ReportWire

Tag: iab-internet

  • Google’s antitrust showdown: What’s at stake for the internet search titan | CNN Business

    Google’s antitrust showdown: What’s at stake for the internet search titan | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Google will face off in court Tuesday against government officials who have accused the company of antitrust violations in its massive search business, kicking off a long-anticipated legal showdown that could reshape one of the internet’s most dominant platforms.

    The trial beginning this week in Washington before a federal judge marks the culmination of two ongoing lawsuits against Google that started during the Trump administration. Legal experts describe the actions as the country’s biggest monopolization case since the US government took on Microsoft in the 1990s.

    In separate complaints, the Justice Department and dozens of states accused Google in 2020 of abusing its dominance in online search by allegedly harming competition through deals with wireless carriers and smartphone makers that made Google Search the default or exclusive option on products used by millions of consumers. The complaints eventually consolidated into a single case.

    Google has maintained that it competes on the merits and that consumers prefer its tools because they are the best, not because it has moved to illegally restrict competition. Google’s search business provides more than half of the $283 billion in revenue and $76 billion in net income Google’s parent company, Alphabet, recorded in 2022. Search has fueled the company’s growth to a more than $1.7 trillion market capitalization.

    Now, the company is set to defend itself in a multiweek trial that could upend the way Google distributes its search engine to users. The case is expected to feature testimony from high-profile witnesses including former employees of Google and Samsung, along with executives from Apple, including senior vice president Eddy Cue. It is the first case to go to trial in a series of court challenges targeting Google’s far-reaching economic power, testing the willingness of courts to clamp down on large tech platforms.

    “This is a backwards-looking case at a time of unprecedented innovation,” said Google President of Global Affairs Kent Walker, “including breakthroughs in AI, new apps and new services, all of which are creating more competition and more options for people than ever before. People don’t use Google because they have to — they use it because they want to. It’s easy to switch your default search engine — we’re long past the era of dial-up internet and CD-ROMs.”

    The trial may also be a bellwether for the more assertive antitrust agenda of the Biden administration.

    In its initial complaint, the US government alleged in part that Google pays billions of dollars a year to device manufacturers including Apple, LG, Motorola and Samsung — and browser developers like Mozilla and Opera — to be their default search engine and in many cases to prohibit them from dealing with Google’s competitors.

    As a result, the complaint alleges, “Google effectively owns or controls search distribution channels accounting for roughly 80 percent of the general search queries in the United States.”

    The lawsuit also alleges that Google’s Android operating system deals with device makers are anticompetitive, because they require smartphone companies to pre-install other Google-owned apps, such as Gmail, Chrome or Maps.

    At the time the lawsuit was first filed, US antitrust officials did not rule out the possibility of a Google breakup, warning that Google’s behavior could threaten future innovation or the rise of a Google successor.

    Separately, a group of states, led by Colorado, made additional allegations against Google, claiming that the way Google structures its search results page harms competition by prioritizing the company’s own apps and services over web pages, links, reviews and content from other third-party sites.

    But the judge overseeing the case, Judge Amit Mehta in the US District Court for the District of Columbia, tossed out those claims in a ruling last month, narrowing the scope of allegations Google must defend and saying the states had not done enough to show a trial was necessary to determine whether Google’s search results rankings were anticompetitive.

    Despite that ruling, the trial represents the US government’s furthest progress in challenging Google to date. Mehta has said Google’s pole position among search engines on browsers and smartphones “is a hotly disputed issue” and that the trial will determine “whether, as a matter of actual market reality, Google’s position as the default search engine across multiple browsers is a form of exclusionary Conduct.”

    In January, meanwhile, the Biden administration launched another antitrust suit against Google in opposition to the company’s advertising technology business, accusing it of maintaining an illegal monopoly. That case remains in its early stages at the US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Microsoft, Amazon facing UK antitrust probe over cloud services | CNN Business

    Microsoft, Amazon facing UK antitrust probe over cloud services | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    London
    CNN
     — 

    Microsoft and Amazon could be in hot water over apparently making it difficult for UK customers to use multiple suppliers of vital cloud services.

    The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA), the country’s antitrust regulator, said Thursday it was launching an investigation into the UK cloud infrastructure services market to determine whether players were engaged in anti-competitive practices.

    Cloud computing firms, such as Microsoft and Amazon Web Services (AWS), use data centers around the world to provide remote access to computing services and storage. This “cloud infrastructure” forms the foundation for how software applications, such as Gmail and Dropbox, are developed and run.

    The CMA probe has been initiated following a report from Britain’s media and communications regulator Ofcom, which found that the supply of cloud infrastructure in the United Kingdom is highly concentrated and competition limited.

    “We welcome Ofcom’s referral of public cloud infrastructure services to us for in-depth scrutiny,” CMA CEO Sarah Cardell said in a statement.

    “This is a £7.5 billion market that underpins a whole host of online services — from social media to [artificial intelligence] foundation models. Many businesses now completely rely on cloud services, making effective competition in this market essential.”

    The CMA said it would conclude its investigation by April 2025.

    The probe is the latest evidence of increased scrutiny of big tech companies by European regulators, which have tightened rules in recent years in areas such as data protection and targeted advertising.

    The European Digital Services Act, which came into force at the end of August, reflects one of the most comprehensive and ambitious efforts by policymakers anywhere to regulate tech giants. It applies to companies including Amazon (AMZN), Apple (AAPL), Google (GOOG), Microsoft (MSFT), Snapchat, TikTok and Meta (META), the owner of Facebook and Instagram.

    According to Ofcom, last year Microsoft and AWS had a combined market share of 70-80% in the UK cloud infrastructure services market. Google is their closest competitor with a share of 5-10%.

    In its report, Ofcom identified features of the market that make it more difficult for customers to change providers or to use multiple providers, such as switching fees.

    “If customers have difficulty switching and using multiple providers, it could make it harder for competitors to gain scale and challenge AWS and Microsoft effectively for the business of new and existing customers,” Ofcom wrote.

    The report also raised concerns about the software licensing practices of some cloud providers, particularly Microsoft.

    Both Amazon and Microsoft said they would engage “constructively” with the CMA.

    But a spokesperson for AWS added that the company disagreed with Ofcom’s findings. “We… believe they are based on a fundamental misconception of how the IT sector functions, and the services and discounts on offer,” the spokesperson said, noting that “the cloud has made switching between providers easier than ever.”

    A spokesperson for Microsoft added: “We are committed to ensuring the UK cloud industry remains innovative, highly competitive and an accelerator for growth across the economy.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Dozens of states sue Instagram-parent Meta over ‘addictive’ features and youth mental health harms | CNN Business

    Dozens of states sue Instagram-parent Meta over ‘addictive’ features and youth mental health harms | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Dozens of states sued Instagram-parent Meta on Tuesday, accusing the social media giant of harming young users’ mental health through allegedly addictive features such as infinite news feeds and frequent notifications that demand users’ constant attention.

    In a federal lawsuit filed in California by 33 attorneys general, the states allege that Meta’s products have harmed minors and contributed to a mental health crisis in the United States.

    “Meta has profited from children’s pain by intentionally designing its platforms with manipulative features that make children addicted to their platforms while lowering their self-esteem,” said Letitia James, the attorney general for New York, one of the states involved in the federal suit. “Social media companies, including Meta, have contributed to a national youth mental health crisis and they must be held accountable.”

    Eight additional attorneys general sued Meta on Tuesday in various state courts around the country, making similar claims as the massive multi-state federal lawsuit.

    And the state of Florida sued Meta in its own separate federal lawsuit, alleging that Meta misled users about potential health risks of its products.

    Tuesday’s multistate federal suit — filed in the US District Court for the Northern District of California — accuses Meta of violating a range of state-based consumer protection statutes, as well as a federal children’s privacy law known as COPPA that prohibits companies from collecting the personal information of children under 13 without a parent’s consent.

    “Meta’s design choices and practices take advantage of and contribute to young users’ susceptibility to addiction,” the complaint reads. “They exploit psychological vulnerabilities of young users through the false promise that meaningful social connection lies in the next story, image, or video and that ignoring the next piece of social content could lead to social isolation.”

    The federal complaint calls for court orders prohibiting Meta from violating the law and, in the case of many states, unspecified financial penalties.

    “We share the attorneys generals’ commitment to providing teens with safe, positive experiences online, and have already introduced over 30 tools to support teens and their families,” Meta said in a statement. “We’re disappointed that instead of working productively with companies across the industry to create clear, age-appropriate standards for the many apps teens use, the attorneys general have chosen this path.”

    The wave of lawsuits is the result of a bipartisan, multistate investigation dating back to 2021, Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser said at a press conference Tuesday, after Facebook whistleblower Frances Haugen came forward with tens of thousands of internal company documents that she said showed how the company knew its products could have negative impacts on young people’s mental health.

    “We know that there were decisions made, a series of decisions to make the product more and more addictive,” Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti told reporters. “And what we want is for the company to undo that, to make sure that they are not exploiting these vulnerabilities in children, that they are not doing all the little, sophisticated, tricky things that we might not pick up on that drive engagement higher and higher and higher that allowed them to keep taking more and more time and data from our young people.”

    Tuesday’s multipronged legal assault also marks the newest attempt by states to rein in large tech platforms over fears that social media companies are fueling a spike in youth depression and suicidal ideation.

    “There’s a mountain of growing evidence that social media has a negative impact on our children,” said California Attorney General Rob Bonta, “evidence that more time on social media tends to be correlated with depression with anxiety, body image issues, susceptibility to addiction and interference with daily life, including learning.”

    The suits follow a raft of legislation in states ranging from Arkansas to Louisiana that clamp down on social media by establishing new requirements for online platforms that wish to serve teens and children, such as mandating that they obtain a parent’s consent before creating an account for a minor, or that they verify users’ ages.

    In some cases, the tech industry has challenged those laws in court — for example, by claiming that Arkansas’ social media law violates residents’ First Amendment rights to access information.

    New Hampshire Attorney General John Formella said the states expect Meta to mount a similar defense but that the company will not succeed because the multistate suit targets Meta’s conduct, not speech.

    Formella added that in addition to consumer protection claims, New Hampshire is also bringing negligence and product liability claims as part of the federal suit.

    The complaints filed in state courts allege violations of various state-specific laws. For example, the complaint from District of Columbia Attorney General Brian Schwalb accuses Meta of violating the district’s consumer protection statute by misleading the public about the safety of company platforms.

    Tuesday’s lawsuits come days before a federal judge in California is set to consider a slew of similar allegations against the wider tech industry. In a hearing Friday morning, District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers is expected to hear arguments by Google, Meta, Snap and TikTok urging her to dismiss nearly 200 complaints involving private plaintiffs that have accused the companies of addicting or harming their users.

    It is possible that Tuesday’s multistate suit could be merged with the consumers’ cases, said Weiser, adding that the main difference of the multistate case is that it could lead to nationwide relief.

    “The coordination that we bring across the AG community, we believe is invaluable to this,” Weiser said.

    Participating in Tuesday’s multistate federal suit are California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia and Wisconsin.

    The additional suits filed in state courts were brought by the District of Columbia, Massachusetts, Mississippi, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Utah and Vermont.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Illinois passes a law that requires parents to compensate child influencers | CNN Business

    Illinois passes a law that requires parents to compensate child influencers | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    When 16-year-old Shreya Nallamothu from Normal, Illinois, scrolled through social media platforms to pass time during the pandemic, she became increasingly frustrated with the number of children she saw featured in family vlogs.

    She recalled the many home videos her parents filmed of herself and her sister over the years: taking their first steps, going to school and other “embarrassing stuff.”

    “I’m so glad those videos stayed in the family,” she said. “It made me realize family vlogging is putting very private and intimate moments onto the internet.”

    She said reminders and lectures from her parents about how everything is permanent online intensified her reaction to the videos she saw of kid influencers. “The fact that these kids are either too young to grasp that or weren’t given the chance to grasp that is really sad.”

    Nallamothu wrote a letter last year to her state senator, Democrat Dave Koehler, urging him to consider legislation to protect young influencers. Last week, her home state became the first to pass a law that establishes safeguards for minors who are featured in online videos – and how they’re compensated.

    Illinois Gov. J. B. Pritzker on Friday signed a bill, inspired by Nallamothu’s letter, amending the state’s Child Labor Law that will allow teenagers over the age of 18 to take legal action against their parents if they were featured in monetized social media videos and not properly compensated, similar to the rights held by child actors.

    Starting July 1 2024, parents in Illinois will be required to put aside 50% of earnings for a piece of content into a blocked trust fund for the child, based on the percentage of time they’re featured in the video. For example, if a child is in 50% of a video, they should receive 25% of the funds; if they’re in 100%, they are required to get 50% of the earnings. However, this only applies in scenarios during which the child appears on the screen for more than 30% of the vlogs in a 12-month period.

    “We understand that parents should receive compensation too because they have equity in this, but we don’t want to forget about the child,” Koehler told CNN.

    Many YouTube parent vloggers or social media influencers post multiple videos each month or weekly, sharing intimate details about their lives, ranging from family financial troubles and the birth of a new baby to opening new toys or going through a child’s phone or report card. Although children are predominantly featured in these monetized videos, parents have had no legal obligation to give them any portion of the earnings.

    Meanwhile, kid influencer accounts, which can at times earn $20,000 or more for sponsored posts, are typically run by parents and not often set up in the child’s name due to age restrictions on social media platforms.

    “We often see with emerging technology and trends that legislation is always a reaction to that,” Koehler said. “But we know with the explosion of social media that parents are using it to monetize kids being on videos. If money is being made and nothing is set up for the children, it’s the same thing as a child actor.”

    The new law is modeled off of the 1936 Jackie Coogan’s Law, the Hollywood silent actor discovered by Charlie Chaplin whose parents swindled him out of his earnings. That California law required parents to set aside a portion of 15% of child earnings in a blocked trust account that the child actor could access after the age of 18.

    Although similar bills have been proposed in California and Washington, Jessica Maddox — an assistant professor at The University of Alabama who studies the social media influencer community — said she’s hopeful other states will follow in Illinois’ footsteps.

    “Even though Illinois is the first state to pass such a law, this legislation is a long time coming,” Maddox said. “Social media labor and careers are becoming increasingly common and viable forms of income, and it’s important that the law catches up with technology to ensure minors aren’t being exploited.”

    Maddox said it also breathes new life into the long-simmering debate over what is appropriate for parents to document online and whether a child can really consent to participating.

    “I’ve seen organic conversations start to emerge between individuals who had been featured heavily in their parents’ social media content but are now of age to tell their stories and admit that had they really understood what was going on, they would have never consented for their lives to be broadcast for everyone.”

    Chris McCarty — the 19-year-old founder of Quit Clicking Kids, an advocacy and education site to combat the monetization of children on social media, who is helping to develop child influencer legislation in Washington State — believes that as the kids featured in family vlogs grow up and share their stories, there will be an increase in public pressure to provide more privacy protections.

    “When children are slightly older, often the narratives get increasingly personal; for example. detailing trouble with bullies, first periods, doctor’s visits, and mental health issues,” McCarty said. “A lot of consumers assume that children working in a family vlog and child actors have the same experiences. This is not the case. As difficult as it is to be a child actor, child actors are still playing a part rather than having their intimate personal details shared for entertainment and monetary purposes.”

    Nallamothu agrees that the next step is for legislation to evolve over time to include more regulations around consent.

    “I know this bill isn’t going to be perfect off the bat but I don’t want perfection to get in the way of progress because regulations have only started coming up,” she said. “I’m glad it’s getting there.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Meta’s Threads is temporarily blocking searches about Covid-19 | CNN Business

    Meta’s Threads is temporarily blocking searches about Covid-19 | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Threads, the much-hyped social media app from Facebook-parent Meta, is taking heat for blocking searches for “coronavirus,” “Covid,” and other pandemic-related queries.

    The tech giant’s decision to block coronavirus-related searches on its service comes as the United States deals with a recent uptick in Covid-19 hospitalizations, per CDC data, and more than three years into the global pandemic.

    News of Threads blocking searches related to the coronavirus was first reported by The Washington Post.

    A Meta spokesperson told CNN that the company just began rolling out keyword search for Threads to additional countries last week.

    “The search functionality temporarily doesn’t provide results for keywords that may show potentially sensitive content,” the statement added. “People will be able to search for keywords such as ‘COVID’ in future updates once we are confident in the quality of the results.” 

    As of Monday, searches on the Threads app conducted by CNN for “coronavirus,” “Covid” and “Covid-19” yielded a blank page with the text: “No results.” Searches for “vaccine” also prompted no results. Typing any of these queries into the Threads app does, however, offer a link directing users to the CDC’s website on Covid-19 or vaccinations, depending on the search.

    Meta did not disclose what other keyword searches currently yield no results.

    Meta’s Facebook and other social media platforms faced controversy in the early part of the pandemic for the apparent spread of Covid-19-related misinformation online.

    Meta officially launched Threads in early July, and the app quickly garnered more than 100 million sign-ups in its first week on the heels of months of chaos at Twitter, which is now known as X. But much of the buzz faded somewhat in the weeks that followed as users realized the bare-bones platform still lacked many of the features that made X popular with users.

    Threads released its much-requested web version late last month, and its keyword search about a week ago. But the current limitations around its search function highlights how the platform still has some kinks to work through before it can fully replace the real-time search and engagement experience that social media users have historically relied on with X.

    –CNN’s Clare Duffy contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • US regulator seeks court order to compel Elon Musk to testify about his Twitter acquisition | CNN Business

    US regulator seeks court order to compel Elon Musk to testify about his Twitter acquisition | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    The US Securities and Exchange Commission on Thursday applied for a court order to force Elon Musk to testify in an ongoing probe related to his acquisition of Twitter and public disclosures he made in connection with the deal, according to court filings.

    The filing Thursday in San Francisco federal court seeks a judge’s order requiring Musk to testify, alleging “blatant refusal to comply” with an earlier SEC subpoena.

    X, the company formerly known as Twitter, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

    The SEC action is the latest turn in a long-running inquiry into whether Musk fully complied with his disclosure obligations when he began acquiring large amounts of Twitter stock, prior to his deal to buy the company. And it underscores years of friction between Musk and the agency over his public comments on numerous matters involving his companies.

    Musk began buying up large amounts of Twitter stock in early 2022, and he revealed on April 4 of that year that he had become the company’s largest shareholder. Later that month, Musk inked a deal to buy the platform for $44 billion and — after a monthslong legal battle attempting to exit the deal — officially closed the acquisition in October of last year. Musk has faced a number of legal challenges related to his Twitter acquisition in the months since his takeover.

    Musk testified twice as part of the SEC’s investigation in July 2022, according to the agency.

    Starting that same month, Musk produced “hundreds of documents” to federal investigators working on the probe, “including documents Musk authored,” according to a declaration by an SEC attorney filed alongside the agency’s court request.

    The SEC served Musk with a subpoena to testify again in the matter in May 2023, according to the court filing. The current subpoena at issue seeks evidence and testimony from Musk that the SEC does not yet possess, the agency said.

    Despite previously agreeing to testify on September 15 and rescheduling the testimony once, Musk “abruptly notified the SEC” two days before his scheduled appearance to say he would not be showing up, the filing states.

    The SEC attempted to negotiate with Musk to find alternative dates later this fall, according to court documents.

    “These good faith efforts were met with Musk’s blanket refusal to appear for testimony,” it adds.

    “The subpoena with which Musk failed to comply relates to an ongoing nonpublic investigation by the SEC,” the filing continued, “regarding whether, among other things, Musk violated various provisions of the federal securities laws in connection with (1) his 2022 purchases of Twitter, Inc (“Twitter”) stock, and (2) his 2022 statements and SEC filings relating to Twitter.”

    When Musk informed the SEC he would not be appearing to testify, his lawyer, Alex Spiro, wrote to the agency on September 13, saying Musk had “already sat for testimony twice in this matter” and that “enough is enough.”

    Spiro’s letter, which was included as an exhibit in the SEC’s court filings, accused regulators of seeking Musk’s testimony in bad faith and attempting to waste Musk’s time.

    In addition, Spiro claimed that the recent release of Walter Isaacson’s biography of Musk would interfere because it contained “new information potentially relevant to this matter” that would take time for both sides to digest.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Two brands suspend advertising on X after their ads appeared next to pro-Nazi content | CNN Business

    Two brands suspend advertising on X after their ads appeared next to pro-Nazi content | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    At least two brands have said they will suspend advertising on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter, after their ads and those of other companies were run on an account promoting fascism. The issue came less than a week after X CEO Linda Yaccarino publicly affirmed the company’s commitment to brand safety for advertisers.

    The nonprofit news watchdog Media Matters for America documented in a report published Wednesday that ads for a host of mainstream brands have been run on the account, which has shared content celebrating Hitler and the Nazi Party.

    Ads for brands including Adobe, Gilead Sciences, the University of Maryland’s football team, New York University Langone Hospital and NCTA-The Internet and Television Association were run alongside tweets from the account that had garnered hundreds of thousands of views, CNN observed.

    Spokespeople for NCTA and pharmaceutical company Gilead said that they immediately paused their ad spending on X after CNN flagged their ads on the pro-Nazi account.

    “We take the responsible placement of NCTA ads very seriously and are concerned that our post about the future of broadband technology appeared next to this highly disturbing content,” NCTA spokesperson Brian Dietz said in a statement, adding that the organization had opted into X’s brand safety measures including keyword restrictions and limiting its ad placement to the “home feed of target audiences.”

    “Brand safety will remain an utmost priority for NCTA, which means suspending advertising on Twitter/X for the foreseeable future and heavily limiting NCTA’s organic presence on the platform,” Dietz said.

    A spokesperson for Gilead said the company will pause its ad spending while X investigates the issue.

    Jason Yellin, University of Maryland’s associate athletic director, expressed concern about the placement of the football team’s post on the account and said Maryland Football has not spent money on advertising on X since 2021, meaning X may have promoted the post despite it not being a paid ad.

    A spokesperson for NYU Langone said in a statement that the hospital was “completely surprised by this and are extremely concerned with any appearance of our advertising and brand next to obviously objectionable content that promotes hatred,” adding that it expects its advertising partners to “act responsibly.”

    X did not immediately respond to a request for comment from CNN. Hours after the Media Matters report was published Wednesday morning and CNN observed additional brands’ ads running on the account, the account appeared to be suspended.

    Adobe did not immediately respond to requests for comment from CNN.

    The issue comes as X has been trying to lure advertisers back to the platform after many left in the wake of Elon Musk’s takeover of the company last fall over concerns about content moderation, mass layoffs and general uncertainty over the platform’s direction. Musk said last month that the company still had negative cash flow because of a nearly 50% drop in its core advertising revenue.

    Yaccarino — who joined the company in June, just ahead of a major rebrand from Twitter to X — told CNBC in her first public interview as chief executive last week that many of the platform’s advertisers have returned and that the company is “close to break-even.” She touted the company’s “freedom of speech, not freedom of reach” policy, which aims to limit the reach of so-called lawful but awful content on the platform and to protect brands from having their ads appear alongside such content.

    X last week said it had rolled out additional brand safety controls for advertisers, including the ability to avoid having their ads show next to “targeted hate speech, sexual content, gratuitous gore, excessive profanity, obscenity, spam, drugs.” In addition to human content moderation reviewers that monitor for content that violates the platform’s rules, X says it has automated software that determines where and how ads are placed on the platform.

    “Your ads will only air next to content that is appropriate for you,” Yaccarino said during last week’s interview.

    But Wednesday’s report suggests that the company still has work to do if it wants to avoid monetizing, and placing ads alongside, objectionable content. “Media Matters and other observers have documented how X has remained a dangerous cesspool of content, especially for advertisers,” Wednesday’s report states. Media Matters says it has also documented instances of brands’ ads being placed next to content from Holocaust denial and white nationalist accounts.

    While she did not publicly comment on the ads appearing alongside pro-Nazi content, Yaccarino did post on X Wednesday that, “Sensitivity Settings is live globally in the X Ads Manager — making it even simpler for all advertisers to find the right balance between reach and suitability.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Landmark Google trial opens with sweeping DOJ accusations of illegal monopolization | CNN Business

    Landmark Google trial opens with sweeping DOJ accusations of illegal monopolization | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    US prosecutors opened a landmark antitrust trial against Google on Tuesday with sweeping allegations that for years the company intentionally stifled competition challenging its massive search engine, accusing the tech giant of spending billions to operate an illegal monopoly that has harmed every computer and mobile device user in the United States.

    In opening remarks before a federal judge in Washington, lawyers for the Justice Department alleged that Google’s negotiation of exclusive contracts with wireless carriers and phone makers helped cement its dominant position in violation of US antitrust law.

    The Google case has been described as one of the largest US antitrust trials since the federal government took on Microsoft in the 1990s, and involves some similar arguments about the tying of multiple proprietary products. The multi-week trial is expected to feature witness testimony from Google CEO Sundar Pichai, as well as other senior executives or former employees from Google, Apple, Microsoft and Samsung.

    The effects of Google’s alleged misconduct are vast, DOJ lawyer Kenneth Dintzer told the court.

    “This case is about the future of the internet, and whether Google’s search engine will ever face meaningful competition,” Dintzer said, adding that Google pays more than $10 billion a year to Apple and other companies to ensure that Google is the default or only search engine available on browsers and mobile devices used by millions.

    Also anticompetitive, the Justice Department said, are Google’s contracts to ensure that Android devices come with Google apps and services — including Google search — preinstalled.

    The deals guarantee a steady flow of user data to Google that further reinforces its monopoly, the US government said, leading to other consequences such as harms to consumer privacy and higher advertising prices.

    “This feedback loop, this wheel has been turning for 12 years, and it always turns to Google’s advantage,” Dintzer said. The practice ultimately affects what consumers see in search results and prevents new rivals from gaining scale and market share, he added.

    For Google’s opening statement, attorney John Schmidtlein said that Apple’s decision to make Google the default search engine in its Safari browser demonstrates how Google’s search engine is the superior product consumers prefer.

    “Apple repeatedly chose Google as the default because Apple believed it was the best experience for its users,” he said.

    The Google case “could not be more different” from the historic Microsoft litigation at the turn of the millennium, Schmidtlein continued.

    Where the Microsoft case revolved around that company’s alleged harms to Netscape, a small browser maker, the Google case is based on claims that Google search has harmed a much larger and more powerful entity: Microsoft and its Bing search engine, Schmidtlein said.

    “Google competed on the merits to win preinstallation and default status” on consumer devices and browsers, he insisted, attacking Microsoft as a failed search engine developer.

    “The evidence will show that Microsoft’s Bing search engine failed to win customers because Microsoft did not invest [and] did not innovate,” Schmidtlein added. “At every critical juncture, the evidence will show that they were beaten in the market.”

    And Schmidtlein argued that forbidding Google from being able to compete for default status on browsers and devices would lead to its own harms to competition in search, stating that contracts ensuring that Android devices come with certain apps preinstalled such as Google Maps and Gmail also promotes competition — against Apple.

    “Google’s Android agreements are important components of a business model that has sustained the most important competitor to Apple for mobile devices in the United States,” Schmidtlein said.

    Google has previously said that consumers choose Google’s search engine because it is the best and that they prefer it, not because of anticompetitive practices.

    But DOJ prosecutors said Tuesday that they plan to present evidence in the case that Google knew what it was doing was illegal and that the company “hid and destroyed documents because they knew they were violating the antitrust laws.

    “The harm from Google contracts affects every phone and computer in the country,” Dintzer said.

    Kent Walker, Google’s president of global affairs, and Rep. Ken Buck from Colorado were in attendance for the opening. Buck, a vocal tech industry critic, is the former top Republican on the House antitrust subcommittee — which in 2020 released a widely publicized investigative report finding that Amazon, Apple, Google and Facebook enjoyed “monopoly power.”

    Kent Walker, President of Global Affairs and Chief legal officer of Alphabet Inc., arrives at federal court on September 12, 2023 in Washington, DC. Google will defend its default-search deals in an antitrust trial against the U.S. Justice Department which begins today.

    The trial marks the culmination of two ongoing lawsuits against Google that started during the Trump administration.

    In separate complaints, the Justice Department and dozens of states accused Google in 2020 of abusing its dominance in online search but were eventually consolidated into a single case.

    Google’s search business provides more than half of the $283 billion in revenue and $76 billion in net income Google’s parent company, Alphabet, recorded in 2022. Search has fueled the company’s growth to a more than $1.7 trillion market capitalization.

    “This is a backwards-looking case at a time of unprecedented innovation,” said Walker in a statement, “including breakthroughs in AI, new apps and new services, all of which are creating more competition and more options for people than ever before. People don’t use Google because they have to — they use it because they want to. It’s easy to switch your default search engine — we’re long past the era of dial-up internet and CD-ROMs.”

    The trial may also be a bellwether for the more assertive antitrust agenda of the Biden administration.

    At the time the lawsuit was first filed, US antitrust officials did not rule out the possibility of a Google breakup, warning that Google’s behavior could threaten future innovation or the rise of a Google successor.

    Separately, a group of states, led by Colorado, made additional allegations against Google, claiming that the way Google structures its search results page harms competition by prioritizing the company’s own apps and services over web pages, links, reviews and content from other third-party sites.

    But the judge overseeing the case, Judge Amit Mehta in the US District Court for the District of Columbia, tossed out those claims in a ruling last month, narrowing the scope of allegations Google must defend and saying the states had not done enough to show a trial was necessary to determine whether Google’s search results rankings were anticompetitive.

    Despite that ruling, the trial represents the US government’s furthest progress in challenging Google to date. Mehta has said Google’s pole position among search engines on browsers and smartphones “is a hotly disputed issue” and that the trial will determine “whether, as a matter of actual market reality, Google’s position as the default search engine across multiple browsers is a form of exclusionary Conduct.”

    In January, meanwhile, the Biden administration launched another antitrust suit against Google in opposition to the company’s advertising technology business, accusing it of maintaining an illegal monopoly. That case remains in its early stages at the US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Apple rejected opportunities to buy Microsoft’s Bing, integrate with DuckDuckGo | CNN Business

    Apple rejected opportunities to buy Microsoft’s Bing, integrate with DuckDuckGo | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Since 2017, Apple has turned down multiple opportunities to chip away at Google’s search engine dominance, according to newly unsealed court transcripts, including a chance to purchase Microsoft’s Bing and to make the privacy-focused DuckDuckGo a default for users of its Safari’s private browsing mode.

    The previously confidential records, unsealed this week by the judge presiding over the US government’s antitrust lawsuit against Google, illustrate the challenges that have faced Google’s rivals in search as they’ve tried to unseat the tech giant from its pole position as Apple’s default search provider on millions of iPhones and Mac computers. It’s a privilege for which Google has paid Apple at least $10 billion a year.

    The closed-door testimony by the CEO of DuckDuckGo, Gabriel Weinberg, and a senior Apple executive, John Giannandrea, offers a glimpse of the kind of failed deals and backroom negotiations that have helped Google maintain its lead as the world’s foremost search engine.

    But it also shows how Apple has wrestled with Google’s rise and how some at Apple yearned for “optionality.” Apple didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

    Giannandrea testified last month Apple began seriously considering a deal with Bing in 2018, after a conversation between Apple CEO Tim Cook and Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella launched a series of further discussions between the two companies. (Last week, Nadella testified that he has spent every year of his tenure as CEO trying to persuade Apple to adopt Bing.)

    Apple insiders ultimately came up with four options for Cook: Buy Bing outright; invest in Bing and take an ownership share of the search engine; collaborate with Microsoft on a shared search index that both companies could use; or do nothing and continue with the Google partnership.

    At the same time, Apple had been actively working with DuckDuckGo on a proposal that could have made it the default search in Safari browser’s private mode, while still maintaining Google as the default in normal mode, which logs user activity, Weinberg testified.

    DuckDuckGo logo displayed on a phone screen and DuckDuckGo website displayed on a laptop screen in October 2021.

    “Our impression was that they were really serious about [it],” Weinberg told the court last month, referring to the roughly 20 meetings and phone calls that DuckDuckGo held with Apple officials, including some senior executives, from late 2017 to late 2019 on the matter. The two companies deliberated over everything from product mockups to contractual language; Apple even went as far as sending a draft contract to DuckDuckGo outlining specific proposed revenue shares.

    “If we were the default in [Safari] private browsing mode, our market share, by our calculations at the time, would increase multiple times over,” said Weinberg, according to the transcript. “We would be getting exposure for our brand every time someone opened up private browsing mode.”

    Ultimately, however, Apple backed away from both potential deals.

    Weinberg blamed Apple’s contract with Google for sinking the initiative, calling it the “elephant in the room” during many of his team’s meetings with Apple. Similar negotiations with other browser or device makers, including Mozilla, Opera and Samsung, fell through due to the Google contract as well, Weinberg claimed, prompting DuckDuckGo to abandon its efforts to gain better browser placement.

    In his testimony, Giannandrea acknowledged a perception that the Apple-Google relationship could be undermined by such plans. In discussing a 2018 slide presentation prepared for Cook and introduced in court, Giannandrea said the slides suggested that even a joint venture with Bing “would probably put us in head-to-head competition with Google” that would “probably” result in the end of the Google search contract with Apple altogether.

    Giannandrea was opposed to moving ahead with a Bing deal, he said, largely because Apple’s testing showed Bing to be inferior to Google in most respects, and that replacing Bing as the default would not best serve Apple’s customers. He made a similar argument internally about DuckDuckGo, saying in an email that moving ahead with that partnership was “probably a bad idea.” (DuckDuckGo licenses search results from Bing.)

    Still, Giannandrea testified, some within Apple thought that dealing with Bing in some fashion could yield benefits to Apple. In one 2018 email introduced in closed session, Adrian Perica, who leads Apple’s strategic investment and merger efforts, argued that collaborating with Microsoft on search technology would help “build them up, create incremental negotiating leverage to keep the take rate from Google and further our optionality to replace Google down the line.”

    Giannandrea believed the proposal “wasn’t a very feasible idea” and in his testimony dismissed Perica’s thinking as a businessperson’s spitballing.

    Apple today has the enormous resources to build a true rival to Google, Giannandrea testified. But, as he wrote in a 2018 email, “it’s probably not the best way to differentiate our products” — a belief he said he still holds today.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Chinese zoo denies its sun bears are people in costume | CNN

    Chinese zoo denies its sun bears are people in costume | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    A zoo in eastern China has denied suggestions that some of its bears were people dressed in costume after videos of a Malayan sun bear standing on its hind legs – and looking uncannily human – went viral, fueling rumors and conspiracy theories on Chinese social media.

    In a statement written from the perspective of a sun bear named “Angela,” officials from Hangzhou zoo said people “didn’t understand” the species.

    “I’m Angela the sun bear – I got a call after work yesterday from the head of the zoo asking if I was being lazy and skipped work today and found a human to take my place,” the statement read.

    “Let me reiterate again to everyone that I am a sun bear – not a black bear, not a dog – a sun bear!”

    In videos shared on the popular Chinese microblogging site Weibo, a sun bear was seen standing upright on a rock and looking out of its enclosure.

    Many Weibo users noted the animal’s upright posture, as well as folds of loose fur on its behind – making the bear look somewhat odd and fueling speculation that a human imposter might be masquerading in its place.

    It might sound like an implausible gambit. But zoos in China have courted public ridicule in the past for trying to pass off pets like dogs as wild animals.

    In 2013, a city zoo in the central Henan province angered visitors by trying to pass off a Tibetan Mastiff dog as a lion. Visitors who had approached the enclosure expressed shock when they heard the “lion” bark.

    Visitors at another Chinese zoo, in Sichuan province, were shocked to discover a golden retriever sitting in a cage labeled as an African lion enclosure.

    Native to the tropical forests of Southeast Asia, sun bears are the world’s smallest bear species. Adult bears stand at heights of up to 70 centimeters tall (28 inches) and weigh between 25 to 65 kilograms (55 to 143 pounds), experts say.

    They do not hibernate and are also characterized by amber colored crescent shaped fur patches on their chests and long tongues which help them extract honey from bee hives – earning them the name “beruang madu” (honey bear) in Malaysia and Indonesia.

    Their numbers in the wild are at threat by poachers and deforestation, declining by 35% over the past three decades, according to conservation groups like the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and Bornean Sun Bear Conservation Center (BSCC) in Sabah, Malaysia.

    Sun bears are listed as vulnerable by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN).

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Elon Musk reactivates Kanye West’s Twitter account following X rebrand | CNN Business

    Elon Musk reactivates Kanye West’s Twitter account following X rebrand | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    X, formerly known as Twitter, has reinstated Kanye West’s account on the social media platform. West will not be able to monetize his account, and no ads will appear next to his posts, the company told the Wall Street Journal on Saturday.

    The musician’s account was suspended in December for violating the platform’s rules on inciting violence. The suspension followed multiple antisemitic comments made by West – who has legally changed his name to Ye – including a threat to “Go death con 3 on JEWISH PEOPLE.” Those statements led to a swift disintegration of multiple business deals, including partnerships with Adidas and luxury fashion house Balenciaga.

    Although CNN at the time was unable to determine which tweet had been the final straw, the day before his suspension West tweeted an altered image of the Star of David with a swastika inside.

    Twitter has long been embroiled in questions surrounding moderation, with the platform’s CEO Elon Musk describing himself as a “free speech absolutist.” After agreeing to buy the company last October, he said Twitter would “be very reluctant to delete things” and “be very cautious with permanent bans.”

    But after West was suspended, Musk tweeted “I tried my best. Despite that, he again violated our rule against incitement to violence.”

    In April, Twitter’s safety team launched a new content enforcement strategy called “Freedom of Speech, Not Reach,” which focused on “restricting the reach of Tweets that violate our policies by making the content less discoverable.”

    This approach, in part, requires the team to “proactively prevent ads from appearing adjacent to content” labeled as violative.

    In an update earlier this month, the safety team reported that these labeled tweets “receive 81% less reach or impressions” than non-restricted ones, and that “more than 99.99% of Tweet impressions are from … content that does not violate our rules.”

    Twitter’s Violent Speech Policy prohibits inciting and glorifying violence, wishing harm on other people, and threatening others. But it makes some exceptions, including for “figures of speech, satire, or artistic expression when the context is expressing a viewpoint rather than instigating actionable violence or harm.”

    “We make sure to evaluate and understand the context behind the conversation before taking action,” the policy states, adding that if a user believes their account was wrongfully suspended, they can submit an appeal.

    It’s not clear whether West submitted an appeal, or if something else prompted his account’s reactivation. The musician has yet to post on the platform. CNN has reached out to Twitter and a representative for West but has not received a response.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Elon Musk has officially killed Twitter. The zombie platform lives on as X, a disfigured shell of its former self | CNN Business

    Elon Musk has officially killed Twitter. The zombie platform lives on as X, a disfigured shell of its former self | CNN Business

    [ad_1]

    Editor’s Note: A version of this article first appeared in the “Reliable Sources” newsletter. Sign up for the daily digest chronicling the evolving media landscape here.



    CNN
     — 

    Bye bye, birdie.

    Twitter, the text-based social media platform that played an outsized role on society by serving as a digital town square, was killed by its unhinged owner Elon Musk on Sunday. It was 17 years old.

    A zombie Twitter, known only as X, reluctantly endures. A warped and disfigured platform, X marches on like a White Walker, an ugly shell of its former self under the command of a loathsome leader.

    Whereas Twitter was once a fountain of authoritative information, X is a platform where trolls can pay a small fee to have their ugly content boosted ahead of reputable sources.

    X is a platform where identity verification no longer exists and impersonation is only a paid subscription away.

    X is a platform where journalists are banned and smeared while the most repellant and dishonest voices are elevated.

    X is a platform where the rules are unclear and content moderation is largely an idea of the past.

    X is a platform where the most important and consequential decisions are made on a whim and can happen without any warning.

    And X is a platform where vital infrastructure is crumbling and the most basic of features often fail to function.

    X might resemble Twitter. It might occupy the same address on the internet that Twitter once did. But make no mistake, it is not the same platform it once was — even as recently as nine months ago, when Musk took over, quickly decapitated the former leadership, and threw the company into chaos and turmoil.

    That platform has ceased to be. It arguably died some time ago, before it was announced to the public by way of a sudden and disorderly rebranding.

    In many ways, Musk has done to Twitter what Donald Trump did to the Republican Party: wholly remade it in his own image. At least, with Musk, the deformed entity is getting a different name, one that allows the public to perhaps separate Twitter from what Musk has transformed it into.

    X will, of course, inherit all of Twitter’s business problems. Musk is the entity that has proven toxic to advertisers and much of the user base, not the widely recognized bird logo. How the billionaire ultimately turns that ship around is unclear, particularly as he faces new competition from Mark Zuckerberg and Threads.

    So far, however, there is little hope Musk will be able to successfully steer the ship out of iceberg-ridden waters. He is, after all, the captain who led the ship into them — all while manically laughing alongside his inner circle while standing at the wheel.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Elon Musk says Twitter logo to change, birds to be gradually abandoned | CNN Business

    Elon Musk says Twitter logo to change, birds to be gradually abandoned | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Elon Musk tweeted on his official account on Sunday that Twitter would be changing its logo to an “X” and that all the birds will be disappearing from the platform.

    In a series of tweets, Musk said: “And soon we shall bid adieu to the twitter brand and, gradually, all the birds.”

    In the same series of tweets, Musk posted “Paint It Black,” before launching a user poll to “Change default platform color to black.”

    “If a good enough X logo is posted tonight, we’ll make go live worldwide tomorrow,” he continued.

    “Like this but X,” he added above an illustration of the iconic bird silhouette but against a black background.

    One of the world’s richest men, Musk, once known for his innovative efforts through companies SpaceX and Tesla to launch rockets and build electric cars, now makes headlines for his antics and eccentric remarks on his personal Twitter account – often sharing conspiracy theories and getting into public spats on the social media platform.

    Musk overhauled the site after acquiring it for $44 billion in late October – drastically cutting staff and overseeing controversial policy changes which have led to frequent service disruptions and upended his own reputation in the process as tech watchers have noted.

    He has also repeatedly warned that Twitter could be at risk of filing for bankruptcy. This month he disclosed that the platform still has a negative cash flow due to a 50% drop in advertising revenue and heavy debt loads.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Tourists fined for dingo selfies as rangers warn of rising wild dog attacks | CNN

    Tourists fined for dingo selfies as rangers warn of rising wild dog attacks | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Two tourists who snapped selfies with dingoes have been fined more than $1,500 each for taking the “extremely dangerous decision” to interact with the native wild dogs following a recent spate of ferocious attacks, Australian authorities said.

    In a statement Friday, Queensland Department of Environment and Science compliance manager Mike Devery said the two women were lucky not to be attacked in the separate incidents on the popular tourist island of K’gari, formerly known as Fraser Island.

    An image provided by the department showed an unnamed New South Wales woman, 29, laying down next to a pack of sleeping dingo pups. “She was lucky the mother of the pups wasn’t nearby,” Devery said.

    The other tourist, a 25-year-old Queensland woman, appeared in a selfie video posted to social media that showed her with a growling dingo, “which was clearly exhibiting dominance-testing behaviour,” he said.

    “It is not playful behaviour. Wongari are wild animals and need to be treated as such, and the woman is lucky the situation did not escalate,” he added, referring to dingoes by their indigenous name.

    In an update Friday, the department said a 23-year-old woman was hospitalized with serious injuries to her arms and legs after she was bitten by dingoes while jogging on an island beach Monday.

    Tourists Shane and Sarah Moffat jumped in to rescue her, CNN affiliate Nine News reported.

    “There was a big piece missing out of her arm there and there was puncture wounds all up the side of her legs,” Shane Moffat told Nine News.

    The leader of that dingo pack was later euthanized, the department said. It had also been involved in recent biting incidents that led to the hospitalization of a 6-year-old girl, the department said.

    “It was also clear from its behaviour that it had become habituated, either by being fed or from people interacting with it for videos and selfies,” the update said.

    “Our number one priority is to keep people on K’gari safe and conserve the population of wongari (dingoes), and those who blatantly ignore the rules for social media attention can expect a fine or a court appearance,” Devery said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Biden administration announces new labels for gadgets that are less vulnerable to cyberattacks | CNN Business

    Biden administration announces new labels for gadgets that are less vulnerable to cyberattacks | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The next time you’re in the market for a smart TV, fitness tracker or other connected gadget, you could see a new US government-backed label identifying some products as being particularly hardened against hackers.

    On Tuesday, the Biden administration announced it’s moving to implement a cybersecurity labeling program aimed at helping consumers pick out trustworthy tech products that are rated as more secure than the competition.

    The program seeks to bolster the nation’s cybersecurity overall by guiding Americans who may be in the market for smart home tech or wearables toward products that meet a high standard for cybersecurity as defined by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).

    The label will appear as a “distinct shield logo,” according to the White House. Products that meet the criteria for the label could include tech that requires strong passwords and that provides regular software updates to guard against the latest threats, for example.

    A wide range of products could be covered, the administration said, including smart refrigerators, microwave ovens, thermostats, home voice assistants and — eventually — WiFi routers, after NIST finishes designing cybersecurity standards for them later this year.

    For years, cybersecurity has been an afterthought in a market for so-called “internet of things” (IoT) devices that prioritizes low costs over security, according to security experts. One of the more famous examples of IoT security failures came in 2016, when criminal hackers used an army of infected computers, known as the Mirai botnet, to disrupt access to the websites of Twitter, PayPal, and others.

    Products certified under the new program may come with a QR code that links to a national database affirming its participation, the administration added in a release.

    The launch of the program could still be as far as a year away. But the administration took its first steps toward implementation on Tuesday as the Federal Communications Commission applied for a trademark linked to the effort, known as the “US Cyber Trust Mark.”

    The FCC, which regulates wireless devices, also issued a formal proposal that will be open for public feedback on how it should manage the program.

    “This new labeling program would help provide Americans with greater assurances about the cybersecurity of the products they use and rely on in their everyday lives,” the administration said in a statement. “It would also be beneficial for businesses, as it would help differentiate trustworthy products in the marketplace.”

    The government proposal comes two years after President Joe Biden signed an executive order calling for an “‘energy star’ type of label” for tech products. At the time, the US government was still reeling from a crippling ransomware attack days earlier that had forced a temporary shutdown of Colonial Pipeline, one of the country’s largest fuel pipeline operators.

    The executive order highlighted how the administration could use product labeling, combined with the federal government’s immense procurement power, to shape commercial markets and raise the bar for companies that sell technology to both US agencies and ordinary consumers.

    Companies including Amazon, Best Buy, Cisco, Google, LG, Logitech, Samsung and others pledged to assist in the government’s labeling push by committing to increase the cybersecurity of their products, the White House said Tuesday.

    Dave DeWalt, CEO of the cybersecurity-focused investment firm NightDragon, said the government’s move could help address a “perfect storm” of billions of insecure IoT devices.

    “Market forces alone were never going to be sufficient to force manufacturers to step up and deliver more secure devices,” he said. “We’ve taken an essential step now in the right direction to put the power back in the hands of the consumers to choose better security.”

    The Consumer Technology Association said Tuesday its next annual trade show, CES 2024, will feature “certification-ready products” once the FCC finalizes its rules.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Why celebrities are on strike: Not every actor makes Tom Cruise money | CNN Business

    Why celebrities are on strike: Not every actor makes Tom Cruise money | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    On Friday, the SAG-AFTRA, a union representing about 160,000 Hollywood actors, officially went on strike after failing to reach a deal with Hollywood’s biggest studios.

    That means Hollywood actors and writers are on strike simultaneously for the first time in more than 60 years, bringing most film and television productions to a halt.

    Among other demands, actors on strike are calling for increased pay and a rethinking of residuals, which union members say has significantly diminished amid the rise of streaming services. Residuals are financial compensation paid out to actors whenever TV shows or movies they’ve appeared in are replayed.

    Here are some significant numbers:

    The union’s 160,000 members join the 11,000 Writers Guild of America members who have been striking since May.

    While many of the world’s highest-paid celebrities, including Meryl Streep and Matt Damon, have voiced their support for the strike, the concerns about higher pay and residuals affect thousands of actors who perform in hundreds of films and TV shows.

    SAG-AFTRA’s president, Fran Drescher, pushed back on the notion that all actors are wealthy, saying that a vast majority “are just working people just trying to make a living just trying to pay their rent, just trying to put food on the table and get their kids off to school.”

    “Everything that you watch, that you enjoy, that you’re entertained by are scenes filled with people that are not making the big money,” she added.

    That’s how much the US Bureau of Labor Statistics reported as the average pay for California actors in 2022. However, the BLS noted in the data that actors aren’t paid full-time year-round due to the nature of the job.

    Before the contract between actors and movie studios officially expired this week, SAG-AFTRA members had negotiated specific minimum rates for performers. For example, an actor who worked on a television show for one week was paid a minimum of $3,756.

    However, Kellee Stewart, an actress who has performed for more than 20 years and has appeared on the television series “All American” and “Black-ish,” noted that performers traditionally don’t get to take home the number that appears as their rate.

    “You don’t get to keep it all when you get a paycheck,” she said.

    “You have to pay taxes, plus commissions. For me, that would include an agent, a manager, and a lawyer that negotiates your deals. Right away, when you’re giving a quote for what you’re going to get paid, you already know that’s really going to be 35% less, give or take,” she added.

    Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson was the highest paid actor of 2022, raking in $270 million, according to Forbes’ list of highest paid entertainers. Johnson received hefty paydays from his roles in “Jungle Cruise” and “Red Notice,” but, according to Forbes, the majority of his earned income in 2022 came from his tequila brand, Teremana.

    Tom Cruise made headlines last year for reportedly making $100 million from his deal to star in “Top Gun: Maverick,” for which he received a cut of ticket sales, according to Variety.

    On CBS’ Face the Nation Sunday, IAC Chairman Barry Diller called on both top-paid actors and movie executives to take 25% pay cuts.

    “You have the actors union saying, ‘How dare these 10 people who run these companies earn all this money and won’t pay us?’ While, if you look at it on the other side, the top 10 actors get paid more than the top 10 executives,” Diller said. “I’m not saying either is right. Actually, everybody’s probably overpaid at the top end.”

    The minimum amount of money a performer must take home in one year to qualify for health insurance is $26,470.

    However, while well-known actors are paid millions of dollars to star in movies and TV shows, many members of SAG-AFTRA don’t bring in enough income each year to meet the union’s minimum requirement.

    According to Shaan Sharma, an actor and SAG-AFTRA board member, just 12.7% of SAG-AFTRA members qualify for the union’s health plan.

    Actor Rod McLachlan, who has appeared in television shows such as “Blue Bloods,” said it’s “a constant struggle” to meet the health insurance threshold.

    “If you think about it, $26,000 isn’t a middle-class wage,” he said.

    “The thing about the life of an actor is that you have good years and bad years,” he added.

    Due to the unpredictable nature of TV acting and the competitive nature of landing roles, actors traditionally rely on residual payments, paid out when films or movies are replayed, as a form of steady income when work is hard to come by.

    “If you were in a popular episode of a popular show, the income streams could last for quite some time. You have almost 18 months on one level or another where you are receiving income that was significant enough to help you until the next time you did a network show,” McLachlan said.

    Actors say that the calculation around residuals has changed. As more shows and movies have moved to streaming services, where it isn’t always clear how often content is replayed, actors say they’re making significantly less money.

    Striking writers and actors take part in a rally outside Paramount studios in Los Angeles on Friday, July 14, 2023. This marks the first day actors formally joined the picket lines, more than two months after screenwriters began striking in their bid to get better pay and working conditions.

    “The residuals that I get when it’s on network television versus what I would get on Netflix are night and day,” Stewart said.

    On Twitter, Stewart shared a screengrab of 5 residual payments totaling 13 cents from replays on streaming services.

    “There’s not just a difference between traditional residual television and streaming; they’re not even in the same conversation,” she told CNN.

    On Thursday, Disney CEO Bob Iger said striking actors’ and writers’ demands are “just not realistic.”

    “They are adding to a set of challenges that this business is already facing, that is quite frankly, very disruptive,” he told CNBC.

    When Iger rejoined Disney as CEO in November 2022, he agreed to an annual base salary of $1 million with a potential annual bonus of $2 million dollars. The agreement also includes stock awards from Disney totaling $25 million.

    On Wednesday, Iger agreed to remain in his post as CEO of Disney through 2026 while the company’s board searches for a successor. In his new agreement, Iger is now eligible for a bonus of up to $5 million, according to a company filing, meaning his total pay may reach $31 million per year.

    Walt Disney Studios is part of The Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers (AMPTP), the trade group that negotiates with currently striking writers and actors. Other major movie studios, such as Paramount Pictures and Sony Pictures, along with streaming services like Netflix and Apple TV+ are members, as well. Warner Bros. Discovery, CNN’s parent company, is also a member.

    Netflix’s co-CEOs Ted Sarandos and Greg Peters made $50 million and $28 million respectively in 2022, according to a company filing.

    In a statement to CNN, the AMPTP said they were “deeply disappointed” with the union’s decision to strike.

    “Rather than continuing to negotiate, SAG-AFTRA has put us on a course that will deepen the financial hardship for thousands who depend on the industry for their livelihoods,” the AMPTP said.

    SAG-AFTRA did not respond to CNN’s request for comment.

    The potential economic impact of the combined writers’ and actors’ strike could cause $4 billion or more in damage, Kevin Klowden, the chief global strategist for the economic think tank, the Milken Institute, told CNN.

    Klowden said the double strike, which has brought Hollywood projects to a grinding halt, may affect more than just the US economy.

    “London and the UK, Australia, New Zealand, and other places, which either have studios or even do post-production, will face a real impact,” he said.

    – CNN’s Natasha Chen contributed reporting to this story

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Actors set to strike after talks with major studios, streaming services fail | CNN Business

    Actors set to strike after talks with major studios, streaming services fail | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    A union representing about 160,000 Hollywood actors is poised to go on strike after talks with major studios and streaming services have failed.

    It will be the first time its members have stopped work on movie and television productions since 1980, after a final day of negotiations failed to produce an agreement.

    Fran Drescher, president of SAG-AFTRA, the union, said in a statement the studio management’s offers were “insulting and disrespectful.”

    The union said its negotiating committee had unanimously recommend a strike and that its governing board will vote on that recommendation later Thursday morning.

    Its members had already voted 98% in favor of authorizing a strike.

    The body representing studios and streaming services did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

    This is a developing story. It will be updated.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Mark Zuckerberg concealed his kids’ faces on Instagram. Should you? | CNN Business

    Mark Zuckerberg concealed his kids’ faces on Instagram. Should you? | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    When Mark Zuckerberg shared a photo on Instagram of his family on July 4, two things stuck out: the billionaire CEO wore a striped souvenir cowboy hat, and the faces of his children were replaced with happy face emojis.

    Zuckerberg’s post was promptly criticized by some who saw the decision to obscure the faces as a reflection of his privacy concerns for sharing pictures of his children online, despite his creating massive platforms that allow millions of other parents to do just that.

    Meta, Instagram’s parent company, has long been scrutinized over how it handles user privacy and for the way its algorithms can be used to lead young users down potentially harmful rabbit hoes.

    But the choice also highlights a broader trend among some social media users, and particularly among high-profile individuals, to be more cautious in sharing identifiable pictures of their children online.

    For years, celebrities from Kristen Bell and Gigi Hadid to Chris Pratt and Orlando Bloom have been blurring images or using emojis to help protect their kids’ privacy on social media. Zuckerberg, too, had previously posted pictures of the back of his daughters’ heads and their side profiles rather than showing their entire faces.

    It’s more rare for everyday users to take a similar approach — but perhaps it shouldn’t be.

    “By modeling for us that he was careful not to share his family’s location or childrens’ identities, he may be communicating that it is the end users’ responsibility to protect themselves online,” said Alexandra Hamlet, a New York City-based psychologist who closely follows the impact of social media on young users.

    Meta did not respond to a request for comment.

    Few things are as central to the parenting experience as showing numerous, possibly embarrassing, pictures of your children with anyone who will stop and look. But over the years, a growing number of parents and experts have raised concerns about the risks of sharing these pictures on social media, including the possibility of exposing kids to identify theft and facial recognition technology, as well as creating an internet history that could follow them into adulthood.

    Some parents choose to either restrict how much they share about their kids or limit sharing to less public platforms. Others adopt more clever hacks like obscuring their children’s faces.

    Leah Plunkett, author of “Sharenthood” and associate dean of learning experience and innovation (LXI) at Harvard Law School, said blocking a child’s face is a symbol that you’re giving them control over their own narrative.

    “Every time you post about your kids, you are chipping away at allowing them to tell their own stories about who they are and who they want to become,” she said. “We grow up making mischief and more than a few mistakes and grow up better having made them. If we lose the privacy of teens and kids to play and explore, and to live and through trial and error, we will deprive them of the ability to develop and tell stories [on their own terms].”

    Noticeably, Zuckerberg did not obscure the face of his infant daughter, which might suggest less concern with the risks for a baby’s face than a young child. However, Plunkett said artificial intelligence technology can be used to trace a face’s changes over time and may still be able to later connect any child, even a baby, to an image of them when older.

    Plunkett believes social media companies can do more, such as offering a setting that automatically blurs kids’ faces or prevents any picture with a child from being used for marketing or advertising purposes.

    For now, however, the onus remains on parents to limit or abstain sharing photos of their kids online.

    “It’s not just parents – grandparents, coaches, teachers and other trusted adults should also keep kids out of photos and videos to protect their privacy, safety, future and current opportunities, and their ability to figure out their own story about themselves and for themselves,” she said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • How Ron DeSantis gained a fan base among some suburban women far from Florida | CNN Politics

    How Ron DeSantis gained a fan base among some suburban women far from Florida | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Like many Americans, when Vanessa Steinkamp was stuck inside early in the Covid-19 pandemic, she logged into Twitter to talk to the outside world. The teacher and mother of three schoolchildren in Dallas was worried that closed classrooms would hurt kids, particularly the most vulnerable students who needed the special resources that schools provide. Calling for children to go back to in-person learning earned her a lot of backlash, but she also befriended likeminded moms.

    When Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis pressed public schools to reopen in the summer of 2020, he became their hero.

    These women built an informal network of overlapping chatgroups across several states, many of them outside Florida. They had a mix of political views, from liberal to conservative, and were brought together by frustrations with a Covid response that they felt left opening schools a low priority.

    College-educated and affluent, the mothers are the kinds of voters seen as critical to both political parties in swing districts and states, and one of the voting groups among whom former President Donald Trump and Republicans underperformed in both 2020 and 2022.

    They’re the kinds of voters DeSantis hopes can drive him to victory in a general election if he can overcome Trump to secure the GOP nomination – and appealing to them is a key part of his case in the primary.

    One of Steinkamp’s first Twitter friends was Jennifer Sey, then an executive at Levi’s. In 2022, Sey said the company pressured her to stop tweeting about opening schools and playgrounds, and when she refused, she said, she was pushed out of her job as brand president. Levi’s disputed her account, telling The New York Times it supported Sey’s advocacy on schools but her comments “went far beyond calling for schools to reopen, and frequently used her platform to criticize public health guidelines and denounce elected officials and government scientists.”

    Gov. Ron DeSantis launched his presidential campaign in May.

    Another Twitter friend was so infuriated when she saw a local school board member’s campaign fliers in San Diego that touted the decision to keep schools closed that she called a real estate agent in Florida and eventually moved to Tampa. She did not want to use her name because she said she feared backlash at work, but she did send CNN photos of the fliers.

    Julie Hamill, a lawyer near Los Angeles, was a later addition to the group. She, too, was furious about the actions of her local public health department and school board. But her husband didn’t want to leave California, so last year Hamill ran for school board and won.

    I first spoke to Steinkamp in the spring of 2021 while reporting a story on how Covid had changed the real estate market in Texas. But it was her appreciation of the then first-term Florida governor that stuck with me.

    “If DeSantis were to run tomorrow, he would win,” she said then. “All he has to do is run on opening schools.”

    Her friends told CNN recently they’d felt the same way – they’d joked about “Daddy DeSantis” and “Freedom Daddy.” His early advocacy for open schools, Sey said, was “pretty heroic.”

    Their fangirl vibe was tongue-in-cheek, but also spoke to their situation. Hamill said: “We’re like desperate women who … had tried everything that we could do in our own power in our own communities, and we weren’t getting anywhere.”

    DeSantis pressured school districts to open in August 2020, earlier than most places in the US. But many European countries opened schools in April and May of 2020. “Children don’t generally infect adults,” a health official in Finland said in May 2020, explaining his country’s decision to reopen schools. (At the time, there was conflicting research on the role kids played in spreading the virus.) As CNN reported in January 2021, “in Europe, shutting schools is widely seen as a last resort.” Recent research has shown kids fell back in their learning during the pandemic. American fourth- and eighth-graders, for example, showed the largest declines in math scores since the Education Department’s National Center for Education Statistics began keeping track in 1990.

    DeSantis’ actions gained him a bigger national platform during the pandemic, which he’s used to launch his presidential bid. He’s campaigning on his Covid record, but also the idea that Florida is “where woke goes to die.”

    Jennifer Sey, who now calls herself a

    Steinkamp has been a Republican all her life, though she said she has never liked Trump. Sey, the former Levi’s executive, had been a leftist Democrat until her Covid experience, she said, but she’s also open to DeSantis’ “war on woke.” She told CNN, “I think, to some extent, he’s got a point. It’s a movement that demands conformity and sees every sort of problem the world faces through this lens of kind of hierarchical oppression.”

    Sey, who now says she’s a “disaffected leftist,” said, “My issue with woke capitalism, in particular, is that it’s hypocritical, and it’s a lie. … I would much rather companies focus on treat treating employees with fairness, paying them well, treating women well – not harassing them – than do these fake campaigns while the leaders take all the money for themselves and obscure their greed with woke washing.”

    Even so, Sey said, she thought DeSantis’ campaigning against wokeness was “a little bit” of a distraction from the policies that made her like him in the first place. She thought the governor’s fight with Disney was unnecessary. “There’s some truth to what he’s saying about woke ideology being corrosive and conformist and authoritarian in some ways. I just don’t think you should counter that with more authoritarianism,” she said.

    Julie Hamill won a seat on her local school board after disagreeing with public health policies during the pandemic.

    Hamill, the lawyer in LA, said she had voted for Barack Obama twice, Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden for president. She is open to voting for DeSantis but is concerned about some of his policies.

    She said she considered herself socially liberal but suffered backlash when she called for schools to be open. “I was demonized for expressing these feelings. And meanwhile, Ron DeSantis in Florida is saying everything that I was desperately wanting to hear from my own elected representatives.”

    The women don’t always agree on politics: Steinkamp is against abortion, while Sey and Hamill are for women having the right to the procedure. But all three think Florida’s new ban on abortion after six weeks is a blot on their favorite governor’s record. “That’s dangerous,” Hamill said. “That’s something that I cannot get behind. And I don’t think that’s going to bode well for his presidential campaign. I think that that might be a real impediment to bringing in moderate women.”

    With none of them living in Florida, the women have not had an opportunity to vote for DeSantis yet. And it’s too early to know if their Covid-era infatuation will become more.

    They all despair at the thought that the 2024 election will be a rematch between Biden and Trump. If those were her two choices, Steinkamp said, she’d go for a third option: “Jump in my swimming pool and drown myself.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • To fridge or not to fridge? Ketchup company clears the air on how you should store the popular condiment | CNN Business

    To fridge or not to fridge? Ketchup company clears the air on how you should store the popular condiment | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    With just five words, a recent tweet from Kraft Heinz sparked a bit of a debate about how you should store your ketchup.

    “FYI,” began the tweet from the United Kingdom-based branch of the food and beverage company. “Ketchup. Goes. In. The. Fridge!!!”

    Kraft Heinz, whose ketchup is among its popular condiments, shared the heavily punctuated statement on Tuesday in a tweet that reached over 4 million people.

    A day later, the company asked the public via a Twitter poll whether they kept their ketchup chilled or in the pantry.

    “Where do you keep yours? It has to be … in the fridge!” the poll stated. The answer of “fridge” appeared to be the consensus, according to 63.2% of over 13,000 votes cast, the poll’s results showed. Meanwhile, 36.8% of respondents said they preferred their ketchup in the cupboard.

    Some Twitter users who voiced their distaste for cold ketchup pointed out that ketchup bottles are stored at room temperature on tables at restaurants. Other users didn’t understand the need for a debate, asserting that once the ketchup bottle is opened, it belongs in the refrigerator.

    In 2017, a Twitter user posed the same question to the United States branch of Heinz through the social media website.

    At the time, Heinz responded, “Because of its natural acidity, Heinz Ketchup is shelf-stable, but refrigerate after opening to maintain product quality.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link