Georgia Governor Nathan Deal speaks silhouetted in front of a large screen that says "Google."

This article from The Atlantic discusses the unitended problems that have stemmed from disinformation being utilized in their knowledge panels. Google knowledge panels are panels that show up at the top of Google search results that are suppose to give a brief but succint information on a people, organizations, etc. These knowledge panels utilize algorithms to quickly grab pertinant information from a wide range of online sources, one of the chief ones being wikipedia. As useful as these panels can be for quick searches, it has been made clear in this article that misinformation plagues Google knowledge panels. The author of this article introduces the reader to this discourse by using Martin John Byrant, a tech consultant who happens to share the same exact name as the shooter from the Port Arthur massacre. According to google knowledge panel, the shooter is the first result posted when you google Martin John Byrant. You can see how this might have an effect on someones career as his identity has been effectively tied to this shooter, because of Google’s algorithms.

Martin is not the first to have been wronged by misinformation being spread on Google knowledge panels. Countless actors and political offices in the United States and abroad have faced issues dealing with misinformation being acredited to their identity or lack thereof in Google Knowledge panels. Google has a feature to report false information on their knowledge panels, but for relatively unimportant people like Martin John Byrant his requests have been ignored. Martin Considered the though of trying to buy the knowledge panel, but apparently Google does not allow the transfer of ownership of knowledge panels. Another glaring issue with the spread of misinformation on google knowledge panels is wikipedia. As most know Wikipedia is a public source that can be edited by anybody. So false information can infact be spread to google knowledge panels by editing certain wikipedia pages.

Google has acknowledged the increasing issue knowledge panels play in presenting misinformation online. They even published a white paper called, “How Google fights Disinformation”, where they go into detail how knowledge panels are a tool for users to get context and to better avoid deceptive content. Google refused to include any information about their algorithms stating that “sharing too much of the granular details of how our algorithms and processes work would make it easier for bad actors to exploit them”. I personally think Google needs to work on their algorithms, its clear the current formula isn’t doing anyone favors.

Tech Companies Are Quietly Phasing Out a Major Privacy Safeguard

On October 2, 2019October 2, 2019 By Lloyd SullivanIn UncategorizedLeave a comment

The silhouette of a man looking at a bright computer screen — https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2019/09/what-happened-transparency-reports/599035/

This article from The Atlantic delves into the intricacies of data being gathered by giant tech companies. It discusses the implementation of transparency reports which is a document detailing the type of information being gathered of its users by tech companies. According to the author of this article these transparency reports used to be a widely acknowledged and well used resource available to the public. This initial interest in following the data came after the Edward Snowden crisis, where it was revealed that sensitive information was being collected and utilized by federal agencies. These reports lost their intial importance as tech companies stopped making them almost entirely to preserve their own vested interests.

Basically after a few years of relative data transparency, tech companies specifically internet providers stopped caring about transparency reports all together by changing the service providers of their customer base to providers who didn’t care about data transparency. Other tech companies changed their policies to not include what demands where being made by the federal government in what data they wanted. Consumers were aware of the data being collected, but were denied the reasoning behind the data collection. Data privacy activists have pushed for transparency reports to be made common place again, but the public by-in-large seems to not care about why the federal government wants their data in the first place.

There has been some push back against these questionable data policies. A bill passed in California last year, the California Consumer Privacy Act helped protect consumer protection and privacy rights, but had zero mention of reimplementing data transparency reports. Former President of Californians for Consumer Privacy Mary Stone Ross said in a quote that “We decided to only focus on the private collection of information rather than government collection” and that “During the campaign phase [we] were worried that the opposition would argue that the CCPA would undermine law enforcement investigations.” (Pegoraro, The Atlantic). It’s clear that most people don’t care what information tech companies hand over to the federal government, but care immensly that tech companies sell data collected on them to advertisers. I personally don’t agree with this line of thinking, I believe that transparency reports are more vital to consumer safety, and that the government shouldn’t be allowed to demand consumer data from tech companies.

Alexa, Where Are My Glasses?

On October 2, 2019October 2, 2019 By Jackson ProffittIn Amazon, Internet Of ThingsLeave a comment

Article: https://www.wired.com/story/everything-amazon-announced-2019/

Amazon has announced a series of wearable internet of things products including glasses, headphones, and even a ring. The company also announced new speakers and other Alexa products. Amazon has been known to release more affordable virtual assistant products than their competitors, such as Apple, and they are trying to continue to be the leader in this category.

At first glance, it’s not hard to confuse the Echo Frames as some sort of attempt at making a successful version of the failed Google Glass. However, the Echo Frames are merely a way to access Alexa without having to use your hands. They feature only a microphone and speakers. If they become successful, it is possible that a camera version could be released, though the bulky look of the Frames make that hard to see happening. The starting price for them will be a steep $180.

Echo Buds are Amazon’s competitor to Airpods. They are handsfree earbuds that feature Alexa capability as well as a Bose sound cancelation feature. Echo Buds will sell for $130.

The Echo Loop is the most absurd product of them all. Amazon is taking an even larger leap with this Alexa enabled smart ring than they are taking with the Echo Frames. The Loop has basically the same capabilities as the frames, but with the added benefit of looking like a lunatic while speaking into your hand in public.

Amazon announced a new revamped Echo Speaker with significantly improved sound quality. Also announced was Echo Studio, a speaker focused on 3d audio; an echo dot with a clock; Echo Show 8, an echo device with a screen; Echo Glow, an echo lamp; an “Eero” wifi router; and two new Ring doorbell cameras.

Alexa will also be getting new computer learning updates.

UPS: building for the future

On October 2, 2019 By Jared GiovanIn Uncategorized2 Comments

Drones

https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&source=images&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwiVyfyxxPzkAhVFn-AKHSSdB2sQjRx6BAgBEAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bostik-industrial.com%2Fdrones-for-package-deliveries-what-it-means-for-the-packaging-market%2F&psig=AOvVaw31WmZ_Rgvl_TirtN_3v0L6&ust=1570069876044612

In recent news, UPS has announced that it has received the US government’s approval to operate a drone delivery service. UPS states that they won’t be sending out packages to its customers yet, as they will use their new drone approval to build a drone fleet to deliver packages to hospitals around the US. In the statement released by UPS, the company said that they have been trying to gain the government’s approval since the beginning of July.

UPS’s new delivery service is called, UPS Flight Forward and was granted an operating certification through the FAA. Even though drones aren’t particularly planes, the FAA still treats them as such and the federal government evaluates these drones with similar expectations and guidelines. Through the certification granted by the FAA, UPS is allowed to fly its drones with these specific exemptions:

UPS can fly as many drones as they want
UPS can let their drones fly beyond their pilot’s line of sight
UPS can load their drones with more than 55 pounds of packages
UPS can fly their drones at night

UPS is the first company to be granted this level of clearance from the FAA and federal government. Currently, other companies that are working on drone delivery but haven’t been approved yet are Amazon and Uber Eats.

In my opinion, I think this is a great thing for UPS and their development of this service will truly benefit everyone. If UPS puts a lot of effort into this service and develops it to its fullest potential, the delivery system we currently have in the United States could drastically change. It would affect how fast people get packages and mail, how individuals order food and items off the internet, and would truly disrupt the current system we have in place. Do I think that this will completely flip our current delivery system upside down? No, however it is cool to think of what the possibilities could be.

https://www.theverge.com/2019/10/1/20893655/ups-faa-approval-delivery-drones-airline-amazon-air-uber-eats-alphabet-wing

“The Irishman” A Martin Scorsese (And Netflix) Film

On October 2, 2019 By rachelshelley22In UncategorizedLeave a comment

Photo Credit
http://collider.com/why-martin-scorsese-made-the-irishman-for-netflix/

Article Credit: https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/27/media/the-irishman-netflix-new-york-film-festival/index.html

A film by Martin Scorsese, “The Irishman” will premiere this Friday at the New York Film Festival. However, the film may have Netflix to thank for making the dream a reality. Scorsese claims he has tried for years to find the funding for the film until Netflix’s chief content officer Ted Sarandos saved the day. Netflix funded and backed the entire film. They allowed Scorcese to keep his creative rights and did not interfere in the directing or producing of the film.

The film includes an all-star cast of Robert De Niro, Al Pacino, Joe Pesci and many more. It also rounded out to be Scorsese’s most expensive production yet at a total of $150 million.

Netflix has recently enjoyed multiple Oscars with films like “Roma” and record-breaking views on “Bird Box.” However, both Scorsese and Sarandos have hopes for “The Irishman” as an Oscar success and a hit among Netflix viewers. While the future of this film is important to Scorsese and his team, it could also be a crucial moment for Netflix. With streaming services from Apple and Disney releasing soon, Netflix needs a power move to help stay on top of competition.

The film will open in theaters on November 1 and on Netflix on November 27. Scorsese obviously pushed for a larger theatrical release, but Netflix surely pushed back. The change in viewing habits has caused strain between theater owners and streaming services such as Netflix. “The Irishman” opening in both shows both sides to the conversation.

A theatrical release allows the director to release commercials, measure ticket and box office sales and a Netflix release draws viewers to the platform and hopefully keeps them there

This article highlights the struggle that popular streaming services will soon face. With the rise of competition in what was once a slim industry, companies will have to create and release the best content in order to get to the top and stay there.

How Will the New Fair Pay to Play Act Law in California Shape the Media Field?

On October 2, 2019October 2, 2019 By dylanmajerusIn UncategorizedLeave a comment

California Passes “Game Changer” Law Allowing College Athletes To Make Money From Name & Likeness

One of the most talked about topics in sports is whether or not NCAA student athletes should be paid from the athletic performance. The monetary statistics that student athletes draw towards nationwide universities and colleges is over 14 billion dollars per year and the NCAA makes an additional 1 Billion annually.

To be equally compensated for their efforts and finances that these universities receive, California legislation has introduced The Fair Pay to Play Act (SB 206). The law addresses the NCAA’s ban on student athletes earning compensation from college sports even though the school can make millions from their athletic performance.

At the very least, California is developing a complete game changer for college athletes. Overtime, it will be interesting to see how the new law will benefit the students, but also the universities as well. In California specifically, the entertainment & marketing is Los Angeles’ business. Music and movie moguls are everywhere and the major tech companies are built within the state. Do you think LeBron James signed with the Lakers to be coached by Luke Walton and play alongside Lonzo Ball? Probably not.

In this light, we can assume that a number of these athletes will be marketed through commercialized advertisements, major partnerships, and social media promotional content. If the Law outlines a positive effect towards both parties, will other states with major cash grabs soon follow? If so, perhaps the NCAA football video game makes a comeback. And the deal for the cover would be huge.

As student athletes begin to be paid, the whole marketing landscape for universities nationwide is going to change, and will bring in even more money. The power of the media and its viewership may increase production costs, but the ROI driven towards the schools will be substantial. And most importantly, the athletes as well.

Three Years of Misery Inside Google: The Happiest Company in Tech

On October 1, 2019 By andreabecassisIn Google, Media Covergence, Online Safety, Search Engine, TechnologyLeave a comment

Image and Text: https://www.wired.com/story/inside-google-three-years-misery-happiest-company-tech/

WIRED spoke with 47 current and former Google employees and put together a groundbreaking report on the hardships and obstacles the company has been facing since the 2016 election. The article presents us with an amazing amount of information that condemns Google’s internal practices in relation to the privacy of their employees, shining a light on the reality that not everyone working at the Silicon Valley tech giant abides to the integrity rules. Readers will learn about the “period of growing distrust and disillusionment inside Google that echoed the fury roaring outside the company’s walls,” reflecting the rapid growth of conservative right-wing politics we have been witnessing over the past few years.

Google hosts many meetings with their employees that are specifically designed for them to openly discuss and oftentimes challenge executive decisions. It was in one of those meetings that James Damore heard about the idea of providing more job interviews and a more welcoming environment to female and underrepresented minority candidates that did not form a high percentage in the company’s demographics. For many people, including Damore, this idea went against its said purpose of inclusion and Google’s meritocratic hiring process, therefore ‘lowering the bar’ on hiring and showing discrimination toward men. He proceeded to write what later became a famous 10-page memo elaborating on his anti-diversity reasoning. After much pressure from other employees, executives decided to fire him due to his blatant attack on the company’s core principles.

The firing of Damore caused a huge commotion inside the company among conservatives that did not agree with the decision, and who decided to attack their co-workers by leaking information from Google’s hundreds of discussion forums. On a pro-Trump subreddit, a collage appeared that showed the full names, profile pictures, and Twitter bios of eight Google employees, most of them queer, transgender, or people of color. Each bio featured phrases that would make the employees instant targets for harassment: “polyamorous queer autistic trans lesbian” and “just another gay communist site reliability engineer.” Days after Damore was fired, a former tech editor at Breitbart shared the Reddit collage image with 2 million Facebook followers. “Look at who works for Google, it all makes sense now,” he wrote, as if these eight employees had been the ones who made the decision to fire Damore.

There have been many other instances in which Googlers were being named personally and started being publicly attacked for things they said in private company forums. The situation only got worse when it became clear that leakers were protected from being prosecuted by “protected concerted activity” and would not suffer any consequences even if they were discovered. The article was extremely interesting to read since it provided information about the inner workings of a tech giant and how typical principles of freedom of expression and Google’s famous “obligation to dissent” concept turned against them when they started being attacked from the inside. The company has been fighting a dirty war on the issue of diversity since the 2016 election. As WIRED wrote, “Googlers on both sides of the battle lines had become adept at working the refs—baiting colleagues into saying things that might violate the company’s code of conduct, then going to human resources to report them. But Googlers on the right were going further, broadcasting snippets of the company’s uncensored brawls to the world, and setting up their colleagues for harassment.”

Locast, a non- profit streaming services sues BIG media companies

On October 1, 2019 By aalesanIn StreamingLeave a comment

Disney’s ABC, CBS, Comcast’s NBCUniversal and Fox were all countersued by a non-profit streaming service called Locast. You might be wondering: why?

According to a CNN article by Kerry Flynn, Locast sued these companies because they violated code of conduct and illegally worked together to grow the strength of their market. Why might Locast be angry and involved? Locast has the right to be raged because they stream content from these media companies on their provided service.

The issue took a war turn when the companies Locast wanted to countersue joined together to accuse Locast of copyright violations. To give more context about Locast, they are a free app to users and they are available in thirteen cities, including major ones like New York. They stream from bigger companies for people who don’t really rely on a antenna.

After being accused of copyright allegations, Locast denied it stating that they are a non-profit company. The article specifically states that, “Goodfriend launched Locast in January 2018 within a non-profit entity, which argues that the company has the legal right to rebroadcast local stations without being accused of copyright notice from networks” (Flynn, 2019).

There have been many times where a streaming service has gone against a network. This topic is interesting because it seemed pretty childish to me. If the non-profit called out big companies on an issue, why would they turn around and also point the finger at Locast? Locast streams their content, giving them a wider audience. Just because it is a non-profit and they are supported differently, doesn’t mean they wouldn’t be affected.

Source: https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/27/media/locast-streaming-lawsuit/index.html

Facebook is Crumbling- and the endless controversies don’t help

On October 1, 2019 By Maura GallagherIn UncategorizedLeave a comment

https://www.google.com/search?q=facebook+leak&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjGtPa5jPzkAhXmp1kKHWm4AJMQ_AUIFCgD&biw=1440&bih=821#imgrc=7fE3x2HmZ0bdlM:

Facebook has a mole and there is now witch hunt within the company to find out who. Over two hours of audio was leaked to The Verge from a all-hands meeting, exposing CEO Zuckerberg ranting about Sen. Warren’s plans to break up the company and how he wants to demolish TikTok. Zuckerberg is often painted in a poor light by media outlets, but this raw uncut audio really puts a bad taste in users mouths. Zuckerberg tries to come off as reserved and composed when in the eye of the public, but this is the first real look the public is getting of him behind close doors.

Clearly the leak shows there are not only issues externally with Facebook, but internally employees aren’t happy either. Transparency is apparently encouraged within the company, but leaks are intolerable. Facebook often reminds employees to never talk to reporters about any issues or scandals going on at the moment or from the past. Anyone who is found to be a leak is terminated, and they even have teams that are meant to just investigate scandals and seek out the ‘lose ends’.

This isn’t the first sign of low morale among employees at Facebook. Back in November the results to a survey were leaked showed that employee morale had dropped across numerous metrics.

Overall, Facebook I think is example No.1 of companies I would never want to work for. The morals and values of the company seem to be non existent or can’t be taken for face value. They don’t seem to have an issue with selling out and invading people’s privacy, which are thing I find troubling.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/01/leaked-facebook-audio-is-a-sign-of-decreased-morale-former-employees-say.html

45% Might Cancel Netflix If Favorite TV Network Shows Depart

On October 1, 2019 By khelt0In Consumer behavior, Netflix, StreamingLeave a comment

A recent study based on Netflix subscribers found that almost half of Netflix’s subscribers would consider canceling their subscription if networks pulled their content. Networks like NBC, Fox and AMC have content on Netflix that draws a pretty big audience, and some people may even use Netflix strictly for those programs. Programs like “Friends”, and “The Office” are fan favorites on the app, and NBC could make a lot more money if they streamed “The Office” strictly on their own services. Other media companies like Marvel have started to take down their content from Netflix for when they release their own streaming service. We are in a time where every big media company and TV network is starting to come out with their own streaming service to house their content. There is a big shift from cable to streaming, and the networks are trying to make the most out the opportunity with their top watched content right now on services like Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Prime.

Netflix started to make some noise in the industry with their original content like Bird Box and Black Mirror. Netflix has a lot of great in depth documentaries on a lot of different topics. That is not the majority of their income, so it is going to be interesting to see how they will adapt if the networks follow through with pulling their content. Will they shift their focus, or will they just put more money and time into their original content. 45% is a very high number of subscribers and if those talks are semi serious I would be concerned if I was Netflix. I would be putting a lot of time into think about how we will adapt if those reports become reality.

Current Issues In Media Management

The Google Feature Magnifying Disinformation