Podcasts about federal communication commission

A case in which the Court will decide whether, under the Hobbs Act, a federal district court is bound by the Federal Communication Commission's legal interpretation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.

In this SSPI-WISE Presents podcast, Tamara Bond-Williams, Director of Engagement at SSPI, speaks with Merissa Velez, Chief of the Satellite Programs and Policy Division at the Federal Communication Commission's (FCC) Space Bureau. This podcast is the second episode of New Ideas in Space Safety, the podcast of the SSPI topic campaign: Reducing the Risks of Space, Part 2: New Ideas in Space Safety. Merissa Velez is Chief of the Satellite Programs and Policy Division of the Federal Communications Commission's Space Bureau. In this role, Ms. Velez oversees a team addressing legal and policy issues associated with the licensing and regulation of satellite systems. Ms. Velez has focused on satellite regulatory issues at the FCC for the past ten years, and was previously the Chief of the Satellite Policy Branch in the International Bureau's Satellite Division. Prior to joining the FCC, Ms. Velez clerked for the Supreme Court of Hawaii and worked in the legal publishing industry.  Ms. Velez is a graduate of Brooklyn Law School and Middlebury College.

Hosts: Maura Carabello and Leah Murray Troy Rydman, Sr. Practice Manager for AWS Security, Risk, Compliance for Strategic Accounts, calls into the program to talk about the Federal Communication Commission’s recent decision to restore net neutrality. He clarifies what the changes will look like, and how they compare to the last time net neutrality was in place.

Hosts: Leah Murray and Maura Carabello Recapping the biggest moments from the weekend’s state conventions KSL at Night hosts Leah Murray and Maura Carabello kick off the week talking about the biggest political stories from the weekend – all centered around the political state conventions. Bridger Beal-Cvetko, KSL.com reporter, joins the program to recap the biggest races and challenges the convention faced. Controversy surrounds the behavior displayed at the conventions Besides the races, the biggest thing coming out of the GOP convention was decorum, or the lack thereof. Former Speaker of the Utah House, Greg Hughes, joins the show to defend conventions, while also admitting that there were several things that disappointed and concerned him with last weekend’s conventions. He explains his more nuanced stance. State political conventions – how do they adapt to the changing times? Continuing the conversation on conventions, we take a look at the opposing views. Holly Richardson, Editor of Utah Policy, discusses her concerns about future conventions due to “disgraceful” behavior by GOP delegates. The hosts discuss if the convention process is even applicable nowadays with the signature-gathering primary option. The FCC restores net neutrality – what does it mean? Troy Rydman, Sr. Practice Manager for AWS Security, Risk, Compliance for Strategic Accounts, calls into the program to talk about the Federal Communication Commission’s recent decision to restore net neutrality. He clarifies what the changes will look like, and how they compare to the last time net neutrality was in place. Democratic Lt. Gov. nominee Rebekah Cummings discuss her and Brian King’s campaign Just today, Democratic Gubernatorial candidate Brian King chose his running mate: Lieutenant Governor-hopeful Rebekah Cummings. She joins KSL at Night – in her first media interview – to explain her stances. She shares how book bans brought her to the political arena, and what she wants to do because of it. Historic deal gives Colorado River tribes access to water rights An historic deal gives water rights to six tribes in the Upper Colorado River Basin. Gene Shawcroft, Colorado River Commissioner for Utah, explains the recent developments that will impact how water will be used along the river. He also talks about how Lake Powell is looking, especially with this year’s snowpack. Salt Lake City revamps its transportation plans Regardless of where you live in Utah, you’re bound to visit Salt Lake City at some point. Whether for a sports game, General Conference, or the potential 2034 Olympics, the world comes to Salt Lake City pretty often. That results in traffic issues, so the city’s looking at revamping its transportation plans. Joe Taylor, Transportation Planner for SLC’s Transportation Division, joins the show. Retiring at 62: Why the trend for earlier retirement is growing in popularity More and more people try to retire earlier than 65, but is it actually feasible? If you didn’t get started on saving for retirement in your 20s, is it too late? Should you prioritize retirement or your kids’ college? Kristen Cooper, President of Axios Capital, breaks it down on KSL at Night, giving good resources for those who might not be the most financially-savvy.    

In the final episode of season one of 'Climate Dads', we are joined by Shomik Dutta - the co-founder of Venture Capital firm, Overture. Shomik previously founded and ran Higher Ground Labs, an accelerator and venture fund that modernized the technology stack of the Democratic Party. He was a longtime aide to President Barack Obama and served as an Advisor to the Chairman of the Federal Communication Commission. After spending the first 5 episodes of the season talking about what you can do to make a contribution to addressing climate change, this episode takes a look at the systems - political, social and economic - that are truly what we need to change to give the planet a fighting chance.

In today's episode of The Mentors Radio, host Dan Hesse talks with Tom Wheeler. Currently a Visiting Fellow at the Brookings Institution and a Senior Research Fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School, Tom Wheeler is a businessman, an author of many books and former Chairman of the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) from 2013 to 2017. As an entreprenuer Wheeler started and helped start multiple companies offering offering innovative cable, wireless and video communications services. He is the only person to be selected to both the Cable Television Hall of Fame and the Wireless Hall of Fame. Prior to being appointed to the FCC, Wheeler was president and CEO of the National Cable Television Association (NCTA) and following NCTA, he was the CEO of several high-tech companies. For 12 years, Tom Wheeler served as president and CEO of the Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Association (CTIA). Presidents Clinton and Bush each appointed him a Trustee of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. He is the former Chairman and President of the National Archives Foundation, and a former board member of the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS). Today, "we're living in a world where my private information has become a corporate asset basically without my permission," notes Wheeler, "and that decision was made by the platform executives without informing me..." Listen to episode below, or on ANY PODCAST PLATFORM here. BE SURE TO LEAVE US A GREAT REVIEW on Apple Podcasts or Spotify and share with friends and colleagues! SHOW NOTES: TOM WHEELER: BIO: https://www.brookings.edu/people/tom-wheeler/ BOOKS: Techlash: Who Makes the Rules in the Digital Gilded Age?, by Tom Wheeler From Gutenberg to Google: The History of Our Future, by Tom Wheeler Take Command: Leadership Lessons from the Civil War: Winning Strategies for Today's Managers, by Tom Wheeler ARTICLES: Here's a New Plan to Rein In the Gilded Tech Bros - WIRED Who makes the Rules in the Digital Gilded Age?, article by Tom Wheeler

An upcoming Federal Communication Commission vote may provide more school bus Wi-Fi funding and the Tennessee murderer of a school bus driver was released. Shelley Rutledge, a school psychologist and a licensed clinical social worker with the Salem-Keizer School District in Oregon, delves into the touchy topic of problematic sexual behavior in student riders and previews her keynote at the Transporting Students with Disabilities and Special Needs Conference in November. Read more at stnonline.com/special-needs. 

The Dr. Pat Show: Talk Radio to Thrive By!: FCC Connectivity Program for Qualifying Tribal Lands with Bambi Kraus.Bambi Kraus, Chief, Office of Native Affairs and Policy, Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau discusses Federal Communication Commission's (FCC) Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) that helps households get and afford the internet service they need for work, school, health care and more. Connecting Eligible households on qualifying tribal lands to the internet with monthly savings!Website:https://getinternet.gov/apply?ln=RW5nbGlzaA%3D%3D Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoicesSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

The Dr. Pat Show: Talk Radio to Thrive By!: FCC Connectivity Program for Qualifying Tribal Lands with Bambi Kraus. Bambi Kraus, Chief, Office of Native Affairs and Policy, Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau discusses Federal Communication Commission's (FCC) Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) that helps households get and afford the internet service they need for work, school, health care and more. Connecting Eligible households on qualifying tribal lands to the internet with monthly savings! Website: https://getinternet.gov/apply?ln=RW5nbGlzaA%3D%3D

The Dr. Pat Show: Talk Radio to Thrive By!: FCC Connectivity Program for Qualifying Tribal Lands with Bambi Kraus. Bambi Kraus, Chief, Office of Native Affairs and Policy, Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau discusses Federal Communication Commission's (FCC) Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) that helps households get and afford the internet service they need for work, school, health care and more. Connecting Eligible households on qualifying tribal lands to the internet with monthly savings! Website: https://getinternet.gov/apply?ln=RW5nbGlzaA%3D%3D

Tune in every other Monday for a new episode of #MantleMondays with host: Bishop Travell Travis, Esq. as he interviews entrepreneurs, pastors, authors, and leaders sharing their career, entrepreneurial, and ministerial journeys. Learn more: www.travelltravis.com Purchase books authored by Bishop Travis: "Don't Eat the Baby: The Characteristics of Cannibalistic Church" and "Where Will the Mantle Fall: A Biblical and Legal Guide to Succession Planning" #mantles #leadership #succession #entrepreneurship #pastors #mantles #cannibalisticchurch #wherewillthemantlefall In 1987 the Lord directed Bishop McCrea to move to Washington DC where he went under the leadership of Bishop A. D. Brooks. There he was tutored in business management, Church administration, soul winning and baptism. Hundreds of souls were baptized by Bishop McCrea during his stay at the Way of the Cross Church, Washington DC; there he developed a love for souls. Bishop Brooks built and instilled in him confidence in one's gifts and talents, teaching to believe in the ability that God has birth in you. Under Bishop A. D. Brooks, the Lord prepared Bishop McCrea for one of most faith testing tasks of his life, the move to Alaska. In 1993 God revealed to Bishop McCrea by several years of vision and confirmation by his pastor Bishop A. D. Brooks, to start a Work in Anchorage Alaska. Having faith like Abraham, Bishop McCrea didn't hesitate at the leading of God, but moved from family and loved ones to fulfill his call of God. He resigned from his job, packs up his belonging and moved the family to Anchorage. The Church was birth on October 9, 1994 with Bishop and Mrs. McCrea and Children as its 1st members, with Bishop A. D. Brooks officiating and many others from the east coast taking part in this service. The Church has since its birth progressively grown. Bishop McCrea has seen God's miraculous healing power when in 1998 he was diagnosed with cancer. His doctor advised him that without treatment he might survive three year and with treatment he might last five years. Bishop McCrea testifies of the healing power of God and until this day he still lives by the grace of God. The Lord in November of 2006 blessed Bishop McCrea and Praise Temple Church Family to purchase their 1st Worship Facility located here at 822 East Loop Road. Also in 2006 Bishop McCrea and Praise Temple Ministries applied for and was granted by the Federal Communication Commission a permit to construct a Gospel Radio Station in Alaska. Bishop McCrea has also obtained permits for 9 other radio stations in several other states. As the ministry progressed, in 2009 Bishop McCrea began setting up connections in Trivandrum India for the birthing of the Praise Temple International Ministries. After 3 years of planning and working with Bishop Manuel Ahimas in January 2012 Bishop and Mrs. McCrea made their first international trip to India for 28 days of crusade. After several weeks of preaching in southern and central India Bishop McCrea was able by the grace of God to bring into fellowship 72 new churches from India into the Way of the Cross Churches of Christ International. Bishop McCrea now serves as Director of the Foreign Region with 167 churches under his leadership in Africa, India and Haiti. Bishop McCrea is now in progress of starting churches in the Philippines. The Lord has been good to Bishop McCrea and the ministry.

The Cyberlaw Podcast kicks off 2023 by staring directly into the sun(set) of Section 702 authorization. The entire panel, including guest host Brian Fleming and guests Michael Ellis  and David Kris, debates where things could be headed this year as the clock is officially ticking on FISA Section 702 reauthorization. Although there is agreement that a straight reauthorization is unlikely in today's political environment, the ultimate landing spot for Section 702 is very much in doubt and a “game of chicken” will likely precede any potential deal. Everything seems to be in play, as this reauthorization battle could result in meaningful reform or a complete car crash come this time next year. Sticking with Congress, Michael also reacts to President Biden's recent bipartisan call to action regarding “Big Tech” and ponders where Republicans and Democrats could potentially find agreement on an issue everyone seems to agree on (for very different reasons). The panel also discusses the timing of President Biden's OpEd in the Wall Street Journal and debates whether it is intended as a challenge to the Republican-controlled House to act rather than simply increase oversight on the tech industry.  David then introduces a fascinating story about the bold recent action by the Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) to bring suit against Covington & Burling LLP to enforce an administrative subpoena seeking disclosure of the firm's clients implicated in a 2020 cyberattack by Chinese state-sponsored group, Hafnium. David posits that the SEC knows exactly what it is doing by taking such aggressive action in the face of strong resistance, and the panel discusses whether the SEC may have already won by attempting to protect its burgeoning piece of turf in the U.S. government cybersecurity enforcement landscape. Brian then turns to the crypto regulatory and enforcement space to discuss Coinbase's recent settlement with New York's Department of Financial Services. Rather than signal another crack in the foundation of the once high-flying crypto industry, Brian offers that this may just be routine growing pains for a maturing industry that is more like the traditional banking sector, from a regulatory and compliance standpoint, than it may have wanted to believe. Then, in the China portion of the episode, Michael discusses the latest news on the establishment of reverse Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), and suggests it may still be some time before this tool gets finalized (even as the substantive scope appears to be shrinking). Next, Brian discusses a recent D.C. Circuit decision which upheld the Federal Communication Commission's decision to rescind the license of China Telecom at the recommendation of the executive branch agencies known as Team Telecom (Department of Justice, Department of Defense, and Department of Homeland Security). This important, first-of-its-kind decision reinforces the role of Team Telecom as an important national security gatekeeper for U.S. telecommunications infrastructure. Finally, David highlights an interesting recent story about an FBI search of an apparent Chinese police outpost in New York and ponders what it would mean to negotiate with and be educated by undeclared Chinese law enforcement agents in a foreign country. In a few updates and quick hits: Brian updates listeners on the U.S. government's continuing efforts to win multilateral support from key allies for tough new semiconductor export controls targeting China. Michael picks up the thread on the Twitter Files release and offers his quick take on what it says about ReleaseTheMemo.   And, last but not least, Brian discusses the unsurprising (according the Stewart) decision by the Supreme Court of the United States to allow WhatsApp's spyware suit against NSO Group to continue.  

The Cyberlaw Podcast kicks off 2023 by staring directly into the sun(set) of Section 702 authorization. The entire panel, including guest host Brian Fleming and guests Michael Ellis  and David Kris, debates where things could be headed this year as the clock is officially ticking on FISA Section 702 reauthorization. Although there is agreement that a straight reauthorization is unlikely in today's political environment, the ultimate landing spot for Section 702 is very much in doubt and a “game of chicken” will likely precede any potential deal. Everything seems to be in play, as this reauthorization battle could result in meaningful reform or a complete car crash come this time next year. Sticking with Congress, Michael also reacts to President Biden's recent bipartisan call to action regarding “Big Tech” and ponders where Republicans and Democrats could potentially find agreement on an issue everyone seems to agree on (for very different reasons). The panel also discusses the timing of President Biden's OpEd in the Wall Street Journal and debates whether it is intended as a challenge to the Republican-controlled House to act rather than simply increase oversight on the tech industry.  David then introduces a fascinating story about the bold recent action by the Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) to bring suit against Covington & Burling LLP to enforce an administrative subpoena seeking disclosure of the firm's clients implicated in a 2020 cyberattack by Chinese state-sponsored group, Hafnium. David posits that the SEC knows exactly what it is doing by taking such aggressive action in the face of strong resistance, and the panel discusses whether the SEC may have already won by attempting to protect its burgeoning piece of turf in the U.S. government cybersecurity enforcement landscape. Brian then turns to the crypto regulatory and enforcement space to discuss Coinbase's recent settlement with New York's Department of Financial Services. Rather than signal another crack in the foundation of the once high-flying crypto industry, Brian offers that this may just be routine growing pains for a maturing industry that is more like the traditional banking sector, from a regulatory and compliance standpoint, than it may have wanted to believe. Then, in the China portion of the episode, Michael discusses the latest news on the establishment of reverse Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), and suggests it may still be some time before this tool gets finalized (even as the substantive scope appears to be shrinking). Next, Brian discusses a recent D.C. Circuit decision which upheld the Federal Communication Commission's decision to rescind the license of China Telecom at the recommendation of the executive branch agencies known as Team Telecom (Department of Justice, Department of Defense, and Department of Homeland Security). This important, first-of-its-kind decision reinforces the role of Team Telecom as an important national security gatekeeper for U.S. telecommunications infrastructure. Finally, David highlights an interesting recent story about an FBI search of an apparent Chinese police outpost in New York and ponders what it would mean to negotiate with and be educated by undeclared Chinese law enforcement agents in a foreign country. In a few updates and quick hits: Brian updates listeners on the U.S. government's continuing efforts to win multilateral support from key allies for tough new semiconductor export controls targeting China. Michael picks up the thread on the Twitter Files release and offers his quick take on what it says about ReleaseTheMemo.   And, last but not least, Brian discusses the unsurprising (according the Stewart) decision by the Supreme Court of the United States to allow WhatsApp's spyware suit against NSO Group to continue.  

This week, National Urban League President and CEO Marc H. Morial, and Joi Chaney, Executive Director of the Washington Bureau, sit down with Commissioner Geoffrey Starks from the Federal Communications Commission to discuss ways to bridge the digital divide.    For more information or to see if you qualify for the affordable connectivity program, visit https://nul.org/news/affordable-connectivity-program Discussed in this episode: Federal Communication Commission, FCC, Commissioner, Commissioner Geoffrey Starks, Geoffrey Starks, digital divide, broadband, free internet, internet, affordable connectivity program, National Urban League, Washington DC, DC, Black community, Black America, African Americans, Race, Black Women, Black Families, State of Black America, For the Movement, National Urban League, Urban League Movement, Young Professionals.   Contact and Follow our Guest(s) on Twitter @GeoffreyStarks, @FCC. Visit their website www.FCC.gov for more information. Contact and Follow the National Urban League at: Web: www.nul.org Email: podcast@nul.org  Facebook, Twitter and Instagram: @NULpolicy, @NatUrbanLeague. Don't forget to rate, review and subscribe to the State of Black America podcast on your favorite streaming platform to let us know what you think of our content!

SAP announced significant leadership changes with the appointment of Lloyd Adams as President of SAP North America, effective as of September 1st, and the announcement that Dominik Asam from Airbus will take over as SAP CFO and member of the Executive Board of SAP SE on March 7, 2023. This comes as no surprise with the related big news in the enterprise software space this week being that cloud-native Salesforce dislodged legacy provider SAP as the world's biggest producer of enterprise applications, with second-quarter financial results showing Salesforce standing strong at $7.72 billion in revenue, topping SAP's $7.52 billion. Deltek announced that its CEO Mike Corkery was named to the Virginia 500 The 2022 Power List, which recognizes the state's most powerful and influential leaders by sector. Published by Virginia Business Magazine, this is the third annual edition of the Virginia 500 Power List and Corkery's second time receiving the honor. Planful Inc. announced momentum in its international operations, recording 110% year-over-year growth ending June 2022. Planful increased its roster of EMEA resellers by 200% and expanded its presence in the APAC region. Its operations in Canada have more than doubled year-over-year while the UK team has grown six-fold. The Communications Workers of America (CWA) and Microsoft announced the launch of “Get Connected” an initiative to boost enrollment in the Federal Communication Commission's Affordable Connectivity Program, a benefit program from the FCC that helps ensure that households can afford the broadband they need for work, school, healthcare, and more. CWA and Microsoft will work with local public housing authorities and other community partners to publicize the events and pre-qualify residents for the program.https://www.erpadvisorsgroup.com866-499-8550LinkedIn:https://www.linkedin.com/company/erp-advisors-groupTwitter:https://twitter.com/erpadvisorsgrpFacebook:https://www.facebook.com/erpadvisorsInstagram:https://www.instagram.com/erpadvisorsgroupPinterest:https://www.pinterest.com/erpadvisorsgroupMedium:https://medium.com/@erpadvisorsgroup

WESLACO, Texas - It is no longer acceptable for students to have to sit outside a McDonald's and link to the free WiFi in order to do their homework.That is the view of Meagan Froh, outreach coordinator for the Texas Broadband Development Office. More importantly, it is also the view of State Comptroller Glenn Hegar. Froh said Hegar cares “passionately” about Texans being able to access to broadband. The Texas Broadband Development Office is administered by the Comptroller's Office. On June 15 it issued the Texas Broadband Plan. The report said almost 2.8 million Texas households and seven million people lack broadband access. Via Zoom, Froh recently spoke about the report and what funding is available to communities to address the Digital Divide during an economic resiliency workshop hosted by the Lower Rio Grande Valley Development Council.“What exactly is broadband? It is high speed internet,” Froh said. She explained that the Federal Communication Commission defines broadband its download speeds of at least 25 megabits per second (or Mbps) and upload speeds of at least 3 Mbps.However, Froh said, that definition was set in 2015. She said the FCC is about to radically change that definition. “That is a very outdated definition. We are expecting them to update that very soon,” Froh.Sure enough, soon after the webinar, FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel proposed raising minimum broadband speeds in the United States to 100 Mbps for downloads and 20 Mbps for uploads.“Any funding that is going to go out through the Broadband Development Office, those projects need to be future proofing our speed. We we are looking at targets of 100 over 20,” Froh said. Froh said her office is looking to close the digital divide in Texas. “We know that nearly eight million Texans in three million households do not have broadband. When I say that we need to look back at that definition. That means they do not even have 25 over 3 service,” Froh said.“Think back to that old AOL tone, we are talking about internet that creeps, that they cannot click through pages. They could not be streaming a meeting like we are doing today. Netflix is certainly off the table. So, when you think about that, there are a lot of people that don't even have the bare minimum broadband speed. And they are paying through the roof for not even broadband.”

Kicking off a packed episode, the Cyberlaw Podcast calls on Megan Stifel to cover the first Cyber Safety Review Board (CSRB) Report. The CSRB does exactly what those of us who supported the idea hoped it would do—provide an authoritative view of how the Log4J incident unfolded along with some practical advice for cybersecurity executives and government officials. Jamil Jaffer tees up the second blockbuster report of the week, a Council on Foreign Relations study called “Confronting Reality in Cyberspace Foreign Policy for a Fragmented Internet.” I think the study's best contribution is its demolition of the industry-led claim that we must have a single global internet. That has not been true for a decade, and pursuing that vision means that the U.S. is not defending its own interests in cyberspace. I call out the report for the utterly wrong claim that the United States can resolve its transatlantic dispute with Europe by adopting a European-style privacy law. Europe's beef with us on privacy reregulation of private industry is over (we surrendered); now the fight is over Europe's demand that we rewrite our intelligence and counterterrorism laws. Jamil Jaffer and I debate both propositions. Megan discloses the top cybersecurity provisions added to the House defense authorization bill—notably the five year term for the head of Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) and a cybersecurity regulatory regime for systemically critical industry. The Senate hasn't weighed in yet, but both provisions now look more likely than not to become law. Regulatory cybersecurity measures look like the flavor of the month. The Biden White House is developing a cybersecurity strategy that is expected to encourage more regulation. Jamil reports on the development but is clearly hoping that the prediction of more regulation does not come true. Speaking of cybersecurity regulation, Megan kicks off a discussion of Department of Homeland Security's CISA weighing in to encourage new regulation from the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) to incentivize a shoring up of the Border Gateway Protocol's security. Jamil thinks the FCC will do better looking for incentives than punishments.  Tatyana Bolton and I try to unpack a recent smart contract hack and the confused debate about whether “Code is Law” in web3. Answer: it is not, and never was, but that does not turn the hacking of a smart contract into a violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. Megan covers North Korea's tactic for earning dollars while trying to infiltrate U.S. crypto firms—getting remote work employment at the firms as coders. I wonder why LinkedIn is not doing more to stop scammers like this, given the company's much richer trove of data about job applicants using the site. Not to be outdone, other ransomware gangs are now adding to the threat of doxing their victims by making it easier to search their stolen data. Jamil and I debate the best way to counter the tactic. Tatyana reports on Sen. Mark Warner's, effort to strongarm the intelligence community into supporting Sen. Amy Klobuchar's antitrust law aimed at the biggest tech platforms— despite its inadequate protections for national security. Jamil discounts as old news the Uber leak. We didn't learn much from the coverage that we didn't already know about Uber's highhanded approach in the teens to taxi monopolies and government.   Jamil and I endorse the efforts of a Utah startup devoted to following China's IP theft using China's surprisingly open information. Why Utah, you ask? We've got the answer. In quick hits and updates:  Josh Schulte has finally been convicted for one of the most damaging intelligence leaks in history.  Google gets grudging respect from me for its political jiu-jitsu. Faced with a smoking gun of political bias after spam-blocking GOP but not Dem fundraising messages, Google managed to kick off outrage by saying it wanted to fix the problem by forcing political spam on all its users. Now the GOP will have to explain that it's not trying to send us more spam; it just wants Gmail to stop favoring lefty spam.  And, finally, we all get to enjoy the story of the bored Chinese housewife who created a complete universe of fake Russian history on China's Wikipedia. She's promised to stop, but I suspect she's just been hired to work for the world's most active producer of fake history—China's Ministry of State Security.

Kicking off a packed episode, the Cyberlaw Podcast calls on Megan Stifel to cover the first Cyber Safety Review Board (CSRB) Report. The CSRB does exactly what those of us who supported the idea hoped it would do—provide an authoritative view of how the Log4J incident unfolded along with some practical advice for cybersecurity executives and government officials. Jamil Jaffer tees up the second blockbuster report of the week, a Council on Foreign Relations study called “Confronting Reality in Cyberspace Foreign Policy for a Fragmented Internet.” I think the study's best contribution is its demolition of the industry-led claim that we must have a single global internet. That has not been true for a decade, and pursuing that vision means that the U.S. is not defending its own interests in cyberspace. I call out the report for the utterly wrong claim that the United States can resolve its transatlantic dispute with Europe by adopting a European-style privacy law. Europe's beef with us on privacy reregulation of private industry is over (we surrendered); now the fight is over Europe's demand that we rewrite our intelligence and counterterrorism laws. Jamil Jaffer and I debate both propositions. Megan discloses the top cybersecurity provisions added to the House defense authorization bill—notably the five year term for the head of Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) and a cybersecurity regulatory regime for systemically critical industry. The Senate hasn't weighed in yet, but both provisions now look more likely than not to become law. Regulatory cybersecurity measures look like the flavor of the month. The Biden White House is developing a cybersecurity strategy that is expected to encourage more regulation. Jamil reports on the development but is clearly hoping that the prediction of more regulation does not come true. Speaking of cybersecurity regulation, Megan kicks off a discussion of Department of Homeland Security's CISA weighing in to encourage new regulation from the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) to incentivize a shoring up of the Border Gateway Protocol's security. Jamil thinks the FCC will do better looking for incentives than punishments.  Tatyana Bolton and I try to unpack a recent smart contract hack and the confused debate about whether “Code is Law” in web3. Answer: it is not, and never was, but that does not turn the hacking of a smart contract into a violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. Megan covers North Korea's tactic for earning dollars while trying to infiltrate U.S. crypto firms—getting remote work employment at the firms as coders. I wonder why LinkedIn is not doing more to stop scammers like this, given the company's much richer trove of data about job applicants using the site. Not to be outdone, other ransomware gangs are now adding to the threat of doxing their victims by making it easier to search their stolen data. Jamil and I debate the best way to counter the tactic. Tatyana reports on Sen. Mark Warner's, effort to strongarm the intelligence community into supporting Sen. Amy Klobuchar's antitrust law aimed at the biggest tech platforms— despite its inadequate protections for national security. Jamil discounts as old news the Uber leak. We didn't learn much from the coverage that we didn't already know about Uber's highhanded approach in the teens to taxi monopolies and government.   Jamil and I endorse the efforts of a Utah startup devoted to following China's IP theft using China's surprisingly open information. Why Utah, you ask? We've got the answer. In quick hits and updates:  Josh Schulte has finally been convicted for one of the most damaging intelligence leaks in history.  Google gets grudging respect from me for its political jiu-jitsu. Faced with a smoking gun of political bias after spam-blocking GOP but not Dem fundraising messages, Google managed to kick off outrage by saying it wanted to fix the problem by forcing political spam on all its users. Now the GOP will have to explain that it's not trying to send us more spam; it just wants Gmail to stop favoring lefty spam.  And, finally, we all get to enjoy the story of the bored Chinese housewife who created a complete universe of fake Russian history on China's Wikipedia. She's promised to stop, but I suspect she's just been hired to work for the world's most active producer of fake history—China's Ministry of State Security.

20220618 Tip of the Day – NOAA NOAA Extreme Weather Information Sheets NOAA Extreme Weather Information Sheets (NEWIS) are a printable downloads containing contact information for local, regional, and national organizations that can provide aid and information during tropical storms, hurricanes, and other extreme coastal events. NCEI created these sheets to help residents of coastal states and the two US territories that are particularly at risk from tropical storms and hurricanes. PDF versions of the 22 NOAA Extreme Weather Information Sheets are available for coastal sections of Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Texas, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. NCEI annually verifies contacts, phone numbers, and websites listed on NEWIS Sheets, and continues to monitor and update this information throughout the hurricane season. NOAA Extreme Weather Information Sheets (NEWIS) can be found here: https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/resources/newis NOAA Weather Radio NOAA Weather Radio All Hazards (NWR) is a nationwide network of radio stations broadcasting continuous weather information directly from the nearest National Weather Service office. NWR broadcasts official Weather Service warnings, watches, forecasts and other hazard information 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Working with the Federal Communication Commission's (FCC) Emergency Alert System, NWR is an "All Hazards" radio network, making it your single source for comprehensive weather and emergency information. In conjunction with Federal, State, and Local Emergency Managers and other public officials, NWR also broadcasts warning and post-event information for all types of hazards – including natural (such as earthquakes or avalanches), environmental (such as chemical releases or oil spills), and public safety (such as AMBER alerts or 911 Telephone outages). NOAA WEATHER RADIO ALL HAZARDS: https://www.weather.gov/nwr/ To listen to NOAA alerts a special radio capable of receiving the frequencies is needed. These are just two of the ones I use. NOAA Weather Radio: https://amzn.to/3QudliB sits on my end table in the front room, and is tuned to the local NOAA frequencies for my location. BAOFENG BF-F8HP (UV-5R 3rd Gen) 8-Watt Dual Band Two-Way Radio (136-174MHz VHF & 400-520MHz UHF) Includes Full Kit with Large Battery: https://amzn.to/3OgfI6U This hand held radio goes with me when I travel, and is programed with all NOAA Weather Radio frequencies allowing me to scan and receive weather information in the location I am at. Note: I am an Amazon affiliate. If you buy from these links I may receive a commission. Additional Information: https://www.emergencyactionplanning.com/2019/09/28/two-way-radio-communications-part-iiic/ https://www.emergencyactionplanning.com/2020/01/15/disaster-communications-summary/ Subscribe like, and share this post with your friends and loved ones. Till next time "Be Safe" PS. Do you know your actual disaster/emergency planning status? Take the free Disaster/Emergency Planning Assessment and schedule a free consultation on what you can do to improve your plans. https://www.eapworkshop.com/f/dep-assessment

It's the return of our ocassional series, We Can't Have Nice Things.  This week, we look at radio contest and promotions that went badly wrong, often at the draft stage.  Free nude wedding anyone? 1-star review shirt! and shirt raising money for Ukraine Red Cross at yourbrainonfacts.com/merch 02:45 Radio Luxembourg's Ice Block Challenge 06:02 Bait & switch 10:12 Rules are rules 17:36 Review and news 20:40 No accounting for taste 22:15 Library of Chaos 27:27 Good, better, breast 30:08  Playing matchmaker  Links to all the research resources are on the website. Hang out with your fellow Brainiacs.  Reach out and touch Moxie on Facebook, Twitter,  or Instagram.  Become a patron of the podcast arts! Patreon or Ko-Fi.  Or buy the book and a shirt. Music: Kevin MacLeod, Bobby Richards . Canadian radio station AMP Radio in Calgary, caused a lot of buzz with a promotion called “Bank it or Burn it” which asked listeners to vote whether they should #BANK C$5,000 and give it away to a listener, or #BURN the money, literally. With 54% of the votes, the option to #BURN emerged victorious, and AMP Radio burned C$5,000 and put it on YouTube.   A YouTube video was posted of the station's morning show hosts throwing the bills into an incinerator.  AMP Radio defended their actions noting that businesses can easily spend C$5,000 on marketing in a week, and that their promotion has garnered a lot of talk, but at what price?  While this promotion received a lot of attention, the vast majority of it came from outraged Calgarians claiming that they would no longer be listening to station. However, that hasn't stopped AMP Radio from continuing the promotion.  The second phase is currently underway, and this time C$10,000 is at stake.   Radio stunts, and their shifty cousins, radio hoaxes, have been with us since the early days of broadcasting as a favorite marketing tool to gain listeners and advertising sponsors. Orson Welles' 1938 "War of the Worlds," caused widespread panic among listeners, who actually believed Martians were invading.  The fallout can range from disappointment to embarassment to property damage, crimes against the person, and even deaths.  You probably recall the incident in California in 2007 where a contest called Hold Your Wee for a Wii, where contestants had to drink a large volume of water and the last person to go to the bathroom would win a video game console, resulted in a woman's death from acute water intoxication.  New Yorkers are unlikely to forget the day "shock jocks" Opie and Anthony finally went too far with a contest that encouraged people to have sex in public, with one couple opting to have their dalience in St. Patrick's Cathedral.     Today's topic was voted on by our patrons, including our newest member Paul D and Pigeon and our All that and Brain Too supporters, David N and EmicationLikely, who just got a bonus mini dealing specifically with radio pranks while I struggle, and struggle it is, to confine this episode to promotions and contests.  The pranks go way, way worse.  Patrons get early, ad-free episodes, but you can also get a glimpse of next week's show and what it's like hanging out in the booth with me by following my tiktok; I've start live-streaming *some of the recording process.     There's nothing new under the sun and that applies to radio contests as much as anything else in life.  Take Radio Luxembourg's and the ice block expedition of 1958.  The challenge: to transport three metric tonnes of ice from the arctic circle to the equator, without the benefit of any form of refrigeration.  The prize was set at 100,000 francs per kilo of ice that made it to its destination as a solid, or about a million bucks per tonne in today's money.  Radio Luxembourg felt they could put their money where their mouth is since who could transport ice that far without refrigeration?  The contest drew fewer hopefuls than your average ‘say the phrase that pays' call-in, but the Norwegian company Glassvatt took them up on it.  A company that produced fiberglass insulation, incidentally, and is still in business today.     Ice was cut out of the Svartisen glacier in 200kg blocks, flown to the nearest town, and melted together into a single 3,050kg block of ice.  It was then wrapped in the company's signature glass wool and placed in an iron container on a truck donated by the Scania company and fueled with with gas donated by Shell.  This was an opportunity for publicity for everyone involved, not just the radio station.  Together with a film crew and a van full of equipment, they  expedition set off from the Norwegian city of Mo i Rana on February 22, 1959, stopping in Oslo to pick up over 600 lbs/300kg of medicine to schlep along to a hospital in Lambarene, Gabon, because when else was so much cold storage going to be going that way?   They made stops in Sweden, Denmark, Germany, Netherlands, Belgium, France, which was the comparatively easy bit, then on to Algeria, Niger, and finally Gabon.  That's when the going got tough.  Not a lot of paved roads across the desert, plus Algeria was in the midst of a civil war for independence from France.  Getting stuck in the sand was a frequent occurrence that cost them hours of digging-out time in the 120degF/50C heat, and their supply of water ironically rather limited.   It took a month a day, but they did it!  And the giant block of ice had only lost about 11% of its weight to melting, so even if Radio Luxemborg didn't pro-rate for partial tons, Glassvatt was still looking to collect about $2mil.  Except.  Radio Luxembourg had withdrawn the offer.  When an insulation company stepped up to their ‘move ice without refrigeration' challenge, Radio Luxembourg got cold feet, npi.  The cancellation wasn't the jerk move it sounds like; they actually called it off before the Glassvatt truck even set out.  Glassvatt decided to continue anyway, because even without the prize, it still seemed like good publicity.     That's really the name of the game, the whole reason radio stations do these things.  It's the aural equivalent of butts in seats.  You've got to entice the public to listen to your station over all their other options.  They can be cheaply run, these contests.  Folks my age probably won a bumper sticker, which costs the station very little, or some concert tickets, which often cost the station nothing since they come from the promoter.  But a constant need for contests means you've got to keep them interesting while not blowing through the promotions budget.  This leads some DJs to get creative and not in a good way.  Oh and a word about DJ.  My mom really wants me to refer to radio DJs as “on-air radio personalities” such as when I reference her background in FM radio in NY and FL in the 70's, because these days “DJ” means Skrillex types, but I can't be asked, so for today, they're all DJs.   In 2005, a Bakersfield, CA station announced they were giving away a Hummer to the person who could correctly guess the number of miles that two Hummers the station had had supposedly driven around the town during the course of a week.  The answer was 103.9, the same as the radio station's frequency, which one Shannon Castillo cleverly guessed.  She must have been on cloud 9 to have won herself a $60k vehicle, which if I were her I would sell because it would cost $60k in gas, so you can imagine her disappointment when she went to collect her prize and was handed a remote control car.  Castillo hired an attorney, and I don't blame her, who pointed out that the station had indicated that the vehicle had 22” rims, so either they were claiming it was a real vehicle or that was one jacked-up RC car.  Castillo sued the station for $60k, but as if often the case, lot of news outlets carry the initial story about the lawsuit, but nobody cared to report how it came out.  That's my research bug-bear.  Well, one of them.   A similar but 166% worse frustration was felt by that same year by Norreasha Gill, a KY woman who was the to the lucky tenth caller in a contest to win “100 grand.”  This was going to be life-changing!  She told her kids how they could finally buy a home of their own and have financial stability, so she probably saw red when she turned up at the station to collect her prize, only to be handed a 100 Grand candy bar.  I like caramel, rice crispies, and chocolate as much as the next person, probably more than a lot of next persons, but I totally agree with Gill suing the radio station for 100,000 actual dollars.   Pulling the wool over peoples' eyes is not only mean-spirited; it can also land businesses into all manner of trouble.  You can't say “it was just a joke” and go about your business.  A FL Hooters, not a radio station, I grant you, learned that lesson in 2001 when they held a contest among their waitstaff for most drinks sold, with the prize being a Toyota.  The winner was blindfolded and led out into the parking lot to discover her Toyota was a toy Yoda, a foot-tall figure of the puppet from Star Wars.  She quit and sued the owners of the franchise, settling out of court a year later.   Radio stations operate under the auspices of the Federal Communication Commission, and they have some pretty firm opinions about what shenanigans you can get up to if you want to do it on the broadcast airwaves.  The rules require a radio station fully and accurately disclose the material terms, aka the relevant details of the contest, which cannot be deceptive, misleading, or patently false, and then to follow through with those terms.  If you're talking about a contest on the air, you have to give the material terms on the air.  It's not good enough to say “we're giving away a hundred grand, see the website for more info” and on the website, admit that it's a candy bar, no siree.  No claiming it was just a joke if you made it out to be a legit contest.     The FCC fined a Kansaa station $4,000 for failing to announce all material terms of a contest, even though it was on the website, and for failure to comply with the terms for their Santa's Sack contest.  Listeners were to call in and guess what was in Santa's Sack and you'd win what was in the sack plus a teddy bear; seems simple enough.  A listener who guessed the sack held $1,000 was told she was wrong, but the next day, she heard someone else guess $1k and that person was proclaimed the winner.  The first caller complained to the station and when that went nowhere, filed a complaint with the FCC.  With the feds breathing down their necks –don't forget, the FCC isn't just about issuing fines, they can yank your broadcast license– the radio station claimed it was an innocent mix-up among the staff, some of whom included the value of the $10 teddy bear and some didn't, and that the rules were on their website.  The radio station then sent a check for $1,000 to the complainant, meaning they were out $5k over a $10 teddy bear and for want of a memo.     The FCC issued KDKA in Pennsylvania with a Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, a scary-sounding document that says “Look what you did!  I should take away your license for that.”  On Thanksgiving day 2007, a DJ, I assumed bored or annoyed at having to work a holiday, said that he'd give away $1,000,000 to the thirteenth caller and he'd do it once an hour.  A listener called and was told he was the thirteenth caller and was then placed on hold for 43 minutes before being put through to the DJ and immediately hung up on.  The station claimed that the on-air contest rules did not apply here because listeners should have realized it was a joke.  The FCC disagreed, since the DJ never said anything to indicate he wasn't serious, at one point saying it was “the real deal,” and he announced the “contest” *several times during his 3-hour show.  After finding that the on-air contest rules applied, the FCC smited them–smote?-- for the tag team of failure to announce the material terms *and failure to comply with said terms, i.e. pony up the dough, and fined the station $6,000.   An LA station got their own Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture and $6k fine after they held a contest online with a drawing for tickets to the musical Les Miserables.  Their web site said the contest would run from 3:50 pm on May 29 to 8:50 pm on June 2.  A listener complained to the FCC after the station awarded the prize to three people at only 3:00.  Yer man must really have wanted to see Les Mis.  The radio station responded that the on-air contest rules didn't apply to its contest because the contest was exclusively online.  The FCC disagreed.  The rules apply to "all contests conducted by the licensee and broadcast to the public" and since the radio station had announced the contest several times on-air and told listeners who entered the contest to stay tuned, it was an on-air contest.   You don't necessarily need the FCC in your stable to hold a radio station's feet to the fire.  Just ask the folks at Singapore's Gold 905 after their big-money game “The Celebrity Name Drop.”  They made a montage of 14 celebrity voices, edited so that each celebrity said one word of “Gold 9-0-5, the station that sounds good, and makes you feel good.”  I couldn't find a clip of it, but if you do, hit up the soc meds or post it in soc.   To win $10,000, the caller had to correctly identify each voice in order.  It took a skilled ear, as well as listening out for other people's right and wrong guesses.  Muhammad Shalehan thought he had it after a month of puzzling and repeatedly trying to get through the phone lines, but when he read his list of names, the DJ said he got one wrong.  A few weeks later, Gold905 declared they had their winner, one Jerome Tan, and that was a wrap.     Except.  Listeners jumped on the station's FB page, pointing out that Shalehan had given the right answer more than two weeks earlier.  Mediacorp, the station;s parent company, said that Shalehan's attempt was invalidated because he failed to pronounce the string of celebrity names accurately, specifically that of Tony Hadley of Spandau Ballet.  So Muhammad went to the mountain or in this case, the internet, whereby Shelahan was able to locate Hadley's management and ask if they could help.  He then got a video from Hadley himself, confirming that, while Muhammad Shalehan has a “slight accent,” he had, in fact, “pronounced my name absolutely correctly.”   Armed now with some pretty bitchin' evidence, Shalehan went back to the station again.  After viewing Hadley's video, Mediacorp …. still refused to pay out. [sfx]  But they offered to make a “goodwill gesture” of $5,000.  By then, the online community, a barely-controlled and badly-tempered beast on the best of days, was having none of it, making for some long work-days for the PR department.  Finally, Mediacorp relented and paid Muhammad Shalehan the full $10k.     MIDROLL  don't forget ad sting   If these stories haven't made you face-palm and ask “what were they thinking,” I'd bet my mortgage one of these will.  Strap in, kids.  The tragic Hold Your Wee for a Wii contest wasn't the first or only radio station promotion to involve urine.   In 1999, KOMP 92.3-FM of Las Vegas DJ Greg McFarlane was trying to think up a novel approach to give away some Mötley Crüe tickets.  His first idea was to have contestants re-enact the Pamela Anderson-Tommy Lee sex tape live on-air, fully clothes of course; wouldn't want to be in bad taste.  Idea number 2: make contestants drink their own urine.  Y'all 1999.  What was the value in seeing Motley Crue in 1999?  That cheese had been moldy for years.  Three die-hard fans actually came into the studio, then lost their nerve when confronted with the fact that McFarlane was in no way kidding.  Then, in McFarlane's own words, “The fourth guy walks in, pushes everyone out of the way and throws it down like it was Pepsi.”  So concert tickets for guy #4 and an empty cardboard box to McFarlane, to gather his personal effects because he's just been sacked.   Hey, remind me to check my stats and see how many people jumped ship in the last 60 seconds.  For those still with me, we go now to a library in Ft Worth, TX, where the staff suddenly found themselves terrorized by crowds of people ransacking the stacks.  Unbeknownst to them, a KYNG DJ thought it would be a keen idea to announce that he had hidden $100 in $5 and $10 bills between pages of books in the library's fiction section.  Even adjusted for inflation, that's just under $200 to try to outcompete hundreds of other people for.   "People started climbing the bookshelves; they started climbing on each other, and books became airborne," library spokeswoman Marsha Anderson said, adding that 3k books had been thrown on the floor and some ended up ripped and with broken spines.  Count the books on your nearest bookcase or shelf.  How many of those would need to get to 3k?  That's a lot of damage!   Do I need to say that the library has an amount of heads-up from the radio station and that amount was none, or did you just assume because what librarian would agree to that?  More than 500 people stampeded through the Fort Worth Central Library looking for the money.  There was money in the library – the station claimed it was $100 and that was the only amount it was ever said to be, whereas a number of people in the money-mob thought it was as high as $10k.  A KYNG spokesman said the DJ was only trying to boost public interest in the library by giving away about $100, and they had no idea where people got the $10k idea.  That was after the fact of course.  In the moment, it was the librarians who had to handle the situation...because they couldn't get ahold of anyone at the radio station.  They told the crowd the only thing that could possibly make them stop looking – that someone already found the money and had just left.     Sometimes it's not judgment that's wobbly; it's taste, subjective as that may be.  BRMB in Birmingham, England ran a contest where they would pay for the winner's wedding, which as anyone less clever than my hillbilly butt getting married in my own yard both times can tell you can really run into money.  There was, of course, a catch.  The station reserved one creative right for the wedding that the station paid for.  This wedding had to be conducted au naturale.  In the buff.  Nude.  At a minimum, the happy couple had to be in all their glory; don't know if there was a maximum.  The lucky couple, who won by listener vote, had been together for eleven years, attributing their long engagement to the cost of the wedding.  Again, back yard, it's free.  The station paid all the expenses and the bride and groom held up their end…as it were, though the bride had her veil and the groom used a top hat as a fig leaf.   Your other why-is-this-so-expensive life event would come just after the end of your life, your funeral.  It costs as much as a decent used car and you don't even get to enjoy it.  Half of that would be handled if you won the contest offered by Radio Galaxy in Germany – they'd pay for your funeral, provided your funeral cost less than 3000 Euro and a modest one could.  Listeners sent in their own epitaphs, that being the words on their tombstone, like how Winston Churchill's says “I am ready to meet my Maker. Whether my Maker is prepared for the great ordeal of meeting me is another matter.”  But you can't have a party without a party-pooper and the radio station was hit was a lawsuit from the Association of German Undertakers.  Also in Germany, station RTL 89.0 wanted to give away a Mini Cooper, but couldn't apparently be asked to put a lot of effort, or forethought, into it.  They just said, pull off the most amazing stunt.  Because that's safe.  Whatever the other entries were paled in comparison to the stunt submitted by the eventual winner – he would have the word mini tattooed on … how to put this delicately?... onto an appendage which most gentlemen would find distressing to have labeled “mini.”  The winner, Andreas Muller, went through with it, live on air with the female host looking on.  Can you imagine if the station refused to give him the car though?   That kind of personal touch would have been right up the alley of the folks at WDVE 102.5 in Pittsburgh.  Every year, for the festive holiday season, they hold a "Breast Christmas Ever."  Yep, they foot the bill for breast enhancement surgery.  To the surprise of no one, the event has come under fire from both feminist groups and health care advocates, who should like us to remember a boob job is surgery and surgery carries risk.  But sometimes, even the tackiest contest isn't as bad as it seems - there's always a silver lining if we look for it.  A Calgary station did a similar give-away and the winner, by popular vote, was a 19 year old trans-female listener who was quotes as saying having breast implants would mean she wouldn't "have to face so much bigotry on a daily basis."   Ottawa radio station Hot 89.9 looked at all that and said Hold My Molson's.  They put on a “Win a baby!” contest.  Specifically, they would pay for up to three rounds of in-vitro fertility treatment up to $35,000.  The contest drew criticism like jellowjackets at a cook-out, but it wasn't without redemption – it brought attention to the issue of IVF funding in Ontario just before voters head to the polls to vote if the provincial government should be required to pay it like other health care.   Said Beverly Hanck, executive director of the Infertility Awareness Association of Canada, “The station is clearly, clearly capitalizing on vulnerable patients that are desperate to have a family.”  The fact that couples have to turn to a radio contest at all points to a “sad state of affairs” in Ontario, she added.   Morning show host Jeff Mauler said the contest was intended to appeal to the station's 24 to 54 year old demographic, but that it has opened up a dialogue about an issue that is “more common than you think.”  “Anyone who complains is lucky enough to have kids or doesn't want kids,” Mauler said. “Anyone in the struggle doesn't slam the contest.” Common enough that more than 400 couples applied for the contest, which they launched on Labor Day.  Because of course they did.   If babies aren't your thing, how about a full-grown human woman?  Edmonton's the Bear FM also poked the bear with their contest to win a Russian bride.  The Bear partnered with an on-line matchmaking service that connects Russian women with foreign husbands.  Problem the first: eww.  Problem the close second: it's not uncommon for women you can meet through such services being exploited.  Employment and Immigration Minister Thomas Lukaszuk found the contest so offensive, he pulled his ministry's advertising from the station.  The prize included a free two-week trip to Russia, and $500 spending money.     New Zealand radio station The Rock FM sponsored their own contest in which the winner would be flown to the Ukraine to pick a bride from an agency, originally called “Win a Wife.”  When people complained, they changed it to “Win A Trip To Beautiful Ukraine For 12 Nights And Meet Eastern European Hot Lady Who Maybe One Day You Marry.”  Well, does what it says on the tin.  This is the same station that, when they needed a contest for Valentine's Day 2012, crab-walked around love and instead offered to cover all the costs of one lucky couple's divorce.  Asterisk, you had to drop the Big D bombshell on them live on the air.  Who says romance is dead?  No one who's watching OFMD on a binge loop for the last 9 days…not that I know anyone like that.  It's just a hypothetical.  An offly specific hypothetical   If you're thinking to yourself, it can't get worse than that, you haven't been paying attention.  Again in Canada (it's always the quiet ones), a Halifax radio station q104 put on a foreign bride contest.  The contest, which would send the winner to Prague, closed on March 8, International Women's Day.  The program director JC Douglad said firmly that there was no sexual connotatioin to the contest.  The men are promised dates with women in the Czech Republic, but they station made no warranty, express or implied, as to how those dates will go.  Okay, sure, but you've kind of undermined your position by calling it the "Male is in the Czech," didntcha?   And that's…AMP Radio defended their actions noting that businesses can easily spend C$5,000 on marketing in a week, and that their promotion has garnered a lot of talk, so it was kind of the same thing.  While a lot of Calgarians vowed to stop listening, then went on to do it again, this time with $10,000. this podcast remember thanks  

Last week, The Buzz explored some of the complexities of ensuring affordable, reliable internet access to all Americans - as well as how the 2021 Investment Infrastructure and Jobs Act looks to improve this. This week, The Buzz gets some perspective from someone who played a key role at the federal level in overseeing the regulation and development of modern broadband infrastructure - Tom Wheeler. Wheeler is a businessman, author, and was Chairman of the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) from 2013 to 2017. Subscribe on your favorite podcast platform to never miss an episode! For more from ACT-IAC, follow us on Twitter @ACTIAC or visit http://www.actiac.org.

The rise of conservative talk radio, following the repeal of the Federal Communication Commission's Fairness Doctrine in 1987, has had a profound impact on the political landscape of the United States. Taking advantage of the newly liberalized regulatory order, a wave of reactionary hosts, most notably Rush Limbaugh, took to the air to propagate their far-right political message. Indeed, they formed the vanguard of opposition to the Democratic Party administration of Bill Clinton. And, following the constitutional coup d'état that installed George W Bush as president, the rightist talkers emerged as key regime propagandists. While it is perhaps an exaggeration to claim that talk radio created the political divisions that bisect American society, conservative domination of the medium certainly fed the growing radicalism of the reactionary right. The power of talk radio both to groom and mobilize elements of the American public was not lost on the left flank of capital and, in 2004, Air America, a “progressive” talk radio network, was founded. Yet, this experiment failed and in 2010 the network was shut down. What was the American media landscape like in the 2000s? What explains the failure of Air America? And will the new plethora of independent online left media outlets be able to overcome the issues that brought down liberal talk radio or at they too doomed to fail?   Sam Seder Sam Seder is a writer, actor, director, and political commentator. He is the host of the Majority Report with Sam Seder. https://majorityreportradio.com/   About TIR Thank you, guys, again for taking the time to check this out. We appreciate each and every one of you. If you have the means, and you feel so inclined, BECOME A PATRON! We're creating patron-only programming, you'll get bonus content from many of the episodes, and you get MERCH!   Become a patron now: https://www.patreon.com/join/BitterLakePresents   Please also like, subscribe, and follow us on these platforms as well, especially YouTube!   THANKS Y'ALL   YouTube: www.youtube.com/thisisrevolutionpodcast   Twitch: www.twitch.tv/thisisrevolutionpodcast & www.twitch.tv/leftflankvets   Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/Thisisrevolutionpodcast/   Twitter: @TIRShowOakland Instagram: @thisisrevolutionoakland   Pascal Robert in Black Agenda Report: https://www.blackagendareport.com/author/PascalRobert   Get THIS IS REVOLUTION Merch here: www.thisisrevolutionpodcast.com   Get the music from the show here: https://bitterlakeoakland.bandcamp.com/   Follow Djene Bajalan @djenebajalan   Follow Kuba Wrzesniewski @DrKuba2

On the Best of Mark Levin, in typical reprobate fashion, Joe Scarborough attacked the judge in the Kyle Rittenhouse case for chastising the rogue prosecutor after he impinged on Rittenhouse's Constitutional rights. Mob rule pushed the media and the prosecution to rush these charges instead of gathering the facts and witnesses. Now the prosecution is angling for a mistrial since their star-witness blew it. Former White House Trade Advisor, Peter Navarro, calls in to discuss his new book "In Trump Time: My Journal of America's Plague Year." Navarro shared personal anecdotes of his years in the Trump Administration and how he witnessed the media lie by omission on various occasions including regarding the coronavirus. President Biden attempted to silence free speech by nominating Gigi Sohn to the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) to control the airwaves and destroy conservative talk radio. Sohn says she will shackle broadband providers and censor Fox News by preventing cable providers from carrying the network. If confirmed, Sohn will likely end free speech on the airwaves unless patriots speak up. Then, the ongoing investigation into the January 6th riot is the biggest investigation in U.S history, according to the Attorney General. The Democrats and never-Trump Republicans on the Congressional select-committee have now issued new subpoenas into Trump's senior team. This is nothing more than another political hit job by the Democrats with the patina of a fair oversight investigation. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On Tuesday's Mark Levin Show, President Biden attempted to silence free speech by nominating Gigi Sohn to the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) to control the airwaves and destroy conservative talk radio. Sohn says she will shackle broadband providers and censor Fox News by preventing cable providers from carrying the network. If confirmed, Sohn will likely end free speech on the airwaves unless patriots speak up. Then, in March of 2017 when this program deduced from publicly available reports that candidate Trump had been spied on, we were attacked yet it turned out to be true. Despite the top intelligence and law enforcement officials being aware of these false claims they still injected them into their spheres of influence. Newly declassified memos show that current National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan delivered some of this false information to then-President Obama and others in the White House. This whole scheme was hatched by Hillary Clinton, the Obama Administration, and the Democrat National Committee and truly is the greatest insurrection in American history. Later, columnist Julie Kelly calls in with an update on the pretrial detention of the January 6th political prisoners. It's nonsensical to think that the FBI was not involved since the FBI had so many informants inside of these various groups. It's interesting to note that AG Garland wouldn't comment on this when questioned in Congress. Was this attack actually instigated by the feds? Meanwhile, it seems abundantly clear that Kyle Rittenhouse did not murder anyone. In fact, the government's star witness (a communist sympathizer) made the self-defense case for the prosecution. Afterward, former White House Press Secretary and author Sean Spicer joins the show to discuss his new book " RADICAL NATION: Joe Biden and Kamala Harris's Dangerous Plan for America."  Spicer added that America can become radicalized right under our noses if citizens don't pay attention and take action. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

According to the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), Larry Coty, a math professor at Georgia State University's Perimeter College, admitted to sharing neo-Nazi and racist propaganda online. Rachel Janik, the editor of the Intelligence Project Southern Poverty Law Center, discusses her organization's report and what's next for the professor. Plus, Kathy Stokes, the director of Fraud Prevention Programs at AARP and the leader of AARP Fraud Watch Network, discusses combating robocalls and new rules adopted by the Federal Communication Commission for phone service providers to follow.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Let’s begin today with two Patreon-fueled shout-outs. One person wants you to know: "We keep each other safe. Get vaccinated, wear a mask, wash your hands, and keep your distance."And in another one, one brand new Patreon supporter wants you to go out and read a local news story written by a local journalist. Whether it be the Daily Progress, Charlottesville Tomorrow, C-Ville Weekly, NBC29, CBS19, the community depends on a network of people writing about the community. Go learn about this place today!On today’s show:A local nonprofit that focuses on water quality releases a report card for the Rivanna RiverThe legislative redistricting process continues this week with a public hearing scheduled for ThursdayThe September surge of COVID-19 cases continues to slow down, but there’s still cause for concernI try to take transit to a campaign forum! The summer COVID surge continues to wane in Virginia, with a seven-day average of new cases at 2,748 and the seven-day positive test rate is 8.5 percent, down from 10.9 percent three weeks ago. The number of COVID deaths continues to increase with 819 fatalities reported since three weeks ago. The Blue Ridge Health District reports another 69 new cases today with a percent positivity rate at 7.2 percent. There have been 17 deaths reported since September 13. Case counts are trending downward but are still higher than at the beginning of the summer. “There are a lot of factors that play into that,” said Dr. Kyle Enfield, an assistant professor of internal medicine at the University of Virginia. “One is that as lots of people have been infected, there are fewer people that are susceptible to Delta at this point in time.  We have seen locally based on data that was collected through social media that mask usage has gone up and there was an uptick in vaccination that has probably contributed to this.”However, Dr. Enfield said behavioral changes that come with seasonal transitions could push case counts back up. “If we look at what happened in October and November and December of last year, we saw increased spread as people moved from the outdoors into the indoors more often so I think there is still some thought and some pause in the epidemiology community that we could see that surge again,” Dr. Enfield said. A COVID-19 model developed by the University of Virginia’s Biocomplexity Institute currently shows a downward trend in cases. Dr. Enfield said epidemiologists remain concerned about the emergence of a new variant, and the best way to reduce the risk of that taking hold is for people to get vaccinated and to continue to wear masks. If our collective efforts to guard the health of the Rivanna River were graded, we’re doing about average. The Rivanna Conservation Alliance has presented their first Rivanna River Report Card by sifting through five years of data from the 50 monitoring sites they have throughout the watershed to look for the presence of E. coli bacteria. “A stream’s biological health is measured by catching, identifying, and counting the different small organisms that live in it,” reads the report card. The RCA has been monitoring water quality since 2003 when part of it was known as StreamWatch. Monitoring sites closer to developed areas tend to register as poor or fair. The RCA further breaks the watershed down into five subwatersheds. The Lower Rivanna in Fluvanna county scored the highest with a health rating of 63.7 and South Fork Rivanna subwatershed #1 in western Albemarle scored second at 62.4. Anything over 60 meets the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality’s water quality standards. The South Fork Rivanna subwatershed #2 is at 57.8. The North Fork subwatershed covers portions of Greene and Orange counties as well as northeastern Albemarle and is at 54.9. The Middle Rivanna which includes Charlottesville and southern Albemarle is at 51.9. To learn more about the RCA’s monitoring efforts, visit their website at rivannariver.org. If you live in the 804 or 276 area codes, you will soon need to dial ten numbers when making a phone call. That’s because of a need to prepare for the launch next year of the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline. Beginning on July 16, 2022, people in crisis will be able to call 988 to connect with mental house counselors. Both the 804 area code for Richmond and the 276 area area code for southwest Virginia have exchanges that start with 988, hence the need to switch to ten-digit dialing. For now if you or anyone else need to access the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline, you can do so at 1-800-273-8255. Learn more about the transition at the Federal Communication Commission’s website. Public hearings are underway today for maps for new legislative boundaries in Virginia with virtual events for northern Virginia and southwest Virginia. Over the weekend, the 16-member redistricting committee worked to finalize maps for the 100-member House of Delegates as well as the 40-member Virginia Senate. They did not reach consensus, and four sets of maps are still under consideration. On Saturday, they discussed two approaches to how the Charlottesville area would be redrawn. We are in the Central Region and the public hearing for the area is Wednesday at 4 p.m. Register here. Under the A7 Statewide map for the House of Delegates drawn by the Republican consultant, Albemarle County is split into three legislative districts. Northern Albemarle would be in the 74th District along with all of Greene and some of Orange County. Charlottesville would be in the 75th District along with much of Ivy in Albemarle County. Southern Albemarle would be in the 76th District along with all of Amherst and Nelson counties. (A7 map comment page)Under the B6 Statewide Map for the House of Delegates drawn by the Democratic consultant, Albemarle is in two districts. Charlottesville would be in the 80th district with central-eastern Albemarle. All of Albemarle County would be in the 81st District along with a portion of eastern Augusta County. (B6 map comment page)Under the A5 statewide map for the Senate drawn by Republican consultant, Albemarle and Charlottesville would be within the 31st District along with Nelson, Fluvanna, and Buckingham counties. (A5 Senate map)The B4 statewide map drawn by Democratic consultant is similar, but the 31st District would include Greene rather than Nelson. (B4 Senate map)The Redistricting Commission did not reach consensus on how to proceed with the House of Delegates before the public hearings began. The Commission next meets on October 8. Watch Saturday’s six hour meeting here. In another sign that the pandemic is loosening its grip on the delivery of some government services, walk-in service will begin tomorrow at Virginia Department of Motor Vehicle customer service centers across the Commonwealth. “At the direction of the General Assembly, DMV is integrating walk-in service back into its operations in addition to appointments,” reads a press release sent out this morning. “Based on research, surveys, experience, and the ongoing pandemic, DMV developed a hybrid service model to offer options and flexibility.”Walk-in service will be available Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays. Appointments are required for Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. The release states that masks are required and long wait times should be expected. Appointment service began in May 2020 after a two-month closure due to help stop the spread of COVID-19 in the early days of the pandemic. In today's subscriber-fueled public service announcement: Lovers of used books rejoice! The Friends of the Jefferson Madison Regional Library will resume the tradition of their annual Fall Book Sale this October 2nd through October 10 at a new location! The Friends of the Library sale will take place at Albemarle Square Shopping Center from 10 a.m. to 7 p.m. each day. Half-price days on October 9 and October 10. Questions? Visit jmrlfriends.org for more information.October is Try Transit month, and anyone who follows me on Twitter knows I have a real passion for getting around the world without driving alone. Maybe it was those old Greyhound ads, but I’d rather leave the vehicle maneuvering to someone else. So, over the next month I’m going to take a little time in some of these newsletters to document my attempts to get to various places without getting in a car. Some context. I own a car, but it’s at a point where I need to make a repair before I can use it again. I do plan to do that in the near future, but for now I’ve been using the new Charlottesville Area Transit app. Again, anyone who’s followed me on Twitter the past few years knows I like to document my regular journeys. The new app presents an opportunity for me to describe a little bit about how I personally use it to try to get around. I am not an advocate and none of this is intended to persuade any policy decisions. I’m simply going with what I have. (download the app)So, in a future installment of Charlottesville Community Engagement, you will hear clips from a Charlottesville City Council campaign forum that my company Town Crier Productions held with the Free Enterprise Forum. This in-person event was to be held at the Hillsdale Conference Center on Hillsdale Drive just over the border into Albemarle County. For some context, a friend of mine asked if she could store a car in my driveway, and I had permission to use it. But, as our audio story begins, with no further narration outside the moment, I was determined not to use it. Yesterday’s newsletter, however, was delayed by a total crash of the work I’d put into the podcast close to the end of production. I had to take an hour to recreate things. I’ve been using the new SPOT app which makes it easier to see where the buses are in relation to each other. The app I had before just told me the estimated times before a bus would show up at a stop. That was not enough information to be able to rely on to get to where I am going.This app, though? After you get used to it, it’s easier to see where the buses are in relation to each other. In the past few weeks, I’ve been using it to time my trips to the grocery store. I’ve gained a new appreciation for the Willoughby Shopping Center, which is currently a de facto hub for the southern end of Charlottesville. I’ve seen a lot, and don’t yet know how to report it all. So, this is the first of a series of trips I hope to record and document. It’s October, but in the late afternoon of September 30, 2021, I was still trying to complete a newsletter. My intention had been to be done early, but… fate intervened. I still wanted to try to use the bus to get to the campaign forum, and this is an attempt to document that journey. Newsletter readers: You’ll have to listen to the rest to find out how I got to the event. I did get there, and you can watch the forum on YouTube. But if you want to skip to the end, watch the video conclusion of my journey, also on YouTube. This is a public episode. Get access to private episodes at communityengagement.substack.com/subscribe

The phrase, “You've Come a Long Way, Baby,” was once an advertising slogan for CIGARETTES! The year was 1968, the Ad featuring a tall, slender woman in a pantsuit became sort of an unofficial slogan for the National Organization for Women and feminists all over the U.S. At the same time, in the late 1960s, the Federal Communication Commission established rules to encourage radio and television stations to hire more women and minorities. That's one of the reasons I got my first radio job. So I have real-life experience with Affirmative Action.   In, 2021 most of us agree that cigarettes cause cancer, and, in fact, we still haven't elected a woman for president. And many young women do NOT support Affirmative Action.  For a transcript of this podcast, check out my blog at gloriamoraga.com.

This week on the podcast, Christopher speaks with Julie Bushell, President of Paige Wireless and Co-chair of Federal Communication Commission’s (FCC) Precision Ag Connectivity Task Force. Christopher and Julie talk about the importance of reliable, symmetrical wireless data connections so farmers can deploy devices on farms which communicate across Long Range Wide Area Network (LoRaWAN) protocols to bring … Continue reading "Chirping Soil and Autonomous Tractors: Connecting Agriculture in Nebraska – Episode 452 of the Community Broadband Bits Podcast"

Twitter’s user growth fell short of expectations for the second quarter in a row, more than 70 investors call on Amazon to stop interfering with a unionisation effort, and Huawei asks a US court to overturn the Federal Communication Commission ruling that labels the telecoms company a security threat. Plus, the FT’s global China editor, James Kynge, explains how US-China investment continues despite political tension.Twitter warns of slowing user growth as pandemic surge fades https://www.ft.com/content/ff84e6c2-a937-4b88-bd8c-df8bcaa1ee7eHuawei challenges its designation as a threat to US securityhttps://www.ft.com/content/b7c2294d-9207-4fae-8fed-d63a80c99618Amazon must not interfere with US union effort, say investorshttps://www.ft.com/content/c7f24fbb-bb4e-489e-8a30-37708700e816US-China investment flows belie geopolitical tensionshttps://www.ft.com/content/b3dcc262-a153-4624-bc1d-156179d6e914 See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

The FCC has been busy for the last several years. Now longtime chairman Ajit Pai is getting ready to make his exit. For an assessment and what might lie ahead, Federal Drive with Tom Temin turned to Commissioner Brendan Carr.

In episode sixteen we speak with Spencer Hutchins the Co-Founder & CEO at Concert Health about integrating behavioral health into primary care, keeping your focus on the problem, not the technology, starting the first health care team at the Federal Communication Commission, and exploring San Diego with your family.

Liam Glynn is an on-air DJ and assistant promotion director for WSOU. WSOU is the award-winning, student-run, radio station of Senton Hall University. WSOU is licensed by the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) to broadcast as non-commercial educational radio station (NCE) on an analog FM frequency of 89.5. Find their website and social media at http://www.wsou.net/.

L'Italiano alla Radio con Paolo Morandotti Fra le novità più recenti presentate sul Portale Italradio, capitanato da Paolo Morandotti ospite della nostra trasmissione, la riunione annuale della Comunità Radiotelevisiva Italofona, che rappresenta buona parte delle emittenti che hanno trasmissioni in Italiano, svoltasi ugualmente quest'anno ma in videoconferenza a causa dell'emergenza sanitaria. Poi parleremo dello studio Italradio, sul rapporto realizzato nel 1942 dalla Federal Communication Commission sulle radio che trasmettevano in Italiano sul suolo statunitense durante il periodo bellico. ***Al termine le notizie dal mondo delle comunicazioni. GUIDA FACILE 00:00 sigla di apertura 01:52 intervista con Paolo Morandotti/Italradio 12:02 seconda parte intervista 18:48 notizie dal mondo delle comunicazioni. PODCAST DISPONIBILE da martedì sera in poi su: www.radiomagazine.net/audio/radiomagazine.mp3 (studio quality 128 kbps - 44 kHz) www.radiomagazine.net/audio/xradiomagazine.mp3 (formato light per il download veloce) link youtube "radiomagazine official" https://youtu.be/zqbsKJ0dZig --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/notewebradio/message

August 4, 1987. The Federal Communication Commission’s leadership has come together in Washington D.C. to decide the fate of a vital issue: fairness. For the previous 40 years, the FCC has attempted to ensure that TV and radio broadcasters present both sides of the political issues discussed on their airwaves. But by the 1980s, the political landscape has changed, and the Fairness Doctrine will soon be no more. Today, we talk to two of the major players who fought on both sides of this great debate to explain what the Fairness Doctrine actually did, why it died, and where exactly that leaves us today.To our listeners, thank you for subscribing to History This Week. We want to hear your feedback: https://bit.ly/3a4FGqJ See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Many in the Northwoods do not have access to high speed broadband internet. That's a critical gap in modern living, especially with the health emergency keeping people at home. State grants through the Public Service Commission have recently been awarded to some communities and counties to help remedy the situation. According to Forest County Broadband Commission Chair Mark Ferris , “Broadband today is much like electricity a hundred years ago. We consider it a utility. It is critical to the operation of any business and of course it is critical for families and their children to be able to connect.” Ferris led the effort in Forest County that recently secured one of the largest state grants from the Wisconsin Broadband Office, a Division of the Public Service Commission. As of 2019, the Federal Communication Commission reports that nearly 28 percent of residents in rural Wisconsin lack access to broadband highspeed internet, defined as download speeds of at least 25 megahertz per

Many in the Northwoods do not have access to high speed broadband internet. That’s a critical gap in modern living, especially with the health emergency keeping people at home. State grants through the Public Service Commission have recently been awarded to some communities and counties to help remedy the situation. According to Forest County Broadband Commission Chair Mark Ferris , “Broadband today is much like electricity a hundred years ago. We consider it a utility. It is critical to the operation of any business and of course it is critical for families and their children to be able to connect.” Ferris led the effort in Forest County that recently secured one of the largest state grants from the Wisconsin Broadband Office, a Division of the Public Service Commission. As of 2019, the Federal Communication Commission reports that nearly 28 percent of residents in rural Wisconsin lack access to broadband highspeed internet, defined as download speeds of at least 25 megahertz per

Many thanks to SRAA contributor, Andy Robins, who shares the following recording and notes:U.S. pirate radio station KVHF recorded on 6.420 MHz (42-meter band) beginning at 0615 UTC on 9 November 1980 in Kalamazoo, Michigan. Only a few minutes of the recording could be recovered because of the poor physical condition of the original cassette tape. This station was later "busted" by the Federal Communication Commission, at which time its location was revealed to have been in California. This made KVHF one of only a relative handful of "free radio" stations that have operated on shortwave from the U.S. West Coast.Receiver and antenna: Collins R390A and random end-fed wire antenna

The window for tribes to secure wireless channels from the Federal Communication Commission is underway. The deadline is August 2nd. That’s a tight time frame for tribes given the complex process. Even before the coronavirus pandemic, tribes urged the FCC to delay the application timeline. The channels are reserved for tribal cell networks or internet access. We’ll talk with experts who are working to comply with the complicated FCC process.

On this episode of Pundits on the Porch, JMI's Sal Nuzzo and Logan Padgett interview the Chairman of the Federal Communication Commission, Ajit Pai about the FCC's response to the coronavirus. The post Ajit Pai appeared first on James Madison Institute.

Hello, COMM122 podcast listeners. As we wrap up the topic of media mandate from previous weeks, we will now start a new series on media regulations.You are no stranger to media regulations. If you follow the news about e-cigarettes, you might have heard of a call to ban the advertising of e-cigarettes on television. This call came after numerous reports of vaping-related deaths. Another recent case is the talk of breaking up big tech because big tech companies become overly influential. There are also conversations on regulating fake news and foreign interference on social media platforms.Well, First of all, Regulations are various rules, standards, and norms set by governments, legislative bodies, and non-government entities. You might think that regulations are all enforced by governments. Well, many regulations are indeed enacted by governments following laws passed by Congress. We call this formal regulation. An example is the ban on the advertising of tobacco products. There is also informal regulation, also called, self-regulation. An example is movie ratings. Movie ratings are not enforced by the US government, but by the Motion Picture Association of America, which is an non-government organization. Regulations could target content produced by media outlets, or something not directly related to content, such as media ownership, licensing, who has access to the media, and etc.If you feel the information is overwhelming, don’t worry, we will go over each of the common types of regulation, with examples. Before we do that, let’s review four milestones of media-related legislation in the US history. First, the Radio Act of 1912. This is a federal law that went into effect in 1912, not long after the sinking of the Titanic. We mentioned it briefly in the last episdoe. The Radio Act of 1912 is the first legislation targeting radio technology. It requires that anyone transmitting signals through radio-waves needs a license. Before this legislation, public airwaves were the wild west. Everyone, including amateurs, commercial operators and US Navy officers can send signals. This created inference issues as someone may inadvertently or intentionally send fake distress calls. At the time of the Radio Act of 1912, radio was used mostly as one-to-one wireless communication. So the radio act in 1912 is not applicable to broadcasting radio stations. The legislation targeting radio broadcasting came later in the Radio Act of 1927. The 1927 act was proposed again to address the interference issue. But this time, the inference issue was caused by broadcasting radio stations. In our community, you can listen to the local NPR station broadcasts on FM88.5. Can you imagine what will happen if a nearby station tries to broadcast using the same frequency? Yes, it will jam the signal from the NPR station. This is basically what typically happened before the Radio Act of 1927. So the Radio Act of 1927 created the Federal Radio Commission, a government body. It gives FRC the authority to allocate frequencies to stations and individuals, following the Guiding Standard: Public Interest, convenience, or necessity. However, Congress failed to define precisely what it meant by “public interest, convenience, and necessity” in either the statutory text or legislative history. The Radio Act of 1927 ushered in the golden age of radio with inferences died down. As radio stations began to broadcast nationally. A common popular culture emerged based on the common consumption of radio shows. Following the radio act of 1927, Congress passed the Communications Act of 1934. It expanded the regulation to telephone communication, an new invention at that time. It creates FCC, Federal Communication Commission, which is still functioning today. Communications Act of 1934 also set the commercial media mandate as the de facto media mandate for the country. If you want to learn more about

Source material: https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/ch02.htm Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State. Radio communication unregulated until The Radio Act of 1912 formally known as "An Act to Regulate Radio Communication" (37 Stat. 302), is a United States federal law which was the first legislation to require licenses for radio stations The Radio Act of 1927 (United States Public Law 632, 69th Congress) replaced the Radio Act of 1912 increased the federal government's regulatory powers over radio communication oversight vested in a newly created body, the Federal Radio Commission (FCC) first legislation to mandate stations show they were "in the public interest, convenience, or necessity" in order to receive a license Communications Act of 1934 “The act established a legal basis for regulating wired and wireless communications on a nationwide and worldwide basis. The Federal Communication Commission was founded because of the act; it replaced the Federal Radio Commission. Because of the act, the U.S. government could regulate new media technologies such as television and mobile phones. Moreover, the act permitted the regulation of commercial communication corporations such as private radio and television companies.” 6 companies control all US media https://www.businessinsider.com/these-6-corporations-control-90-of-the-media-in-america-2012-6 List of administrations in control of transportation by creation date https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_Transportation The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulates all aspects of civil aviation Its powers include the construction and operation of airports, air traffic management, the certification of personnel and aircraft, and the protection of U.S. assets during the launch or re-entry of commercial space vehicles. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.  Equal liability of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.  Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.  Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, &c, &c.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_in_the_United_States By state law, education is compulsory over an age range starting between five and eight and ending somewhere between ages sixteen and eighteen, depending on the state. This requirement can be satisfied in public schools, state-certified private schools, or an approved home school program. Description: In the current zeitgeist we are told that “capitalism” is failing us as well as being responsible for the increasing wealth gap between the “haves and the have nots.”  In this episode we focus on the US primarily. We will use the 10 planks of Karl Marx’ Communist Manifesto (1848) to try and ascertain if the US truly is a capitalist nation or if it is far more Marxist in character than people are often lead to believe. Topics include: Communication Transportation Education Bitcoin

In this special episode, we delve deep into the Federal Communication Commission's major rule change in 1979.  The change altered how radio frequency emissions from computers would be regulated for years to come and affected every major player on the market, be it computer, console, and even arcade. To help us understand the technical side is QuarterPast83 who has made it his personal mission to understand this often overlooked yet extremely important chapter in the computer industries history.   https://twitter.com/QuarterPast83?s=20  

Hello, COMM122 podcast listeners. As we wrap up the topic of media mandate from previous weeks, we will now start a new series on media regulations.You are no stranger to media regulations. If you follow the news about e-cigarettes, you might have heard of a call to ban the advertising of e-cigarettes on television. This call came after numerous reports of vaping-related deaths. Another recent case is the talk of breaking up big tech because big tech companies become overly influential. There are also conversations on regulating fake news and foreign interference on social media platforms.Regulations are various rules, standards, and norms set by governments, legislative bodies, and non-government entities. You might think that regulations are all enforced by governments. Well, many regulations are indeed enacted by governments following laws passed by Congress. We call this, formal regulation. An example is the ban on the advertising of tobacco products. There is also informal regulation, such as movie ratings. Movie ratings are not by the US government, but by the Motion Picture Association of America, which is an non-government organization. Regulations could target content produced by media outlets, or something not directly related to content, such as media ownership, licensing, who has access to the media, and etc.If you feel the information is overwhelming, don’t worry, we will go over each of the common types of regulation, with examples. Before we do that, let’s review four milestone media-related legislations in the US history. First, the Radio Act of 1912. This is a federal law that went into effect in 1912, not long after the sinking of the Titanic. The Radio Act of 1912 is the first legislation targeting the radio technology. It requires that anyone transmitting signals through radio-waves needs a license. Before this legislation, public airwaves was a wild west. Everyone, including amateurs, commercial operators and US Navy officers can send signals. This created inference issues as someone may inadvertently or intentionally send fake distress calls. At the time of the Radio Act of 1912, radio was used mostly as one-to-one wireless communication. So the radio act in 1912 is not applicable to broadcasting radio stations. The legislation targeting radio broadcasting came later in the Radio Act of 1927. The 1927 act was proposed again to address the interference issue. But this time, the inference issue was caused by broadcasting radio stations. In our community, you can listen to the local NPR station broadcasts on FM88.5. Can you imagine what will happen if a nearby station tries to broadcast using the same frequency? Yes, it will jam the signal from the NPR station. This is basically what typically happened before the Radio Act of 1927. So the Radio Act of 1927 creates Federal Radio Commission, a government body. It gives FRC the authority to allocate frequencies to stations and individuals, following the Guiding Standard: Public Interest, convenience, or necessity. However, Congress failed to define precisely what it meant by “public interest, convenience, and necessity” in either the statutory text or legislative history. The Radio Act of 1927 ushered in the golden age of radio with inferences died down. As radio stations began to broadcast nationally. A common popular culture emerged based on the common consumption of radio shows. Following the radio act of 1927, Congress passed the Communications Act of 1934. It expands the regulation to telephone communication, an invention at that time. It creates FCC, Federal Communication Commission, which is still functioning today. Communications Act of 1934 also set the commercial media mandate as the de facto media mandate for the country. If you want to learn more about this part of the history, read the Commercial radio debate section on the Wikipedia page about this legislation.

A case in which the Court held that Fourth Circuit did not properly consider preliminary issues that determine whether a district court must accept the Federal Communication Commission's legal interpretation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.

If there’s one thing that everyone can agree on, it’s that robocalls are an abomination. Last month, Americans received roughly five billion of them -- about 1,700 per second -- and spam calls rank as the top complaint to the Federal Communication Commission. This week, telecom reporter Kelcee Griffis joins us to explain the problem and why it’s taken so long to fix. Also this week, an update on the "Varsity Blues" admission scandal; another round of copyright litigation for Led Zeppelin; and a musical update on New York City’s favorite personal injury lawyers, Cellino & Barnes.

Tom Wheeler: Gutenberg, Google, Darwin & Beyond (Ep. 177) Tom Wheeler joined Joe Miller to discuss Mr. Wheeler's new book 'From Gutenberg to Google: The History of Our Future'.   Bio Chairman Tom Wheeler is a visiting fellow in Governance Studies at Brookings. Wheeler is a businessman, author, and was Chairman of the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) from 2013 to 2017. For over four decades, Wheeler has been involved with new telecommunications networks and services. At the FCC he led the efforts that resulted in the adoption of Net Neutrality, privacy protections for consumers, and increased cybersecurity, among other policies. His chairmanship has been described as, “The most productive Commission in the history of the agency.” During the Obama-Biden Transition of 2008/09 Mr. Wheeler led activities overseeing the agencies of government dealing with science, technology, space and the arts. As an entrepreneur, he started or helped start multiple companies offering innovative cable, wireless and video communications services. He is the only person to be selected to both the Cable Television Hall of Fame and the Wireless Hall of Fame, a fact President Obama joked made him “the Bo Jackson of telecom.” Prior to being appointed Chairman of the FCC by President Obama, Wheeler was Managing Director at Core Capital Partners, a venture capital firm investing in early stage Internet Protocol (IP)-based companies. He is CEO of the Shiloh Group, a strategy development and private investment company specializing in telecommunications services. He co-founded SmartBrief, the Internet’s largest curated information service for vertical markets. From 1976 to 1984 Wheeler was associated with the National Cable Television Association (NCTA) where he was President and CEO from 1979 to 1984. Following NCTA Wheeler was CEO of several high-tech companies, including the first company to offer high-speed delivery to home computers and the first digital video satellite service. From 1992 to 2004 Wheeler served as President and CEO of the Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association (CTIA). Mr. Wheeler wrote Take Command: Leadership Lessons from the Civil War (Doubleday, 2000), and Mr. Lincoln’s T-Mails: The Untold Story of How Abraham Lincoln Used the Telegraph to Win the Civil War (HarperCollins, 2006). His commentaries on current events have been published in the New York Times, Washington Post, USA Today, Los Angeles Times, and numerous other leading publications. Mr. Wheeler served on President Obama’s Intelligence Advisory Board prior to being named to the FCC. Presidents Clinton and Bush each appointed him a Trustee of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. He is the former Chairman and President of the National Archives Foundation, and a former board member of the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS). He is a proud graduate of The Ohio State University and the recipient of its Alumni Medal. He resides in Washington, D.C. Resources Brookings Governance Studies From Gutenberg to Google: The History of Our Future by Tom Wheeler (Brookings, 2019) Time to Fix It: Developing Rules for Internet Capitalism (Harvard: Kennedy, 2018) The Root of the Matter: Data & Duty: Rules of the New Digital Economy Should Look to Old Common Law Traditions (Harvard: Kennedy, 2018) The Supreme Court and House Democrats Breathe New Life into Net Neutrality (Brookings, 2018) Who Makes the Rules in the new gilded age? (Brookings, 2018)   News Roundup Elizabeth Warren proposes breaking up big tech Senator Elizabeth Warren announced her proposal last week to reign in tech firms like Google, Amazon, and Facebook. The plan calls for potentially breaking up some mergers as well as new legislation. Senator Warren wants to break up Doubleclick and Google, Facebook and its subsidiaries Instagram and Whats App, and the Amazon/Whole Foods merger. Politico reported Monday that Facebook removed ads that Elizabeth Warren placed on the social network which criticized Facebook and called for its breakup. Facebook backtracked after its attempt to silence Warren backfired. Democrats announce net neutrality bill Nancy Pelosi, on behalf of Democrats, introduced a new net neutrality bill last week. The bill is two pages long and would simply reinstate the 2015 Open Internet rules. The bill’s likely to pass the House where Ds hold the majority, but it faces a more uncertain future in the Senate and getting it over the presidents desk. Trump details plan for government-owned 5G Trump’s reelection campaign is proposing a plan that would give the government control of the nation’s 5G airwaves, allowing it to lease them out to carriers on a wholesale basis. Most carriers think the plan’s unworkable. But the plan is seen as an attempt to attract rural voters with spotty internet service. Huawei sues the U.S. Chinese device manufacturer Huawei, which the U.S. government has accused of spying and violating sanctions against Iran, has now sued the U.S. government for banning the company from doing business in the U.S.  The company filed in a U.S. District Court in Plano, Texas, where the company has its U.S. headquarters. TMobile spent $195k at Trump hotel TMobile’s expenditures at Trump’s DC hotel rose sharply after the company reported that it would be seeking to acquire Sprint. Since April of last year, when the merger was announced, TMobile has spent $195,000 at the hotel. But before the merger announcement, the company said that only two employees had stayed there. The FCC paused its review of the merger last week. This is the third time the FCC has paused the 180-day shot clock, which is now on day 122. The merger review has been going on for 8 months. It’s not clear why it was paused this time. But the hotel expenditures may have had something to do with it—especially since the White House actually approved the deal. A ‘Greenbook’ for bigots Finally, The Hill reported on Monday on a new app that launched which gives users a listing of MAGA-friendly establishments—places where they’re least likely to be made fun of or harassed for wearing their red MAGA hats, or that let them carry legally-concealed weapons … check it out it’s called 63Red—great way to figure out where not to go other than Cracker Barrel. Events House E&C Committee, Comms & Tech SubComm Hearing on Legislating to Safeguard the Free and Open Internet Tues., 3/12, 11:00AM Rayburn 2322     House E&C Committee, Comms & Tech SubComm The Impact of Broadband Investments in Rural America Tues., 3/12, 2:30PM Hart, Rm. 216   ACT Voters to Policymakers: Bridging the Digital Divide Inlcudes Unlicensed Spetrum Thurs., 3/14, 9:30AM Dirksen, Rm. 562     Federal Communications Commission Monthly Meeting Friday, 3/15, 12:30-2:30 445 12th St., NW Washington, D.C.    

My guest this week is Sara Spangelo, co-founder and CEO of Swarm Technologies. The company is noteworthy for its innovation in developing a communication satellite 1/4 the size of a traditional CubeSat, which is 10 cm x 10 cm x 10 cm. To put it another way, and as my guest put it, the size of a grilled cheese sandwich. The company wants to build and launch 150 of these pico satellites, called SpaceBees, to create a global network to allow Internet of Things devices such as sensors in a farmers field to send small amounts of data back to servers for processing. Currently the company has 7 experimental satellites in orbit. Swarm is less than two years old and it's gotten more attention than perhaps they would have wanted. Last year could have been a company killing year for a startup as they ran afoul of the Federal Communication Commission when they not only launched 4 of their satellites without an FCC license, they also performed unauthorized weather balloon-to-ground station tests and unauthorized tests of satellite and ground station equipment. They settled with the FCC, paying a whopping $900,000 fine and they recently closed their Series A round of financing for $25M. The company wants to put past mistakes behind them and build the company out with its innovative technologies.

Hundreds of Authors who survived slavery, penned books, newspapers, pamphlets and speeches without using the N-Word, yet today the word is unavoidable! Garrett Fortner III, the Brooklyn Grassroot Publisher and founder of New Word Media has had enough and he's doing something about it! He filed a complaint with the Federal Communication Commission.   Read Books Penned By Slavery Survivors ********** Dave Chappelle's Great Grandfather,  Rev. Wilson David Chappelle survived slavery, became the President of a HBCU and wrote about it in his book!  A BRIEF SKETCH OF THE LIFE AND CAREER OF THE RIGHT REV. WILLIAM DAVID CHAPPELLE A.M., D.D., LL.D. Some of His Addresses and Sermons. Dave Chappelle supports HBCU,His great-grandfather, Bishop WM. David Chappelle, was a president at Allen University in Columbia, S.C.  Watch Dave's  interview here: http://bit.ly/DaveChapHBCU https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10204585972114645&type=1&l=5b75078b55  

The Federal Communications Commission recently voted to establish a $100 million fund to support telemedicine, a strategy that's proven useful at the Veterans Affairs Department. Now it could come to more veterans and low-income, rural Americans. FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr joined Federal Drive with Tom Temin to discuss how it will work.

Last June, President Donald Trump reinstituted the National Space Council by Executive Order, chaired by Vice President Mike Pence. The council has been active on many fronts and has approved several recommendations devoted to regulatory reform for various commercial space activities. Since the Council’s reformation, President Trump has adopted two directives, the second of which sets policies ensuring that any regulations adopted and enforced promote economic growth and encourage American leadership in space commerce. At the same time, the FCC has been focusing on related issues. It recently granted authorization of the use of the Ka, Ku and V bands for satellites to provide internet service in the geostationary and non-geostationary satellite orbits. The Commission has also proposed changes to the regulatory review process for smaller satellite systems and discussed the issue of space debris. With so many government initiatives on these issues, it is timely to focus public attention on the domestic and global barriers to U.S. leadership.This event was hosted by the Federalist Society’s Telecommunications & Electronic Media Practice Group and focused on the current Administration's efforts to modernize and reform American commercial space policy and the Federal Communication Commission's regulatory approach to the booming American space industry.Schedule:Luncheon and Opening Address12:00 p.m.- 1:00 p.m. Featuring:Michael Beavin, Senior Policy Advisor, National Space CouncilPanel Discussion 1:00 p.m. - 1:45 p.m. Featuring:Maj. Gen. Jim Armor, USAF (Ret.), Director, Government Relations, Northrop Grumman CorporationJennifer A. Manner, Senior Vice President of Regulatory Affairs, EchoStar Corporation/Hughes Network Systems LLCMaureen McLaughlin, Vice President, Public Policy, Iridium Satellite, LLCJennifer A. Warren, Vice President, Technology Policy & Regulation, Lockheed Martin Government AffairsModerator Erin McGrath, Legal Advisor, Wireless, Public Safety and International, Federal Communications Commission Closing Remarks1:45 p.m.- 2:00 p.m. Featuring:Hon. Michael O'Rielly, Commissioner, Federal Communications Commission

Last June, President Donald Trump reinstituted the National Space Council by Executive Order, chaired by Vice President Mike Pence. The council has been active on many fronts and has approved several recommendations devoted to regulatory reform for various commercial space activities. Since the Council’s reformation, President Trump has adopted two directives, the second of which sets policies ensuring that any regulations adopted and enforced promote economic growth and encourage American leadership in space commerce. At the same time, the FCC has been focusing on related issues. It recently granted authorization of the use of the Ka, Ku and V bands for satellites to provide internet service in the geostationary and non-geostationary satellite orbits. The Commission has also proposed changes to the regulatory review process for smaller satellite systems and discussed the issue of space debris. With so many government initiatives on these issues, it is timely to focus public attention on the domestic and global barriers to U.S. leadership.This event was hosted by the Federalist Society’s Telecommunications & Electronic Media Practice Group and focused on the current Administration's efforts to modernize and reform American commercial space policy and the Federal Communication Commission's regulatory approach to the booming American space industry.Schedule:Luncheon and Opening Address12:00 p.m.- 1:00 p.m. Featuring:Michael Beavin, Senior Policy Advisor, National Space CouncilPanel Discussion 1:00 p.m. - 1:45 p.m. Featuring:Maj. Gen. Jim Armor, USAF (Ret.), Director, Government Relations, Northrop Grumman CorporationJennifer A. Manner, Senior Vice President of Regulatory Affairs, EchoStar Corporation/Hughes Network Systems LLCMaureen McLaughlin, Vice President, Public Policy, Iridium Satellite, LLCJennifer A. Warren, Vice President, Technology Policy & Regulation, Lockheed Martin Government AffairsModerator Erin McGrath, Legal Advisor, Wireless, Public Safety and International, Federal Communications Commission Closing Remarks1:45 p.m.- 2:00 p.m. Featuring:Hon. Michael O'Rielly, Commissioner, Federal Communications Commission

Despite the Federal Communication Commission’s decision in December 2017 to eliminate the common carrier regulations for Internet services — the so-called net neutrality rules the FCC created in 2015 — the net neutrality debate rages on. The Trump FCC preempted states’ authority to regulate the Internet, yet governors in six states have attempted to enforce net neutrality principles via executive order and three states have passed “baby net neutrality bills.” Several more state bills are pending. Can state agencies regulate Internet services? What are the legal and practical impediments? What are the consequences of businesses operating under inconsistent regulations amongst the states and at the federal level? Gus Hurwitz, Brent Skorup, and Geoffrey Manne will discuss this new front in regulation, federalism, and grassroots activism.Featuring:- Justin (Gus) Hurwitz, Assistant Professor of Law and Co-Director of Space, Cyber, and Telecom Law Program, University of Nebraska College of Law- Brent Skorup, Senior Research Fellow, Technology Policy Program, Mercatus Center at George Mason University- [Moderator] Geoffrey A. Manne, Executive Director, International Center for Law & EconomicsVisit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

Despite the Federal Communication Commission’s decision in December 2017 to eliminate the common carrier regulations for Internet services — the so-called net neutrality rules the FCC created in 2015 — the net neutrality debate rages on. The Trump FCC preempted states’ authority to regulate the Internet, yet governors in six states have attempted to enforce net neutrality principles via executive order and three states have passed “baby net neutrality bills.” Several more state bills are pending. Can state agencies regulate Internet services? What are the legal and practical impediments? What are the consequences of businesses operating under inconsistent regulations amongst the states and at the federal level? Gus Hurwitz, Brent Skorup, and Geoffrey Manne will discuss this new front in regulation, federalism, and grassroots activism.Featuring:- Justin (Gus) Hurwitz, Assistant Professor of Law and Co-Director of Space, Cyber, and Telecom Law Program, University of Nebraska College of Law- Brent Skorup, Senior Research Fellow, Technology Policy Program, Mercatus Center at George Mason University- [Moderator] Geoffrey A. Manne, Executive Director, International Center for Law & EconomicsVisit our website – RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

A United States federal judge approved the merger of AT&T and Time Warner Cable. In effect, AT&T owns distribution, content, and media rights to nearly 100 companies across the world.  Moreover, Comcast and Disney are battling for the acquisition of a 21st Century Fox stake to add additional content and rights to the asset class. This all may spell trouble for consumers as net neutrality regulations are set to expire thanks to the Federal Communication Commission.  Next, the CIO of General Motors has transformed the Information Technology branch of the company in just under five years by insourcing over 10,000 jobs and focusing on innovation, research, and development. Lastly, we share a personal story of how one single app is changing the life of addiction.

Net Neutrality is a mess of divisive, confusing, and controversial opinion. And the clutter has only worsened over the last few months. After the Federal Communication Commission’s repeal of the Obama-era rules in December of 2017, chat forums, comment sections, and news articles about the repeal sprang up in every corner of the exact place […]

The backlash against the Federal Communication Commission’s rollback of net neutrality regulations continues — even a certain monarchy-themed hamburger establishment has weighed in with a video. El Kaiser and J.D. discuss the latest developments concerning the Open Internet, and also ponder Twitter’s photo-cropping skills, the Google gestalt and  listening to Netflix in other languages. Click … Continue reading PTJ 260: WHOPPERS →

This week's tools, tips and tricks episode is a tip on gathering guidelines on building a cybersecurity program. The Federal Communication Commission has a website for Cybersecurity planning. There you can download great beginning resources, especially if you are a small business looking to strengthen your security posture.  FCC Cyberplanning website - https://www.fcc.gov/cyberplanner   Be aware, be safe. ------------------------------------ Website - https://www.binaryblogger.com Podcast Page - http://securityinfive.libsyn.com Podcast RSS - http://securityinfive.libsyn.com/rss Twitter @binaryblogger - https://www.twitter.com/binaryblogger iTunes - https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/security-in-five-podcast/id1247135894?mt=2 YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/binaryblogger TuneIn Radio - Security In Five Channel Spotify - Security In Five Podcast Page Email - contactme@binaryblogger.com  

Avant d’accueillir la nouvelle année, comme le veut la coutume, il faut dire adieu à celle qui achève. Et 2017, sur le plan de l’actualité, n’aura pas été décevante. Entre nos sujets de prédilection comme l’immigration et les réfugiés, les autochtones, l'action internationale du Canada et les nouvelles de nos régions cibles (Monde arabe, Afrique, Amérique latine, Asie, Francophonie, Commonwealth), les artisans de RCI en ont eu plein les bras. Ils ont traité en tout quelque 13 000 sujets en 2017. Difficile dans ce contexte d’isoler un enjeu ou événement marquant. C’est pourtant ce qu’ont réussi à faire pour cette édition spéciale de Tam-Tam Canada des représentants des sections de RCI, mais aussi d’Espaces autochtones et Regard sur l'Arctique, deux sites voisins, relevant de Radio-Canada. ÉcoutezFR_Tam_tam_Canada-20171231-WEF17 Zoubeir Jazi, « Mr Techno» de RCI avec sa chronique Jazinet, explique en quoi consiste le principe de neutralité du Web et pourquoi il faut s'inquiéter de la décision de la Federal Communication Commission (FCC)  de remettre en question l’égalité du traitement des flux de données sur Internet. Wu Wei de la section chinoise revient sur le 19e Congrès annuel du Parti communiste chinois notamment marqué par la consolidation du pouvoir du président Xi Jinping  dont le nom et la doctrine sont désormais inclus dans les statuts du parti. Guy Bois d’Espaces autochtones, a retenu l'Enquête nationale sur les femmes et les filles autochtones disparues et assassinées. Un exercice complexe, douloureux et traumatisant dont le but est d’examiner les causes systémiques des violences subies par ces Canadiennes et de faire des recommandations au gouvernement. Levon Sevunts de la section anglaise revient quant à lui sur le crise des Rohingyas cette minorité musulmane persécutée au Myanmar (Birmanie). Quelque 900 000 Rohingyas du Myanmar sont regroupés dans le sud du Bangladesh, dont 625 000 arrivés depuis fin août. L'une des plus grandes chaines de vente au détail, Sears Canada a mis la clé sous la paillasson en 2017. Du jour au lendemain, quelque 12000 personnes ont perdu leur emploi. Pire, Sears a supprimé leurs indemnités de départ. Stéphane Parent de la section française y revient. La Syrie est déchirée par une guerre civile depuis début 2011, suite aux manifestations prodémocratiques réprimées par le régime de Bachar el-Assad. Depuis lors, le conflit a fait des centaines de milliers de morts et des millions de déplacés. Ce dossier a été sur le radar Pierre Ahmaranian de la section arabe. Pablo Gomez de la section espagnole a retenu la Colombie. Le 26 septembre 2016, un accord de paix historique entre la guérilla des Farc et le gouvernement mettait un terme un conflit armé vieux de 52 ans. Peut-on parler pour autant de retour de la paix dans le pays? Rien n'est moins sûr selon Pablo. Eilis Quinn de Regard sur l’Arctique a retenu la signature du moratoire sur la pêche commerciale dans l'Arctique. Selon Eilis, l'événement mérite d'être souligné d'autant plus que les signataires, dont le Canada, la Russie, les États-Unis et la Chine, ne nous ont pas habitués à des ententes spontanées sur des enjeux internationaux majeurs. https://youtu.be/5-sBjTlL7jA

Avant d'accueillir la nouvelle année, comme le veut la coutume, il faut dire adieu à celle qui achève. Et 2017, sur le plan de l'actualité, n'aura pas été décevante. Entre nos sujets de prédilection comme l'immigration et les réfugiés, les autochtones, l'action internationale du Canada et les nouvelles de nos régions cibles (Monde arabe, Afrique, Amérique latine, Asie, Francophonie, Commonwealth), les artisans de RCI en ont eu plein les bras. Ils ont traité en tout quelque 13 000 sujets en 2017. Difficile dans ce contexte d'isoler un enjeu ou événement marquant. C'est pourtant ce qu'ont réussi à faire pour cette édition spéciale de Tam-Tam Canada des représentants des sections de RCI, mais aussi d'Espaces autochtones et Regard sur l'Arctique, deux sites voisins, relevant de Radio-Canada. ÉcoutezFR_Tam_tam_Canada-20171231-WEF17 Zoubeir Jazi, « Mr Techno» de RCI avec sa chronique Jazinet, explique en quoi consiste le principe de neutralité du Web et pourquoi il faut s'inquiéter de la décision de la Federal Communication Commission (FCC)  de remettre en question l'égalité du traitement des flux de données sur Internet. Wu Wei de la section chinoise revient sur le 19e Congrès annuel du Parti communiste chinois notamment marqué par la consolidation du pouvoir du président Xi Jinping  dont le nom et la doctrine sont désormais inclus dans les statuts du parti. Guy Bois d'Espaces autochtones, a retenu l'Enquête nationale sur les femmes et les filles autochtones disparues et assassinées. Un exercice complexe, douloureux et traumatisant dont le but est d'examiner les causes systémiques des violences subies par ces Canadiennes et de faire des recommandations au gouvernement. Levon Sevunts de la section anglaise revient quant à lui sur le crise des Rohingyas cette minorité musulmane persécutée au Myanmar (Birmanie). Quelque 900 000 Rohingyas du Myanmar sont regroupés dans le sud du Bangladesh, dont 625 000 arrivés depuis fin août. L'une des plus grandes chaines de vente au détail, Sears Canada a mis la clé sous la paillasson en 2017. Du jour au lendemain, quelque 12000 personnes ont perdu leur emploi. Pire, Sears a supprimé leurs indemnités de départ. Stéphane Parent de la section française y revient. La Syrie est déchirée par une guerre civile depuis début 2011, suite aux manifestations prodémocratiques réprimées par le régime de Bachar el-Assad. Depuis lors, le conflit a fait des centaines de milliers de morts et des millions de déplacés. Ce dossier a été sur le radar Pierre Ahmaranian de la section arabe. Pablo Gomez de la section espagnole a retenu la Colombie. Le 26 septembre 2016, un accord de paix historique entre la guérilla des Farc et le gouvernement mettait un terme un conflit armé vieux de 52 ans. Peut-on parler pour autant de retour de la paix dans le pays? Rien n'est moins sûr selon Pablo. Eilis Quinn de Regard sur l'Arctique a retenu la signature du moratoire sur la pêche commerciale dans l'Arctique. Selon Eilis, l'événement mérite d'être souligné d'autant plus que les signataires, dont le Canada, la Russie, les États-Unis et la Chine, ne nous ont pas habitués à des ententes spontanées sur des enjeux internationaux majeurs. https://youtu.be/5-sBjTlL7jA

On December 14, the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) is scheduled to vote to rescind a 2015 regulation that would end “net neutrality”. Opponents of this action say it will consolidate too much power over the Internet into the hands of a few large broadband providers such as Comcast, AT&T and Verizon and cable companies. If passed, the high speed Internet providers would be allowed to block certain websites (at their discretion) and “throttle” (slow delivery) content for others. The large broadband companies then could charge a premium to content providers to ensure faster service and delivery of content to customers. Those additional charges would be passed along to consumers, according to Dr. Trevor Roycroft, an economist, and expert on consumer issues in telecommunication. Dr. Roycroft is a professor in the J. Warren McClure School of Information and Telecommunication Systems at Ohio University. Also, not every Internet user would have equal access to legal and legitimate websites. Some may be blocked by various providers. This action also will limit individual access to Internet sites as determined by the broadband carriers, according to Dr. Roycroft. He also believes it will curtail innovation and creativity on the internet and be a disincentive to small entrepreneurial developers. This move is part of the de-regulation initiatives of the Trump Administration and is being led by FCC chairman and Trump appointee Ajit Pai. It is uncertain exactly when this action, if approved by the FCC on December 14, will actually take effect. If passed, the action needs to be published in the Federal Register and will most likely be challenged in court. The court action will not prevent implementation unless a court grants a “stay” of the rescission.

This week, Google's offerings from its annual I/O developer conference; the latest fallout from the WannaCry ransomware attack; and the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) votes 2:1 to overturn some legislation protecting net neutrality.

In today's Federal Newscast, after the late night comedian ran a segment on the Federal Communication Commission's planned changes to its net neutrality policy, the agency's CIO says it faced a massive distributed denial of service attack.

Art is the founder of New Media Rights and a law professor at California Western School of Law, specializing in the areas of internet, intellectual property, privacy, and media law. Art has provided and overseen legal services to nearly 2000 small businesses, entrepreneurs, and creators, and is a 3 time appointee to the Federal Communication Commission's Consumer Advisory Committee.The book is co-written by Teri Karobonik who is a former Staff Attorney at New Media Rights where she worked with all manner of creative individuals on a daily basis on preventative, transactional and pre-litigation matters. In 2015 Teri was appointed as an Internet Law & Policy Foundry Fellow in recognition of her work as an early career leader in the tech law and policy space.

NC Family president John Rustin talks with Tim Winter, president of the Parents Television Council (PTC), about the Federal Communication Commission’s enforcement of the broadcast decency law and why it matters to families.

In 2003, the Internet was reclassified as an information service instead of a public utility which reduced the Federal Communication Commission’s ability to control the giant telecoms’ behavior. Ever since, defenders of Internet freedom have been fighting to make it a public utility or common carrier again and the telecoms have been fighting to further commodify and profit from the Internet. After a dedicated ten month campaign, net neutrality activists have finally won. The FCC is expected to vote on reclassification on Feb. 26. While this is a victory and we will celebrate, there is more to do. Craig Aaron of Free Press explains why reclassification is necessary for net neutrality, but not sufficient. And David Isenberg who organizes Freedom to Connect discusses more steps that can be taken to guarantee that the Internet is a place for free speech in the 21st century and is available to everyone. For more information, visit www.ClearingtheFOGRadio.org.

In the segment we discuss recent developments in the administration's campaign to provide high quality Internet access to all students. Follow: @aasadan @bamradionetwork Dr. Brian Talbott is the Executive Director Emeritus of the Association of Educational Service Agencies (AESA).1n 1997 Dr. Talbott was appointed by the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) to the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC) Board. He currently serves as the USAC Board Chair, which oversees the Rural Health Care Program, High Cost &Low Income Program and the Schools and Libraries Program,(the E-Rate Program).

John Nathan Anderson’s new book, Radio’s Digital Dilemma: Broadcasting in the 21st Century (Routledge, 2014), documents the somewhat tortured path of broadcast radio’s digital transition in the United States.  Beginning his analysis with rise of neoliberal communications policy in the 1980s, Anderson charts the development of the idea of digitalization by closely examining two key archival sources: The Federal Communication Commission’s extensive archive of rulemaking and public comments and the archives of the two most important trade journals in broadcast radio, Radio World and Current. As Anderson explores in the book, FCC regulatory neglect coupled with the huge consolidation within the radio industry following the passage of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 resulted in a digital transition that was dictated largely by commercial interests.  For example, the most important decision about digital radio – the engineering standard for digital broadcasting – was determined by a federation of corporations that formed a proprietary standard called HD Radio.  This new digital standard was a failure on a number of levels, argues Anderson.  First, it was at odds with the global digital radio standard, Eureka 147.  Second, it caused unwanted interference with analog radio signals.  Third, the corporate entity which owned the rights to the HD Radio standard, iBiquity, was determined to charge local stations a fee for using its digital radio standard.  Once digital radio began to roll out across the nation in 2002, local stations’ and listeners’ complaints about interference and bad reception were effectively drowned out by a sustained marketing effort on behalf of HD Radio’s corporate partners.  Today, the future of digital radio in the United States is in doubt: only 13% of all stations are broadcasting a digital signal.  Throughout the book, Anderson argues that the lack of regulatory guidance and oversight, coupled with blind allegiance to market forces, has resulted in a radio environment that falls well short of our aspirations for a democratic media system. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

John Nathan Anderson’s new book, Radio’s Digital Dilemma: Broadcasting in the 21st Century (Routledge, 2014), documents the somewhat tortured path of broadcast radio’s digital transition in the United States.  Beginning his analysis with rise of neoliberal communications policy in the 1980s, Anderson charts the development of the idea of digitalization by closely examining two key archival sources: The Federal Communication Commission’s extensive archive of rulemaking and public comments and the archives of the two most important trade journals in broadcast radio, Radio World and Current. As Anderson explores in the book, FCC regulatory neglect coupled with the huge consolidation within the radio industry following the passage of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 resulted in a digital transition that was dictated largely by commercial interests.  For example, the most important decision about digital radio – the engineering standard for digital broadcasting – was determined by a federation of corporations that formed a proprietary standard called HD Radio.  This new digital standard was a failure on a number of levels, argues Anderson.  First, it was at odds with the global digital radio standard, Eureka 147.  Second, it caused unwanted interference with analog radio signals.  Third, the corporate entity which owned the rights to the HD Radio standard, iBiquity, was determined to charge local stations a fee for using its digital radio standard.  Once digital radio began to roll out across the nation in 2002, local stations’ and listeners’ complaints about interference and bad reception were effectively drowned out by a sustained marketing effort on behalf of HD Radio’s corporate partners.  Today, the future of digital radio in the United States is in doubt: only 13% of all stations are broadcasting a digital signal.  Throughout the book, Anderson argues that the lack of regulatory guidance and oversight, coupled with blind allegiance to market forces, has resulted in a radio environment that falls well short of our aspirations for a democratic media system. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

John Nathan Anderson’s new book, Radio’s Digital Dilemma: Broadcasting in the 21st Century (Routledge, 2014), documents the somewhat tortured path of broadcast radio’s digital transition in the United States.  Beginning his analysis with rise of neoliberal communications policy in the 1980s, Anderson charts the development of the idea of digitalization by closely examining two key archival sources: The Federal Communication Commission’s extensive archive of rulemaking and public comments and the archives of the two most important trade journals in broadcast radio, Radio World and Current. As Anderson explores in the book, FCC regulatory neglect coupled with the huge consolidation within the radio industry following the passage of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 resulted in a digital transition that was dictated largely by commercial interests.  For example, the most important decision about digital radio – the engineering standard for digital broadcasting – was determined by a federation of corporations that formed a proprietary standard called HD Radio.  This new digital standard was a failure on a number of levels, argues Anderson.  First, it was at odds with the global digital radio standard, Eureka 147.  Second, it caused unwanted interference with analog radio signals.  Third, the corporate entity which owned the rights to the HD Radio standard, iBiquity, was determined to charge local stations a fee for using its digital radio standard.  Once digital radio began to roll out across the nation in 2002, local stations’ and listeners’ complaints about interference and bad reception were effectively drowned out by a sustained marketing effort on behalf of HD Radio’s corporate partners.  Today, the future of digital radio in the United States is in doubt: only 13% of all stations are broadcasting a digital signal.  Throughout the book, Anderson argues that the lack of regulatory guidance and oversight, coupled with blind allegiance to market forces, has resulted in a radio environment that falls well short of our aspirations for a democratic media system. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

John Nathan Anderson’s new book, Radio’s Digital Dilemma: Broadcasting in the 21st Century (Routledge, 2014), documents the somewhat tortured path of broadcast radio’s digital transition in the United States.  Beginning his analysis with rise of neoliberal communications policy in the 1980s, Anderson charts the development of the idea of digitalization by closely examining two key archival sources: The Federal Communication Commission’s extensive archive of rulemaking and public comments and the archives of the two most important trade journals in broadcast radio, Radio World and Current. As Anderson explores in the book, FCC regulatory neglect coupled with the huge consolidation within the radio industry following the passage of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 resulted in a digital transition that was dictated largely by commercial interests.  For example, the most important decision about digital radio – the engineering standard for digital broadcasting – was determined by a federation of corporations that formed a proprietary standard called HD Radio.  This new digital standard was a failure on a number of levels, argues Anderson.  First, it was at odds with the global digital radio standard, Eureka 147.  Second, it caused unwanted interference with analog radio signals.  Third, the corporate entity which owned the rights to the HD Radio standard, iBiquity, was determined to charge local stations a fee for using its digital radio standard.  Once digital radio began to roll out across the nation in 2002, local stations’ and listeners’ complaints about interference and bad reception were effectively drowned out by a sustained marketing effort on behalf of HD Radio’s corporate partners.  Today, the future of digital radio in the United States is in doubt: only 13% of all stations are broadcasting a digital signal.  Throughout the book, Anderson argues that the lack of regulatory guidance and oversight, coupled with blind allegiance to market forces, has resulted in a radio environment that falls well short of our aspirations for a democratic media system. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Are the Federal Communication Commission's new rules on net neutrality fair?; is NYC brewing with radioactive elements?; How can Citibike be improved after this one year ride?; and who are these young homeless youth who traveler around the country?

Wird es künftig im Internet eine Zwei-Klassen-Gesellschaft geben? Geht es nach der US-Behörde für Kommunikation, der Federal Communication Commission (FCC), dann könnte das so kommen. Auf dem Spiel steht das gleichberechtigte Internet. >> Artikel zum Nachlesen: https://detektor.fm/digital/wie-geht-es-mit-dem-angriff-auf-die-netzneutralitaet-in-den-usa-weiter

Professor Robert McChesney  returned to Tell Somebody for the February 12, 2013 edition to talk about the vital importance of independent media and the urgent need to support it. Robert McChesney is co-founder and former president of Free Press, the national non-partisan media reform group that organized opposition to the Federal Communication Commission's decision to relax media ownership rules in 2003. He is the author of many books, and is the Gutgsell Endowed Professor in the Department of Communication at the University of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana.. This page and the podcast are produced and maintained by Tell Somebody and may or may not reflect the edition of the show broadcast on the radio.  Click on the pod icon above or the .mp3 filename below to listen to the show, or right-click and choose "save target as" to save a copy of the audio file to your computer.  You can also subscribe to the podcast, for free, at the iTunes store or your podcast directory. If you have any comments or questions about the show or any problems accessing the files, send an email to:  mail@tellsomebody.us  Twitter: @tellsomebodynow Tell Somebody on facebook

In part 1, investigator with the Howard Hughes Medical Institute Michael Eisen talks about his research, the field, and both experimental and computational biology. Eisen is Associate Professor of Genetics, Genomics, and Development in UC Berkeley's Dept. of Molecular Biology.TranscriptSpeaker 1: Spectrum's next Speaker 2: [inaudible]. Welcome to [inaudible] Speaker 1: section, the Science and technology show on k a l x Berkeley, a biweekly 30 minute program bringing you interviews [00:00:30] featuring bay area scientists and technologists as well as a calendar of local events and news. Speaker 3: Good afternoon. My name is Brad Swift. Thanks for tuning in. Today we are presenting part one of two interviews with Michael Eisen and associate professor of genetics, genomics and development in UC Berkeley's department of molecular biology. Iceland employs a combination of experimental and computational methods to the study of gene regulation [00:01:00] using the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster as a model system. Isen and his colleagues have pioneered genomic approaches in modern molecular biology and our leaders in the emerging field of computational biology. In part one, Michael talks about how he got started in biology and how his research has evolved onto the interview. Michael Isen, welcome to spectrum. Thank you. My pleasure. Would you give us a narrative of how you initiated your research and how your research has [00:01:30] changed to what it is currently? Speaker 4: Okay. Actually, I grew up in a family of scientists. My parents were both biologists, so I always had an interest in biology. But as a kid, my talents were primarily in math and I was a heavy duty math geek and went to college expecting to be a mathematician and took this freshman calculus class and all the hardcore math geeks tuck. And I did fine. I did well in the class, but [00:02:00] there were several people in the class who were clearly a notch better than me in a way that I think you only can realize and you know, basketball and mathematics at the age of 18 that you're not destined to be the best. And I think math is a field where if you're not the best, it's just kind of boring. And so I stayed as a mathematician and math major in college, but I started increasingly taking a lot of biology classes and had more or less, you know, realized that biology was what really captured my, my attention and [00:02:30] my heart. Speaker 4: And so I went to graduate school but had the idea that I'm interested in biology, but I'm really good at math. So there must be some way of combining these two things. And so I entered a graduate program in biophysics, which is sort of a place where people who are interested in biology maybe haven't taken all the prereqs for a normal biology department but also have a quantitative background go cause. And so, you know, in the way that people sort of drifted into things, I drifted into working on protein structure and [00:03:00] did my phd studying the evolution of the proteins on the surface of flu viruses and using a combination of experimental work and I would hesitate to call it mathematics. It was really just sort of kind of physics and it's, it's a lot of data. You generate a lot of raw data, you generate a lot of data on the coordinates of individual protein molecules and things that they might bind to. Speaker 4: And so it was very natural to start using computers in that work. You know, my background was not in computer science. I programmed as a kid [00:03:30] because my grandfather bought me a computer and I taught myself how to program and I wrote programs to, you know, keep track of baseball statistics and other things like that. In College, I basically never programmed anything in the math department I was in. It was considered not math that you were touching a computer. And so I didn't really do anything with computers until I got to graduate school when you started seeing all this data coming down the pipe. But I wasn't particularly interested in structural biology and I discovered that through six years from graduate school that [00:04:00] although I liked doing it, it wasn't intellectually satisfying, was too small. You're working on one sugar bound to one protein in one virus and I was having trouble seeing how that would expand into something grand and whatever. Speaker 4: You know, the ambitions of, uh, of a graduate student wanting to do something big. And I got lucky in the way that often happens in that my advisor had a colleague he knew from an advisory board. He sat on and he was coming into town because his brother was getting some honorary degree [00:04:30] and I met him in his hotel room, Austin. And he had with him, uh, glass microscope slide onto which had been spotted down little pieces of DNA, each of which corresponded to one gene in the yeast genome. So it's about 6,000 genes in the yeast genome. And you could see them because there was still salt in the spots, but it was a very evocative little device. You could sort of hold it up in front of the sun and you could see the sun sort of glittering on all these little spots. Speaker 4: You could just see the grandness of [00:05:00] the device. Didn't know how people were using them. I didn't know what they would be used for. I didn't know what I would do with them, but I was sort of drawn in by the scale of it all. The idea that you could work on everything at once and you didn't have to choose to work on just one little thing and disappear into a little corner and study. Just that. And so my advisor said, oh, you really should go do this. They need someone who's, you know, understands biology, but can deal with the computational side of things. It's clear that this was going to generate a lot of data [00:05:30] and that, you know, he was right. I mean this was a field that really was in great need of people who understood the biology but could work well in the quantitative computational side of things. Speaker 4: So I packed up and moved to Stanford with a short stint as a minor league baseball announcer in between. Really it was just a very fortuitous time to have gotten into this new field. I mean, the field was really just beginning. So this was in 1996 the first genomes been sequenced, they were microbes, there's bacteria and yeast [00:06:00] and so forth. And we were just getting our first glimpse of the scale of the kind of problems that we were going to be facing in genomics. But what I loved about this device, which is a DNA microarray, it's the sort of became a very hot tool in biology for a number of years was that it wasn't just a computer, it wasn't just data in a computer. It actually you were doing to do experiments with this. I'm interested in biology cause I liked living things. I like doing experiments, I like seeing things and I didn't want to just disappear with someone else's data and [00:06:30] analyze it. Speaker 4: So I went to Stanford to work on these and it really was just this awesome time and we were generating huge amounts of data in the lab and not just me. There were, you know, dozens of people generating tons of different types of experiments and so forth. And we lacked any kind of framework for looking at that data constructively. You couldn't look at those experiments and figure out by looking line by line in an excel spreadsheet at what gene was expressed, at what level and what condition. It just wasn't [00:07:00] the way to do it. And so my main contribution to the field at the time was in bringing tools for organizing the information and presenting it visually and being able to interact with that kind of incredibly complicated data in a way that was intuitive for people who understood the biology and allowed them to go back and forth between the experiment in the computer and the data and really try to make sense of what was a huge amounts of data with huge amounts of information, but something nobody had really been trained to [00:07:30] look at. And so it was there that I really realized kind of the way I like to do science, which is this constant back and forth between experiments on the computer. In my mind and in what I try to teach people in my lab. There's no distinction between doing experiments on the bench or in the field or in a computer that they're just different ways of looking at biology. Speaker 3: This is spectrum line KALX Berkeley. Today, Michael [00:08:00] I's associate professor at UC Berkeley explains his research in developmental biology. Speaker 4: On the basis of that time at Stanford, I got a job at Berkeley and what I did when I started my lab at Berkeley was really tried to focus on one problem. I mean I had been working on a million different problems at Stanford where we had a huge group and a million different people working on, and I was sort of moving around from problem the problem and helping out people with their data or thinking of different experiments. And when I came to Berkeley, I really [00:08:30] wanted to focus on one problem. And the problem that had intrigued me from the beginning of working on the microarray stuff was figuring out how it is that an animal's genome, which is the same essentially in every cell in the body, how it instructs different cells to behave differently, to turn on different genes and to acquire different properties. And so partly because of the influence of people here at Berkeley who were working on fruit flies, I switched my research program to work on [inaudible] when I started my lab at Berkeley, the genome of that [00:09:00] had just been sequenced and I liked working with animals. Speaker 4: I like having something that moves around and you know, had some behaviors and so the lab started to work on flies and pretty much since then that's what we've worked on. That's sort of the story of how I got to where I am. So your research then is you're looking at flies over time? Yeah, I mean, I mean I see how the genes are expressed. I'd say we're looking at classified more as developmental biology in the sense that we're looking at how genes are expressed over time during the lifespan of a lie. To this day, [00:09:30] we can't look at a newly sequenced genome and say, oh well this is what the animal's going to look like. That is, I couldn't tell you except sort of by cheating and knowing, comparing it to other genomes. If I, you gave me a fly genome, I look at it, I wouldn't know it was a fly or a worm or a tree or it's just the way in which the organism acquires it. Speaker 4: Things that make them interesting, their form, their appearance, their function. We have just the tiniest scratch of understanding of how that works. And so it's, for me, the most [00:10:00] interesting problem in biology is how do you get in a complicated structure like an animal out of a single cell. And how is that encoded in a genome sequence? I mean it's a fascinating mystery that I thought, you know, when I first started doing this I thought we'd have solved that problem by now. Not Easily. You know, because we had all this new data, we had the genome sequences we could measure. And a lot of what my lab does is actually measure which genes come on when, during development and try to understand for individual genes where that's been encoded in the genome [00:10:30] and how that happens. And I just sort of figured, well, you know, the problem for all these years was not that the problem was that hard. Speaker 4: We just didn't have the right data to look at this problem. And now we can do these experiments. I can sequence the genome of a fly and in a day I can characterize which genes are turned on when during development. And I sort of naively thought, well, we'll just sort of put it into a computer and shake things up and be clever and we'll figure out how these things are related to each other. And I mean now it's laughable that I would've ever thought that, but it was a very, very complicated thing. It's a process that's [00:11:00] executed by very complicated molecular machines operating in a very complicated environment or the nucleus and it, you know, we really don't understand it very well. We've learned a lot, but it's not a problem. We really understand. And so what is it that you've accumulated in terms of knowledge in that regard? Speaker 4: What do you think you've learned? A small amount of this is coming from my lab, but this is a whole field of people looking at this. But that we know the basic way in which that information is encoded in the genome. [00:11:30] We know that there are tuneable switches that can turn genes on and off in different conditions. And we know basically what molecular processes are involved in doing that in the sense that we know that there are proteins that can bind DNA in a sequence specific manner. So they will stick only to pieces of DNA that contain a motif or a particular code that distinct for each of these factors. In flies, there's several hundred of these factors and for humans that are several thousand of these factors that bind DNA in a [00:12:00] sequence specific manner, and they basically translate the nucleotide sequence of the genome into a different kind of code, which is the code of proteins bound to DNA. Speaker 4: And we know from a million different experiments that it's the action of those proteins binding to DNA that triggers the differential expression of genes in different conditions. So if you have a particular proteins, these are called transcription factors. If you have one in a cell at high levels than the genes [00:12:30] that are responding to that factor will be turned on in that cell. And if there's another cell where that protein isn't present, the set of genes that responds to it won't be turned on. So we know that as a general statement, but working out exactly how those proteins function, what it is that they actually do to turn a gene on and off, how they interact with each other, what conditions are necessary for them to function. All of those things are, I wouldn't say we know nothing about it, but they're very, [00:13:00] very poorly understood. Speaker 4: A lot of this sort of simple ideas that people had of there being a kind of regulatory code that looked something like the protein code that we're, you know, amino acid code that people are familiar with, right, that there'll be a genetic code for gene regulation. The idea that that's true is long disappeared from our thinking in the sense that it's much more like a very, very complicated problem with hundreds of different proteins that all interact with each other in a dynamic way. Something bind recruits, something else. [00:13:30] The thing it recruits changes the coding on the DNA and essence to a different state and then that allows other proteins to come in and that somehow or another that we still really don't understand. You eventually reach a state where the gene is turned on or turned off depending on what these factors are doing and you know, while there's lots of models for how that might function, they're all still tentative and we're getting better. The techniques for doing these kinds of experiments get better all the time. We can take individual pieces of or Sophala embryo [00:14:00] and sequence all the RNA contains and get a really complete picture of what's turned on when the technology is improving to the point where we can do a lot of this by imaging cells as amazing things we can do, but still the next level of understanding the singularity in our understanding of transcriptional regulation is still before us. Speaker 3: Spectrum is on KALX, Berkley alternating Fridays today. Michael [inaudible], associate professor at UC Berkeley [00:14:30] is our guest. In the next section, Michael describes the challenges his research poses Speaker 4: and is the task then the hard work of science and documenting everything's, yeah. Mapping a little bit about just observing. I mean, I'm a big believer in observational science that what's limited us to this has been just our poor tools for looking at what's going on. I mean we still hard to visualize the activity of individual molecules within cells, although we're on the precipice [00:15:00] of being able to do that better. So yeah, it's looking and realizing when the paradigms we have for thinking about this thing are clearly just not sufficient. And I think the fields get trapped sometimes in a way of thinking about how their system works and they do experiments that are predicated on some particular idea. But you know, usually when you have an idea and you pursue it for quite a long time and it doesn't pan out, it's because the idea is wrong. Speaker 4: And not always, but I think the transcriptional regulation field has been slow to adapt [00:15:30] to new sort of models for thinking. Although that is changing, I think that there's a lot of activity now and thinking about the dynamics of DNA and proteins within the nucleus. You know, we tend to think about DNA as kind of a static thing that sits in the nucleus and it's a, it's sort of read out by proteins, but really much more accurate as to think of it as a living kind of warned me like thing in the nucleus that gets pulled around to different parts of the nucleus and where it is in the nucleus is one way in which you control what's turned on and off. And I think people are really [00:16:00] appreciating the importance of this sort of three-dimensional architecture of the nucleus as a key facet and controlling the activity that there's, the nucleus itself is not a homogeneous place. Speaker 4: There is active and inactive regions of the nucleus and it's really largely from imaging that we're learning how that's functioning and you know, we as the whole field and are there lots of collaborators and people who are doing work? Yeah, I mean I'd say oh yeah. I mean it's a, it's an active feeling. Pay Attention to [00:16:30] oh yeah. So it's an active, if not huge field and not just in flies. I mean, I think it's transcriptional regulations of big field and in particular in developmental biology where amongst scientists we're interested in how animals develop. It's long been clear that gene regulation is sort of sits at the center of understanding development and so people interested in developmental biology and have long been interested in transcriptional regulation and I think everybody's got their own take on it here. But yeah, it's a very active field with lots of people, including several other people at Berkeley who are doing really [00:17:00] fascinating stuff. Speaker 4: So it's not out in the wilderness. This is not the hinterlands of science, but it's um, it's a nice field to work in about appropriate size. Our annual meetings only have a thousand, a few thousand people. It's not like some of these fields with 25,000 people. I can realistically know all the people who are working on problems related to ours and I literally know them and I know what they're doing and we sort of exchange ideas. So I like it. It's, it's nice community of people. [00:17:30] Is the field driving a lot of tool development? Absolutely. I say, this is something I really try to encourage people in my lab and people I trained to think, which is when you have a problem, you should be thinking not what am I good at? What can I apply to this problem? What technique has out there that would work here? Speaker 4: But what do I need to do? What is the right way to solve this problem? And if someone else has figured out how to do it, great, do it. But if they haven't, then do it yourself. And I think that this applies sort of very specifically [00:18:00] to doing individual experiments, but also to this broader issue we were talking about before with this interplay between computation and experiment. I think too many people come into science graduate school or wherever, thinking, well, I'm an experimentalist or I'm a computational biologist or whatever. And then they ask a question and then the inevitably hit the point where the logical path and pursuing their question would take them across this self-imposed boundary. Either you're an experimentalist who generated data and you're not [00:18:30] able to get at it in the right way and therefore, you know what you really need to be doing is sitting at a computer and playing around with the data. Speaker 4: But if you view that as a boundary that you're not allowed to cross or you're incapable of crossing, you'll never solve it because it almost never works. You almost never can find somebody else no matter how talented they are. Who's as interested in the problem that you're working on as you are. And I think that's a general rule. Scientists should feel as uninhibited about pursuing new things even if they're bad at it. It's certainly been a mantra [00:19:00] I've always tried to convey to the people in my lab, which is, yeah, sure, you come in with a computer science background and you know you're a coder and you've never picked up a pipette or grown a fly. But that's why the first thing you should do in the lab is go grow flies and vice versa. For the people who come in perfectly good in the lab but unable to do stuff in the computer, the first thing you should do is start playing around with data on the computer and it doesn't always work and not everybody sort of successfully bridges that gap, but the best scientists in my mind are ones who don't [00:19:30] circumscribe what they're good at. Speaker 4: They have problems and they pursue them. When something like visualization, is that a bridge too far to try to embrace that kind of technology? I've always done that. I mean I almost every time I do an analysis in the computer, I reduce it to picture some way or another. You know, because of the human brain, no matter how fancy your analysis is, the human brain is just not good at assimilating information as numbers. What we're good at as thinkers is looking at patterns, [00:20:00] finding patterns and things, looking at looking at images, recognizing when patterns are interesting and important, and there's a crucial role for turning data into something the human brain can pull in. And that's always, for me, one of the most fun things is taking data that is just a string of numbers and figuring out how to present it to your brain in a way that makes some sense for it and the refinement of it so that it's believable. Speaker 4: Yeah, and so then you can do it over and over and over and get the same result. Yeah, and all, I mean it is one of the dangers [00:20:30] you deal with when you're working with, when you're relying on human pattern recognition is we're so good at it that we recognize patterns even when they don't exist. There's a lot of statistics that gets used in modern biology, but often people I think use it incorrectly and people think that statistics is going to tell them what things are important, what things they should be paying attention to. For me, we almost entirely used statistical thinking to tell us when we've fooled ourselves into thinking something's interesting, you know, with enough data and enough things going on, you're going [00:21:00] to find something that looks interesting there and having a check on that part of your brain that likes to find patterns and interesting things is also crucial. Speaker 4: You know, I think people understand that if you flip a coin three times, it's not that we are trying to land on heads, but they have much, much harder time thinking about what happens if you flip a coin a billion times. We're struggling with this in biology, this transformation from small data to big data, it taxes people's ability to think clearly about what kinds of phenomena are interesting and aren't interesting. [00:21:30] Big Data is sort of the promise land now for a lot of people. Yeah. I'm a big believer in data intrinsically. If you're interested in observing things and interested in understanding how they work, the more you can measure about them better. It's just that's not the end of the game. Right? Just simply measuring things that doesn't lead to insight. Going from observing something to understanding it. That's where the challenges and that's true. Whether you're looking at the movement of DNA in a nucleus or you're [00:22:00] looking at people by a target, right? Like the same. It's the same problem. Speaker 3: This concludes part one of our interview with Michael [inaudible]. On the next spectrum, Michael Eisen will explain the Public Library of science, which he [inaudible]. He will give his thoughts on genetically modified organisms and a strategy for labeling food. He discusses scientific outreach and research funding. Don't miss him now. Our calendar of science and technology [00:22:30] events happening locally over the next few weeks. Rick Karnofsky and Renee Rao present the calendar Speaker 5: tomorrow, February 9th from noon to one wild Oakland presents nature photography basics at lake merit. Meet in front of the Rotary Nature Center at 600 Bellevue Avenue at Perkins in Oakland. For this free event, learn to get more out of the camera you currently have and use it to capture beautiful photos of Oakland's jewel lake merit. [00:23:00] Bring your camera and you'll learn the basics of composition, camera settings, but photography and wildlife photography. Okay. Your instructor will be Dan. Tigger, a freelance photographer that publishes regularly in Bay Nature and other magazines. RSVP at Wild Oakland dot o r G. UC Berkeley Speaker 6: is holding its monthly blood drive. This February 12th you are eligible to no-name blood if you are in good health way, at least 110 pounds and are 17 years or older. You can [00:23:30] also check out the eligibility guidelines online for an initial self screening if you're not eligible or you prefer not to donate blood. There are other ways to support campus blood drives through volunteering, encouraging others and simply spreading the word. You can make an appointment online, but walk ins are also welcome. The blood drive will be on February 12th and the alumni house on the UC Berkeley campus will last from 12 to 6:00 PM you can make an appointment or find more information at the website. [00:24:00] Red Cross blood.org using the sponsor code you see be February 13th Dr. Bruce Ames, senior scientist at the Children's Hospital Oakland Research Institute will speak at a colloquium on the effects that an inadequate supply of vitamins and minerals has on aging. Speaker 6: Dr Ames posits that the metabolism responds to a moderate deficiency of an essential vitamin or mineral by concentrating on collecting the scarce proteins [00:24:30] to help short term survival and reproductive fitness, usually at the expense of proteins important for longterm health. This is known as triaged theory. Dr Ian Discuss ways in which the human metabolism has evolved to favor short term survival over longterm health. He will also present evidence that this metabolic trade-off accelerates aging associated diseases such as cancer, cognitive decline, and cardiovascular disease. The colloquium will be on February 13th from 12 [00:25:00] to 1:15 PM on the UC Berkeley campus in five one oh one Tolman hall February 16th the Monthly Science at Cau Lecture series will hold a talk focusing on the emerging field of synthetic biology, which applies engineering principles to biology to build sales with new capabilities. The Speaker, John Dabber is a mentor in the international genetically engineered machines competition or ai-jen and a UC Berkeley professor, [00:25:30] Dr Debra. We'll discuss the new technique created in J key's link's lab to make low cost drugs to treat malaria. He will also introduce student members of the UC Berkeley Igm team who will discuss their prize winning project. The free public event will be on February 16th from 11:00 AM to 12:00 PM will be held on the UC Berkeley campus in room one oh five of Stanley hall Speaker 5: on Tuesday the 19th how long now and Yearbook Buenos Center for the Arts Presents. Chris Anderson's talk [00:26:00] on the makers revolution. He describes the democratization of manufacturing and the implications that that has. Anderson himself left his job as editor of wired magazine to join a 22 year old from Tijuana and running a typical makers firm. Three d robotics, which builds is do it yourself. Drones, what based collaboration tools and small batch technology such as cheap 3d printers, three d scanners, laser cutters and assembly. Robots are transforming manufacturing. [00:26:30] Suddenly large scale manufacturers are competing, not just with each other on multi-year cycles are competing with swarms of tiny competitors who can go from invention to innovation to market dominance. In a weeks today, Anderson notes there are nearly a thousand maker spaces shared production facilities around the world and they're growing at an astounding rate. The talk is seven 30 to 9:00 PM at the Lam Research Theater at the Yerba Buena Center for the arts at 700 Howard Street in San Francisco. Speaker 5: [00:27:00] Tickets are $15 for more information, visit long now.org now to new stories presented by Renee and Rick. The Federal Communication Commission has released a proposal to create super wifi networks across the nation. This proposal created by FCC Chairman Julius Jenna Koski, is it global first, and if approved, could provide free access to the web in every metropolitan area and many rural areas. The powerful new service could even allow people [00:27:30] to make calls for mobile phones using only the Internet. A robust public policy debate has already sprung up around the proposal, which has drawn aggressive lobbying on both sides. Verizon wireless and at t, and t along with other telecommunications companies have launched a campaign to persuade lawmakers. The proposal is technically and financially unfeasible. Meanwhile, tech companies like Google and Microsoft have championed the ideas sparking innovation and widening access to an [00:28:00] increasingly important resource. We can add this to the growing list of public policy debate over our changing and complex relationship with the Internet. Speaker 5: A team at McMaster university as reported in the February 3rd issue of nature chemical biology that they have found the first demonstration of a secreted metabolite that can protect against toxic gold and cause gold. Biomineralization. That's right. Bacterium Delphia, [00:28:30] a seat of [inaudible] take solutions continuing dissolve the gold and creates gold particles. This helps protect the bacteria from absorbing harmful gold ions, but it also might be used to harvest gold. The researchers found genes that cause gold, precipitation, engineered bacteria that lack these jeans and observed that these bacteria had stunted growth and that there was no gold precipitation. They also extracted the chemical responsible [00:29:00] for the gold mineralization naming it delftibactin a, the molecule creates metallic gold within seconds in Ph neutral conditions at room temperature. Gold exists in extremely dilute quantities in many water sources and the bacteria or the metabolite might be used to extract gold from mine. Waste in the future. Speaker 3: [inaudible] the music her during the show is by Luciana, David [00:29:30] from his album foam and acoustic, released under a creative Commons license, 3.0 attribution. Thank you for listening to spectrum. If you have comments about show, please send Speaker 1: them to us. Our email address is spectrum dot k a l x@yahoo.com join us in two weeks at this same time. Speaker 2: [inaudible]. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

In part 1, investigator with the Howard Hughes Medical Institute Michael Eisen talks about his research, the field, and both experimental and computational biology. Eisen is Associate Professor of Genetics, Genomics, and Development in UC Berkeley's Dept. of Molecular Biology.TranscriptSpeaker 1: Spectrum's next Speaker 2: [inaudible]. Welcome to [inaudible] Speaker 1: section, the Science and technology show on k a l x Berkeley, a biweekly 30 minute program bringing you interviews [00:00:30] featuring bay area scientists and technologists as well as a calendar of local events and news. Speaker 3: Good afternoon. My name is Brad Swift. Thanks for tuning in. Today we are presenting part one of two interviews with Michael Eisen and associate professor of genetics, genomics and development in UC Berkeley's department of molecular biology. Iceland employs a combination of experimental and computational methods to the study of gene regulation [00:01:00] using the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster as a model system. Isen and his colleagues have pioneered genomic approaches in modern molecular biology and our leaders in the emerging field of computational biology. In part one, Michael talks about how he got started in biology and how his research has evolved onto the interview. Michael Isen, welcome to spectrum. Thank you. My pleasure. Would you give us a narrative of how you initiated your research and how your research has [00:01:30] changed to what it is currently? Speaker 4: Okay. Actually, I grew up in a family of scientists. My parents were both biologists, so I always had an interest in biology. But as a kid, my talents were primarily in math and I was a heavy duty math geek and went to college expecting to be a mathematician and took this freshman calculus class and all the hardcore math geeks tuck. And I did fine. I did well in the class, but [00:02:00] there were several people in the class who were clearly a notch better than me in a way that I think you only can realize and you know, basketball and mathematics at the age of 18 that you're not destined to be the best. And I think math is a field where if you're not the best, it's just kind of boring. And so I stayed as a mathematician and math major in college, but I started increasingly taking a lot of biology classes and had more or less, you know, realized that biology was what really captured my, my attention and [00:02:30] my heart. Speaker 4: And so I went to graduate school but had the idea that I'm interested in biology, but I'm really good at math. So there must be some way of combining these two things. And so I entered a graduate program in biophysics, which is sort of a place where people who are interested in biology maybe haven't taken all the prereqs for a normal biology department but also have a quantitative background go cause. And so, you know, in the way that people sort of drifted into things, I drifted into working on protein structure and [00:03:00] did my phd studying the evolution of the proteins on the surface of flu viruses and using a combination of experimental work and I would hesitate to call it mathematics. It was really just sort of kind of physics and it's, it's a lot of data. You generate a lot of raw data, you generate a lot of data on the coordinates of individual protein molecules and things that they might bind to. Speaker 4: And so it was very natural to start using computers in that work. You know, my background was not in computer science. I programmed as a kid [00:03:30] because my grandfather bought me a computer and I taught myself how to program and I wrote programs to, you know, keep track of baseball statistics and other things like that. In College, I basically never programmed anything in the math department I was in. It was considered not math that you were touching a computer. And so I didn't really do anything with computers until I got to graduate school when you started seeing all this data coming down the pipe. But I wasn't particularly interested in structural biology and I discovered that through six years from graduate school that [00:04:00] although I liked doing it, it wasn't intellectually satisfying, was too small. You're working on one sugar bound to one protein in one virus and I was having trouble seeing how that would expand into something grand and whatever. Speaker 4: You know, the ambitions of, uh, of a graduate student wanting to do something big. And I got lucky in the way that often happens in that my advisor had a colleague he knew from an advisory board. He sat on and he was coming into town because his brother was getting some honorary degree [00:04:30] and I met him in his hotel room, Austin. And he had with him, uh, glass microscope slide onto which had been spotted down little pieces of DNA, each of which corresponded to one gene in the yeast genome. So it's about 6,000 genes in the yeast genome. And you could see them because there was still salt in the spots, but it was a very evocative little device. You could sort of hold it up in front of the sun and you could see the sun sort of glittering on all these little spots. Speaker 4: You could just see the grandness of [00:05:00] the device. Didn't know how people were using them. I didn't know what they would be used for. I didn't know what I would do with them, but I was sort of drawn in by the scale of it all. The idea that you could work on everything at once and you didn't have to choose to work on just one little thing and disappear into a little corner and study. Just that. And so my advisor said, oh, you really should go do this. They need someone who's, you know, understands biology, but can deal with the computational side of things. It's clear that this was going to generate a lot of data [00:05:30] and that, you know, he was right. I mean this was a field that really was in great need of people who understood the biology but could work well in the quantitative computational side of things. Speaker 4: So I packed up and moved to Stanford with a short stint as a minor league baseball announcer in between. Really it was just a very fortuitous time to have gotten into this new field. I mean, the field was really just beginning. So this was in 1996 the first genomes been sequenced, they were microbes, there's bacteria and yeast [00:06:00] and so forth. And we were just getting our first glimpse of the scale of the kind of problems that we were going to be facing in genomics. But what I loved about this device, which is a DNA microarray, it's the sort of became a very hot tool in biology for a number of years was that it wasn't just a computer, it wasn't just data in a computer. It actually you were doing to do experiments with this. I'm interested in biology cause I liked living things. I like doing experiments, I like seeing things and I didn't want to just disappear with someone else's data and [00:06:30] analyze it. Speaker 4: So I went to Stanford to work on these and it really was just this awesome time and we were generating huge amounts of data in the lab and not just me. There were, you know, dozens of people generating tons of different types of experiments and so forth. And we lacked any kind of framework for looking at that data constructively. You couldn't look at those experiments and figure out by looking line by line in an excel spreadsheet at what gene was expressed, at what level and what condition. It just wasn't [00:07:00] the way to do it. And so my main contribution to the field at the time was in bringing tools for organizing the information and presenting it visually and being able to interact with that kind of incredibly complicated data in a way that was intuitive for people who understood the biology and allowed them to go back and forth between the experiment in the computer and the data and really try to make sense of what was a huge amounts of data with huge amounts of information, but something nobody had really been trained to [00:07:30] look at. And so it was there that I really realized kind of the way I like to do science, which is this constant back and forth between experiments on the computer. In my mind and in what I try to teach people in my lab. There's no distinction between doing experiments on the bench or in the field or in a computer that they're just different ways of looking at biology. Speaker 3: This is spectrum line KALX Berkeley. Today, Michael [00:08:00] I's associate professor at UC Berkeley explains his research in developmental biology. Speaker 4: On the basis of that time at Stanford, I got a job at Berkeley and what I did when I started my lab at Berkeley was really tried to focus on one problem. I mean I had been working on a million different problems at Stanford where we had a huge group and a million different people working on, and I was sort of moving around from problem the problem and helping out people with their data or thinking of different experiments. And when I came to Berkeley, I really [00:08:30] wanted to focus on one problem. And the problem that had intrigued me from the beginning of working on the microarray stuff was figuring out how it is that an animal's genome, which is the same essentially in every cell in the body, how it instructs different cells to behave differently, to turn on different genes and to acquire different properties. And so partly because of the influence of people here at Berkeley who were working on fruit flies, I switched my research program to work on [inaudible] when I started my lab at Berkeley, the genome of that [00:09:00] had just been sequenced and I liked working with animals. Speaker 4: I like having something that moves around and you know, had some behaviors and so the lab started to work on flies and pretty much since then that's what we've worked on. That's sort of the story of how I got to where I am. So your research then is you're looking at flies over time? Yeah, I mean, I mean I see how the genes are expressed. I'd say we're looking at classified more as developmental biology in the sense that we're looking at how genes are expressed over time during the lifespan of a lie. To this day, [00:09:30] we can't look at a newly sequenced genome and say, oh well this is what the animal's going to look like. That is, I couldn't tell you except sort of by cheating and knowing, comparing it to other genomes. If I, you gave me a fly genome, I look at it, I wouldn't know it was a fly or a worm or a tree or it's just the way in which the organism acquires it. Speaker 4: Things that make them interesting, their form, their appearance, their function. We have just the tiniest scratch of understanding of how that works. And so it's, for me, the most [00:10:00] interesting problem in biology is how do you get in a complicated structure like an animal out of a single cell. And how is that encoded in a genome sequence? I mean it's a fascinating mystery that I thought, you know, when I first started doing this I thought we'd have solved that problem by now. Not Easily. You know, because we had all this new data, we had the genome sequences we could measure. And a lot of what my lab does is actually measure which genes come on when, during development and try to understand for individual genes where that's been encoded in the genome [00:10:30] and how that happens. And I just sort of figured, well, you know, the problem for all these years was not that the problem was that hard. Speaker 4: We just didn't have the right data to look at this problem. And now we can do these experiments. I can sequence the genome of a fly and in a day I can characterize which genes are turned on when during development. And I sort of naively thought, well, we'll just sort of put it into a computer and shake things up and be clever and we'll figure out how these things are related to each other. And I mean now it's laughable that I would've ever thought that, but it was a very, very complicated thing. It's a process that's [00:11:00] executed by very complicated molecular machines operating in a very complicated environment or the nucleus and it, you know, we really don't understand it very well. We've learned a lot, but it's not a problem. We really understand. And so what is it that you've accumulated in terms of knowledge in that regard? Speaker 4: What do you think you've learned? A small amount of this is coming from my lab, but this is a whole field of people looking at this. But that we know the basic way in which that information is encoded in the genome. [00:11:30] We know that there are tuneable switches that can turn genes on and off in different conditions. And we know basically what molecular processes are involved in doing that in the sense that we know that there are proteins that can bind DNA in a sequence specific manner. So they will stick only to pieces of DNA that contain a motif or a particular code that distinct for each of these factors. In flies, there's several hundred of these factors and for humans that are several thousand of these factors that bind DNA in a [00:12:00] sequence specific manner, and they basically translate the nucleotide sequence of the genome into a different kind of code, which is the code of proteins bound to DNA. Speaker 4: And we know from a million different experiments that it's the action of those proteins binding to DNA that triggers the differential expression of genes in different conditions. So if you have a particular proteins, these are called transcription factors. If you have one in a cell at high levels than the genes [00:12:30] that are responding to that factor will be turned on in that cell. And if there's another cell where that protein isn't present, the set of genes that responds to it won't be turned on. So we know that as a general statement, but working out exactly how those proteins function, what it is that they actually do to turn a gene on and off, how they interact with each other, what conditions are necessary for them to function. All of those things are, I wouldn't say we know nothing about it, but they're very, [00:13:00] very poorly understood. Speaker 4: A lot of this sort of simple ideas that people had of there being a kind of regulatory code that looked something like the protein code that we're, you know, amino acid code that people are familiar with, right, that there'll be a genetic code for gene regulation. The idea that that's true is long disappeared from our thinking in the sense that it's much more like a very, very complicated problem with hundreds of different proteins that all interact with each other in a dynamic way. Something bind recruits, something else. [00:13:30] The thing it recruits changes the coding on the DNA and essence to a different state and then that allows other proteins to come in and that somehow or another that we still really don't understand. You eventually reach a state where the gene is turned on or turned off depending on what these factors are doing and you know, while there's lots of models for how that might function, they're all still tentative and we're getting better. The techniques for doing these kinds of experiments get better all the time. We can take individual pieces of or Sophala embryo [00:14:00] and sequence all the RNA contains and get a really complete picture of what's turned on when the technology is improving to the point where we can do a lot of this by imaging cells as amazing things we can do, but still the next level of understanding the singularity in our understanding of transcriptional regulation is still before us. Speaker 3: Spectrum is on KALX, Berkley alternating Fridays today. Michael [inaudible], associate professor at UC Berkeley [00:14:30] is our guest. In the next section, Michael describes the challenges his research poses Speaker 4: and is the task then the hard work of science and documenting everything's, yeah. Mapping a little bit about just observing. I mean, I'm a big believer in observational science that what's limited us to this has been just our poor tools for looking at what's going on. I mean we still hard to visualize the activity of individual molecules within cells, although we're on the precipice [00:15:00] of being able to do that better. So yeah, it's looking and realizing when the paradigms we have for thinking about this thing are clearly just not sufficient. And I think the fields get trapped sometimes in a way of thinking about how their system works and they do experiments that are predicated on some particular idea. But you know, usually when you have an idea and you pursue it for quite a long time and it doesn't pan out, it's because the idea is wrong. Speaker 4: And not always, but I think the transcriptional regulation field has been slow to adapt [00:15:30] to new sort of models for thinking. Although that is changing, I think that there's a lot of activity now and thinking about the dynamics of DNA and proteins within the nucleus. You know, we tend to think about DNA as kind of a static thing that sits in the nucleus and it's a, it's sort of read out by proteins, but really much more accurate as to think of it as a living kind of warned me like thing in the nucleus that gets pulled around to different parts of the nucleus and where it is in the nucleus is one way in which you control what's turned on and off. And I think people are really [00:16:00] appreciating the importance of this sort of three-dimensional architecture of the nucleus as a key facet and controlling the activity that there's, the nucleus itself is not a homogeneous place. Speaker 4: There is active and inactive regions of the nucleus and it's really largely from imaging that we're learning how that's functioning and you know, we as the whole field and are there lots of collaborators and people who are doing work? Yeah, I mean I'd say oh yeah. I mean it's a, it's an active feeling. Pay Attention to [00:16:30] oh yeah. So it's an active, if not huge field and not just in flies. I mean, I think it's transcriptional regulations of big field and in particular in developmental biology where amongst scientists we're interested in how animals develop. It's long been clear that gene regulation is sort of sits at the center of understanding development and so people interested in developmental biology and have long been interested in transcriptional regulation and I think everybody's got their own take on it here. But yeah, it's a very active field with lots of people, including several other people at Berkeley who are doing really [00:17:00] fascinating stuff. Speaker 4: So it's not out in the wilderness. This is not the hinterlands of science, but it's um, it's a nice field to work in about appropriate size. Our annual meetings only have a thousand, a few thousand people. It's not like some of these fields with 25,000 people. I can realistically know all the people who are working on problems related to ours and I literally know them and I know what they're doing and we sort of exchange ideas. So I like it. It's, it's nice community of people. [00:17:30] Is the field driving a lot of tool development? Absolutely. I say, this is something I really try to encourage people in my lab and people I trained to think, which is when you have a problem, you should be thinking not what am I good at? What can I apply to this problem? What technique has out there that would work here? Speaker 4: But what do I need to do? What is the right way to solve this problem? And if someone else has figured out how to do it, great, do it. But if they haven't, then do it yourself. And I think that this applies sort of very specifically [00:18:00] to doing individual experiments, but also to this broader issue we were talking about before with this interplay between computation and experiment. I think too many people come into science graduate school or wherever, thinking, well, I'm an experimentalist or I'm a computational biologist or whatever. And then they ask a question and then the inevitably hit the point where the logical path and pursuing their question would take them across this self-imposed boundary. Either you're an experimentalist who generated data and you're not [00:18:30] able to get at it in the right way and therefore, you know what you really need to be doing is sitting at a computer and playing around with the data. Speaker 4: But if you view that as a boundary that you're not allowed to cross or you're incapable of crossing, you'll never solve it because it almost never works. You almost never can find somebody else no matter how talented they are. Who's as interested in the problem that you're working on as you are. And I think that's a general rule. Scientists should feel as uninhibited about pursuing new things even if they're bad at it. It's certainly been a mantra [00:19:00] I've always tried to convey to the people in my lab, which is, yeah, sure, you come in with a computer science background and you know you're a coder and you've never picked up a pipette or grown a fly. But that's why the first thing you should do in the lab is go grow flies and vice versa. For the people who come in perfectly good in the lab but unable to do stuff in the computer, the first thing you should do is start playing around with data on the computer and it doesn't always work and not everybody sort of successfully bridges that gap, but the best scientists in my mind are ones who don't [00:19:30] circumscribe what they're good at. Speaker 4: They have problems and they pursue them. When something like visualization, is that a bridge too far to try to embrace that kind of technology? I've always done that. I mean I almost every time I do an analysis in the computer, I reduce it to picture some way or another. You know, because of the human brain, no matter how fancy your analysis is, the human brain is just not good at assimilating information as numbers. What we're good at as thinkers is looking at patterns, [00:20:00] finding patterns and things, looking at looking at images, recognizing when patterns are interesting and important, and there's a crucial role for turning data into something the human brain can pull in. And that's always, for me, one of the most fun things is taking data that is just a string of numbers and figuring out how to present it to your brain in a way that makes some sense for it and the refinement of it so that it's believable. Speaker 4: Yeah, and so then you can do it over and over and over and get the same result. Yeah, and all, I mean it is one of the dangers [00:20:30] you deal with when you're working with, when you're relying on human pattern recognition is we're so good at it that we recognize patterns even when they don't exist. There's a lot of statistics that gets used in modern biology, but often people I think use it incorrectly and people think that statistics is going to tell them what things are important, what things they should be paying attention to. For me, we almost entirely used statistical thinking to tell us when we've fooled ourselves into thinking something's interesting, you know, with enough data and enough things going on, you're going [00:21:00] to find something that looks interesting there and having a check on that part of your brain that likes to find patterns and interesting things is also crucial. Speaker 4: You know, I think people understand that if you flip a coin three times, it's not that we are trying to land on heads, but they have much, much harder time thinking about what happens if you flip a coin a billion times. We're struggling with this in biology, this transformation from small data to big data, it taxes people's ability to think clearly about what kinds of phenomena are interesting and aren't interesting. [00:21:30] Big Data is sort of the promise land now for a lot of people. Yeah. I'm a big believer in data intrinsically. If you're interested in observing things and interested in understanding how they work, the more you can measure about them better. It's just that's not the end of the game. Right? Just simply measuring things that doesn't lead to insight. Going from observing something to understanding it. That's where the challenges and that's true. Whether you're looking at the movement of DNA in a nucleus or you're [00:22:00] looking at people by a target, right? Like the same. It's the same problem. Speaker 3: This concludes part one of our interview with Michael [inaudible]. On the next spectrum, Michael Eisen will explain the Public Library of science, which he [inaudible]. He will give his thoughts on genetically modified organisms and a strategy for labeling food. He discusses scientific outreach and research funding. Don't miss him now. Our calendar of science and technology [00:22:30] events happening locally over the next few weeks. Rick Karnofsky and Renee Rao present the calendar Speaker 5: tomorrow, February 9th from noon to one wild Oakland presents nature photography basics at lake merit. Meet in front of the Rotary Nature Center at 600 Bellevue Avenue at Perkins in Oakland. For this free event, learn to get more out of the camera you currently have and use it to capture beautiful photos of Oakland's jewel lake merit. [00:23:00] Bring your camera and you'll learn the basics of composition, camera settings, but photography and wildlife photography. Okay. Your instructor will be Dan. Tigger, a freelance photographer that publishes regularly in Bay Nature and other magazines. RSVP at Wild Oakland dot o r G. UC Berkeley Speaker 6: is holding its monthly blood drive. This February 12th you are eligible to no-name blood if you are in good health way, at least 110 pounds and are 17 years or older. You can [00:23:30] also check out the eligibility guidelines online for an initial self screening if you're not eligible or you prefer not to donate blood. There are other ways to support campus blood drives through volunteering, encouraging others and simply spreading the word. You can make an appointment online, but walk ins are also welcome. The blood drive will be on February 12th and the alumni house on the UC Berkeley campus will last from 12 to 6:00 PM you can make an appointment or find more information at the website. [00:24:00] Red Cross blood.org using the sponsor code you see be February 13th Dr. Bruce Ames, senior scientist at the Children's Hospital Oakland Research Institute will speak at a colloquium on the effects that an inadequate supply of vitamins and minerals has on aging. Speaker 6: Dr Ames posits that the metabolism responds to a moderate deficiency of an essential vitamin or mineral by concentrating on collecting the scarce proteins [00:24:30] to help short term survival and reproductive fitness, usually at the expense of proteins important for longterm health. This is known as triaged theory. Dr Ian Discuss ways in which the human metabolism has evolved to favor short term survival over longterm health. He will also present evidence that this metabolic trade-off accelerates aging associated diseases such as cancer, cognitive decline, and cardiovascular disease. The colloquium will be on February 13th from 12 [00:25:00] to 1:15 PM on the UC Berkeley campus in five one oh one Tolman hall February 16th the Monthly Science at Cau Lecture series will hold a talk focusing on the emerging field of synthetic biology, which applies engineering principles to biology to build sales with new capabilities. The Speaker, John Dabber is a mentor in the international genetically engineered machines competition or ai-jen and a UC Berkeley professor, [00:25:30] Dr Debra. We'll discuss the new technique created in J key's link's lab to make low cost drugs to treat malaria. He will also introduce student members of the UC Berkeley Igm team who will discuss their prize winning project. The free public event will be on February 16th from 11:00 AM to 12:00 PM will be held on the UC Berkeley campus in room one oh five of Stanley hall Speaker 5: on Tuesday the 19th how long now and Yearbook Buenos Center for the Arts Presents. Chris Anderson's talk [00:26:00] on the makers revolution. He describes the democratization of manufacturing and the implications that that has. Anderson himself left his job as editor of wired magazine to join a 22 year old from Tijuana and running a typical makers firm. Three d robotics, which builds is do it yourself. Drones, what based collaboration tools and small batch technology such as cheap 3d printers, three d scanners, laser cutters and assembly. Robots are transforming manufacturing. [00:26:30] Suddenly large scale manufacturers are competing, not just with each other on multi-year cycles are competing with swarms of tiny competitors who can go from invention to innovation to market dominance. In a weeks today, Anderson notes there are nearly a thousand maker spaces shared production facilities around the world and they're growing at an astounding rate. The talk is seven 30 to 9:00 PM at the Lam Research Theater at the Yerba Buena Center for the arts at 700 Howard Street in San Francisco. Speaker 5: [00:27:00] Tickets are $15 for more information, visit long now.org now to new stories presented by Renee and Rick. The Federal Communication Commission has released a proposal to create super wifi networks across the nation. This proposal created by FCC Chairman Julius Jenna Koski, is it global first, and if approved, could provide free access to the web in every metropolitan area and many rural areas. The powerful new service could even allow people [00:27:30] to make calls for mobile phones using only the Internet. A robust public policy debate has already sprung up around the proposal, which has drawn aggressive lobbying on both sides. Verizon wireless and at t, and t along with other telecommunications companies have launched a campaign to persuade lawmakers. The proposal is technically and financially unfeasible. Meanwhile, tech companies like Google and Microsoft have championed the ideas sparking innovation and widening access to an [00:28:00] increasingly important resource. We can add this to the growing list of public policy debate over our changing and complex relationship with the Internet. Speaker 5: A team at McMaster university as reported in the February 3rd issue of nature chemical biology that they have found the first demonstration of a secreted metabolite that can protect against toxic gold and cause gold. Biomineralization. That's right. Bacterium Delphia, [00:28:30] a seat of [inaudible] take solutions continuing dissolve the gold and creates gold particles. This helps protect the bacteria from absorbing harmful gold ions, but it also might be used to harvest gold. The researchers found genes that cause gold, precipitation, engineered bacteria that lack these jeans and observed that these bacteria had stunted growth and that there was no gold precipitation. They also extracted the chemical responsible [00:29:00] for the gold mineralization naming it delftibactin a, the molecule creates metallic gold within seconds in Ph neutral conditions at room temperature. Gold exists in extremely dilute quantities in many water sources and the bacteria or the metabolite might be used to extract gold from mine. Waste in the future. Speaker 3: [inaudible] the music her during the show is by Luciana, David [00:29:30] from his album foam and acoustic, released under a creative Commons license, 3.0 attribution. Thank you for listening to spectrum. If you have comments about show, please send Speaker 1: them to us. Our email address is spectrum dot k a l x@yahoo.com join us in two weeks at this same time. Speaker 2: [inaudible]. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

TRANSCRIPT As we've been telling you for years now, the establishment Church is duplicitous as Hell. They have no regard for your souls. All they care about is maintaining the machine. The latest example of this is Relevant Radio. Here's the case in a nutshell: A short while back, Relevant Radio accepted advertisements from the Biden Campaign that essentially portray him as "St. Joe." Relevant Radio accepted the advertisements because, under current law, they must accept them because they are a Federal Communications Commission ("FCC") licensed commercial broadcast station. Biden is currently barnstorming through the Catholic world portraying himself as a devout Catholic — as the blood of tens of millions drips from his power-hungry hands. Listeners to Relevant Radio were aghast when word started circulating that Relevant had accepted the advertisements for airplay. As of last week, Biden advertisements were going to play on Relevant Radio stations in (at least) Milwaukee, Wisconsin and Fort Meyers, Florida — two key battleground locations. When the rightful uproar from faithful Catholics hearing about the Biden advertisements got really loud, the board of directors held a series of emergency meetings over the weekend and pulled a "fast one" to protect themselves from the ire of listeners. The board decided to change its status from commercial to non-commercial, which relieved them of any legal obligation to accept any advertisements — political or otherwise. Of course, that also means they won't be getting any more advertising revenue. When we contacted Fr. Francis Hoffman (who runs Relevant Radio) to inquire about all this, here is the answer we got back in an email from him directly: "No political ads have aired on Relevant Radio owned and operated stations during the current election cycle." Relevant was willing to do business with a heretic, placing advertisements to deceive Catholics into voting for him. That is a duplicitous answer meant to protect themselves and provide cover. It's true they have not aired Biden advertisements, but they were planning to air them, as you can plainly see on the agreement between the Biden Campaign and Relevant Radio provided per the Federal Communication Commission rules. Pay attention to the relevant dates on the ad-buy document. The ad-buy was made on Sept. 29 — last week — and the advertisements were supposed to start airing two days ago and for the rest of October. That's why all the emergency meetings by the board of directors had to happen over the weekend — because the advertisements were contracted to start running on Tuesday. So get the big picture here: Relevant was willing to do business with a heretic, placing advertisements to deceive Catholics into voting for him. When — and only when — word got out, they decided to pull the legal "switcheroo" and become non-commercial and be able to turn down the Biden commercials (and all other commercials of any kind in the future). It was only the blowback that forced their hand. The trade-off is obvious as well. A decision was made that it would be more damaging financially to accept the Biden advertisements and lose all kinds of donor support as a result than to sacrifice future revenue from all commercials — political and otherwise. Smart call. In his email response to Church Militant, Fr. Hoffman — also known as Fr. Rocky — even chest-thumped how brave a call it was to dump all commercial advertising moving forward, framing it as a "courageous decision of the Relevant Radio board of directors to stop airing all paid commercials, including political ads, which would have violated the core principles of our mission to bring Christ to the world through the media." No, sorry, Father. It would have been "courageous" had the board made the decision before accepting the Biden's blood money, not after. You guys took that child-murdering heretic's money to run all his advertisements on your stations, and only after people went nuts once word got out did you suddenly become "courageous." Those advertisements were created to trick and deceive Catholics about Biden's fake Catholicism. You guys know this child killer is a fraud, yet you chose to accept his advertisements so you would not have to give up all your other advertising revenue. It was only the outcry that forced your hand. Again, you were fine with running his ads, hiding behind the law that you had to run them, which also allowed you to hold onto your other advertisement revenue. That's rotten. On the board of directors of Relevant Radio is the all-important Abp. Bernard Hebda of the St. Paul-Minneapolis archdiocese. In addition to being a key man on the board, Hebda is an attorney. So it seems beyond all reason to think he did not have a controlling hand in the decision to drop commercial advertisements — a decision again based on money, not morality. They accepted blood money from the baby-killing Biden Campaign and comingled it with your donations. Hebda, you will recall, was the same archbishop who actually ordered his priests to not vote in the primaries so media outlets could not discover their party affiliation. This is a cover-up dude. A man of the "Church of nice" machine. Don't rock the boat. Keep the status quo. Never denounce evil unless there is a financial gain to be made doing so (or unless you can at least pretend you're "courageous" when, actually, you are just the opposite). This whole decision was about money, nothing else. At first, it was simple: Take Biden's money and keep access to all your other advertisement revenue. Then came the uproar and then the calculation that you would lose more money ticking off donors than you would keeping future advertisement revenue. That board meeting over the weekend was probably loaded with financial spreadsheets scattered all over the table and lots of calculators burning up. There was not a thing courageous about it. And to pretend it was is a further deception. We've been saying it for years — the Catholic media establishment cannot be trusted with your souls, your formation or your money. They accepted blood money from the baby-killing Biden Campaign and comingled it with your donations. Faithful Catholics, who are naively brought along to think that nice, sweet-sounding platitudes are all you need, give their hard-earned money and get duped. The board of directors made a purely financial risk-benefit decision, nothing more. Relevant Radio should be denouncing this heretic and cutting off all ties with those who help him spread his evil. But when you look at the list of bishops on the episcopal advisory committee, you see why that would never happen. It reads like a rogues gallery of cowards and complicit clergy, some of whom want Biden to win. This is just one more brick in the wall of everything wrong with Catholic establishment media.