Wednesday, January 22, 2014

Viacom Names Martha Riley As Senior Vice President Of Music Sales For Viacom Media Networks

Viacom Names Martha Riley As Senior Vice President Of Music Sales For Viacom Media Networks.   Riley will provide the strategic connection between Viacom's Music and Entertainment Ad Sales group and the Music and Logo Group brands

 By Mi2N


 Viacom Inc. promoted Martha Riley to Senior Vice President, Music Sales, with sales responsibility for the company's Music and Logo Group, which includes MTV, MTV2, mtvU, VH1, VH1 Classic, Palladia and Logo. Based in New York, Riley will report directly to Jeff Lucas, Head of Sales for Music and Entertainment at Viacom.

 In her new role, Riley will provide the strategic connection between Viacom's Music and Entertainment Ad Sales group and the Music and Logo Group brands it supports. She will work closely with channel leadership to drive ad sales strategy and products that are consistent with each brand, its content and its overall goals. Riley will foster collaboration among Ad Sales, Integrated Marketing, Programming, Scheduling and Digital to develop marketing solutions that leverage the company's creative and cross-platform capabilities in full to achieve client objectives.

 "Our Ad Sales team and its marketing solutions are at their best when they're fully aligned with the creative content of our brands across capabilities in full to achieve client objectives. "Our Ad Sales team and its marketing solutions are at their best when they're fully aligned with the creative content of our brands across every screen," said Lucas. "Martha is a big picture, innovative thinker who knows how to get the most out of our content for our clients in a way that resonates with our audiences."

 Riley is a twenty-year veteran of Viacom, and during that time she has worked extensively with the company's Music and Logo Group brands. Most recently, she served as Vice President of Sales for the Music Group, with responsibility for New York-based ad sales across MTV, MTV2, mtvU, VH1 and Logo. Earlier, Riley was Director of Sales for MTV2. She joined Viacom as a Sales Planner in 1993. Related News from Mi2N: » Viacom Names Martha Riley As Senior Vice President Of Music Sales For Viacom Media Networks

Saturday, January 18, 2014

If you think cable TV sucks, just wait

Does This Ruling Mean The End of the Internet? Maybe.

If you think cable TV sucks, just wait. Craig Aaron, president and CEO of Free Press, says the end of the Internet as we know it is coming—unless we do something about that.
On Tuesday, the federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., trashed the Federal Communications Commission’s “Open Internet” rules.
Translation: The judges just killed Net Neutrality.
Less-wonky translation: Verizon, AT&T, Time Warner Cable or whoever provides your Internet connection can now block, slow or otherwise mess with websites, apps and other services.
And the FCC—the agency that’s supposed to protect Internet users and oversee communications networks—can’t do anything about it.
Well, they can do one thing—which I’ll explain in a second.
But first …
What did the court actually say?
Let’s be clear: The court didn’t rule against Net Neutrality —  that fundamental principle which ensures you can go wherever, browse whenever, and download whatever you want when you go online.
The court just invalidated the way the FCC tried to make Net Neutrality rules in a 2010 order. The judges rejected the legal framework used by the FCC and said the agency currently lacks the authority to implement and to enforce these rules.
Indeed, the court specifically stated that its “task as a reviewing court is not to assess the wisdom of the Open Internet Order regulations, but rather to determine whether the Commission has demonstrated that the regulations fall within the scope of its statutory grant of authority.”
So how did we get into this mess?
The reason the FCC’s authority to regulate broadband didn’t pass muster in court is because, under the Bush administration, the FCC abdicated its authority. At the urging of phone and cable lobbyists, the agency changed the way it treated broadband under the law. That was a huge mistake.
“We can still have Net Neutrality in America—but the FCC must reclaim its legal authority immediately.”
And so when the FCC tried to stop Comcast from blocking lawful file-sharing back in 2008, Comcast sued them claiming the agency didn’t have the authority. And Comcast won.
And when the FCC tried to implement watered-down but not completely worthless Net Neutrality rules in 2010, Verizon sued claiming they still lacked the authority. And Verizon won yesterday.
The silver lining is that there’s nothing in the court’s decision that prevents the FCC from reversing its earlier misguided decisions and treating broadband under the law as the “telecommunications service” it so obviously is.
Well, there’s nothing stopping the FCC but a lack of political will and the lobbying might of the telecom industry (which spends more to influence Washington than anybody outside the drug companies).
But both Tuesday’s decision and a prior decision by the Supreme Court in the 2005 Brand X case clearly establish that the FCC must “reclassify broadband” if it wishes to have any lasting ability to prohibit ISPs from blocking websites or discriminating against apps.
We can still have Net Neutrality in America—but the FCC must reclaim its legal authority immediately.
What if the FCC doesn’t act?
If you think cable TV sucks, just wait. ISPs like Time Warner Cable, AT&T and Verizon want to take the worst aspects of the cable system and impose them on the Internet.
Expect Internet blackouts that extend far beyond the popular content vendors, as smaller websites are caught in the crossfire. Tweets, emails and texts will be mysteriously delayed or dropped. Videos will load slowly, if at all. Websites will work fine one minute and freeze the next.
Your ISP will claim it’s not their fault, and you’ll have no idea who is to blame. You also won’t be able to vote with your feet or your wallet, because there’s no competition in broadband, and all the big ISPs will be playing this game.
You see, ISPs hate the idea that they’re nothing more than providers of “dumb pipes.” Now that they are free from any legal restraints, the ISPs will try to get Internet companies to pay extra tolls—and threaten to block or delay them if they don’t. Exclusive deals could become the norm, with AT&T exclusively bringing you Netflix, while Time Warner Cable is the sole source for YouTube.
Is that all?
Net Neutrality lowers the barriers of entry for entrepreneurs, startups and small businesses by ensuring the Web is a fair and level playing field. It’s because of Net Neutrality that small businesses and innovators have been able to thrive on the Internet. They use the Internet to reach new customers and showcase their goods, applications and services.
Without Net Neutrality, the next Google being built in a garage somewhere will never get off the ground.
And it gets worse. The court’s decision and the FCC’s bungling have put more in jeopardy than just Net Neutrality.
For example, the ruling threatens FCC efforts to modernize the universal service program to ensure that rural and low-income users are able to access affordable broadband services. We could see the progress made toward closing the digital divide come to a full stop.
And if privacy is your main concern, this ruling frees ISPs to monitor everything you do and say online—and sell that information to the highest bidder. ISPs have something that companies like Google and Facebook don’t: direct control over your connections to the Internet and the devices you use to connect to it.
So if this decision stands, it won’t be long before your ISP requires you to connect via their list of approved devices and then uses those devices to literally watch you. Forget about encryption—your ISP could require the key as condition of using its network.
Is there any hope?
Yes. The one thing, that aforementioned silver lining, is that the FCC still has the power and ability to turn this all around.
New FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler recently stated that the FCC must be able to protect broadband users and preserve the Internet’s fundamental open architecture. Now he has no other choice but to reassert the FCC’s clear authority over our nation’s communications infrastructure.
Will he do it? Not without a lot of political pressure—enough political pressure to counteract the onslaught of industry lobbyists (and hired guns and sketchy front groups) about to descend on his office.
But we’ve seen throughout the fight over Net Neutrality, the massive mobilization to stop the SOPA/PIPA Web censorship bills, and the public outcry against unchecked NSA surveillance that when millions of Internet users speak out, Washington will pay attention
So is this the end of the Internet? Only if we let it be.
Editor's Note: An earlier version of this post mentioned Comcast in the context of this week's court ruling. However, under the terms of its merger with NBC, Comcast must abide by the Open Internet rules regardless of the court decision until 2018. The author regrets the error.

Friday, January 17, 2014

California woman faces trial for wearing Google Glass while driving

California woman faces trial for wearing Google Glass while driving

SAN DIEGO (Reuters) - A woman ticketed for driving while wearing Google Glass, a tiny computer mounted on an eyeglass frame, is scheduled to appear in a Southern California traffic court on Thursday, in a case that raises new questions about distracted driving. Technology entrepreneur Cecilia Abadie, one of thousands of people testing the device for Google Inc, was stopped for speeding in October by the California Highway Patrol on Interstate 15 in San Diego.

The officer then gave her a second citation for using a "monitor" in her car while driving, according to the Highway Patrol. Abadie quickly posted the news of her ticket on social media. "A cop just stopped me and gave me a ticket for wearing Google Glass while driving!" she wrote on the Google Plus social networking site. Abadie is apparently the first person cited for wearing Google Glass while driving. The device, which projects a small screen in the corner of a wearer's eye, is expected to become a major catalyst for what many believe to be the next big trend in mobile, wearable computing devices.

 Developers are already crafting apps to try to position themselves if the devices, which can be voice- or motion-activated, prove popular with consumers. Google Glass is not yet available for sale to the general public, although the company is testing the product with the help of thousands of so-called "Explorers" who have been given early access to the technology. At the end of December, Google made the device available to select developers, and it is expected to come to market later this year.

 Abadie is scheduled to appear in traffic court in San Diego on Thursday, where a trial will be held in front of a judge. (Editing by Sharon Bernstein and Ken Wills)

Friday, January 10, 2014

India diplomat indicted, asked to leave U.S.


Indian Diplomat Indicted But Already Has Immunity And Left US
By Nate Raymond and David Brunnstrom

A U.S. government official said Washington accepted a request by India to accredit the diplomat, Devyani Khobragade, at the United Nations and then asked New Delhi to waive the diplomatic immunity that status conferred. India denied the request, leading Washington to ask for her departure, the official said.NEW 
YORK/WASHINGTON D.C. (Reuters) - The Indian diplomat whose arrest and strip-searching in New York caused a major rift between India and the United States was indicted for visa fraud on Thursday, and the U.S. government immediately asked her to leave the country.
In a letter accompanying her indictment on Thursday, the prosecutor in the case, U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara in Manhattan, initially said Khobragade had left the country.
Shortly afterwards, a spokesman for Bharara said in a statement that she had not left.
A lawyer for Khobragade confirmed this.
"Despite Preet Bharara's reports to the contrary, Devyani Khobragade has not left the country," Daniel Arshack, her lawyer, said in a statement. "She is at home with her children."
There was no immediate comment from the Indian embassy in Washington or its mission to the United Nations.
Khobragade, who was deputy consul-general in New York, was arrested December 12 and charged with one count of visa fraud and another of making false statements about how much she paid her housekeeper.
Her arrest set off protests in India amid disclosures that she was strip searched on the day of her arrest. It also soured the broader U.S.-India bilateral relationship, leading to the postponement of two visits to India by senior U.S. officials and another by a U.S. business delegation.
Furious at Kobragade's treatment, India has curtailed privileges offered to U.S. diplomats and ordered the U.S. Embassy to close a club for expatriate Americans in New Delhi.
The arresting authority, the U.S. Marshals Service, characterized the strip search as a routine procedure imposed on any new arrestee.
Khobragade's departure would remove the focus of current friction between New Delhi and Washington, but it is unclear how long it will take the anger to subside in the run up to national elections in India in May.
The case has exposed underlying problems in a bilateral relationship that has failed to live up to its billing by President Barack Obama in 2010 as "a defining partnership for the 21st Century."
Critics accuse Obama of failing to pay sufficient attention to ties with a country viewed as a key strategic counterbalance to China and as an engine to boost the U.S. economy, while U.S. hopes of building a more robust business relationship with India have run into bureaucratic hurdles.
Frustration has grown among the U.S. corporate lobby. Indian sourcing rules for retail, information technology, medicine and clean energy products are contentious and U.S. firms complain about "unfair" imports from India of everything from shrimp to steel pipes. In June, more than 170 U.S. lawmakers signed a letter to Obama about Indian policies they said threatened U.S. jobs.
Daniel Markey, senior fellow for India, Pakistan and South Asia at the Council on Foreign Relations, said the Khobragade case made it appear the Obama administration had taken its eye off the ball on the relationship with India.
"The question is why this wasn't managed in a more sophisticated or subtle way, because things can be managed more effectively. This was always going to be an issue, but it could have been resolved more rapidly with less fanfare."
Speaking at a seminar on Thursday, Ron Somers, president of the U.S.-India Business Council blamed "bumbling on both sides" for the Khobragade affair.
"We have to do some thinking on this side as to what has there been in the way of frustration that allowed this incident to provoke and spill over as it has," he said.
"We really need now to be building trust and taking an introspective look at whether we really mean what we say when we talk about strategic partnership and how do we get there."
(Reporting by Nate Raymond in New York, David Brunnstrom in Washington, and Louis Charbonneau at the U.N.; editing by Clive McKeef)

Tuesday, January 7, 2014

How to Find Out Who Has Blocked You on Facebook

Edited by Flickety, Krystle, Jordan, Nyrangersfan1 and 49 others

Checking your Facebook account, you realize that someone has disappeared from your list of friends! Perhaps you had a falling out, or a misunderstanding, and now you're wondering whether you were not only unfriended, but also blocked. Here are some ways to find out, if you've got the will and patience to do some cyber-detective work.

MEMPHIS TN (IFS) --Facebook continues its ban on KDTN Radio One for the second straight month without any explanation as to why or how the ban was placed.  Several letters to the CEO of Facebook has resulted in no response at all.  Their opinion is, that they are to big to care, and you don't count at all.  It's a crazy way to do business with this company.  We have ads that we have paid for and we spend money with them.  But this is just the beginning of a long fight with these guys, and we are all in it for the long haul.  

Blog Archive