The 463: Inside Tech

And Oh, By the Way, Thanks for Your Service

 
(Tom Galvin) I’m sure when Meredith Atwell Baker decided to leave the FCC, she didn’t expect a lot of gratitude for her public service. After all, it’s old-fashioned to actually thank someone for working long hours, taking a pay cut and subjecting themselves to the scrutiny and criticism that comes with being a government employee. But she probably didn’t expect to be kicked in the shins either, and for good reason.
 
Baker is an expert in the field of telecommunications and technology, and she gathered that expertise largely through private sector policy and lobbying jobs.  She then put that expertise to work for the federal government first at the Commerce Department, where she was widely praised by Democrats and Republicans alike, and then as a Senate-confirmed commissioner at the FCC.
 
Now she’s leaving to go back to what she did before, government relations.  She did everything the right way, including recuse herself when she started talking with NBCUniversal about a job. She played by the rules, and gets burned for it. The criticism is she must have been angling for the job when she voted to approve the NBC/Comcast merger in January. If so, why did two Democrats on the panel vote for it as well? Perhaps because they all followed the process and reached a conclusion.
 
And the media is, of course, aghast. Baker didn’t control the timing of the FCC merger vote, or the fact a retirement opened up a great job that she had to consider, but don’t let those facts stand in the way. And what if Baker had instead taken a job lobbying for the newspaper industry? That’s right, the Washington Post and many newspapers hire lobbyists who do exactly what Baker does for a living. But you don’t read much about that in the papers because that’s, well, awkward.
 
Now the FCC has one opening and likely another in coming months. Good luck finding the best and the brightest to fill those jobs now that they know their future employment will be criticized by those who fling arrows from the cheap seats.

The BP Spill and Crisis Communication

(Katie Durkin) Exactly one year ago today, an explosion occurred on BP’s Deepwater Horizon oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico, just over 50 miles off the coast of Louisiana. The accident resulted in approximately 4.9 million barrels of oil being dumped into the Gulf over the course of three months as BP struggled to stop the leak.  The disaster is the largest accidental oil spill in history.

 

The spill is an interesting and continuing case study for communication professionals.  BP took a major hit to its public image and financial stability throughout the firestorm of negative press and environmental activists’ protests during the prolonged crisis.  The public was particularly infuriated by the company’s CEO Tony Hayward’s lack of engagement and sincere concern for those affected by the disaster.  At the end of last May, he said on the Today Show,  “There is no one who wants this over more than I do. I’d like my life back.” Hayward’s continuous dismissal of the public’s concern on behalf of BP resulted in distrust of the company’s ability to effectively handle the situation. Again in June, the media attacked Hayward when he was photographed attending a leisurely sailing event and then failed to participate in the World National Oil Companies Congress.  Hayward’s repeated public relations missteps led to his replacement in July. 

 

During the crisis, BP’s stock fell dramatically but has since recovered. The company reported fourth quarter profits 30% above those from the prior year.  The crisis is naturally comparable to the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill in which the Exxon’s reputation was severely tarnished, while it remained financially strong.  Improving BP’s reputation are its continued clean-up efforts and the several billion dollars it has distributed to business affected by the disaster.

 

A year later, the full scope environmental effects of the spill are still unknown.  Scientists believe it could be many years before all the repercussions of the disaster are understood.  At this point, researchers predict a low probability of continuing devastating consequences on the Gulf’s ecosystem.  However, last year’s disaster must still be reflected upon and learned from by oil industry leaders, policy-makers, and crisis communication practitioners alike. 

 

 

 

 

National Association of Broadcasters Calls for Closure of Patent Office, Proclaims that “All the world’s inventions have happened, nothing is left”

 
(Tom Galvin) April 1, 2011 – In a stunning development today, the National Association of Broadcasters proclaimed that 2011 as the “End of the Discovery Age” and said that there was nothing left to invent. NAB also called for the immediate closure of the Patent Office, since there will be no further innovation in the world.
 
“NAB has a long history of supporting innovation. After all, it was our industry that came up with the Yule Log and Infomercial,” said NAB spokesman Diade Inocente. “But after a long review, we’ve come to the conclusion with the development of the DVR, there is really nothing left in the world to invent, so let’s just stop trying.”
 
NAB also called for the Obama Administration to retract its National Broadband Plan, which it unveiled to great fanfare last year. “We don’t need a broadband plan. Does anyone really think there will an iPhone 5? C’mon!,” said NAB’s Inocente. Instead, NAB suggested that 2011 devices, programming and features be locked.
 
“We have enough programming  to last us 500 years,” added Inocente. “Between ‘Murder She Wrote,’ ‘Real Housewives of Atlanta’ reunion shows and “Kitchen Nightmares’ we have enough quality programming to last forever. And that doesn’t even include the ground-breaking news coming from local television outlets.”
 
When asked about the need for more broadband to support exciting new devices such as tablets and smart phones, NAB’s Inocente chortled: “Let’s be real. What are you going to do with them? We all know the Internet is a fad, just look at those dot-com stocks from ten years ago. The smart money is in Univision, TNT and other companies that are leading the cutting edge of communications.”
 
“Sure Apple got lucky once or twice, but it’s not like you can go on the Internet and watch videos of anything you want whenever you want,” said Inocente. “And anyway, if you could, what would you even call it? Youtube?”
 
 

3D Frenzy: Just a Fad or Here to Stay?

(Katie Durkin) Has anyone else noticed the bombardment of 3D products from the entertainment and technology industries within the past two years?  Ever since the release of James Cameron’s Avatar in 2009, it seems like everyone has hopped on the 3D bandwagon.

 While 3D technology has come a long way, it is by no means a new concept. In fact, the first form of three-dimensional images was presented in 1856, and 3D films have been popular in amusement parks for decades.  I recall “Honey, I Shrunk the Audience” being my favorite Disney World attraction when I visited about ten years ago.  So why the sudden surge of 3D movies from Hollywood?  After Avatar, came Clash of the Titans, Despicable Me, Tron: Legacy and Jackass 3D to name a few.   I initially thought it was a fleeting trend whipped up by the film industry to revamp interest in movie going.  But now other industries are following suit…

While I’ve yet to try one out, 3D televisions are becoming increasingly popular among early adopters.  They run between $800 and $3,500, but their prices have already started to drop.  Just last week, Nintendo launched its newest gaming console, Nintendo 3DS, which is a handheld console that projects 3D images without the need for 3D glasses. 

 However, the new 3D products aren’t for everyone. Gamers have already complained that using the Nintendo 3DS causes headaches and dizziness.  And I remember hearing multiple fearful shrills as Jake Sully sailed through Pandora on his winged-creatures.   I guess only time will tell whether 3D’s sudden popularity will become a societal norm or eventually be scaled back. 

 

The 463 Timeline – As Measured by our Apple Gifts

(Tom Galvin) Been thinking a lot lately about how the technology community has evolved over the last 6 1/2 years since we founded 463 in late 2004. When we started our firm, YouTube wasn’t invented yet, Facebook just received its first investment and no one was yet atwitter about Twitter. Jim, Sean and I founded the firm on the premise that technology was becoming pervasive and ever more important in everyday life, the economy and society – and that it would become increasingly regulated.
 
All that’s been proven true, but we missed a lot along the way. We (I) were certain that RFID would revolutionize all aspects of life as much or more than the Internet did. And so far, so wrong. It could still happen though, but not like we expected. We thought health-care IT would become one of the most important tech issues in Washington, and while it’s important, it’s become subsumed into overall health care.
 
Actually, the biggest difference between 2004 and 2011 is back then, there were tech issues. Now they are just issues that have a tech angle. Back in the early days, technology stood out as a separate challenge – Internet tax, for example. Now, it’s become such an everyday part of life it’s just assumed to be in the mix of everything. Just look at the never-ending debate on energy and  “green” – tech is all over it.
 
That’s led to another change – back in the day many reporters who had technology as their beat. Over time, many of those technology reporter beats disappeared, victim to the change in journalism, economic downturn and the fact that tech just became an integral part of a broader beat, such as health care or energy.
 
One thing has stayed the same. Our core group of original clients – Cisco, VeriSign, Sun, TechNet and Technology CEO Council – all but Sun are still with us, and that’s because Sun was swallowed by up by Oracle. Along the way we’ve added new ones – Facebook and CEA come to mind - but we take pride in our long-term relationships.
 
But if you want to mark the last 6 1/2 years to see change, one must look no further than the prizes we give out at 463 parties. Those who we count as friends know us as folks who like to do two things – release a dopey holiday video every year making fun of ourselves, our clients and reporters and give out gadgets at our regular happy hours and company parties.
 
In 2004, I recall when we gave away iPods the winners were excited to get them. Nowadays you can get one by subscribing to a magazine.They have become the clock radio of technology – so available as to be barely valuable. But in a sense, that’s success, because it’s about the content, right? Along the way we’ve given away Flip cameras and flat-screen TVs. And Danielle, you can’t win anymore.
 
Which gets me to my finale. We now live in an iPad world, so while it’s still hot, we’ll be giving one away at our next 463 event on April 13th, during which we’ll also honoring CEA’s Gary Shapiro’s new book, “The Comeback.” We hope to see you there.
 
Six and a half years from now, who’s to say what will be hot? Technology will be further ingrained in our society, we’ll have a new president but some of the same old challenges (debt, fear of overseas competition). And hopefully some hot gadgets to give away.
 

Sticker Shock on Chevy Volt

 

 

 

 

 

     
(Jim Hock) As most close to 463 will tell you, I have been super excited to get the new Chevy Volt.  What’s not to love with the eco-friendly features and limited amount of overpriced gasoline you have to buy.  But imagine my surprise after doing a ton of research to be told – when putting my $2,000 deposit down at the dealer yesterday – that there is a “dealer surcharge” that could range anywhere up to $20,000 on top of the MSRP.  Crazy.  The guy at the Koons dealer in Vienna, Virginia said that for me they would give the “reduced rate” of $8,000 down from $12,000.  Thanks, but no thanks.  And this was just thrown on at the end of the conversation and when asked what it was they said it basically was for paperwork and such.  Total BS.  
 
So I come to find out that this is not official GM corporate policy, but a policy that’s up to the discretion of the individual dealers.  Just another example of American car companies screwing up in the short term rather than long-term customer satisfaction.  And promulgating the sleezy reputation of US car dealers.   
 
Message to Chevy dealers – charge what you advertise up front.  Don’t play around. You’ve been in the wilderness for so long.  Don’t you go there again with these stupid practices.  I have been a totally committed Toyota-hybrid-Camry guy and was ready for a change. Maybe that has to wait a bit.
 

Rise of the Robots

(Katie Durkin)  IBM’s supercomputer aka Watson crushed its two-legged Jeopardy! opponents last night in the second part of a three-night series.  Watson fell short of expectations the first night, tying Jeopardy! legend Brad Rutter.  Watson shined on Day 2 though and finished with $35,734, while his contenders Rutter earned $10,400 and Ken Jennings earned only $4800.

 Scientists at IBM’s Thomas J. Watson Research Lab in New York spent over four years designing and preparing Watson for the Jeopardy! challenge.  Watson’s overwhelming victory last night demonstrates the power and rapid advancement of artificial intelligence. 

Not every one is as impressed by Watson as I am though.  Wired reader Anthony Williams commented, “Duh, what a concept.  A computer can locate and answer questions faster than a human big deal.”  Others allude to an eventual machine takeover: “By 2030 we’ll make good pets if we’re lucky,” commented Wired reader ConvivalVisits. 

 However, the triumph of Watson is a truly feat in the name of innovation.  IBM has designed a machine that can analyze and understand complicated human language and wordplay.  The reach of IBM’s accomplishments could span from the military to health care to classrooms. 

The important thing to remember is that whether it’s Watson, Rutter, or Jennings that wins the final game tonight, the power of the human brain will be behind the victory.  

 

National Wireless Initiative: Win-Win for All

(By: Krista Strum) If you missed President Obama’s speech on the National Wireless Initiative and its execution plan, here are a few important highlights. First, he signaled support for legislation to allow the FCC to conduct voluntary incentive auctions to free up 500MHz worth of spectrum. What makes incentive auctions attractive, as proposed in the FCC’s National Broadband Plan, is that current owners will get a share of revenue earned from auctioning off the spectrum. It’s a sweet deal that should encourage those “squatting” on idle or unused spectrum to participate.

Second, the plan includes measures to help consumers become more connected, directing $5 billion to constructing 4G networks in rural areas. The effort will also be backed by a $3 billion R&D budget to help guide the rollout. When all is said and done, it’s projected that at least 98 percent of American’s will have service.  This is awesome considering more connectivity and information sharing makes for a smarter America.

The ‘icing on the cake’ is a $10.7 billion budget for a nationwide public safety network.  So during national emergencies, emergency response workers and groups can communicate on a larger scale. Under the plan, “$3.2 billion would be devoted to reallocating the “D Block” (which is a band of spectrum that would be reserved and prioritized for public safety and not auctioned as called for under existing law); $7 billion to support the deployment of this network; and $500 million from the WIN Fund for R&D and technological development to tailor the network to meet public safety requirements.”

If you’re worried about this adding to the federal deficit, don’t! The spectrum auctions, “estimated to raise $27.8 billion,” will help offset these costs -- $9.6 billion of which will go toward reducing the deficit.

Overall, his plan is a win-win for all: “squatters” have good reason to unload their idle spectrum, consumers could enjoy more connectivity and, in times of national emergency we’ll be able to communicate better.

For more details about the plan, visit: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/02/10/president-obama-details-plan-win-future-through-expanded-wireless-access

Super Bowl Ads vs. Social Media Marketing

(Katie Durkin) On one particular Monday morning of every winter, there’s always three pressing questions Americans will ask each other: who were you rooting for, what’d you think of that half-time show, and which was your favorite commercial? Advertisers spend up to $3 million for a 30 second spot during the coveted Super Bowl airtime.  With viewership climbing every year, it seems like a smart investment.  Last year, 106 million viewers tuned in to watch the big game, and early ratings show that last night’s game will most likely shatter the record number of audience members once again. 

However, in the age of new media, one wonders whether spending millions of dollars for a few seconds of television advertising is wise.  While the Super Bowl attracts millions of viewers each year, Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube boast billions of users daily.  Why not just launch a viral campaign that will cost next to nothing in comparison? 

Not to worry, Super Bowl ad fans.  Social media won’t be diminishing the quality of your annual parade of amusing advertisements anytime soon; it will actually enhance their influence.  The buzz around this year’s commercials seems bigger than ever thanks to Internet traffic. 

Here’s how some of the most popular ads from last night are faring so far on YouTube:

Chrysler’s “Imported From Detroit” featuring Eminem: 803,406 views

Best Buy’s “Ozzy Osbourne and Justin Bieber”: 408,572 views

NFL’s “Best Fans Ever”:  170,011 views

And the winner by a landslide is Volkswagen’s “Darth Vader Kid”: 15,662,189 views  (It had just over 13 million when I started writing this post.)

 

Cutting the Internet Off To Spite Its Regime?

The events in Egypt over the past 10 days are historic, memerizing, scary, uplifting (insert your adjective here).  Much has been written about the impact of social media on the ability for protesters to organize and participate in the uprising in such large numbers. 

Indeed, the Mubarak government even took the amazing step of actually shutting down the Internet across the entire country.  However, much like a cortisone shot may ease pain but does not fix the bulging disk in a back, Egypt has proven that shutting down the Internet and social media may ease the pain for some time (just hours in today's fast-paced world) but it does not eliminate the underlying malady.

Perhaps most importantly, the shutting of the Internet appears to have made the Mubarak government even more vulnerable.  The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development says that Egypt's Internet shut down cost the country's economy more than $90 million, accounting for roughly 3-4 percent of economic output, resulting in a loss of $18 million per day for the Egyptian economy.  Those esimates may  appear to be an understatment as further calculations have valued the economic impact at more than $110 million.

Moreover, the shutting down of the Internet did not stop communication among protesters.  Google, for instance, created a voice-to-tweet service that allowed Egyptians to leave voicemail messages that were turned into tweets. Other Internet services allowed streaming audio clips from young Egyptians to be heard from anywhere on the world.

So, in a story with many morals, the Egyptian government has proven that technological innovation and communication in 2011 cannot be thwarted with a simple on/off switch.  But, maybe even more importantly, as the OECD study proved, the government is just as dependent on the Internet as its citizens.

An Internet shut down may have cut Mubarak's nose off to spite his face.