Tag Archives: netflix

Meet the Engineer Who Forced Silicon Valley’s Gender Problem Into the Open

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>
Tracy Chou Josh Robenstone/Fairfax Media

Back in October 2013, Tracy Chou, a top engineer for the social scrapbooking site Pinterest, was flying home to San Francisco with fellow attendees of the annual Grace Hopper Celebration, the nation’s biggest conference for women in computing. “If this flight out of Minneapolis goes down,” she tweeted, “Silicon Valley is going to be down a substantial % of female engineers.”

She was only half joking. At the conference, Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg had posited that the Valley’s gender gap was actually getting worse, and the comment set Chou’s geek gears whirling. “Not that I disagree with the premise,” she says. “I just had this thought that nobody actually knows what the numbers are.”

For years, Silicon Valley has tried to hide those numbers. Starting in 2008, news outlets filed Freedom of Information Act requests with the Department of Labor, hoping to obtain the workforce diversity data the tech giants refused to release. The companies lawyered up—as of March 2013, most of the top firms (Apple, Google, Microsoft, et al.) had convinced the feds their stats were trade secrets that should remain private.

Their real reason for withholding the data may well have been embarrassment. Although tech employment has grown by 37 percent since 2003, the presence of women on engineering teams has remained flat (at around 13 percent) for more than two decades, and women’s share of what the US Census Bureau calls “computer workers” has actually declined since the early 1990s.

In this male-dominated landscape, Chou, 27, is a rising star, with two degrees from Stanford, including a master’s in computer science with a focus on artificial intelligence. On her way up, she interned at Google, Facebook, and a rocket science company. Her coding prowess recently landed her on Forbes“30 under 30” and Fast Company‘s 2015 list of the “most creative people in business.”

Read about how Rev. Jesse Jackson is taking on Silicon Valley’s epic diversity problem.

Despite her success, she’s more than passingly familiar with the obstacles the Valley’s sausage fest creates for women—from brogrammer pickup lines to biased hiring and promotion. (Not to mention pay: As of 2011, census data shows, women in technical fields were making about $16,000 less, on average, than men.)

Fed up with the data void, Chou came home from her conference and wrote a Medium post calling for more transparency: “The actual numbers I’ve seen and experienced in industry are far lower than anybody is willing to admit,” she wrote. “So where are the numbers?” With her bosses’ permission, she started the ball rolling: Just 11 of Pinterest’s 89 engineers (12 percent) were women, she revealed. (Today, it’s around 17 percent.)

Her post quickly made its way around programmer circles, and employees of two dozen companies shared gender stats with Chou via Twitter. To keep track of the numbers, she set up a repository on the code-sharing site GitHub and invited all to participate. As word spread, more techies stepped up. Within a week, her repository had stats on more than 50 firms. (It now has more than 200—including GitHub, whose 104 coders include just 14 women—making it the most comprehensive available source of coders’ gender data.)

The numbers were as bad as you might expect: Just 17 of Yelp’s 206 engineers (8 percent) were women, for example. Dropbox was barely better, with 26 out of 275 (9 percent). Nextdoor, a social-media tool for neighborhoods, had 29 engineers—all male. Change.org, which bills itself as “the world’s platform for change,” had less than 13 percent women engineers; it has since changed for the better, with 20 percent.

Chou’s project helped fuel the wave of public criticism that has shamed big companies into coming clean. Seven months after the launch, Google disclosed that 17 percent of its tech staff is female. (Chou heard that her Medium post had made it all the way to cofounder Larry Page.) Twitter, Facebook, Yahoo, and dozens of other companies coughed up their stats not long after: Most reported between 10 and 20 percent women in “tech” positions—which can be pretty loosely defined. Some household names, like IBM, Netflix, and Zynga, still have yet to produce meaningful diversity data. “The crowdsourced stuff is way better and more reliable than the official party line,” notes Silicon Valley diversity consultant Nicole Sanchez, whom Github recently hired as a VP. (The racial diversity numbers are equally cringeworthy; see our related story on Jesse Jackson’s efforts in Silicon Valley.)

I sat down with Chou at Pinterest’s San Francisco headquarters a few days before an infusion of capital made it one of the world’s most valuable startups—$11 billion on paper. In a glass-wrapped conference room, she perched on the edge of her seat, speaking softly, but at a spitfire pace. Chou first learned of the industry’s gender problem from her parents, engineers who earned their Ph.D.s together back in the 1980s. “Their names are gender-ambiguous transliterations of their Chinese names,” she recalled. “One of the stories my mom told was that she went to pick up finals for both her and my dad. The professor was really surprised at who was who, because my mom was doing better in the class.”

When she started out studying computer science as a Stanford undergrad, “I felt really out of place,” she told me. “There weren’t many other women.” The coursework was tough, and the guys in her classes talked a big game. “My self-calibration was off,” she explained. “There’s research on how guys are generally inclined to give themselves more credit. So their calibration was ‘I’m awesome; this is super easy,’ when I felt like I was doing poorly.”

Concerned she wasn’t qualified for CS, Chou switched to electrical engineering. But the more she excelled, the more pushback she got. Male classmates would interrupt her or tune out when she spoke. During group projects, guys would reject her proposals and debate alternatives for hours before returning to her idea. “It’s okay to have a girl in the class if she’s not very good,” she said. “But it felt like once I became better than they were, it was not okay anymore.”

This insidious sexism followed her into the real world. At one diversity event, Chou got into a debate with a male developer over a product built by Quora, where she’d been an early engineer. “Finally, I had to say, ‘No, I worked there. Stop shitting on me!'” Another time, at a meet-up, a guy joked about Chou’s job at another company: “What do you do there, photocopy shit?” Men tried picking her up with lines like, “You’re too pretty to code.” Such cluelessness presented a conundrum: “There’s always that question of, ‘Do I want to be the engineer that always talks about gender? Or do I want to be an engineer that talks about engineering?'”

The Valley’s sexism came under renewed scrutiny this year when Ellen Pao, a former partner at Kleiner, Perkins, Caufield, and Byers, sued the VC firm for discrimination. She lost, but the case “raised awareness of the sort of thing that a lot of women face: unconscious bias, messy situations, discrimination that’s not clear-cut,” Chou said. In her view, getting the numbers out there is merely a first step: “There’s an analogy in product development,” she said. You can try to grok your users by looking at what people are clicking and how many are creating accounts, but “understanding the why in the numbers is pretty important,” she added. “We’re not quite there yet.”

Link:  

Meet the Engineer Who Forced Silicon Valley’s Gender Problem Into the Open

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Meet the Engineer Who Forced Silicon Valley’s Gender Problem Into the Open

Native American Actors Walk Off Set of New Adam Sandler Movie Over Racist Jokes

Mother Jones

About a dozen Native American actors quit the set of a new Adam Sandler film, produced by Netflix, to protest the script’s portrayal of Apache culture and what the actors claim are racist jokes about native women and elders.

According to a report by Indian Country, the actors of “The Ridiculous Six,” a spoof of the classic western flick “The Magnificent Seven,” complained to producers about the offensive stereotypes, which include the naming of female characters as Beaver’s Breath and No Bra. One scene also has a native woman “squatting and urinating while smoking a peace pipe.”

Allison Young, a Navajo Nation tribal member and student, said the actors talked to the producers and told them what they found offensive. “They just told us, ‘If you guys are so sensitive, you should leave,'”she said. “I didn’t want to cry but the feeling just came over me. This is supposed to be a comedy that makes you laugh. A film like this should not make someone feel this way.”

Loren Anthony, another tribal member and actor, told Indian Country that while he initially had reservations about appearing in the film, producers had assured him the jokes would not be racist. But from the very beginning, he said, things “started getting weird” and what were supposed to be jokes were simply offensive.

On set, going to brawl out with Nick Nolte. #TheRidiculousSix #NickNolte #NMfilm #NM #film #SAGfilm #LasVegasNM #movies #NativeActor #Acting #Actor #hollywood #Comedy #NativePride #NativeAmerican

A photo posted by Loren Anthony (@lorenanthony) on Apr 21, 2015 at 7:31am PDT

Netflix defends the film as a supposed satire. “The movie has ‘ridiculous’ in the title for a reason: because it is ridiculous,” the company said in a statement. “It is a broad satire of Western movies and the stereotypes they popularized, featuring a diverse cast that is not only part of—but in on—the joke.”

“The Ridiculous Six” follows a string of flops for Sandler, whose recent films include the 2012 movie “Jack and Jill,” which succeeded in winning every single category at the Razzies that year. His latest production stars Nick Nolte, Steve Buscemi, Will Forte, and Vanilla Ice. A preview of what that looks like below:

Awesome time with all my fellow Native’s – Navajo, Apache, Comanche, Choctaw. Cherokee.

A photo posted by Vanilla Ice â&#156;… (@vanillaiceofficial) on Apr 23, 2015 at 8:14pm PDT

“Nothing has changed,” Young says. “We are still just Hollywood Indians.”

See original article: 

Native American Actors Walk Off Set of New Adam Sandler Movie Over Racist Jokes

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Native American Actors Walk Off Set of New Adam Sandler Movie Over Racist Jokes

Netflix Just Released the Trailer for Tina Fey’s New Sitcom and It Looks Incredible

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Welcome to your new favorite thing. Finally, a glimpse of Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt—the latest from Tina Fey and the team behind 30 Rock—which comes to Netflix on March 6. Reminiscent of the recent rash of reality TV shows like Breaking the Faith and Breaking Amish, the comedy series starring Ellie Kemper (The Office, Bridesmaids) follows a peppy former doomsday cult victim as she tries to make a new life in New York City, having been rescued from an Indiana bunker. Hilarity ensues. Alongside Kemper, it’s a joy to see former 30 Rock stars Jane Krakowski and Tituss Burgess.

The first sitcom for Fey since 30 Rock was originally developed to air on NBC (co-written by NBC show-runner Robert Carlock), but it was bought up by Netflix last November. At a recent press conference for TV critics, Fey joked that the lack of network restrictions on streaming platforms was creatively liberating: “I think season two’s gonna mostly be shower sex,” she said, according to NPR.

For someone who has made network TV her career, the shift to streaming is a big move for Fey. But she told critics that the basics of any television series still apply on Netflix: “People still have that communal feeling when the next season of Orange is the New Black goes up. And they do want to talk about it, they do want to email about it and they do want to talk about it at work. So you still have the communal feeling of, like, ‘Oh we want to see this and talk about it right now.'”

The only catch? “Its just not literally at that specific hour of the night.”

Original source: 

Netflix Just Released the Trailer for Tina Fey’s New Sitcom and It Looks Incredible

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Netflix Just Released the Trailer for Tina Fey’s New Sitcom and It Looks Incredible

All that light pollution is wasting energy AND making you sick

All that light pollution is wasting energy AND making you sick

23 Oct 2014 8:23 PM

Share

Share

All that light pollution is wasting energy AND making you sick

×

If you stood at the heart of Hong Kong in the middle of the night and looked up, the sky would be about 1,000 times brighter than it’d be in the countryside.

Not all of us are living in cities that huge, or that utterly blinding — Hong Kong has been dubbed “the most light-polluted city in the world.” Still, researchers claim “light pollution” is not only wasting a lot of energy, but it could also be impacting our health.

According to Harvard Medical School neuroscientist Steven Lockley, this whole life-after-dark habit we’ve got is really messing with our natural rhythms. “Every day we don’t go to bed at dusk, we experience what Lockley calls ‘mini jetlag,’” reports The Guardian. And prolonged mini jetlag could even be “carcinogenic;” one study found that female workers on the night shift are more likely to develop breast cancer.

To add insult to injury, a lot of the excess light is superfluous:

“As a society we need to think, do we really need some of these amenities that are putting light pollution into the environment?” Lockley says. “Do we need 24/7 garages, do we need 24/7 supermarkets, do we need 24/7 TV? It was only in 1997 that the BBC turned off and there was the national anthem and we all went to bed.”

OK, so maybe everything would be a lot more beautiful and a lot less cancer-causing if we didn’t live in these blazing urban centers and instead went to bed with the sun like our well-rested ancestors. But since most of us do live in cities, then perhaps more places should take a page from Los Angeles, whose fleet of LED street lamps save the city almost $10 million annually in energy and maintenance costs.

Because LED technology also makes it easier to install smart things like color-changing lights and motion sensors, it could both reduce our carbon footprint and make it a little less likely to have that annoying streetlamp flooding our bedroom window. But would it make us less likely to be up ’til the wee hours eating cookies and watching Netflix? Hmmmm.

Source:
Urban light pollution: why we’re all living with permanent ‘mini jetlag

, The Guardian.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.Share

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Get stories like this in your inbox

AdvertisementAdvertisement

Taken from:  

All that light pollution is wasting energy AND making you sick

Posted in Anchor, Everyone, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on All that light pollution is wasting energy AND making you sick

Amazon’s cloud is about to get dirtier

SERVER HARM

Amazon’s cloud is about to get dirtier

17 Sep 2014 3:18 PM

Share

Share

Amazon’s cloud is about to get dirtier

×

In the latest effort to satisfy our desire to save every photo, thought, and fragment of information in cyberspace, Amazon plans to build a fat new server farm that will offer “cloud” storage for such companies as Yelp, Netflix, Pinterest, Dropbox, Spotify, Soundcloud, Tumblr, and Vine, to name more than a few.

According to the Seattle Times, the $1.1 billion server farm will be located in Dublin, Ohio. The city is served by an electric utility that gets two-thirds of its juice from coal-fired power plants, and has a history of lobbying for the coal industry.

As a Greenpeace report from earlier this year shows, not all energy-hogging data centers warm the climate equally, and Amazon’s are among the worst of the worst. Fossil fuel burning provides over half the energy used by Amazon’s colossal digital network — and nuclear power supplies another quarter. Here’s the breakdown:

Greenpeace

By contrast, the Greenpeace report raves that Apple powers the iCloud with 100 percent renewables; Facebook put a data center in Iowa to spark the world’s largest purchase of wind turbines; and Google is signing long-term contracts to buy cleaner power for some of its centers. What’s more, these three web giants teamed up in North Carolina to pressure Duke Energy, the largest U.S. utility and one of the country’s biggest emitters, to offer customers — including their data warehouses — the choice to buy greener electricity.

(Before heaping too much praise on all that progress, recall that these companies and their founders don’t have perfect track records when it comes to caring for the climate.)

To avoid adding to Amazon’s dirty energy use (and supporting its labor-abusing, writer-exploiting, bookstore-bullying, and publisher-extorting ways) we can host our websites and store our digital stuff elsewhere until the company cleans up its act — and maybe even shop in a real store like back in the old days.

Yet given Amazon’s’s dominion over many of the apps and sites we use for fun, entertainment, information, and procrastination, we’d basically have to give up our computers and all other devices to steer clear of its sovereign realm.

If all the less desirable impacts of the internet were as palpable as the gratification we get from instantly streaming the last five Parks and Recreation episodes (made possible by Amazon’s web infrastructure), it would be a lot easier to make an informed decision about how much digital property we really want.

Maybe we need an app that’ll kick a could of smoke out of the back of our laptops every time we order a bag of groceries from Amazon Fresh.

Source:
Investors may balk, but Amazon plans to boost cloud spending

, The Seattle Times.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.Share

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Get stories like this in your inbox

AdvertisementAdvertisement

Visit source: 

Amazon’s cloud is about to get dirtier

Posted in Anchor, Cyber, FF, G & F, GE, LG, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Amazon’s cloud is about to get dirtier

Who Gets Special Access to Comcast’s Customers? Who Decides?

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Things that make you go “hmmm”:

Apple Inc. is in talks with Comcast Corp. about teaming up for a streaming-television service that would use an Apple set-top box and get special treatment on Comcast’s cables to ensure it bypasses congestion on the Web, people familiar with the matter say.

….Under the plan Apple proposed to Comcast, Apple’s video streams would be treated as a “managed service” traveling in Internet protocol format—similar to cable video-on-demand or phone service. Those services travel on a special portion of the cable pipe that is separate from the more congested portion reserved for public Internet access.

People familiar with the matter said that while Apple would like a separate “flow” for its video traffic, it isn’t asking for its traffic to be prioritized over other Internet-based services.

Making video-on-demand operate properly requires careful engineering. It doesn’t work if you just dump it out on the public internet and call it a day. However, that careful engineering costs money, and it’s not unfair for companies to demand reasonable compensation of some sort if they’re the ones who bear the costs.

But who decides what’s reasonable and what isn’t? In a competitive market, the market eventually decides. Price signals and competition do the heavy lifting with only light government regulation to set a level playing field and police the worst abuses. But when companies like Comcast have effective monopoly control over internet access in their territories, who decides then? There are no market forces to rely on. So, for example, when Netflix finally agrees to pay a fee to Comcast for delivery of its video content, the quality of Netflix transmissions miraculously goes up almost instantly. Apparently there were no infrastructure issues at all and no special buildout costs. It was just a matter of Comcast extorting some extra revenue from Netflix.

The Apple case is different in the details, but it raises the same basic principle: Who decides? Who gets special access to Comcast’s customer base? Who gets shut out? The market can’t provide any guidance because Comcast has little genuine competition in this space.

So who decides?

See the article here: 

Who Gets Special Access to Comcast’s Customers? Who Decides?

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Who Gets Special Access to Comcast’s Customers? Who Decides?

Is "House of Cards’" Most Principled New Character Also a War Criminal?

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Democratic congresswoman and war vet Jacqueline Sharp (played by Molly Parker) is one of the most sympathetic characters on the Netflix political drama House of Cards. In a series populated by dark, purely self-interested, and/or corrupt characters, Sharp is something of a refreshing outlier. She is smart and strong, particularly when in a room of cynical, powerful old men. She is generally a kind and upfront person. She demonstrates an aversion to unethical deal-making. And she isn’t a heartless mass-manipulator on the scale of Vice President Francis Underwood (Kevin Spacey).

“I don’t think that this character is a sociopath. I think that she has a conscience,” Parker said of her character. “I think that she’s a principled woman in terms of her point of view, her perspective as a soldier.”

However likeable or principled she may be, could she also be the show’s first war criminal?

In the first episode of season two, Underwood informs Sharp that he wishes to have her succeed him as House Majority Whip. When she asks why he is so adamant, the morally bankrupt Underwood reveals that he picked her because of her “ruthless pragmatism” in wartime. He asks her about the number of missile strikes she ordered during the war, and how she ordered them knowing many innocent women and children would perish in the attacks. “I had orders to eliminate the enemy,” she says, rationalizing the civilian casualties. “I watched apartment buildings, entire villages, gone, like they were never there.”

Her actions clearly haunt her. In a subsequent episode, when she is in bed with her lover, she confesses in sorrow that she “killed a lot of people,” before she tells him to continue bringing her to climax.

Continue Reading »

Continued here:  

Is "House of Cards’" Most Principled New Character Also a War Criminal?

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Is "House of Cards’" Most Principled New Character Also a War Criminal?

Forget TV, It’s Internet Access at Stake in the Comcast Deal

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Paul Krugman says we made a mistake when we stopped worrying about monopolies:

At first, arguments against policing monopoly power pointed to the alleged benefits of mergers in terms of economic efficiency. Later, it became common to assert that the world had changed in ways that made all those old-fashioned concerns about monopoly irrelevant. Aren’t we living in an era of global competition? Doesn’t the creative destruction of new technology constantly tear down old industry giants and create new ones?

The truth, however, is that many goods and especially services aren’t subject to international competition: New Jersey families can’t subscribe to Korean broadband. Meanwhile, creative destruction has been oversold: Microsoft may be an empire in decline, but it’s still enormously profitable thanks to the monopoly position it established decades ago.

….And the same phenomenon may be playing an important role in holding back the economy as a whole. One puzzle about recent U.S. experience has been the disconnect between profits and investment. Profits are at a record high as a share of G.D.P., yet corporations aren’t reinvesting their returns in their businesses. Instead, they’re buying back shares, or accumulating huge piles of cash. This is exactly what you’d expect to see if a lot of those record profits represent monopoly rents.

It’s time, in other words, to go back to worrying about monopoly power, which we should have been doing all along. And the first step on the road back from our grand detour on this issue is obvious: Say no to Comcast.

I can’t find anything to disagree with here. Our current situation is mostly a result of the Borkian revolution in antitrust law, which began in the 1970s and has since upended the way courts think about monopolies. Instead of caring about competition per se—or its lack—Bork invented a beguiling tautology in which any company with lots of customers is ipso facto creating a lot of consumer welfare and must therefore be OK. And since successful monopolies always have lots of customer, consumers must be benefiting.

This has been a huge mistake. Competition is what drives creative destruction, and it’s valuable for its own sake. We’ve lost sight of that, and it’s time to reverse course.

In the case of Comcast, of course, it’s possible to argue that cable TV is already a monopoly in every geographical area, so it doesn’t really matter who the monopolist is. That’s not entirely true, but it’s true enough to give one pause. More clearly dangerous, though, would be Comcast’s newfound monopoly over broadband internet in half the country. There are, theoretically, multiple ways to get broadband internet in your home, but in practice you’re limited to cable in about 90 percent of the country. That monopoly has given us some of the world’s worst broadband, both painfully slow and painfully expensive.

What’s more, as Michael Hiltzik points out, broadband is a direct competitor to cable in the streaming video market, and having a single company with a monopoly position in both is just begging for trouble. Comcast will almost certainly be willing to make promises of net neutrality in order to win approval for its merger with Time-Warner, but those promises will be short-lived. The truth is that if this deal were allowed to go through under any circumstances, it would probably deal a serious blow to our ability to use the internet the way we want, not the way Comcast wants us to.1 But if it goes through under our actual existing current circumstances, in which enforcement of net neutrality has already been reduced to a husk of its former self, then we can just kiss streaming video goodbye.

Our real public priority ought to be figuring out a way to insist on broadband competition. There are various ways of doing this, some more free-marketish than others. But that should be the minimum price for approving this merger. A bigger cable TV provider might or might not be dangerous. A bigger monopoly in broadband internet will undeniably be. Competition is the answer to this, the more the better.

1Just to be clear for those new to this, Comcast wants us to use the internet only in ways that don’t interfere with the money they make from bringing TV and other video streams into our homes. In other words, their self-interest is directly opposed to net neutrality: they will push at every turn to block, slow down, or otherwise interfere with access to high quality streaming video over the internet. They want you to get that stuff from Comcast via cable TV, not via Netflix or Hulu or BitTorrent or any other provider via high-speed broadband.

Source article:

Forget TV, It’s Internet Access at Stake in the Comcast Deal

Posted in alo, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Forget TV, It’s Internet Access at Stake in the Comcast Deal

Comcast-Time Warner Merger Really Has Nothing to do With You and Me

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Via Matt Yglesias, I see that Matthew Klein has finally written a short post that explains what’s really behind the Comcast-Time Warner merger:

To understand what the deal is really about, remember that pay-TV distributors are at the mercy of the networks that sell programming. According to Bloomberg Industries analyst Paul Sweeney, about half your cable bill goes to companies such as Viacom Inc. and Walt Disney Co. The networks consistently raise prices about 10 percent a year on average, irrespective of the state of the economy. By contrast, the typical cable bill only goes up by about 5 percent a year. Cable companies have eaten the difference by lowering their margins and cutting costs elsewhere, but there are limits to both processes.

This margin squeeze is why Time Warner Inc. spun off its cable business, why Comcast acquired NBC Universal, and why Internet-based subscription services offered by Netflix Inc. and Amazon.com Inc. have invested in original programming as a defense against the rising cost of licensing content. It also explains why Time Warner Cable had to cave to demands for higher fees from CBS Corp. a few months ago. Merging the two biggest cable operators might give them more bargaining power with the networks, especially if it encourages DIRECTV and Dish Network Corp. to consolidate the satellite business.

In the same way that the health care business can largely be understood as a competition between suppliers (hospitals, pharma, etc.) and consumers (insurance companies), the video entertainment business should largely be understood as a competition between content producers (Disney, Viacom, etc.) and content distributors (Comcast, Verizon, etc.). Ideally, you want competition everywhere. That is, you want enough producers that they compete with each other; enough distributors that they compete with each other; and enough balance between the two that neither producers nor distributors have the whip hand against the other.

So the question we should be asking about the Comcast-Time Warner merger is simple: Do content distributors need more clout? Klein suggests they do: they’re at the mercy of rapacious networks who keep raising carriage fees and they don’t have the market power to fight back. The merger will help that.

That may be, but I’d like to hear more about this. Networks and cable companies fight constantly, as you know if you’ve ever seen dueling ads about why your favorite shows will soon be off the air in your area. The networks run ads telling people that if they don’t want to miss the next episode of CSI, they better call their cable company and tell them to knock off the gamesmanship. The cable companies run ads insisting that the network is jacking up rates unconscionably and everyone should besiege them with demands that they be more reasonable. Usually this continues until about one minute before the current contract runs out, at which point both sides make a deal. Occasionally it goes longer, and certain shows really are blacked out for a while.

If you’ve ever had trouble figuring out which side is really at fault in one of these battles of the titans, well, that’s the problem. Two mega-corporations are duking it out, and the rest of us are just caught in the middle. From a consumer point of view, part of the problem is that we’ve all been trained to hate the cable companies who send us outrageous bills every month and love the content producers who make all the shows we love. But don’t fall for that: it’s just an artifact of which business happens to be customer facing. The truth is that both sides are big, soulless corporations who have no claim on your emotions. That said, I’d normally take Klein’s side of this except for one thing: would a bigger Comcast really have more negotiating clout than they do now? I guess that’s possible, but they have a helluva lot of clout already. No network can afford to be shut out of Comcast’s market for long. So it’s not clear to me that a bigger Comcast would really do much for the rest of us.

In any case, that’s how to think of this stuff. Practically every big battle you see in the media arena is, one way or another, a battle between gigantic producers on the one hand and gigantic distributors on the other. That’s what net neutrality is all about. That’s what copyright battles are all about. That’s what broadband fights are all about. And that’s what this merger is all about. We are all just pawns watching the fireworks.

See original article:  

Comcast-Time Warner Merger Really Has Nothing to do With You and Me

Posted in Casio, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Comcast-Time Warner Merger Really Has Nothing to do With You and Me

Here’s Why You Don’t See Romney Reacting to the 47 Percent Video in "Mitt"

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

“I think I’m a flawed candidate,” says Republican presidential contender Mitt Romney, in director Greg Whiteley‘s behind-the-scenes documentary Mitt, which premieres on Netflix on Friday. The film, which spans six years and two Romney presidential runs, offers some intimate moments of the Romney family on the campaign trail. We get to see Mitt privately acknowledging that his image was boiled down to “the flippin‘ Mormon,” the family playing in the snow, Ann Romney talking about her horse, and Mitt ironing his tux sleeve while wearing it.

But if you’re looking for a more thorough political history of the 2012 campaign and the GOP candidate, you’ll notice (as we previously pointed out here) a few things missing: Bain outsourcing jobs, self-deportation, Romneycare, Obamacare, the decision to pick Paul Ryan as running mate, “Let Detroit Go Bankrupt,” Afghanistan, Iraq, varmint-shooting, cheesy grits, abortion, China, “binders full of women,” Benghazi, “corporations are people, my friend,” and a whole lot more.

Furthermore, Whiteley’s film doesn’t include any scenes revealing how Romney and his team processed the release of the 47 percent video—news that came to reinforce Romney’s political persona. The reason? Limited access—and, according to Whiteley, the fact that the goal in making the movie wasn’t to please political junkies.

Continue Reading »

Credit – 

Here’s Why You Don’t See Romney Reacting to the 47 Percent Video in "Mitt"

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Here’s Why You Don’t See Romney Reacting to the 47 Percent Video in "Mitt"