the other for $14.99. Fixed "best of both" bundles would cost $16.99.
Two new packages -- one that would air mostly music and another that would offer news, talk and sports shows -- would be available for $9.99, he said. Family-friendly tiers, which omit adult-themed material also would be available for a discounted price.
National Association of Broadcasters' spokesman Dennis Wharton said policymakers "should not be hoodwinked" by the news because the services could individually offer a more affordable choice in limited program packages. Customers might also have to buy a new radio to reap the alleged rewards, he said.
In all, Sirius and XM plan to provide eight post-merger subscription models that "ensure that no consumer pays more after the merger for the service they enjoy today." A la carte would be ready within a year of the merger's approval and the other options could be unveiled within six months of the consolidation.
If the merger fails, Sirius has no plan to offer a la carte programming, Karmazin said. "Our company has not made a profit since the year it started" and per-channel pricing would be "a risky proposition" if Sirius were to go it alone, he said.
Public Knowledge President Gigi Sohn said she was pleased with the a la carte scheme, which is one of several conditions that need to be in place if the merger is blessed by the FCC and Justice Department antitrust officials.
"It is exactly what we hoped for and in some ways more," she said. "Never in my wildest dreams did I think you'd be able to pick individual channels."
Public Knowledge also has called for the merged entity to freeze prices for three years and set aside 5 percent of capacity for noncommercial educational and informational content. While no commitment has been made to either request, Sirius and XM seem "very open to it," Sohn said.
Karmazin's announcement did not change the mind of one the merger's most vocal Capitol Hill critics, Senate Judiciary Antitrust Subcommittee Chairman Herb Kohl. The Wisconsin Democrat's concern is that "a merger would result in a satellite radio monopoly for consumers" and his opposition to the deal remains, a spokesman said.
| |
|
Security
House, Senate Negotiators Cite Progress On Security Bill
by Chris Strohm
Negotiations over the weekend and early Monday yielded breakthroughs on two of the most contentious issues holding up a sweeping bill to implement unfulfilled recommendations of the commission that investigated the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, according to aides.
House and Senate lawmakers have agreed in principle to let the Bush administration decide which federal agency should be in charge of managing and dispersing transportation security grants, aides said. The administration already has stated its preference to have the Homeland Security Department handle the job, rather than the Transportation Department, aides added. The agreement essentially mirrors language in the Senate's version of the legislation. One aide cautioned, however, that the final agreement on transportation grants has not been officially approved by House and Senate leadership, meaning that a last-minute shakeup could still occur.
On another front, lawmakers also have agreed in principle to give the Federal Emergency Management Agency responsibility for grants aimed at helping state and local governments buy interoperable communications equipment, aides said.
Divisions over how grants for transportation security and interoperable communications have impeded completion of a final bill for weeks.
During a public conference meeting last week, for example, House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman James Oberstar, D-Minn., offered an amendment that would allow the Homeland Security and Transportation departments to share control of transportation security grants. Oberstar said he did not trust Homeland Security to be in total control. But senators did not agree to his amendment, essentially killing it. A spokeswoman for Oberstar declined to comment for this story.
But a third significant issue remained outstanding Monday. Conferees still had not formally decided to include a provision in the bill that would give immunity to people if they are sued for reporting on suspicious activity around transportation networks. The provision is supported by House Homeland Security Committee ranking Republican Peter King of New York, as well as Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee Chairman Joseph Lieberman, I-Conn., and ranking Republican Susan Collins of Maine. Lieberman said the Senate parliamentarian has ruled that the provision can be included in the bill.
But House Homeland Security Chairman Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., said last week he wanted to alter the language of the provision to ensure it does not lead to racial profiling or the targeting of innocent people. Thompson's office did not clarify by press time whether he is actively trying to change the language.
Regardless, aides were optimistic that work on the 9/11 bill would be wrapped up this week. "It looks like it's in good shape," one aide said.
| |
|
Courts
Former Official Says Ky. Blog Blocked For Politics
by Michael Martinez
A man who used to manage the computer system used by Kentucky's executive branch told a federal court on Friday that aides to Republican Gov. Ernie Fletcher blocked state employees from a blog for political reasons last year.
Michael Inman, the state's former technology commissioner, said in an affidavit submitted in the U.S. district court in Eastern Kentucky that Fletcher's office specifically targeted a blog written by a Democratic critic of the administration.
Inman's affidavit supports accusations made in a federal lawsuit submitted last year by Mark Nickolas, the author of the BluegrassReport.org blog. Nickolas also managed now U.S. Rep. Ben Chandler's failed 2003 gubernatorial campaign against Fletcher.
Fletcher's administration has maintained that state employees were blocked from reading Nickolas' blog at work last year as part of a content-neutral Web-filtering initiative to limit distractions at the workplace. Other filtered pages included ESPN.com and various entertainment sites.
But Nickolas has alleged that the administration cut off access to his site in response to things he said online and in interviews with newspapers, charges that were backed by Inman. Nickolas' lawsuit notes that his blog was blocked after he was quoted in a story in The New York Times about Fletcher being indicted in a hiring scandal.
In his affidavit, Inman said former deputy Mark Rutledge, who has since become the state's chief information officer, bragged to him about blocking Nickolas' blog. Inman also alleged that Rutledge said to him that he doubted anyone would discover that the administration blocked the site because they "hid it in a bunch of other stuff."
"Based on my conversations with Rutledge, it was apparent that the state had intentionally blocked BluegrassReport.org and had blocked the category of blogs and other categories of Web sites to disguise that fact," Inman said.
Inman added that the decision to block BluegrassReport came directly from the governor's office as a result of Nickolas' criticism of the administration.
A Fletcher spokeswoman declined to comment on Inman's affidavit because the case is still pending. Fletcher, who was never charged with any crimes in the hiring scandal, is up for re-election this fall.
Nickolas recently moved to Montana and stopped writing BluegrassReport. He has launched another blog, Rocky Mountain Report, which focuses on politics in Western states.
Inman also said he was never told why he was dismissed last summer and replaced by Rutledge. He has been highly critical of the administration during the past several months. Earlier this spring, he accused Fletcher's administration of monitoring the e-mail accounts of state employees to measure their loyalty.
He told the court last week that he was "compelled to state the truth" about the administration and its explanation for why Nickolas' site was blocked.
"I believe the state has authority to block Web sites that cause disruption in the workplace," he said, in the affidavit. "I disagree, however, that decisions about which Web sites to block should be based on the official disapproval of the content of particular Web sites."
| |
|
E-Government
Sen. Hatch Pans Federal Contract For Traffic.com
by Aliya Sternstein
Sen. Orrin Hatch has accused the Transportation Department of squelching competition for an open-bid contract to collect and post real-time data on traffic conditions.
Traffic.com has been under contract with the department since 1999 to deploy "intelligent transportation systems," or ITS, capable of measuring and managing the performance of the nation's highways. By installing digital roadside sensors, Traffic.com will be able to offer citizens free online access to basic traffic data and give agencies archived data in 26 metro areas, including Boston, Detroit, Los Angeles and Tampa, Fla.
The equipment tracks traffic volume, speed and, sometimes, vehicle classification.
Under the 1999 program, Traffic.com has sole discretion over funding for 10 years after each installation. Hatch, R-Utah, has said the contract gave Traffic.com a long-term monopoly on government data collection.
In 2005, he successfully pushed through legislation to level the playing field for small businesses outside the 26 areas covered by the government contract with Traffic.com. Under the new law, the follow-on contract, or program extension, allows for state agencies to access funding for ITS without using Traffic.com.
But Traffic.com still has the upper hand, Hatch said. In a May 10 letter to Transportation Secretary Mary Peters, he said "the overwhelming majority of the remaining funds available" for the program went to the initial city partnerships with Traffic.com. "By continuing its clear bias toward Traffic.com, I believe [Transportation] is stifling competition and ultimately harming consumers, businesses and taxpayers."
Bill Allison, a senior fellow with the Sunlight Foundation, an open-government group, noted in a post to his blog on July 9 that the department's pre-solicitation notice for the follow-on bids uses language that seems to discourage potential bidders from seeking more information on the contract.
For example, the document states: "Freedom of Information Act requests for copies of [Traffic.com's] contract document are unlikely to be fruitful for organizations wishing to compete for this follow-on project. ... Any attempt, by an offeror submitting a proposal for this follow-on project, to respond to [Traffic.com's proposal] would almost certainly call into serious question the offeror's grasp of, and commitment to attaining, the technical objectives of this follow-on project."
Transportation Department spokesman Ian Grossman said on Friday that the intent of the language was to separate the follow-on program from the existing Traffic.com program. "We want to be clear [that our] desire is to entertain original proposals and approaches to accomplish the activities requested," he said. "The language reflects that we did not want a cookie-cutter proposal."
DOT replied to Hatch, in a June 22 letter, that, since legislation requires DOT to honor the initial program's contract, "only a limited amount of funding remains uncommitted. ... Because of this lack of funds, only two cities will be able to participate under [the follow-on contract]."
A request for vendor bids for one of those two cities -- Dallas/Forth Worth -- was issued June 22.
Traffic.com officials said the company supports the goals of the transportation technology program "and welcomes the opportunity to offer our solutions as the USDOT considers future deployments and expansion."
Hatch is "going to keep fighting for this," Hatch spokesman Peter Carr said on Friday.
| |
|
Education
Education Officials Say Data Key In Improving Schools
by Aliya Sternstein
As the Bush administration and Congress work to renew a 2002 education law that is based on holding schools accountable through assessments, some advocates of educational reform say it's important that the data be used to improve schools, not punish students and teachers.
"There is a natural inclination to want to know how you're doing," said Lan Neugent, assistant superintendent for technology at the Virginia Department of Education. He was one of several state and local school officials who spoke Monday about the role of data and technology in high schools at a panel hosted by the Alliance for Excellent Education and the State Educational Technology Directors Association.
Bruce Umpstead, director of educational technology and data at the Michigan Department of Education, said data should be used holistically in nurturing students to "get the best players into the best spots," adding that not every student needs the same score.
Currently, educational technology activists are pushing for several proposed federal reforms meant to improve -- rather than just prove -- student performance with hard data. One such bill, H.R. 2955, which was introduced July 10, would finesse the calculation of high school graduation rates to hold high schools responsible for students graduating. In May, House members proposed legislation, H.R. 2449, that partly would boost funding for data analysis to address individualized student needs and support school decision making.
"I don't know any investment that you can make which is designed to show you exactly the return on investment and that's what this does," said former West Virginia Gov. Bob Wise, president of the alliance. "You're not only driving decisions in the classroom, you're also driving state decisions and federal decisions."
Virginia has an information management system funded through a $6.1 million grant from the U.S. Education Department that measures the longitudinal progress of individual students. Neugent said teachers wanted the capability to link numbers with progress.
"You can see where you are," he said.
At present, Michigan schools lack the resources to "truly create widespread innovation in the classroom" with federal funding levels, Umpstead said. "We are home to a declining U.S. auto market," and it's expensive to implement technology. "We need leadership."
That said, schools can get a bigger bang for the buck now with more funding, than they could have in the past. "We're at a good time," with technology, because the cost of laptop computers for students is decreasing sharply, Umpstead said.
Mary Ann Wolf, executive director of the association, summed up the need for more government money to buy school software: "It's probably more expensive not to implement educational technologies."
| |
|
E-Government
SEC's Suspension Of Anti-Terrorism Tools Praised
by Winter Casey
The top Republican on the House Financial Services Committee is pleased by the Friday announcement that the Securities and Exchange Commission will temporarily suspend the availability of a controversial Web tool that tracks corporations with investments in countries considered by the United States to sponsor terrorism.
"Retooling this Web site -- which previously provided access to incomplete and extraneous information -- will enhance its usefulness to citizens seeking to determine whether their investments are being used to finance terrorism or genocide," Rep. Spencer Bachus of Alabama said, in a statement.
SEC Chairman Christopher Cox said the agency plans to work to improve the Web tool, which permits investors to view company disclosure documents on business interests in countries that the secretary of State has designated to be "state sponsors of terrorism." These countries include Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Sudan, and Syria. This tool, which Cox said has experienced "exceptional traffic" since it was unveiled on June 25, has generated criticism from some lawmakers and businesses.
According to Cox, the commission received many positive comments about the usefulness of the Web tool but also negative comments, "primarily from the registrants whose disclosures were findable using the Web tool," as well as from those concerned by the lack of updated information beyond what a company has included in its most recent annual report.
Both Bachus and House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank, D-Mass., recently sent letters to Cox regarding the list. Bachus said the "ill-conceived" initiative links companies with no apparent link to terrorist-financing states and leaves off the list other publicly traded companies that have significant operations in such nations. He said the list was seemingly created by performing a cursory word-search using the SEC's EDGAR database.
Frank said "the concept of a list generated in this fashion strikes me as unfair and perhaps counterproductive." Frank also said "it is a significant concern to me that by developing its list without any clear criteria, the SEC's efforts will dilute the effectiveness of publicizing the names of companies that do have material investments in the economies of rogue states."
SEC Republican Commissioner Paul Atkins reportedly said last week that the SEC should fix the Web tool if possible or remove the page.
SEC "staff is considering whether the use of interactive data tags applied by companies themselves could permit investors, analysts and others to easily discover this disclosure without need of an SEC-provided Web tool at all," Cox said in his statement. While the Web tool is offline, the companies' disclosures regarding their business contacts in the specified countries will be available through the SEC's EDGAR database, he said.
Cox disputed claims that the Web site's content was generated from a "mere keyword" search of the SEC's EDGAR database. He also said the SEC's only commentary with the search results stated that a company's disclosure does not mean the entity directly or indirectly has supported any improper activities.
| |
|
|
|
On The Download
Clinton, Romney Web Expenses Bust $1 Million Mark
by Shira Toeplitz
It's time to welcome Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney to the million-dollar club, as both presidential candidates have now spent at least $1 million on their Internet operations so far this year.
A survey of Federal Election Commission records compiled by PoliticalMoneyLine.com also showed that John McCain spent at least $646,601, John Edwards spent at least $448,005 and Barack Obama spent at least $485,400.
But a single number does not tell the full story about a campaign's online operation -- even if that number follows a dollar sign. One of the biggest trends to come out of these reports is the blurring line between an Internet team, a communications shop and the rest of the campaign, as many staffers do double duty and grassroots fundraising becomes synonymous with online fundraising.
Many political Internet experts say that by the 2009-2010 election cycle, there no longer will be Internet departments because Web staffers will be fully integrated into every other section of the campaign war room.
Below are the details on how much the presidential campaigns of 2008 have spent on their online operations in the first two financial-reporting quarters, according to FEC records compiled by PoliticalMoneyLine.com. The list is organized from the most expenditures to the least.
(A single asterisk notes that despite a request for more information, the names could not be confirmed with campaign spokesmen, though at least one source with knowledge of the staffers confirmed their status. A double asterisk notes that the person or company is known to no longer be on the campaign's payroll.)
| Candidate |
Firms |
Staff |
Other |
Total |
| Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y.* |
($1,207,730 total): NGP Software ($700,725), Mayfield Strategies ($507,005) |
($178,400 total): Jesse Berney, Peter Daou, Nancy Eiring, Sarah Foy, Recardo Gibson, Jess O'Connell, Crystal Patterson, Kevin Thurman |
Not applicable |
$1,386,130 |
| Former Gov. Mitt Romney, R-Mass. |
($1,196,019): Molecular ($803,523), Salesforce.com (345,268), Diginovations (47,228) |
($98,055 total): Abby Brack, Gary Coby, Mindy Finn, Andrew Goodrich, Larry Simmons, Stephen Smith |
Not applicable |
$1,294,074 |
| John McCain* |
($456,529): 3EDC ($339,940), Campaign Solutions ($86,589), New Media Strategics ($30,000) |
($38,844 total): Christian Ferry |
EDonation.com ($151,228) |
$646,601 |
| Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill. |
($223,802): NGP Software, Inc. ($97,039), Brightcove ($67,168), Blue State Digital ($59,595) |
Staff ($155,767 total): Scott Goodstein, Sam Graham-Felson, Chris Hughes, Jon Jones, Chris Northcross, Josh Orton, Luke Peterson, Udai Rohhegi, Joe Rospars, Jessica Slider. |
($105,831 total): Auburn Quad ($61,608), Google Adwords ($23,229), Hitwise ($13,000), Webster Strategies ($7,994 |
$485,400 |
| Former Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C.* |
Firms ($312,607): Plus Three ($167,214), NGP Software ($69,393), Matthew Gross Communications ($45,000), Advocacy Inc. ($18,600), Care2.com ($10,000), Advomatic ($2,400 |
($135,398 total): Ryan Alexander, Ben Brandzel, Amanda Marcotte,** Melissa McEwan,** Aaron Myers, Amy Rubin, Tracy Russo, George Stern |
Auburn Quad ($40,130) |
$448,005 |
| Gov. Bill Richardson, D-N.M. |
($135,848): Articulated Man ($36,455), Blue State Digital ($26,230), Rock Coast Media ($25,000), NGP Software ($24,100), Care2.com ($17,500), Anne Lewis Strategies ($6,563) |
($28,368 total): Joaquin Guerra, Andrea Johnson, Seth Tanner |
Auburn Quad ($10,467) |
$164,216 |
| Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio* |
Not applicable |
($138,375): Michael Criscione, Chad Ely, Karen Kilroy |
($679): ActBlue |
Minimum Internet-related expenditures: $139,054 |
| Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan. |
($119,627): ElectionEdge US ($72,000), Aristotle International ($47,627) |
($5,500): Leon Wolf |
Not applicable |
$125,127 |
| Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del. |
($64,076): NGP Software ($33,697), GetActive Software ($12,945), Advocacy Inc. ($9,965), Articulated Man ($7,469) |
$50,137 total): Eric Carbone, Joel Meister, Timothy Westmyer |
Not applicable |
Minimum Internet-related expenditures: $114,213 |
| Former Mayor Rudy Giuliani, R-New York City* |
The campaign did not respond to multiple requests for this information |
(at least $40,478): Kathryn Harbath (25,209), Patrick Ruffini (15,269), plus others |
Not applicable |
Not applicable |
| Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo. |
($71,119): Aristotle International ($70,219), Six Apart ($900) |
($2,974): Mike Tate |
Not applicable |
$74,093 |
| Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif. |
($70,231): ElectionMall Technologies ($34,983), TCV Media ($26,500), Aristotle International ($8,748) |
($2,841 total): John Hawkins, Sam Hunter |
Not applicable |
$73,072 |
| Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn. |
($4,384): Wired for Change ($2,800), Pair Networks ($1,584) |
($65,529 total): Tim Cullen, Matt Browner-Hamlin, Erik Moe, Tim Tagaris |
Not applicable |
$69,913 |
| Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas |
($53,434): Bill Dumas Productions ($50,284), Terra Eclipse Media Design ($3,150) |
($14,688 total): Justine Lam |
Not applicable |
$68,122 |
| Former Gov. Mike Huckabee, R-Ark. |
($34,314): LCM Strategies ($20,488), GSL Solutions (13,826)** |
($3,615 total): Vincent Harris, Zach Taylor |
Not applicable |
$37,929 |
| Former Gov. Tommy Thompson, D-Wis.* |
($22,466): Maelstrom Solutions ($14,466), Aristotle International ($8,000) |
Not applicable |
Not applicable |
$22,466 |
|
Today's Feature:
Issue of the Week
Increased scrutiny by regulators and the media has forced most companies to end the practice of backdating stock options, experts say.
Every Monday, read the Issue of the Week by the Technology Daily staff.
|
|
|
|
E-briefs
Telecom: The Senate Commerce Committee rapidly approved a bill late last week that would make it easier for wireless telephone customers to keep their telephone numbers when switching wireless service providers, CongressDaily reports. The bill, S. 1769, would expedite the "portability" process, which can take weeks in some instances. The bill would require the FCC to establish guidelines for different types of number portability, such as wireless and wireline; along with different services provided, such as voice and data. The bill also would require porting timelines to be established. "We have heard instances of number ports taking 10 to 30 days, and we have heard of some providers requiring more than 100 pieces of data to port a number," said Senate Commerce Committee ranking Republican Ted Stevens of Alaska, in a statement. "These are unnecessary hassles that consumers complain about, and providers are slow to correct."
Broadband: Almost three in four Americans now have access to high-speed Internet service, also known as broadband, a new report released Monday said. Research by the Consumer Electronics Association found that more than half of U.S. households, 57.8 million, are broadband subscribers -- an increase of 21 percent in the past year. "With 20 percent of non-broadband subscribers expecting to adopt this service in the next two years, future growth looks strong," CEA President Gary Shapiro said. "Yet competition among broadband service providers must stay robust for this expected growth to prevail." Most broadband subscribers said they upgraded to the service for a faster connection. Many nonsubscribers said they still have access to broadband outside of the home -- through work, at public libraries, or at school. The price of the service is the most prohibitive factor, 15 percent of non-subscribers say they do not subscribe to broadband because of the cost.
Courts: A federal court in New York on Monday decided that new state rules governing lawyer advertising are unconstitutional. The watchdog group Public Citizen sued to block enforcement of the new rules, which went into effect on Feb. 1. The rules included restrictions on the use of Internet pop-up advertisements. The court found that those rules placed unreasonable restrictions on free speech. "The New York rules went too far in imposing burdensome restrictions on legal free speech that do not protect consumers," said Public Citizen attorney Greg Beck, in a press release. "The court rightly recognized that the First Amendment prevents states from arbitrarily restricting advertising just because some may find it distasteful."
|
|
|
President -- John Fox Sullivan, 202-739-8468
Editor in Chief -- Louis Peck, 202-739-8481
Editor -- K. Daniel Glover (bio)
Assistant Editor -- Theresa Poulson
Senior Writers -- David Hatch (bio), Heather Greenfield (bio), Andrew Noyes (bio) and Aliya Sternstein (bio)
Special Correspondent -- Chris Strohm (bio)
Staff Writer -- Michael Martinez
Senior Business Affairs Manager -- Chris Hamby
Business Affairs Associate -- Anne TeBeest
Advertising Sales -- Alex Treadway
National Journal's Technology Daily is published every weekday, except holidays, by National Journal Group Inc., 600 New Hampshire Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20037.
| | ©2006 by National Journal Group Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction or transmission in any form of this product by any means—from a retrieval service or any other electronic form or from a photocopy—in whole or part without permission is strictly prohibited.
National Journal Group makes no representations or warranties with respect to and is not responsible for the content of World Wide Web sites linked to by this publication but not controlled by National Journal Group.
Please read the details of our Privacy Policy.
Editorial: 202-266-7197
Fax: 202-266-7094
Subscription
Inquiries: 202-266-7264
Customer Service: 202-266-7230 or 1-800-207-8001
|
|
|
|
|
