• On MovieTome: First Look: Jessica Alba in 'Machete'!

Media Sphere

November 30, 2007 8:00 AM PST

NFL Network vs. cable: Who's right? Who's wrong?

by Josh Wolf
  • 6 comments

Did you catch the Packers-Cowboys game Thursday night? According to USA Today, less than 40 percent of the United States was able to sit at home and watch as the Cowboys edged out the Packers 37-27. The widely anticipated competition between the two 10-1 teams aired locally, but for those not living in Green Bay, Milwaukee,or Dallas/Fort Worth, the only place to see the game was on the NFL Network, a fairly recent cable channel that reportedly, "provides about 24 hours per year of live NFL football and about 8,736 hours of filler."

Unfortunately, the NFL Network isn't available on many cable systems. Some cable providers, such as Comcast, only offer the network as part of its sports tier, despite the NFL's pleas to be included as basic cable. The two major satellite companies offer the channel in their basic package, and the NFL has mounted a campaign urging viewers to dump its cable companies for an alternative that carries the NFL Network.

... Read more
November 27, 2007 2:12 PM PST

What if Apple brought universal wifi to San Francisco

by Josh Wolf
  • Post a comment
While San Francisco's plan for municipal wifi may have stalled after Earthlink decided to abandon the project amidst corporate restructuring, the city's desire for free city-wide wifi was affirmed on November 6 when 62% of voters voiced their support for the original proposal. It's unclear whether the city will ever get their free wifi, but the city has voiced their desire to be able to log in anytime, anywhere and there do seem to be a few ways for this to still happen even without Earthlink on board.

It sounds silly, but San Francisco is Apple country. With a combined area of just 7x7 miles, there are three Apple Retail Stores (one of which just opened this past Friday) that are almost always crowded, Macbooks seem to outnumber PCs at every coffee shop, and the iPhones was already ubiquitous the moment it launched. With the iPod Touch being dependent on accessible wifi and the iPhone stiffled by AT&T's slow network speeds, San Francisco seems like the perfect opportunity to demonstrate how powerful these gadgets can be in a city with universal wireless access.

The benefits for Apple would be significant. Those living in San Francisco would have another incentive to upgrade to an iPod Touch or the iPhone, and the PR opportunities would be enormous. Apple's market share in the bay area would continue to climb, and the company would be able to push their airport technology and continue to build their global brand in association with San Francisco.

Of course, Apple would probably be disinclined to jump into this endeavor alone. There are a number of companies that are obvious choices to partner with Apple in connecting the entire city, but none of them have the same caliber of support amongst bay area residents.

Google could easily come on as a partner: they have the ad network that could make the initiative sustainable, but the privacy concerns that plagued the first iteration would obviously continue. AT&T is another possibility, but their track record is far spottier than Google's; many people in San Francisco wouldn't feel comfortable surfing on an AT&T network, but the telco is probably the most natural partner for such a project.

With Comcast and AT&T battling over the high-speed internet consumers, AT&T could offer a full-speed universal wifi connection to all of its DSL and mobile customers while providing a throttled connection to everyone for free. Doing so would provide a competitive advantage over Comcast, and would also help make up for the slower speed of DSL when compared to cable. Although the Google-Earthlink wifi deal generated significant criticism, most of the people who opposed the partnership were still largely in favor of bringing high-speed wireless internet to all San Franciscans. Some were concerned about Google's obsession with tracking users, many vocalized their opposition to the crippled speed that would come with the free service and still others simply felt that the best way to bring high-speed internet to everyone would be through an expansion of the City's existing fiber optic network. Yes, there were a few that opposed the plan because it would increase the amount of radio waves in the air, but these detractors seemed to make up a very small minority.

I still contend that the best solution is for the City to expand its fiber optic cabling and build a wireless network on the fiber network that is owned and maintained by the City. Doing so will cost a significant amount of tax-payer's money up front, but in the long run, the City would likely be able to recoup this investment by selling bandwidth to various companies.

While I don't feel that a network backed by Apple is the ideal solution for universal wifi, it's a deal that I could probably feel good about and one that would likely be quite popular with most people in San Francisco.

November 26, 2007 2:01 PM PST

TechCrunch polls readers on potential advertiser

by Josh Wolf
  • 1 comment

The conversational nature of blogs allows editors to ask their readers to weigh in--even decide--issues that affect the publication. Over the Thanksgiving weekend, Michael Arrington at TechCrunch empowered his readers to determine whether the site should accept advertising from Izea. Arrington agreed to abide by the results of the poll. After 24 hours, voting concluded with just under 3,500 people taking part.

Traditional news outlets often establish a wall between the editorial and advertising departments to maintain editorial independence. In other words, the people who line up advertisements have no say in the content, and the editorial staff is completely removed from deciding which advertising clients to engage. Of course, such an arrangement is all but impossible for most blogs and other small publications. These small outlets often have a staff of one, and even with a half-dozen at the helm it may not make sense to dedicate an entire employee to handle advertising.

... Read more
November 20, 2007 2:07 PM PST

Will 'Purple Violets' mark the decline of movie theaters?

by Josh Wolf
  • Post a comment

Edward Burns' latest film, Purple Violets, won't be coming to a theater near you, but you won't have to go far to see it. The movie is available to anyone with $13 and an account at iTunes. It is the first time a feature film has premiered at the Apple media store.

Burns first landed on the scene in Hollywood with his highly successful 1995 film The Brothers McMullen. He wrote, directed, produced and starred while managing to spend less than $30,000 putting together the vehicle that would pave the way for his role acting in Saving Private Ryan.

... Read more

November 16, 2007 4:21 PM PST

What does Bonds indictment mean for reporters Fainaru-Wada and Williams?

by Josh Wolf
  • 2 comments
The news that home run record holder Barry Bonds had been indicted came as a shock to much of the bay area yesterday. For several years, Bonds' legal struggle has made headlines and helped shed a light on the use of performance-enhancing drugs in professional sports, but after such a prolonged saga, it seemed unlikely that the Giants star would go down. His personal trainer Greg Anderson (whom I met while at the Federal Detention Center in Dublin, CA), spent over a year in custody for refusing to cooperate with the grand jury and many believed that Bonds' indictment hinged on the testimony Anderson had refused to provide.

Anderson is out today, but there is no reason that he caved and testified. The grand jury was due to expire next month and its extraordinarily unlikely that he would give up now. Former US Attorney Kevin Ryan confirmed on a radio news program this morning. Anderson's attorney Peter Garagos stated, Law.com, "Frankly I'm aghast. It looks like the government misled me and Greg as well, saying this case couldn't go forward without him."

There are many unanswered questions about why the government brought the indictment when they did, but what's just barely been mentioned is how this turn-of-events will affect Mark Fainaru-Wada and Lance Williams, whose coverage of the story for the San Francisco Chronicle and their book, Game of Shadows, led to the reporters being subpoenaed and later found in contempt for not revealing their anonymous sources.

... Read more
November 15, 2007 5:29 PM PST

Letterman's got a lot of love

by Josh Wolf
  • Post a comment
With the writer's strike 10 days in, many of those employed by talk shows and other programs are beginning to feel the financial effects of the silent set, but some folks have been spared the impact (at least for now).

David Letterman, who hosts the The Late Show with David Letterman on CBS, has offered to pay his staff through the rest of the year. According to Deadline Hollywood Daily, the money will come directly from Letterman himself. His production company, Worldwide Pants, also owns The Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson and the employees of that show will also be provided for throughout the remainder of 2007.

... Read more
November 13, 2007 1:01 PM PST

Judge orders reporter to produce public interest story or go to jail

by Josh Wolf
  • Post a comment
We've all heard the story of Warren Jeffs, the leader of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints who was recently convicted of two counts of rape and is facing life in prison, but there is another legal saga that originated in that same case which hasn't garnered much national attention.

Katie Baker was covering Jeffs case for the Salt Lake City television station KUTV. She interviewed a number of individuals involved in the case, including Mo Webb, a potential juror. Unfortunately for Baker, her interview with Webb violated a decorum order issued by Judge James Shumate that Baker was only vaguely familiar with.

Upon realizing that she violated the order, Baker apologized to the Court's public information officer and explained that she was unaware of the details of the order. In an October 23 written ruling, (PDF), Shumate found Baker in contempt, arguing that her ignorance of the prohibition is no excuse: "The Court's order would be meaningless if the 'I forgot to read it all' excuse was accepted."

In what Shumate would likely consider a moment of kindness, he did not send Baker directly to jail, nor did he assess an astronomical fine for her mistake. Instead the judge stayed his sentence for 90 days stating that, "Ms. Baker may purge her contempt if, within the said ninety (90) day period she produces a newscast addressing a public need." The ruling goes on to explain that Baker's assignment from the judge does not need to be broadcast at the station, but that she must submit a DVD copy of the newscast to the court.

Baker's attorney David Reymann plans to appeal Shumate's ruling and has asked the judge to grant a stay pending the appeal.

As highlighted in the judge's own ruling, "the elements of contempt of the Court's order are "a party must have (1) known of the duty imposed by the Court's order, (2) had the ability to comply with the order, and (3) willfully and knowingly refused to comply." It seems quite likely that the court of appeals will vacate the contempt order. After all, even Shumate acknowledges that Baker was unaware that her interview with Webb was prohibited.

Whether Baker's actions can be considered contemptuous is obviously central to her appeal, but it is actually Shumate's remedy: that Baker can submit a story addressing a public need of the community, which has ignited the anger of first amendment advocates.

On October 31, the Society of Professional Journalists sent an open letter to Judge Shumate urging him to vacate the contempt ruling against Baker. In the letter, SPJ president Clint Brewer and FOI Chair David Collier argue that it is their belief that "it is unconstitutional to punish Ms. Baker by ordering her to create a public service story."

Gene Policinski, the executive director of the First Amendment Center agrees. In the Tucson Citizen Policinski writes, "when government speaks, we ought to know it's the government talking - not a press under duress, and certainly not the government pretending to be the press."

I'd certainly agree that the order is a scary proposition, and the notion that judges can order reporters to cover certain stories is a blow against democracy on so many levels, but in this case, I'm uncertain that Shumate's alternative to contempt rises to the First Amendment assault that others allege.

If the judge had given Baker an opportunity to erase her contempt by feeding the homeless or volunteering at a local non-profit would that have created the same sort of an uproar? Probably not. She might have still chosen to refuse the settlement and fight the contempt through the appellate process, but I don't think the alternative provision would have drawn any red flags.

By the same token, KUTV is not required to broadcast Baker's report, and it also appears that KUTV is not mandated to use their resources to help Baker either. So, it is not the news media who are being commanded by the judge's strange request, so much as it is Baker herself.

Shumate should certainly reverse his order; everyone acknowledges Katie Baker did not mean to violate the judge's decorum order. I also think that Shumate's offer to purge Baker's contempt was rather short-sighted, but I'm still not convinced that it rises to the level of offense that others have suggested. Either way, I'm glad to see that Baker is seeking to fight the judges ruling and I hope her legal battles are successful.
November 1, 2007 8:00 AM PDT

A country divided: Should Stephen Colbert be running for president?

by Josh Wolf
  • 3 comments

Stephen Colbert

(Credit: Comedy Central)

On October 16, Stephen Colbert announced that he is seeking the presidential nomination from both the Republican and Democratic parties in his home state of South Carolina. Though Colbert has never asserted he is serious (he recently told students at Columbia University, "I don't actually want to win, I just want to f**k with people."), his candidacy continues to be covered by just about every media outlet you can think of. Some people fully support his run for president whereas others are less than excited about turning the U.S. into a Colbert Nation.

While it's interesting that Colbert continues to garner coverage for his bid on the White House, what fascinates me is the level of support his campaign has generated. It's clear that many Americans are frustrated with the state of politics and their voting options; this is the reason that less than one third of voters stated they would definitely vote against Stephen Colbert for President in a Rasmussen poll, and six percent said they'd definitely vote for him despite the fact that he's a Democrat with no political experience who plays a caricature of Bill O'Reilly on television.

Of course, this is actually the same story that made its way through the theater last year in the Robin Williams vehicle, Man of the Year. In the film Williams is more Stewart than he is Colbert, but the premise is the same, a late-night political satirist decides to run for president and manages to gather far more support than anyone expected. He actually winds up getting elected in the movie due to a technical glitch, but surrenders his victory after learning his success was only made possible through computer error.

It's unlikely that Diebold will deliver Colbert the win, or that he will even make it onto the national ballot, but the success he's already achieved in his campaign is indicative of the same hunger for a real alternative that Man of the Year tapped into. As the New York Times reports on their blog The Caucus, the Facebook group 1,000,000 Strong for Stephen T Colbert has already eclipsed their stated goal and left Barrack Obama in the dust. Obama has the second most popular Facebook group amongst the presidential contenders but hasn't even accrued 400,000 supporters in the 8 months the group has been active.

Jon Friedman at MarketWatch has suggested that Colbert's campaign is nothing more than an attempt to bolster sales of his new book. Friedman argues that, "The clever host of Comedy Central's "The Colbert Report" is holding the usually clear-eyed media in the palm of his hand and bringing out the worst in some star-struck journalists who should know better," but Allison Kilkenny at The Huffington Post sees things differently:

This is the root of all that is wrong with American politics. It's the "you can't win, so sit down" attitude. Supporters of this philosophy forget that runners don't necessarily have to win to shape public opinion. Victories are won with ideas, and true leaders possess the vision and wisdom to know that sometimes revolutions happen gradually.

Sometimes, revolutions begin with one person standing up and saying: "I know you don't take me seriously. I know I'm the clown in the room, but damnit, I'm trying anyway."

I tend to agree with Kilkenny. It often feels as if a politician's influence can be bought and sold like a commodity on the stock market (Colbert himself alluded to this when he announced that his campaign would be sponsored by Dorritos), and this tends to be true at both the national and local level. Colbert and other also ran candidates are doing what they can to shed light on this sordid system we call politics. Lawrence Lessig, a Stanford professor and the author of Free Culture has been working to eradicate political corruption not as candidates, but as an expert on culture and a beacon in the academic community, and he's not the only one working to build alternatives to the current system.

There's obviously a long way to go before we can develop something that is truly representative of the will of the people, of all people, but it's encouraging to know that people are working on it. The classic saying is true: democracy is not a spectator sport; with the advent of the internet and Web 2.0, I'm hopeful that we can begin moving toward direct democracy and a system that isn't governed by the economic influence of special interests and the political elite.

In the words of John Lennon, "You may say that I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one."

Here's to Stephen Colbert, Dennis Kucinich, Ron Paul, and every other person, who has ever run for office knowing their odds of being elected are a long shot, at best, but are committed to making a change in whatever capacity they are able: good luck and never, never, give up!

October 30, 2007 2:00 PM PDT

Google gives social networking another go

by Josh Wolf
  • 1 comment

Though almost everything Google touches seems to turn to gold, there is one project that never quite became ubiquitous (at least here in the U.S.). Orkut may have found a following in Brazil and Asia, but I don't know anyone who uses the service. As Erick Schonfeld reports in TechCrunch, that may be about to change.

Known internally as Maka-Maka, the project will provide a means for all of Google's existing applications to work together within a social-networking landscape. Google is also building a series of APIs that will allow developers to integrate their own applications into the Google universe.

... Read more

October 26, 2007 1:58 PM PDT

From driving to file-sharing, the Brits do it backwards

by Josh Wolf
  • Post a comment
Ever since Napster found its way into every college dorm room in 1999, the defenders of intellectual property have been perplexed at how to best deal with peer-to-peer file transfer. Last week's news that Comcast's servers were interfering with BitTorrent traffic may have come as a surprise to some, but given that few companies have been willing to acknowledge the legal uses for P2P, it shouldn't be too much of a shock.

What strikes me is the fact that in the United Kingdom, it is actually the ISPs who are opposed to banning file-sharing and the lawmakers who have been pushing it. According to Broadband Reports, a representative from the service providers union suggested that, "ISPs are no more able to inspect and filter every single packet passing across their network than the Post Office is able to open every envelope." While this argument seems somewhat weak given Comcast's ability to infiltrate BitTorrent, it is true that file-sharers will always be one step ahead of the regulators, and I support their commitment toward an open internet.

... Read more
advertisement

About Media Sphere

Josh Wolf first became interested in the power of the press after writing and distributing a screed against his high school's new dress code. Within a short time, the new dress code was abandoned, and ever since then he's been getting his hands dirty deconstructing the media every step of the way. Wolf recently became the longest-incarcerated journalist for contempt of court in U.S. history after he spent 226 days in federal prison for his refusal to cooperate. In Media sphere, Josh shares his daily insights on the developing information landscape and examines how various corporate and governmental actions effect the free press both in the United States and abroad.

Add this feed to your online news reader

Media Sphere topics

Most Discussed