Source: http://www.techlawjournal.com/alert/2011/07/17.asp
Timestamp: 2019-04-20 10:36:46+00:00

Document:
TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,261, July 17, 2011.
Sunday, July 17, 2011, Alert No. 2,261.
7/14. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report [42 pages in PDF] titled "Children's Television Act: FCC Could Improve Efforts to Oversee Enforcement and Provide Public Information".
The Congress enacted the Children's Television Act (CTA), Public Law No. 101-437, in 1990. It is codified at 47 U.S.C. § 303a and 47 U.S.C. § 303b. It requires the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), among other things, to write rules "to prescribe standards applicable to commercial television broadcast licensees with respect to the time devoted to commercial matter in conjunction with children’s television programming".
The just released report finds that "Broadcasters aired significantly more core children's programming in 2010 than in 1998, primarily because there are more broadcast channels and stations than there were then. An important source is multicasting, or the multiple channels aired by broadcasters since the digital television transition."
It also finds that "households increasingly rely on cable and satellite providers -- to which core children’s programming requirements do not apply -- increasing the number of channels specifically targeted to children, but also increasing the impact of CTA and FCC's rules on advertising, which limit the duration of commercials and require their separation from children’s programming on broadcast, cable, and satellite. Other media platforms, such as the Internet and MP3 players, are outside CTA's reach."
This report states that "FCC has avoided developing specific standards for core children's programming or judging program content, due to free speech concerns, relying instead on a broad definition and oversight by the public. A lack of widely accepted standards to assess such programming makes it difficult for parents and broadcasters to evaluate the educational content of core children's programming, potentially leading to wide variation in its quality."
It recommends that the FCC "develop and implement a strategy for overseeing cable operators’ and satellite providers’ compliance with the required advertising limits", "collaborate with the media industry to explore the potential for voluntary guidelines or standards to be used in creating and assessing core children’s programming", and identify and implement additional mechanisms for educating the public about core children's programming on commercial broadcast television stations.
7/14. The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee (SENRC) held a business meeting at which it marked up numerous bills, but not either of the two bills on the agenda that pertain to rare earth materials (REMs). See, SENRC release announcing results of meeting.
The two bills are S 1113 [LOC | WW], the "Critical Minerals Policy Act of 2011", and S 383 [LOC | WW], the "Critical Minerals and Materials Promotion Act of 2011". REMs have many applications in information and communications technology products and devices.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), the ranking Republican on the SENRC, introduced S 1113 on May 26, 2011. As of July 14, 2011, there are 19 cosponsors.
It states that "It is the policy of the United States to promote an adequate, reliable, domestic, and stable supply of critical minerals, produced in an environmentally responsible manner, in order to strengthen and sustain the economic security, and the manufacturing, industrial, energy, technological, and competitive stature, of the United States."
It would require the Secretary of the Interior to draft a methodology for determining which minerals qualify as critical minerals, and require the President "to encourage Federal agencies to facilitate the availability, development, and environmentally responsible production of domestic resources to meet national critical minerals needs".
Sen. Mark Udall (D-CO) introduced S 383 on February 17, 2011. There are two cosponsors.
It states that "It is the policy of the United States to promote an adequate and stable supply of critical minerals and materials necessary to maintain national security, economic well-being, and industrial production with appropriate attention to a long-term balance between resource production, energy use, a healthy environment, natural resources conservation, and social needs."
It directs the President to "coordinate the actions of applicable Federal agencies" and "promote and encourage private enterprise in the development of economically sound and stable domestic critical minerals and materials supply chains".
Sen. Udall stated that "These materials are used in everything from wind turbines to cell phones to weapons guidance systems." See, Congressional Record, February 17, 2011, at Page S882.
He continued that "One group of critical minerals with very high importance today is rare earth elements. The United States was once the primary producer of rare earth materials according to the U.S. Geological Survey, but over the past 15 years we have become 100 percent reliant on imports, with 97 percent coming from China."
Sen. Udall continued that "When the rare earth industry left the United States, our rare earth materials workforce dwindled as well, leaving very few experts with experience in processing these materials. Currently, there are no curricula in U.S. universities that are geared toward training a new expert workforce; rather, most of the expertise resides in China and Japan. In addition, the U.S.-developed intellectual property for making many of these materials is owned by Japan."
On July 13, 2011, Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) sent a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder asking the DOJ and Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to investigate News Corporation and "determine whether U.S. laws have been violated".
He cited only one U.S. statute, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). He wrote that "the anti-bribery provisions of FCPA make it illegal for a U.S. person or company to pay foreign officials to obtain or retain business. In this case, media reports indicate that reporters for News of the World, a newspaper that is controlled by a subsidiary of News Corporation, paid London police officers for information, including private telephone information, about the British royal family and other individuals for use in newspaper articles."
He added that "Because News Corporation is a U.S. corporation, the FCPA may apply to all Company employees everywhere in the world, regardless of their nationality or where they reside or do business."
The requests for investigations of News Corporation have identified and proposed two U.S. agencies for conducting investigations, the DOJ and SEC.
Also on July 13, Sen. John Rockefeller (D-WV) and Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) sent a letter to Holder and Mary Schapiro, Chairman of the SEC, to request an investigate whether News Corporation has violated the FCPA.
They wrote that "senior officials of News Corporation subsidiaries have recently been arrested on allegations that they bribed members of London's Metropolitan Police to gain access to private information. If these allegations are true, they may constitute a violation of the" FCPA.
They added that "There have also been allegations that News Corporation employees may have illegally accessed the phone records of victims of the attacks of September 11, 2001. We urge you to investigate whether any United States citizens had their privacy violated by this alleged hacking."
Sen. Rockefeller also issued a statement on July 12. He wrote, "The reported hacking by News Corporation newspapers against a range of individuals -- including children -- is offensive and a serious breach of journalistic ethics. This raises serious questions about whether the company has broken U.S. law, and I encourage the appropriate agencies to investigate to ensure that Americans have not had their privacy violated. I am concerned that the admitted phone hacking in London by the News Corp. may have extended to 9/11 victims or other Americans. If they did, the consequences will be severe."
The Center for American Progress (CAP), a Washington DC based interest whose policy proposals over overlap those of the Democratic party, initiated an online petition drive pertaining to the information collection activities in the United Kingdom of News Corporation subsidiaries.
The petition is directed to Holder and Schapiro. It states that there are reports that "News Corp. subsidiaries bribed police offers to obtain information" and "hacked into voicemails of politicians".
The CAP wants the DOJ, which enforces criminal statutes, and the SEC, which has civil and administrative authority to regulate securities markets, to investigate News Corporation and its subsidiaries, including U.S. based subsidiaries "such as Fox News, the Wall Street Journal and the New York Post".
The petition identifies two statutes. It requests investigation of whether there was any violation of "The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (15 U.S.C. §§ 78dd-1, et seq.), the Electronic Privacy Communications Act (18 U.S.C. § 2510-2522) or any other applicable U.S. laws."
7/14. This commentary presents two related points regarding recent calls for the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to investigate News Corporation for its accessing of phone records and messages, and other confidential information, to further its news reporting.
First, while in this matter it is reporters who have improperly obtained confidential information, there is also a long history of others using improper means to obtain phone records and other confidential information of reporters -- often for the purpose discovering their sources, impeding their news reporting, and reducing public understanding of the activities of government and publicly traded companies.
Second, while some of improper activity has been conducted by companies such as Hewlett Packard, the DOJ and its Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) have been serial and unrepentant offenders of communications privacy principles and journalistic independence, and have directed their improprieties at news reporters.
The DOJ, and to a lesser extent the SEC, and have done much to interfere improperly with the legitimate and important activities of news journalists that are protected and promoted by the First Amendment.
To the extent that the News Corporation investigation focuses on prosecuting, punishing and deterring improper access to phone and other information, the DOJ would enter into the investigation with the unclean hands of any prosecutor that imposes rules upon the public that it violates itself.
To the extent that this investigation is about restoring news journalism to its appropriate position as an ethical and effective provider of information, the DOJ's involvement is undermined by its history of impeding and obstructing news reporting, particularly through its abuse of subpoena powers to force journalists to disclose confidential sources.
Pretexting. There is not yet a factual record on News Corporation. No court has issued a findings of fact. No evidentiary hearing has taken place. One of the activities alleged in media reports is bribery of police officers to obtain phone information. However, much of the activity alleged in media reports is in the nature of pretexting to obtain phone, medical and financial information.
During Congressional consideration of pretexting related legislation following the HP pretexting scandal in 2006, Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) said that "Pretexting is pretending to be someone you're not, to get something you shouldn't have, to use in a way that is probably wrong." See, story titled "House Commerce Committee Holds Hearing on Bill Related to Pretexting of, and Data Sharing by, Carriers" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,550, March 12, 2007.
The 109th Congress enacted HR 4709, the "Telephone Records and Privacy Protection Act of 2006", early in 2007, in the aftermath of the HP pretexting scandal, to ban phone record pretexting. It is now Public Law No. 109-476. It added 18 U.S.C. § 1039, regarding "Fraud and related activity in connection with obtaining confidential phone records information of a covered entity", to the criminal code. The Congress had previously banned pretexting to obtain financial records in the Gramm Leach Bliley Act, at § 521. See, 15 U.S.C. § 6821.
One of the events that prompted the Congress to act was the HP pretexting scandal, in which pretexters and private investigators, attempted to obtain phone records of, and/or physically surveil, HP Directors (including George Keyworth, Thomas Perkins, Lawrence Babbio, and Carly Fiorina) and numerous news reporters (including Dawn Kawamoto, Tom Krazit, and Stephen Shankland of CNET, Roger Crockett, Ben Elgin, and Peter Burrows of Business Week, John Markoff of the New York Times, and Pui-Wing Tam and George Anders of the Wall Street Journal, which is now owned by News Corporation).
The House Commerce Committee (HCC) held a lengthy hearing on this matter on September 28, 2006. See, HCC web page with hyperlinks to prepared testimony. See also, stories in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,462, October 5, 2006, and TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,463, October 6, 2006.
The HCC also held a hearing on September 29, 2006, at which business reporter Christopher Byron testified regarding pretexting to obtain his phone records to learn his sources for news stories. A company about which he had reported was seeking to stop reporting that reflected negatively on the company. See, Byron's prepared testimony.
Byron worked for News Corporation's New York Post, although the reporting at issue was for Red Herring.
NSA Illegal Warrantless Wiretap Program. Federal government agencies do not have to resort to pretexting to obtain phone records or content of communications. Phone companies give it to them pursuant to existing, or non-existent, statutory authority.
The federal government and communications companies may, or may not, have engaged in illegal activities pursuant to the National Security Agency's (NSA) warrantless wiretap program.
The New York Times published a story by James Risen and Eric Lichtblau on December 16, 2005, titled "Bush Lets U.S. Spy on Callers Without Courts". It stated that "President Bush secretly authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on Americans and others inside the United States to search for evidence of terrorist activity without the court-approved warrants ordinarily required for domestic spying, according to government officials." See also, story titled "President Bush Discloses Interception of Communications Without Court Approval" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,275, December 19, 2005, and story titled "Bush, Gonzales & Hayden Discuss Presidential Intercepts and PATRIOT Act" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,276, December 20, 2005.
The details of this program have not been disclosed to the public. Nor has the legality of this program been determined by the courts. This is because the DOJ has blocked such consideration by asserting sovereign immunity and the state secrets privilege, and in 2008 the Congress granted the private companies immunity, including retroactive immunity, for their collaboration in this program. See, HR 6304 (110th Congress), the "FISA Amendments Act of 2008", Public Law No. 110-261, at Title II, Section 201.
FBI Illegal Use of Exigent Letters to Surveil Washington Post and New York Times. On January 20, 2010, the DOJ's Office of the Inspector General (OIG) released a redacted copy [306 pages in PDF] of a report that found misconduct at the FBI.
The report discloses misconduct by the FBI in its use of "exigent letters" to obtain phone records from collaborating communications companies to, among other things, "target" reporters at the Washington Post and New York Times, which first reported the NSA warrantless wiretap program.
See, report at pages 250-252. See also, story titled "Another DOJ Inspector General Report Finds FBI Misconduct in Obtaining Phone Records" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,037, January 20, 2010.
The FBI has considerable authority to conduct counter-terrorism surveillance. The 2001 USA PATRIOT Act (HR 3162, 107th Congress, October 26, 2001, Public Law 107-56) expanded these powers. Yet, two aspects of this OIG report are particularly pertinent.
First, while the Congress has given the FBI powers to surveil terrorists, the OIG report revealed that the FBI was also surveilling journalists at the publications that were among the most accomplished at reporting on the war on terror.
Second, the FBI did not abuse exigent letter authority to get phone records from phone companies. It made up exigent letter authority out of thin air. There is no such thing in any federal statute as exigent letters.
The federal agency entrusted with investigating and prosecuting DOJ officials is the DOJ. The DOJ has not prosecuted FBI General Counsel Valerie Caproni, who remains in office, or any other DOJ officials.
FBI Illegal Use of National Security Letters. The DOJ's OIG has also released two other reports that document FBI abuse of National Security Letter (NSL) authority.
NSL authority exists under federal statute. See, 18 U.S.C. § 2709. NSLs do not require a warrant or other prior court authorization, and hence, are inherently subject to abuse. They enable the DOJ's FBI to obtain records, including subscriber, billing and call records of phone companies and ISPs. NSLs also apply to libraries to the extent that they are providing an electronic communication service.
On March 13, 2008, the OIG released a report [187 pages in PDF] titled "A Review of the FBI’s Use of National Security Letters: Assessment of Corrective Actions and Examination of NSL Usage in 2006". See also, story titled "DOJ Inspector General Releases Second Report on FBI Misuse of National Security Letters" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,730, March 12, 2008.
DOJ Abuse of Subpoena Powers. Underlying the investigation of News Corporation is the notion that it has engaged in unethical journalistic practices, and that the public interest in ethical and reliable news reporting has been compromised and must be restored.
The gist of this commentary is that reliance upon the DOJ to restore the news media to its appropriate position is misplaced due to the DOJ's long history of working to undermine news reporting. In addition to the improper targeting of the Washington Post and New York Times in surveillance activities, the DOJ has a history of abuse of subpoena powers to impede and degrade the quality of news reporting.
The DOJ uses subpoenas to compel reporters to disclose their confidential sources, including government whistleblowers who disclose government corruption, waste, and fraud, and officials who disclose information to which the public would be entitled under the Freedom of Information Act, Open Meetings Act, and Administrative Procedure Act, were the relevant agencies to comply with those statutes.
The American Society of News Editors (ASNE) published a piece in 2009 that states that "Since 2001, five journalists have been sentenced or jailed for refusing to reveal their confidential sources in federal court. Two reporters were sentenced to 18 months in prison and one reporter faced up to $5,000 a day in fines. A 2006 study estimated that in that year alone, 67 federal subpoenas sought confidential material from reporters, with 41 of those subpoenas seeking the name of a confidential source."
Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN) and former Rep. Rick Boucher (D-VA) worked over many Congresses to enact legislation known as both "media shield" and "free flow of information" that would protect news reporters from abusive subpoenas from federal government agencies. These bills would limit the ability of federal entities to compel journalists to provide testimony or documents, or disclose sources, related to their work. These bills would also would limit government access to records of carriers, ISPs and other service providers.
The DOJ's excessive use of subpoenas not only harms the reporters who are served with the subpoenas. It harms news gathering regarding government and policy across the board, and the public's interest in access to information about their government. The use of subpoenas to root out whistleblowers and other confidential sources puts all government officials on notice that their discussions with reporters may be discovered, and that they may be subjected to retaliation. This makes legitimate news gathering more difficult, and degrades the quality of news reporting.
The Bush and Obama administrations, and particularly the DOJ, have opposed the media shield bills.
The House passed HR 985 [LOC | WW], the "Free Flow of Information Act", on March 31, 2009. See, story titled "House Judiciary Committee Approves Media Shield and Communications Services Provider Protection Bill" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,919, March 30, 2009. HR 985 is substantially identical to HR 2102 [LOC | WW], the version of the bill in the 110th Congress. See, story titled "House Approves Boucher-Pence Media Shield Bill" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,656, October 17, 2007. On December 10, 2009, the Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) approved its version of the bill, S 448 [LOC | WW], also titled the "Free Flow of Information Act of 2009".
SEC's Improper Subpoenas Directed to Reporters. Senators and others who have asked for investigation of News Corporation have also asked for an SEC investigation. However, the SEC is affected too by disclosure in early 2006 of its abuse of subpoenas to compel business reporters to disclose their sources to the SEC.
Similarly, HP CEO Mark Hurd profusely apologized for HP's pretexting and promised that HP would respect privacy in the future. See, Hurd's prepared testimony of September 28, 2006. In contrast, the DOJ has not disclosed contrition for any of its improprieties referenced in this article.
Also, it should not go unnoticed that the SEC in recent years, despite its huge budget and massive resources, failed to uncover the long running and extensive fraud at either Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC or at Enron Corporation.
It learned about fraud at these companies by reading the reports of financial analysts and business journalists, such as Fortune's Bethany McLean.
Conclusion. The thrust of this commentary is not that News Corporation should not be investigated, but rather that there exist reasons for questioning the suitability of the DOJ and FBI for this investigation.
The DOJ and FBI, which have a history of improperly accessing phone records and communications, would be called upon to investigate News Corporation for improperly accessing phone records and communications.
The DOJ and FBI, which have a history of improperly undermining free and effective news journalism, would be called upon to restore propriety to news journalism.
The House will meet at 12:00 NOON for morning hour, and at 2:00 PM for legislative business. Votes will be postponed until 6:30 PM. See, Rep. Cantor's schedule for week of July 18.
6:00 - 8:30 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) Young Lawyers Committee will host an event titled "FCBA Trivia Night". Location: Laughing Man Tavern, 1306 G St., NW.
Deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to its Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM) regarding ex parte communications with the FCC. The FCC adopted this item on February 1, 2011, and released it on February 2, 2011. It is FCC 11-11 in GC Docket No. 10-43. See, notice in the Federal Register, May 2, 2011, Vol. 76, No. 84, at Pages 24434-24436.
Deadline to submit initial comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to its Notice of Inquiry (NOI) [27 pages in PDF] regarding rights of way policies and wireless facilities siting requirements. The FCC adopted and released this item on April 7, 2011. It is FCC 11-51 in WC Docket No. 11-59. See, notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 76, No. 95, Tuesday, May 17, 2011, at Pages 28397-28403.
The House will meet. Votes will be postponed until 6:30 PM. See, 2011 House Calendar.
Day two day event hosted by the Minority Media and Telecom Council (MMTC) titled "25th Anniversary Access to Capital and Telecom Policy Conference". See, conference web site. Location: Westin Georgetown Hotel, 2350 M St., NW..

References: § 303
 § 303
 § 2510
 § 1039
 § 521
 § 6821
 § 2709
in fine