DOCSLIB.ORG

Cable Modem Service and the First Amendment: Adventures in a “Doctrinal Wasteland”

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Harvard Journal of Law & Technology Volume 16, Number 1 Fall 2002 CABLE MODEM SERVICE AND THE FIRST AMENDMENT: ADVENTURES IN A “DOCTRINAL WASTELAND” * William E. Lee TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION..............................................................................125 II. THE EMERGING BROADBAND MARKET .......................................129 III. FCC POLICY ...............................................................................134 A. The AT&T Mergers ..................................................................134 B. The AOL-Time Warner Merger................................................136 C. The Declaratory Ruling ...........................................................139 IV. THE FIRST AMENDMENT.............................................................140 A. AT&T Corp. v. City of Portland...............................................140 B. Comcast v. Broward County ....................................................147 1. Strict Scrutiny........................................................................149 2. Intermediate Scrutiny ............................................................154 V. CONCLUSION................................................................................157 I. INTRODUCTION Broadband communication facilities — whether provided by ca- ble companies, telephone companies, wireless providers, or satellite operators — are commonly seen as a veritable panacea for all that ails America. A group of technology company CEOs recently advocated a massive government program, similar in scope to putting a man on the moon, to increase broadband deployment.1 The group claimed wide- scale broadband deployment would have a $500 billion impact on the economy (and coincidentally increase sales of their products).2 Broadband also has President George W. Bush’s attention; he recently * Professor, Department of Telecommunications, Grady College of Journalism and Mass Communication, University of Georgia. An earlier version of this Article was presented at the Academic Seminar, National Cable Telecommunications Association Convention, New Orleans, Louisiana, May 4, 2002. Research for this Article was supported by the Magness Institute. 1. TechNet, A National Imperative: Universal Availability of Broadband by 2010 (Jan. 15, 2002), at http://www.technet.org/news/newsreleases/2002-01-15.64.pdf (last visited Nov. 19, 2002). See generally Yochi J. Dreazen & Jim VandeHei, Plugging In: Tech Lobby- ists Seek Bonanza in New Push for Speedy Internet, WALL ST. J., Jan. 18, 2002, at A1. 2. See TechNet, supra note 1. 126 Harvard Journal of Law & Technology [Vol. 16 appointed a panel to advise him on ways in which broadband deploy- ment may be increased.3 Notwithstanding its cachet as an opportunity for government sub- sidies, broadband has also triggered another response: communica- tions firms have sought to use government regulation to impair their competitors. Telephone companies, legally required to lease their broadband facilities to unaffiliated Internet Service Providers (“ISPs”), have advocated that cable networks also be opened to unaf- filiated ISPs.4 There is more to these initiatives than a desire for regu- latory parity; the more bandwidth a cable operator is required to devote to multiple ISP use, the less bandwidth is available for local telephony. The debate over multiple-ISP access to cable modem platforms has involved a very truncated discussion of cable providers’ First Amendment rights. Proponents of mandated access characterize cable operators as “gatekeepers” poised to restrict the public’s access to the wealth of information on the Internet,5 despite the lack of any evi- dence that cable operators have done so.6 Paradoxically, the support- ers of mandated access claim that cable modem service does not 3. Jim VandeHei, Bush Set to Name Advisory Panel to Shape Technology Issues, WALL ST. J., Dec. 12, 2001, at B7. Currently, the Bush Administration is deeply divided over broadband policy. Yochi J. Dreazen, Tech Firms Bemoan Bush Talk, WALL ST. J., June 21, 2002, at A4. 4. See, e.g., MediaOne Group, Inc. v. County of Henrico, 257 F.3d 356, 364 (4th Cir. 2001) (noting that Verizon has an interest in having cable modem service categorized as a “telecommunications service” because this would trigger regulations not applicable to “ca- ble” service); Comcast Cablevision of Broward County, Inc. v. Broward County, 124 F. Supp. 2d 685, 696 (S.D. Fla. 2000) (finding that “open access” ordinance was adopted at the behest of a telephone company seeking to eliminate or hamper a competitor); Comments of Charter Communications, Inc. at 17, FCC GN Docket No. 00-185 (Dec. 1, 2000) (noting that local telephone companies have incentives to encourage technical solutions to the prob- lem of multiple-ISP access consuming bandwidth intended for cable telephony). Alternatively, local exchange carriers have backed legislation that would free them from the obligation to lease parts of their high-speed networks to competitors. See Internet Free- dom and Broadband Deployment Act of 2001, H.R. 1542, 107th Cong., (1st Sess. 2001); Yochi J. Dreazen, Verizon Plays Every Angle in Broadband Battle, WALL ST. J., Aug. 15, 2001, at A16; Yochi J. Dreazen, Battle Over Bells and Broadband Service Heats Up, WALL ST. J., May 15, 2001, at A28. The battle over this legislation has generated huge campaign donations. See Yochi J. Dreazen, House Backs Bill to Aid Bells’ Broadband Sales, WALL ST. J., Feb. 28, 2002, at B8; Stephan Lebaton, Congressional Broadband Fight Intensifies, N.Y. TIMES, Feb. 27, 2002, at C4; Juliet Eilpern, A Contest of Connections: Millions Spent to Influence Bill on High-Speed Internet Access, WASH. POST, Feb. 27, 2002, at A8. 5. See, e.g., CENTER FOR DEMOCRACY & TECHNOLOGY, BROADBAND BACKGROUNDER: PUBLIC POLICY ISSUES RAISED BY BROADBAND TECHNOLOGY at 35 (2000) (arguing that if broadband becomes the proprietary domain of large companies, the rough equality among Internet speakers could be destroyed); Comments of Center for Democracy & Technology at 18, FCC GN Docket No. 00-185, (Dec. 10, 2000) (“free speech is too important to leave solely in the hands of private industry”). 6. See Inquiry Concerning High-Speed Access to the Internet Over Cable and Other Fa- cilities, FCC GN Docket No. 00-185, FCC 02-77, at ¶ 87 (Mar. 15, 2002) (Declaratory Ruling and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking) [hereinafter High-Speed Declaratory Ruling]. No. 1] Cable Modem Service and the First Amendment 127 involve speech by a cable operator, but also claim that mandated ac- cess is necessary to protect the speech of unaffiliated ISPs.7 The Fed- eral Communications Commission (“FCC”) has also largely ignored the impact of mandated access on cable operators’ First Amendment rights. In 2000, when the agency began a proceeding to determine the appropriate framework for regulating cable modem service, it did not even discuss the First Amendment’s application to this service.8 Nor did the FCC mention AOL Time Warner’s First Amendment rights in 2001 when the agency imposed conditions preventing the merged firm from discriminating against other ISPs.9 The FCC only began to pose questions about the First Amendment and cable modem service in 2002,10 when it sought comments on the regulatory implications of classifying cable modem service as an “information service.”11 The lack of concern for the First Amendment rights of cable op- erators is not surprising given the Supreme Court’s uncertain pro- nouncements about cable’s constitutional status. Since 1986, the Supreme Court has addressed cable’s First Amendment protection on six occasions,12 indicating that regulations aimed at cable content may or may not be subject to strict scrutiny,13 and that cable is regulated like broadcasting in some instances and not in others.14 This dis- 7. See, e.g., Reply Comments of Earthlink, Inc. at 57, FCC GN Docket No. 00-185 (Jan. 10, 2001) (arguing that the protected “speakers” in the cable modem context are the ser- vice’s users, not the service’s providers). But see Raymond Shih Ray Ku, Open Internet Access and Freedom of Speech: A First Amendment Catch-22, 75 TUL. L. REV. 87, 93 (2000) (arguing that a First Amendment approach which does not treat cable ISPs as “speakers” must not treat competing ISPs as “speakers”). Some scholars dismiss the First Amendment’s relevance to mandated access, focusing instead on the antitrust and regulatory issues. See, e.g., Mark A. Lemley & Lawrence Lessig, The End of End-to-End: Preserving the Architecture of the Internet in the Broadband Era, 48 UCLA L. REV. 925 (2001). 8. Inquiry Concerning High-Speed Access to Internet Over Cable and Other Facilities, FCC GN Docket No. 00-185, 15 F.C.C.R. 19,287 (2000) (Notice of Inquiry). Nonetheless, commentators discussed the First Amendment and cable modem services, but less exten- sively than they discussed the statutory classification issues. See, e.g., Comments of the National Cable & Telecommunications Association at 38–39, FCC GN Docket No. 00-185 (Dec. 1, 2000). 9. Applications for Consent to the Transfer of Control of Licenses and Section 214 Au- thorizations by Time Warner Inc. and America Online, Inc., Transferors, to AOL Time Warner Inc., Transferee, FCC CS Docket No. 00-30, 16 F.C.C.R. 6547 (2001) (Memoran- dum Opinion and Order) [hereinafter AOL-Time Warner Merger Order]. 10. High-Speed Declaratory Ruling, supra note 6, ¶ 80. 11. 47 U.S.C. § 153(20) (2002); see infra notes 75–83 and accompanying text. 12. United States v. Playboy Entm’t Group,
Recommended publications
  • The Regime Change Consensus: Iraq in American Politics, 1990-2003

    The Regime Change Consensus: Iraq in American Politics, 1990-2003

    THE REGIME CHANGE CONSENSUS: IRAQ IN AMERICAN POLITICS, 1990-2003 Joseph Stieb A dissertation submitted to the faculty at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of History in the College of Arts and Sciences. Chapel Hill 2019 Approved by: Wayne Lee Michael Morgan Benjamin Waterhouse Daniel Bolger Hal Brands ©2019 Joseph David Stieb ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii ABSTRACT Joseph David Stieb: The Regime Change Consensus: Iraq in American Politics, 1990-2003 (Under the direction of Wayne Lee) This study examines the containment policy that the United States and its allies imposed on Iraq after the 1991 Gulf War and argues for a new understanding of why the United States invaded Iraq in 2003. At the core of this story is a political puzzle: Why did a largely successful policy that mostly stripped Iraq of its unconventional weapons lose support in American politics to the point that the policy itself became less effective? I argue that, within intellectual and policymaking circles, a claim steadily emerged that the only solution to the Iraqi threat was regime change and democratization. While this “regime change consensus” was not part of the original containment policy, a cohort of intellectuals and policymakers assembled political support for the idea that Saddam’s personality and the totalitarian nature of the Baathist regime made Iraq uniquely immune to “management” strategies like containment. The entrenchment of this consensus before 9/11 helps explain why so many politicians, policymakers, and intellectuals rejected containment after 9/11 and embraced regime change and invasion.
  • Eric Johnson Producer of Recode Decode with Kara Swisher Vox Media

    Eric Johnson Producer of Recode Decode with Kara Swisher Vox Media

    FIRESIDE Q&A How podcasting can take social media storytelling ‘to infinity and beyond’ Eric Johnson Producer of Recode Decode with Kara Swisher Vox Media Rebecca Reed Host Off the Assembly Line Podcast 1. Let’s start out by introducing yourself—and telling us about your favorite podcast episode or interview. What made it great? Eric Johnson: My name is Eric Johnson and I'm the producer of Recode Decode with Kara Swisher, which is part of the Vox Media Podcast Network. My favorite episode of the show is the interview Kara conducted with Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg — an in-depth, probing discussion about how the company was doing after the Cambridge Analytica scandal and the extent of its power. In particular, I really liked the way Kara pressed Zuckerberg to explain how he felt about the possibility that his company's software was enabling genocide in Myanmar; his inability to respond emotionally to the tragedy was revealing, and because this was a podcast and not a TV interview she was able to patiently keep asking the question, rather than moving on to the next topic. Rebecca Reed: My name is Rebecca Reed and I’m an Education Consultant and Host of the Off the Assembly Line podcast. Off the Assembly Line is your weekly dose of possibility-sparking conversation with the educators and entrepreneurs bringing the future to education. My favorite episode was an interview with Julia Freeland Fisher, author of Who You Know. We talked about the power of student social capital, and the little known role it plays in the so-called “achievement gap” (or disparity in test scores from one school/district to the next).
  • The FCC's Knowledge Problem: How to Protect Consumers Online

    The FCC's Knowledge Problem: How to Protect Consumers Online

    The FCC’s Knowledge Problem: How to Protect Consumers Online Hon. Maureen K. Ohlhausen* TABLE OF CONTENTS I. A FRAMEWORK FOR THINKING ABOUT REGULATION: COMPARING THE FCC AND THE FTC .................................................................. 205 A. The Regulator’s Knowledge Problem....................................... 206 B. The FCC’s Prescriptive, Ex Ante Regulatory Approach .......... 208 C. The FTC’s Flexible, Ex Post Enforcement-Based Approach ... 212 II. NET NEUTRALITY AND THE FCC: A CASE STUDY IN REGULATORY DIFFICULTY ..................................................................................... 214 A. What is Net Neutrality? ............................................................ 215 1. Proponents of Net Neutrality Regulation .......................... 215 2. Opponents of Net Neutrality Regulation .......................... 216 B. The FCC’s History of Broadband Regulation: The Road to Reclassification ........................................................................ 218 1. Broadband as a Title I information service ....................... 218 2. The Verizon Decision ........................................................ 220 3. The Aftermath of Verizon ................................................. 221 Commissioner, Federal Trade Commission. I would like to thank Neil Chilson for his contributions to this essay. The views expressed here are solely my own and do not necessarily represent the views of the Commission or any other individual Commissioner. Portions of this essay were adapted from a keynote
  • Building a Transatlantic Digital Marketplace: Twenty Steps Toward 2020

    Building a Transatlantic Digital Marketplace: Twenty Steps Toward 2020

    Building a Transatlantic Digital Marketplace: Twenty Steps Toward 2020 Report of the Atlantic Council Task Force on Advancing a Transatlantic Digital Agenda Co-Chairs: H.E. Carl Bildt The Hon. William E. Kennard Project Director: Frances G. Burwell Rapporteur: Tyson Barker Building a Transatlantic Digital Marketplace: Twenty Steps Toward 2020 Report of the Atlantic Council Task Force on Advancing a Transatlantic Digital Agenda Co-Chairs H.E. Carl Bildt The Hon. William E. Kennard Project Director Frances G. Burwell Rapporteur Tyson Barker ISBN: 978-1-61977-943-3 This report is written and published in accordance with the Atlantic Council Policy on Intellectual Inde- pendence. The authors are solely responsible for its analysis and recommendations. The Atlantic Council and its donors do not determine, nor do they necessarily endorse or advocate for, any of this report’s conclusions. March 2016 Table of Contents Foreword...................................................................................................................................................v Note from the Co-Chairs ..........................................................................................................................vii Task Force on Advancing a Transatlantic Digital Agenda .....................................................................ix Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................1 Redefning the Rules of Digital Trade......................................................................................................11
  • A Brief History of Net Neutrality

    A Brief History of Net Neutrality

    A Brief History of Net Neutrality Professor Daniel Lyons, Boston College Law School 71st NECPUC Annual Symposium May 21, 2018 Origins: 1996 Telecommunications Act “Today, with the stroke of a pen, our laws will catch up with our future.” --President Bill Clinton, signing the 1996 Telecommunications Act Origins: 1996 Telecommunications Act Title I Title II Title III Title VI Information Telecom Wireless Cable Services Services Services Services Lightly Common Licensing Local Regulated Carriage Franchising Example: Example: Example: Example: Voicemail Telephone Broadcast Cable TV What About the Internet? • 1996: only 50% of Americans have Internet Access • Act mentions Internet almost entirely in context of regulating online pornography • Mentions Broadband only once What About the Internet? “I want to create an oasis from regulation in the broadband world, so that any company, using any technology, will have incentives to deploy broadband in an unregulated or significantly deregulated environment.” --FCC Chairman William Kennard 1999 What About the Internet? Title I Title II Title III Title VI Information Telecom Wireless Cable Services Services Services Services Lightly Common Licensing Local Regulated Carriage Franchising Example: Example: Example: Example: Voicemail Telephone Broadcast Cable TV City of Portland, Oregon (1999) Title I Title II Title III Title VI Information Telecom Wireless Cable Services Services Services Services Lightly Common Licensing Local Regulated Carriage Franchising Example: Example: Example: Example: Voicemail
  • Kara Swisher Is on the Show Today; Tech Journalist and Co-Founder of Recode

    Kara Swisher Is on the Show Today; Tech Journalist and Co-Founder of Recode

    SM 714 Transcript EPISODE 714 [INTRODUCTION] [0:00:35.0] FT: Today, we're in conversation with Silicon Valley's most feared and liked journalist. Welcome to so money, everyone. I'm your host, Farnoosh Torabi. Kara Swisher is on the show today; tech journalist and co-founder of Recode. She is an outspoken straight-shooting reporter who for decades has been working nonstop to keep Silicon Valley and the tech world at large accountable. Kara is host of the popular podcast Recode Decode. She began her career at the Washington Post and later The Wall Street Journal, before launching her own tech media empire. I kick off the interview with Kara's take on Facebook amidst the recent Cambridge Analytica scandal and the social networks tumbling stock price. Then we hear about Kara's childhood, experiencing the loss of her dad at a young age. She also takes us down memory lane to a very specific moment in her early career when she was asking for a raise, how she earned her worth and had to ask her what tech giants will be gone in 10 years’ time? Snapchat, Twitter. You might be surprised to hear Kara's predictions. Here is Kara Swisher. [INTERVIEW] [0:01:47.1] FT: Kara Swisher. Oh, my gosh. I can't believe I just said your name on this show. Welcome to So Money my icon. I love you so much. [0:01:55.3] © 2018 Farnoosh, Inc. "1 SM 714 Transcript KS: You got to calm down there. You got to calm – [0:01:56.9] FT: Okay.
  • Working Paper

    Working Paper

    No. 11-46 November 2011 WORKING PAPER THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATION COMMISSION’S EXCELLENT MOBILE COMPETITION ADVENTURE By Thomas W. Hazlett The ideas presented in this research are the author’s and do not represent official positions of the Mercatus Center at George Mason University. The Federal Communication Commission‘s Excellent Mobile Competition Adventure Thomas W. Hazlett1 I. INTRODUCTION Stressed-out undergrads meet deadlines for term papers by cramming facts, figures, and buzzwords; splicing Wikipedia entries; pasting select expert quotations; citing everything twice; inserting some nifty, multi-color pie charts—and hoping that the professor notes the paper‘s girth but not its (lack of) substance. If such a paper says anything at all, the student is unaware of it. Yet it does not overshoot the cosmic probability table that an all-nighter pays off and someone, somewhere, learns something. Welcome to the Federal Communications Commission‘s 15th Annual Report and Analysis of Competitive Market Conditions With Respect to Mobile Wireless, released June 27, 2011. The FCC Report makes mistakes with the Commission‘s own data.2 It contains typos.3 It omits crucial, relevant, and available facts. It wastes page after page discussing tangential issues.4 Indeed, the Report avoids discussing the state of ―effective competition‖ in what is entitled an ―analysis of competitive market conditions.‖ With just 308 pages, 1,306 footnotes, 6 appendices, and 18 years to prepare its templates and hone its analysis (since Congress mandated annual FCC reports), the agency cannot make up its mind. Of course, regulators want to keep their options open. If they deem the industry ―effectively competitive,‖ that might imply that regulatory interventions were unwarranted.
  • The Dual Jurisdiction of the Fcc and the Justice Department Over Telecommunications Transactions

    The Dual Jurisdiction of the Fcc and the Justice Department Over Telecommunications Transactions

    SERVING Two MASTERS: THE DUAL JURISDICTION OF THE FCC AND THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT OVER TELECOMMUNICATIONS TRANSACTIONS James R. Weiss Martin L. Stern* I. INTRODUCTION reaction that followed the Justice Department an- nouncement, the FCC's decision was cheered by On April 22, 1996, Bell Atlantic Corporation many critics of the DOJ's decision, and was de- and NYNEX Corporation announced their plans scribed as the action "where [the] Justice [Depart- 5 to form the largest local telephone company in ment] failed to act." the United States with 141,000 employees in thir- The contrasting decisions of the DOJ and the teen states and the District of Columbia, 39 mil- FCC regarding the Bell Atlantic/NYNEX merger lion lines, $53.3 billion in assets, and $3.4 billion illustrate the confusing and unpredictable nature estimated annual profits.' After enormous ef- in of dual agency review of telecommunications forts by the merging parties and the reviewing mergers. Despite years of precedent and the federal agencies-the Antitrust Division of the existence of so-called guidelines, telecommunica- U.S. Department of Justice ("DOJ" or 'Justice De- tions merger review remains an ad hoc process. partment") and the Federal Communications In general, one would think that the antitrust Commission ("FCC" or "Commission")-the two agencies reached opposite conclusions. activities of the FCC and the DOJ do not com- Approximately one year after the Bell Atlantic/ pletely overlap. In many respects, as the agency NYNEX merger was announced, the DOJ issued a responsible for telecommunications policy, the two sentence press release stating that it would FCC's antitrust activities are prospective, establish- not challenge the transaction.
  • February 12, 2019: SXSW Announces Additional Keynotes and Featured

    February 12, 2019: SXSW Announces Additional Keynotes and Featured

    SOUTH BY SOUTHWEST ANNOUNCES ADDITIONAL KEYNOTES AND FEATURED SPEAKERS FOR 2019 CONFERENCE Adam Horovitz and Michael Diamond of Beastie Boys, John Boehner, Kara Swisher, Roger McNamee, and T Bone Burnett Added to the Keynote Lineup Stacey Abrams, David Byrne, Elizabeth Banks, Aidy Bryant, Brandi Carlile, Ethan Hawke, Padma Lakshmi, Kevin Reilly, Nile Rodgers, Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss, and More Added as Featured Speakers Austin, Texas — February 12, 2019 — South by Southwest® (SXSW®) Conference and ​ ​ Festivals (March 8–17, 2019) has announced further additions to their Keynote and Featured Speaker lineup for the 2019 event. Keynotes announced today include former Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives John Boehner with Acreage Holdings Chairman and CEO ​ ​ Kevin Murphy; a Keynote Conversation with Adam Horovitz and Michael Diamond of Beastie ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Boys with Amazon Music’s Nathan Brackett; award-winning producer, musician and songwriter ​ ​ T Bone Burnett; investor and author Roger McNamee with WIRED Editor in Chief Nicholas ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Thompson; and Recode co-founder and editor-at-large​ Kara Swisher with a special guest. ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Among the Featured Speakers revealed today are national political trailblazer Stacey Abrams, ​ ​ multi-faceted artist David Byrne; actress, producer and director Elizabeth Banks; actress, ​ ​ ​ ​ writer and producer Aidy Bryant; Grammy Award-winning musician Brandi Carlile joining a ​ ​ ​ ​ conversation with award-winning actress Elisabeth Moss; professional wrestler Charlotte Flair; ​ ​ ​
  • Download Book

    Download Book

    0111001001101011 01THE00101010100 0111001001101001 010PSYHOLOGY0111 011100OF01011100 010010010011010 0110011SILION011 01VALLEY01101001 ETHICAL THREATS AND EMOTIONAL UNINTELLIGENCE 01001001001110IN THE TECH INDUSTRY 10 0100100100KATY COOK 110110 0110011011100011 The Psychology of Silicon Valley “As someone who has studied the impact of technology since the early 1980s I am appalled at how psychological principles are being used as part of the busi- ness model of many tech companies. More and more often I see behaviorism at work in attempting to lure brains to a site or app and to keep them coming back day after day. This book exposes these practices and offers readers a glimpse behind the “emotional scenes” as tech companies come out psychologically fir- ing at their consumers. Unless these practices are exposed and made public, tech companies will continue to shape our brains and not in a good way.” —Larry D. Rosen, Professor Emeritus of Psychology, author of 7 books including The Distracted Mind: Ancient Brains in a High Tech World “The Psychology of Silicon Valley is a remarkable story of an industry’s shift from idealism to narcissism and even sociopathy. But deep cracks are showing in the Valley’s mantra of ‘we know better than you.’ Katy Cook’s engaging read has a message that needs to be heard now.” —Richard Freed, author of Wired Child “A welcome journey through the mind of the world’s most influential industry at a time when understanding Silicon Valley’s motivations, myths, and ethics are vitally important.” —Scott Galloway, Professor of Marketing, NYU and author of The Algebra of Happiness and The Four Katy Cook The Psychology of Silicon Valley Ethical Threats and Emotional Unintelligence in the Tech Industry Katy Cook Centre for Technology Awareness London, UK ISBN 978-3-030-27363-7 ISBN 978-3-030-27364-4 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27364-4 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2020 This book is an open access publication.
  • Notice of AT&T Inc. 2018 Annual Meeting of Stockholders and Proxy

    Notice of AT&T Inc. 2018 Annual Meeting of Stockholders and Proxy

    Notice of AT&T Inc. 2018 Annual Meeting of Stockholders and Proxy Statement To Our Stockholders Letter from the Chairman, CEO Letter from the Lead Director and President Dear Stockholders: Dear Stockholders: I’m pleased to invite you to join us for our 2018 Annual As your company’s Lead Independent Director, I’m Meeting of Stockholders on Friday, April 27, 2018, at proud of the commitment to strong governance that is 9:00 a.m., at the Moody Performance Hall, 2520 Flora a hallmark of AT&T. The Board’s role is to keep our Street, Dallas, Texas 75201. company focused on the long term and protect the interests of our stockholders. We do that by challenging At this year’s meeting, we will discuss our business and conventional thinking and offering different points of strategy to create the best entertainment and view, while maintaining a sharp focus on creating value communications experiences in the world. for stockholders. Everything we’ve done is about executing that strategy: As the marketplace around us has changed, so too has From our wildly popular DIRECTV NOW video streaming the composition of our Board. Since 2013, we have service to the success of our bundled video, wireless elected seven new directors, resulting in a Board with and broadband offerings, to being named by the U.S. the rich diversity of knowledge, experience and per- First Responder Network Authority to build a best-in- spectives across technology, finance, marketing and class nationwide network for first responders and public public policy that AT&T needs to continue creating safety officials.
  • Securing American Identity Through the Retelling of ‘9/11’

    Securing American Identity Through the Retelling of ‘9/11’

    © COPYRIGHT by M. L. deRaismes Combes 2018 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED To Ada B. SECURING AMERICAN IDENTITY THROUGH THE RETELLING OF ‘9/11’ BY M. L. deRaismes Combes ABSTRACT This dissertation is a longitudinal study of the transformation of American identity through 9/11 storytelling from September 2001 to December 2016. Drawing on and contributing to critical security studies, discourse theory, and social identity theory, I argue that the narrative of the attacks (‘9/11’) has contributed to an unconscious shift in normalized experience that has broadened the permissive boundaries of American actions at home and abroad. In other words, the extraordinary has become the ordinary. Examining the discourses of aviation security and the covert drone strike program, I explain how this permissiveness is made possible by unearthing the two-step process of how ‘9/11’ constructs threat (understood as embodied insecurity) and then reveals how that threat (in part) constitutes identity. Theoretically, I incorporate elements of ontological security and materiality into a new framework that highlights Self/Other differentiation by way of the transitory role of the Stranger. Methodologically, I use Foucauldian discourse analysis to trace the original themes of ‘9/11’ and their contestation through the texts associated with key moments in the development and implementation of each policy. Brought together, the resulting genealogy sheds light on the ways in which certain truth claims of ‘9/11’ have bounded the space of ‘appropriate’ American-ness, in turn justifying and perpetuating government policies that otherwise might have been construed as exceptional and ‘un- American’. Revealing this contingency opens up space for a reassessment of both American identity and U.S.