463 Communications

  • Unless otherwise noted, posts here are written by 463 partner Sean Garrett.
  • 463 is a communications consultancy based in Washington, DC and San Francisco that works with top technology companies and organizations.

463's Web Home

The Caveat


  • The opinions on postings are of individual 463 Communications partners and employees. They do not necessarily represent the opinions of 463 Communications, the firm, or our clients. Comments will remain posted at the sole discretion of 463.

« January 2008 | Main | March 2008 »

February 2008

February 25, 2008

Add Pakistan to the List

Picture 1-15
YouTube is banned "till further orders"....

The Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) told the country's 70 Internet service providers Friday that the popular website would be blocked until further notice, the Associated Press reports.

The authority did not specify what the offensive material was, but a PTA official said the ban concerned a movie trailer for an upcoming film by Dutch lawmaker Geert Wilders, who has said he plans to release an anti-Koran movie portraying the religion as fascist and prone to inciting violence against women and homosexuals.

Even better, this move apparently cut off traffic to the video site for a mere two-thirds of the world.

Seemingly, this is not part of Pakistan's recent hire of a US PR firm to "polish its image".

UPDATE: One day later, the ban is lifted.

Lessig is Not Running for Congress. Good.

Despite the urgings of fanboys around the world, Larry Lessig is not running for Congress.

If you somehow haven't been paying attention, the Stanford professor, copyright reform advocate and, more recently, an outspoken voice to rid Congress of corruption, pondered trying to fill the Bay Area congressional seat of the late Tom Lantos. Here's a WSJ story if you need a primer.

The many hundreds of people who wanted Lessig to run and contributed to yet-to-be announced campaign seemed to forget one critical point. He would lose. And, not only lose, but lose big and in an embarrassing way. The loss would be pointed at by snickering critics who would say that if Larry Lessig can't win in one of most densely populated tech geek populations in the country than what does that mean?

Why would he lose so bad? Well, besides only having a month to prepare and campaign in the Democratic primary, there was the small matter of who he would face as an opponent.

The leading contender is a state senator named Jackie Speier. After serving for 25 years, she is Democratic royalty in the state. As a staffer to Rep Leo Ryan, she was shot on the tarmac of Jonestown just prior to the infamous massacre. The congressman and others died from their wounds. Speier was one of the survivors.

Since then, while managing other personal setbacks including the death of her husband, Speier has been a force in local and state politics and has the endorsements of everyone and their brother.

Lessig is right to take up his battle from the outside for now. Yes, it would have been thrilling to watch him on the inside. But, it was never going to happen -- no matter what the blog echo chamber could convince themselves of.

I'm Losing My Edge

The opening lyrics to LCD Soundsystem's "Losing My Edge" (above) are:

Yeah, I'm losing my edge.
I'm losing my edge.
The kids are coming up from behind.
I'm losing my edge....
...But I was there.

This is how I feel when reading the new-ish Capitol Valley blog. It's written by two guys. One in the Bay Area. On in DC. The DC guy is almost three years out of college.

Anyway, they have the time and energy to power off 13 posts in the last few days (versus zero here). Most were tech policy related. They are semi-live blogging the FCC hearing today.

And, while I can't say that I fully agree with the tenor of many of the posts there (or some of the purported facts), it's good to have idealistic and over-the-top energetic company in this tech policy blog land.

They are also providing content that I either can't or won't. I've been involved with tech policy since 1996. This means that I know a lot and a lot of people. But, it also means that I am insider, for better or worse, and, therefore, am not going to cut my nose off to spite my face by writing either about scoops that I have access to or opinions that could damage relationships.

On the other hand, the Capitol Valley guys feel free to take Facebook to task for "ignoring Washington at its peril."

The kids are coming up from behind.
I'm losing my edge....
...But I was there.

February 14, 2008

Online Privacy 101

Mark Glaser at MediaShift gives the topic of online privacy in the socially-networked era a broad brush once over. Lots of helpful links at the bottom for you researchers and kids cramming on term papers.

Johnny Watches "The L Word"; Mommy and Daddy Get a Fine

200802141653
Adam Thierer at PFF and The Center for Democracy & Technology's Sophia Cope got hold of a two-year-old transcript of a panel discussion at the National Lawyers Convention.

No.... Wait!  Come back.  This is actually interesting.

Included in the debate is a little ditty by FCC Chairman Martin who throws out the idea that parents might be liable for their kids consuming "indecent" material.  How indecent?  The conversation at that point was centered on satellite radio "shock jocks."  And, previously, the parent liability issue is first raised by a "Morality in Media" rep who want to protect kids from HBO and Showtime.

Even if you assume that Martin's comment was made in the spirit of rhetorical legal debate (as I do), the suggestion is still note worthy enough.

Thierer says:

In a free society, public officials should not act in loco parentis when parents have the power to make media decisions on their own. Raising children, and determining what they watch, play, read, listen to, or download, is a quintessential parental responsibility. We should leave it that way and keep the threat of criminal sanctions for poor parental judgment out of the discussion.

And Cope raises the ante...

(Martin) seems to imply that the government should have the authority to regulate content at any cost, regardless of how burdensome the government’s chosen method is on the right to freedom of speech. We should expect more responsible rhetoric from a public leader who has such immense power to affect a fundamental liberty.

Not to pile on here (seems pretty unnecessary), but it's trial balloons like these that make people get apoplectic about seemingly innocuous pieces of legislation that might allow the FCC to tip their toe into Internet content regulation.

February 12, 2008

UK Government to Push ISP Filtering Plan

200802121010

This will make some noise... (from the Times)...

People who illegally download films and music will be cut off from the internet under new legislative proposals to be unveiled next week.

Internet service providers (ISPs) will be legally required to take action against users who access pirated material, The Times has learnt....

...Ministers will make an explicit commitment to legislate with the launch next week of a Green Paper on the creative industries. A draft copy, obtained by The Times, states: “We will move to legislate to require internet service providers to take action on illegal file-sharing.” A consultation paper setting out the options is promised within months.

It will be interesting to see how long it takes for those who want ISPs to filter "indecent" material to get in on the act as this process plays out.

February 11, 2008

463 West: Big Moves

lift 4 6 3

We don't talk much about ourselves, but we have news that begs for an exception....

In 463's three years, we've accomplished a lot. First-class clients, a smart, experienced team and a penchant for irreverent videos have all been hallmarks.

However, we started with one representative in the Bay Area (me), and until last week, I was still manning the helm solo.

463 West has doubled in size thanks to the addition of 463's fourth partner, Hani Durzy. Obviously, adding a fourth partner is a huge deal to 463's founding partners -- me, Jim Hock and Tom Galvin. But, once we got past Hani's obnoxious Red Sox Nation-isms, we knew that he would be the perfect compliment to our team and a great asset as we grow in the Bay Area.

And, we do plan to grow in the Bay Area. We're close to securing an office in Palo Alto (knock on wood) and making additional notable hires.

Hani was most recently the director of corporate communications at eBay and was their chief spokesperson for the last five years. His bio is after the jump...

Continue reading "463 West: Big Moves" »

February 08, 2008

Doesn't Anyone Remember the Movie "Heathers"?

The sad story goes like this.

Small Wales town named Bridgend.

Fourteen teen suicides in one year.

Despair. Anger. Reflection. Blame!

Pointed fingers. Right at the Web. "Social Networking Websites."

"it was revealed she used the computer hours before she died"

"Randall's death raised fears that the suicides were related to a desire for the "prestige" that is associated with having a memorial page on the social networking site Bebo."

Call to action! Now!

Conservative MP has a plan.

"A string of teenage suicides has highlighted the urgent need to tighten up internet safety for youngsters"

Self-regulation has failed.

Solution: An Internet Standards Authority -- A "co-regulatory structure" for the internet, bringing together parties including law enforcement agencies, government, charities and parents.

The enforcers?

ISPs. Of Course.

What to censor? Easy. "Harmful content would include content where cultural, taste and decency judgments have to be made."

Moreover. No sites with this: "glorification of violence and terrorism, pornography, cyber-bullying, suicide, internet gambling and anorexia websites"

ISPs would offer two-tiers of content for kids and adults. The "default" would be for kids. Opt-out. Like the Australian plan.

Need a password to read about anorexia.

No happy endings involving Winona Ryder.

Worst. Primary. Ever.

200802080736

The only thing more annoying than suggesting that Web tools are a panacea for democracy and the election process may be the smug claims that they have little to no effect.

Declan "Iconoclast" McCullagh wrote after Super Tuesday that:

It must have come as a surprise to the boisterous Barack Obama supporters who were flagging down commuters at light rail stations south of San Francisco after work on Tuesday, but Hillary Clinton won far more votes in Silicon Valley than did her rival from Illinois....

....So why did Obama--who's popular online and has been touted as a more tech-savvy candidate--lose the nation's high-tech heartland by an embarrassing 16-point margin?...

...clicks in online polls and credit card numbers typed into a Web form by political enthusiasts (do not) necessarily translate into votes.... Traditional politicking and on-the-ground organization still count for more, and that's one area where the Clinton machine excels.

As I wrote last month, it worked for the Clintons in New Hampshire, and it worked again even in Silicon Valley, one of the most tech-savvy places in the world. It shows once again that it's so much easier to click a mouse button (or type in a credit card number, or post to a discussion forum) than it is to register to vote and then actually do it.

Let's first take a magical trip to a fantasy land where everyone in Silicon Valley is tech savvy and works for an Internet company.

You with me?

"Credit card numbers typed into Web forms" doesn't, of course, guarantee you anything. But, ask any candidate whether they would rather have more money or less, and you get my point. I think it's been well documented that Obama has gained support as he has gained resources and vice versa. Not exactly a deep insight.

And, as the readily available data from this primary season demonstrates, this isn't a zero-sum game. On the Democratic side, especially, there has been a surge in turnout that been split by all candidates. It could be argued that the traditional base has been motivated by Hallmark TV informercials and the "Clinton Machine" to vote to Hillary and the Obama side has used new media to inspire record numbers of youth voters, well-educated affluents and independents to vote for him. After all, in a recent 463/Zogby/Cong. Internet Caucus survey of voters, we found that 48 percent of those polled cited the Internet as the primary source of their knowledge of the presidential candidates. Only 31 percent and 13 percent cited television and radio, respectively. as the primary source. Nearly 67 percent of 18-29 year-olds cited the Internet as their primary source.

But, I am not even going to make that argument. It's a fractured media world. People will get their insights on candidates from many different places. Old people. Young People. Hispanics. Eskimos. Even all those Internet employees who somehow are also moonlighting as school teachers, bus drivers and welders in Silicon Valley.

P.S. Now that they ride is over, feel free to peek at the census figures from Santa Clara and San Mateo Counties.

February 07, 2008

Mandatory Filtering in Europe?

200802071137-1

Susan Crawford (an esteemed professor and ICANN board member) isn't one to toss around rumors lightly. In an interesting ISP-level filtering round-up, she mentions that China is having second thoughts about the breadth of its Great Firewall and that the US is creating a "Voice of America" for software that would enable "widespread ... Internet use where the Internet is now censored."

But, juicily, she also says: "There are strong rumors that a concerted effort is underway in the EU to mandate ISP filtering for (at the least) copyright issues and indecent material."

Already, France has taken a lead in developing legislation that would mandate ISP-level filtering for copyrighted material on P2P networks. And, the international version of the RIAA (IFPI), hopes that the French effort is extended to other countries. However, a European Parliament amendment that would create filtering rules failed in January.

France is one thing. (So is Australia). Copyright rules are another. Copyright AND "indecency" mandates across the EU are more than exponentially quite another and would blast open a Pandora's Box. Boom.