Mediaboss Marketing

John Malone is vying to dominate the global pay-TV market. Photograph: Kevork Djansezian/Getty Images

When the American billionaire John Malone failed in his first attempt to become a major player in the British pay-TV market a decade ago he questioned Rupert Murdochs power by dubbing Sky the Death Star. It was a rich comment coming from a man whose fearsome reputation for deal-making in the wild west days of the cable TV market in the 1970s and 80s led Al Gore, the former US vice president, to nickname him Darth Vader.

Last weeks move by Malones Discovery he holds the most voting shares at almost 30% to buy Scripps Networks in a deal worth $14.6bn (10.9bn) marks the latest move among the titans of media vying to dominate the global pay-TV market.

The 76-year-olds global ambitions mean he frequently crosses swords with Murdoch on his way to becoming the most powerful challenger to the octogenarians empire in the UK and Europe.

Malones latest deal will add UKTV, owner of 10 channels including Dave and Gold, and Food Network, which broadcasts shows such as Nigella Express, to a burgeoning European portfolio that includes Eurosport, which paid almost 1bn for Olympic TV rights, Bear Gryllss shows and channels including Animal Planet and Discovery.

Over the years Malones sporadic skirmishes with Murdoch have varied from fierce to frenemy-like.

Earlier this year, Malones Liberty Media bought Bernie Ecclestones Formula One in a deal valuing the sport at about $8bn, an asset Murdoch had looked to buy Sky has TV broadcast rights in the UK, Germany and Italy. He rubbed it in by promptly installing Chase Carey, a former top executive at Fox and once Murdochs right-hand man, as chairman.

We bang into each other all the time, Malone said recently. I have absolutely the highest respect for Rupert. That may be, but the man known as the swamp alligator among Wall Street traders for his cut-throat tactics, is one of the few to have got the better of Murdoch and threaten the family empire.

In 2004, when Murdoch was de-listing News Corp from the Australian stock market so it could list in New York, a small window appeared when hugely valuable voting shares, through which the Murdochs maintain control of their empire, suddenly became available.

Malone secretly built up a stake of about 18% in News Corp votes, becoming its second-largest shareholder and threatening the familys cast-iron grip. After a two-year standoff he used the stake as leverage in an asset swap that won him Murdochs controlling stake in DirecTV, the largest satellite business in the US.

He had the chance to strike again in 2011 when a weakened Murdoch was forced to pull his $8bn bid to take full control of Sky as the phone-hacking scandal engulfed his UK newspaper business. However, Malone passed up the opportunity, saying that in previous deals Murdoch had acted with the greatest integrity and he did not want to give him a hard time.

Malones stakes tend to be strategic and he is a prolific deal-maker, said Claire Enders, of Enders Analysis. Malone and Murdoch have complementary business approaches. They are healthy frenemies.

An opportunity Malone didnt pass up was fulfilling a long-held ambition to create a pay-TV powerhouse in Britain when Liberty Global, his primarily European cable business which has a presence in over 30 markets, struck its biggest deal, acquiring Virgin Media for 15bn in 2013.

A year later Malone looked set to achieve what NTL had failed to do in 2006 and acquire ITV, Britains largest commercial, free-to-air broadcaster. It had been James Murdoch, then chief executive of Sky, spying the threat the combination could make, who thwarted NTL when he swooped in to buy a 17.9% stake for almost 1bn and block the move.

Ironically it was Sky, which had been ordered to sell down its stake over competition issues, that opened the door for Malone by selling a 6.4% chunk to Liberty Global in 2014. The following year Malone upped it to 9.9% but the expected takeover, which could cost 9bn, has so far failed to emerge.

Malone believes ITV is overpriced and is facing uncertainties, such as the impact of the rise of streaming services, while London-listed Liberty Global does not generate any revenues in dollars so hasnt benefited from the post-Brexit slump in the pound.

Murdoch, meanwhile, is also aiming to strengthen his pay-TV empire, as viewers move away from traditional packages for online services such as Netflix and Amazon, with his protracted 11.7bn bid for full control of Sky across Europe, which is currently bogged down in the regulatory process.

Malones power can be seen in the way he at times uses his businesses to work in concert to push a deal through, as he did when Discovery and Liberty Global paid 500m for All3Media, the maker of Skins, Midsomer Murders and The Only Way is Essex.

Malone could look to marshal his forces to provide a rival to Sky and BT in the 5bn-plus auction of Premier League rights due to kick off at the end of the year. Before the last auction David Zaslav, Discovery chief executive, said that he had held talks with potential partners over joint bids for premium sports rights such as football.

Discovery has eyed numerous assets in the UK, including expressing interest to the government in buying Channel 4 when it was being considered for a 1bn privatisation. It also looked at Channel5 when Richard Desmond put it up for sale, ultimately pulling out with MTV-owner Viacom, in which Malone has a small interest, seizing control.

Malones eclectic range of investments includes TripAdvisor, the worlds largest live event company Live Nation, the US digital radio company Sirius, the Atlanta Braves baseball team and shopping channel QVC.

He also has a stake in Lionsgate, the studio behind films including La La Land and TV dramas Mad Men and Orange is the New Black.

For the last few years there has been rapid consolidation in the media sector internationally and an almost ubiquitous investor behind this game is Malone, said Alex DeGroote, research analyst at Cenkos Securities. He is very patient. Stealth and long-term planning are Malones hallmarks.

Malone has used part of his $7.9bn fortune to become a conservation activist and is the largest private landowner in the US. His 2.2 million acres puts him just ahead of his old friend and business partner Ted Turner, the founder of CNN.

He also owns a castle and the former estate in Ireland of Tony OReilly, who owned the Independent before the Lebedevs. This despite a supposed aversion to flying which means his holiday of choice is said to be a family vacation in a super-sized Winnebago.

Malone has started planning his succession at Discovery and Liberty Global by giving their chief executives, Zaslav and Mike Fries respectively, the first right of refusal if he sells his stakes.

However, he has made it clear he is not quite ready to hang up his spurs just yet. A decade younger than Murdoch, Malone looks like he will remain a thorn in the side for the next generation of the clan, sons James and Lachlan, who are gradually taking over the reins.

On the horizon remains the potential of a 100bn mega-merger between Liberty Global and Vodafone. The two companies have had on-off talks over the past two years, focusing on the possibility of some form of asset swap in the UK, and recently agreed to merge their Dutch businesses. If a deal came off it would pose the biggest pan-European threat Murdoch has faced, and a fair-sized global headache, with Sky UK just beginning to get into the mobile market.

The man once nicknamed the cable cowboy is not ready to ride off into the sunset just yet.

Liberty Global Virgin Media ITV (9.9% stake) TV3 in Ireland All3Media (50%) TV production group behind shows including Skins, Midsomer Murders and The Only Way is Essex TV and broadband operations in 30 territories, mostly Europe, including Latin America and the Caribbean

Liberty Media Formula One US satellite radio group SiriusXM (68%) Atlanta Braves baseball team Live Nation, worlds biggest live event company (35%)

Discovery Communications (He has most voting shares, almost 30%) Eurosport, which owns European TV rights to the Olympics All3Media (50%), joint venture Channels including Discovery, TLC, Animal Planet UKTV, owner of 10 channels including Dave and Gold (50% with BBC Worldwide) Food Network

Investments through other Liberty vehicles or personally QVC home shopping TV business operating in the US, UK, Germany, Japan, Italy, China, France Travel sites Expedia and TripAdvisor Lionsgate (8%) studio behind La La Land, Hunger Games and TV shows including Mad Men Starz, premium cable channel group bought by Lionsgate in which Malone had a stake Small stakes in Time Warner and Viacom, owner of MTV, Nickelodeon and Channel 5

See the article here:
John Malone, the 'swamp alligator' chewing up the UK's media market - The Guardian

MANILA (Reuters) - More than two dozen Asian countries will agree to utilize social media to counter the spread of violent extremism in the region, according to a draft statement being prepared ahead of a top security gathering on Monday.

Foreign ministers from the 10-member Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) and from 17 dialogue partner-countries are expected to create a regional mechanism to address the security threat.

"The ministers expressed strong condemnation of recent acts of terrorism in all its forms and manifestations," said the draft chairman's statement seen by Reuters, reflecting discussions expected at the ASEAN Regional Forum in Manila.

"They also took note of the need to make full and effective use of social media to counter the spread of terrorists' narratives online."

The ARF is expected to discuss creating a mechanism to boost efforts on Security of Information Communication Technology, which Japan, Malaysia and Singapore have volunteered to lead.

The Philippines, which is hosting the ASEAN meetings, is among those most affected. Authorities have said Islamic State's radical ideology is taking a hold in the country's south, with local groups using social media as a primary means of recruiting fighters, which include Indonesians, Singaporeans and Malaysians.

Philippine troops have been battling Islamist militants who seized control of parts of the mainly Muslim Marawi City more than two months ago. Close to 700 people have died and more than 400,000 displaced in the intense fighting.

Philippine authorities believe the problem goes beyond Marawi and militants may be preparing to attack other cities.

ASEAN ministers were ready to act because they have seen how extremists exploited social media to promote their ideology, recruit and inspire attacks, a senior Philippines foreign ministry official familiar with the issue told Reuters.

"They spread violent videos on Twitter and Facebook and communicate through Telegram messaging apps," he said, adding the ministers decided to counter the threat using those same platforms.

Brigadier-General Restituto Padilla, Philippine military spokesman, said many countries were making progress in that regard but "there is a need for ASEAN to do more."

"We can do more beyond the traditional military cooperation," he said, acknowledging support from Indonesia and Malaysia through information and intelligence exchanges and coordinated maritime border patrols.

"This is a very robust engagement that we wish to increase not only with Indonesia and Malaysia," he said. "This challenge that we face in Marawi has its effects also in the whole region."

Reporting by Manuel Mogato; Editing by Martin Petty and Bill Tarrant

Read this article:
Asia security forum to push social media use to fight extremism - Reuters

August 4, 2017 by Terry Flew, The Conversation Our internet is becoming increasingly fragmented thanks to local laws. Credit: c12/Shutterstock

Both The Economist and WIRED are worried about the "splinternet". The UK research organisation NESTA thinks it could "break up" the world wide web as we know it.

What is this awkwardly named idea? It's the concept that someone's experience of the internet in Turkey, for example, is increasingly different from their experience of the internet in Australia.

Travellers to China, in particular, will be familiar with this phenomenon. Thanks to the government's tight control, they have to use Baidu rather than Google as their search engine, and are unable to access Facebook or news sites like The Economist and the New York Times.

We have a growing splinternet because of regional content blocking and the need for companies to comply with diverse, often conflicting national policies, regulations and court decisions.

This tension is particularly apparent when it comes to the likes of Google, Facebook and Twitter. These platform companies have users in almost every country, and governments are increasingly insisting that they comply with local laws and cultural norms when it comes to access and content.

The internet was never truly open

The idea of the internet as an independent, global and unregulated platform has always been something of a fiction. Even at the height of techno-futurist rhetoric about its potential to transcend national boundaries in the late 1990s, there were always exceptions.

The Chinese Communist Party understood from the start that the internet was simply a new form of media, and media control was central to national sovereignty and its authority.

But the splinternet refers to a broader tendency to use laws and regulatory powers within territorial jurisdictions to set limits on digital activities.

A threshold moment was Edward Snowden's revelations in 2013. The documents he shared suggested that the US National Security Agency, through its PRISM program, had been collecting information from global users of Google, Facebook, Apple, Microsoft and Yahoo.

In countries such Brazil, whose leaders had had their communications intercepted, this accelerated moves towards developing national internet control.

Brazil's Marco Civil da Internet law, for instance, now requires global companies to comply with Brazilian laws around data protection.

Is this a bad thing?

Until now, much of the appeal of the internet has been that it's driven by user content and preferences, and not by governments.

But people are paying more attention to hate speech, targeted online abuse, extremism, fake news and other toxic aspects of online culture. Women, people of colour and members of certain religions are disproportionately targeted online.

Academics such as Tarleton Gillespie and public figures such as Stephen Fry are part of a growing rejection of the typical response of platform providers: that they are "just technology companies" intermediaries and cannot involve themselves in regulating speech.

A UK House of Commons report into "hate crime and its violent consequences" noted that:

"there is a great deal of evidence that these platforms are being used to spread hate, abuse and extremism. That trend continues to grow at an alarming rate but it remains unchecked and, even where it is illegal, largely unpoliced."

If we say online hate speech "should be policed", two obvious questions arise: who would do it and on what grounds?

At present, content on the major platforms is largely managed by the companies themselves. The Guardian's Facebook Files revealed both the extent and limitations of such moderation.

We may see governments become increasingly willing to step in, further fragmenting the user experience.

Fair play for all

There are other concerns at play in the splinternet. One is the question of equity between technology companies and traditional media.

Brands like Google, Apple, Facebook, Microsoft, Netflix and Amazon are eclipsing traditional media giants. Yet film, television, newspapers and magazines are still subject to considerably greater levels of country-specific regulation and public scrutiny.

For example, Australian commercial television networks must comply with locally produced material and children's content regulations. These mostly do not apply to YouTube or Netflix despite audiences and advertisers migrating to these providers.

It is increasingly apparent to media policy makers that existing regulations aren't meaningful unless they extend into the online space.

In Australia, the 2012 Convergence Review sought to address this. It recommended that media regulations should apply to "Content Service Enterprises" that met a particular size threshold, rather than basing the rules on the platform that carries the content.

Do we want a splinternet?

We may be heading towards a splinternet unless new global rules can be set. They must combine the benefits of openness with the desire to ensure that online platforms operate in the public interest.

Yet if platform providers are forced to navigate a complex network of national laws and regulations, we risk losing the seamless interconnectedness of online communication.

The burden of finding a solution rests not only on governments and regulators, but on the platforms themselves.

Their legitimacy in the eyes of users is tied up with what Bank of England chair Mark Carney has termed for markets is a "social licence to operate".

Although Google, Facebook, Apple, Amazon, Netflix and others operate globally, they need to be aware that the public expects them to be a force for social good locally.

Explore further: Facebook, Google crack down on hate speech: EU

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Facebook, Google and other US internet giants have sharply boosted efforts to clamp down on online hate speech, a top European Union official said Thursday.

Britain's interior minister is traveling to California to press Internet firms including Facebook, Twitter and Google to stem the flow of extremist content online.

Facebook said Tuesday its ranks of monthly active users had hit the two billion markmeaning more than a quarter of the world's population is on the giant social network.

Facebook, Microsoft, Twitter and YouTube announced Monday the launch of an anti-terror partnership aimed at thwarting the spread of extremist content online.

Facebook said Tuesday that it deleted about 66,000 posts a week in the last two months as the social media giant cracks down on what it deems to be hate speech.

Internet giants Facebook, Microsoft, Twitter and YouTube are not doing enough to fight online hate speech despite "moving in the right direction", the European Commission said on Tuesday.

It has been argued that the ability of humans to recognize social signals is crucial to mastering social intelligence - but can robots learn to read human social cues and adapt or correct their own behavior accordingly?

The small, ornate figurines look like relics of a bygone age: a serene Buddha's head from the Tang dynasty, or a collection of stone-faced soldiers from the Qin era.

Research scientists have achieved a new world record in tape storage their fifth since 2006. The new record of 201 Gb/in2 (gigabits per square inch) in areal density was achieved on a prototype sputtered magnetic tape ...

The near-supersonic rail system known as hyperloop has passed another key milestone on its path to become reality, the US startup Hyperloop One said Wednesday.

Researchers are looking to insects - specifically cicadas - for insight into the design of artificial surfaces with de-icing, self-cleaning and anti-fogging abilities.

High-speed images of a common laser-based metal 3-D printing process, coupled with newly updated computer models, have revealed the mechanisms behind material redistribution, a phenomenon that leads to defects in printed ...

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Read more from the original source:
The 'splinternet' may be the future of the web - Phys.org - Phys.Org

Snopes creator David Mikkelson has secured half a million dollars to keep the iconic fact-checking website Snopes afloat, thanks to a judges ruling in an ongoing court battle.

Mikkelson cannot be removed as chief exec of Snopes.com, while the disputed $500k will be released to the firm that controls Snopes, Bardav Inc.

Proper Media does not have standing to seek removal of Mikkelson. Plaintiffs have not presented sufficient evidence to prove fraudulent acts, wrote Judge Judith Hayes of the San Diego Superior Court in her tentative ruling, published late yesterday.

The judge also ruled that Proper Media, the ad firm which is in dispute with Bardav and which had withheld the $500k, could continue with its claim for breach of contract against Bardav. Vincent Green, one of Proper Medias five directors, is accused by Proper of conspiring with Mikkelson to block the rest of Proper Medias directors from being able to seize full control of Bardav and thus Snopes.

In addition, the source code and templates for Snopes.com will remain under control of Proper Media, despite Mikkelson applying for them to be transferred to Bardav.

Snopes, as all internet users know, is the original fact-checking website. It mostly debunks viral rumours, including such tales as cats being accidentally fired at jet engines during bird strike tests and social media sites demanding upfront payments unless gullible users forward on a particular message.

As we reported in July, Snopes is in trouble thanks to a battle between two companies claiming ownership of the iconic website. Its parent company, Bardav, is being challenged by its advertising partner Proper Media for control of the business.

Proper Media, while placing ads on Snopes and collecting the revenue, was said to be withholding at least $500,000 from Bardav. Proper claims ownership of 50 per cent of Snopes on the basis that Mikkelsons ex-wife sold the firm her stake in the site when she and Mikkelson divorced in 2016. Mikkelson himself owns the other half, which is not in dispute.

Barbara Mikkelsons stake, the newspaper reports, was split between Propers five directors in varying proportions. Proper Media claims that its directors shareholdings amount to making it a beneficial owner of shares in Snopes, entitling it to a seat on Snopes board. Mikkelson says that the five individuals each hold minority stakes and no board seat is due.

The case continues, with more hearings due to take place later today.

PROPER MEDIA LLC VS BARDAV INC is being heard in the Superior Court of California, County of San Diego.

Sponsored: The Joy and Pain of Buying IT - Have Your Say

See the original post here:
Snopes lawsuit latest: Judge orders disputed cash can flow to fact-checking site - The Register

Maybe John F. Kelly can actually do it. If so, he will be the first.

Politico reports that the new White House chief of staff plans to restrict the flow of information to President Trump including news media reports in the hope of keeping the boss on a more even keel. Here's a bit from reporter Josh Dawsey:

When new White House Chief of Staff John F. Kelly huddled with senior staff on his first day at work, he outlined a key problem in President Donald Trumps White House that he planned to fix: bad information getting into the presidents hands.

Kelly told the staff that information needed to flow through him whether on paper or in briefings because the president would make better decisions if given good information.

Kelly's diagnosis makes perfect sense, but others have tried and failed to tame Trump by monitoring his media diet.

If candidate Trump was upset about unfair coverage, it was productive to show him that he was getting fair coverage from outlets that were persuadable, Sam Nunberg, a former campaign adviser, told Politico in February.

Politico's Tara Palmeri wrote at the time that the key to keeping Trumps Twitter habit under control, according to six former campaign officials, is to ensure that his personal media consumption includes a steady stream of praise.

Okay. But the idea that Trump's Twitter habit has ever been under control is laughable. Maybe these campaign officials know something the rest of us don't that Trump's tweets would have been even more inflammatory if not for their interventions.

We'll probably never know about tweets that Trump didn't send. If his staffersmanaged to him out of trouble even a few times, then their efforts were worthwhile. But no one has been able to consistently prevent Trump from stirring up controversy.

Part of the problem is that in a White House composed of competing factions, people invariably try to advance their agendas by presenting Trump with material which may or may not be reliable that promotes their worldviews.

Politico all over this story reported in May on advisers' penchants for strategically feeding dubious information to the president. This was one example, described by reporter Shane Goldmacher:

Current and former Trump officials say Trump can react volcanically to negative press clips, especially those with damaging leaks, becoming engrossed in finding out where they originated.

That is what happened in late February when someone mischievously gave the president a printed copy of an article from GotNews.com, the website of Internet provocateur Charles C. Johnson, which accused deputy chief of staff Katie Walsh of being the source behind a bunch of leaks in the White House.

No matter that Johnson had been permanently banned from Twitter for harassment or that he offered no concrete evidence or that he had lobbed false accusations in the past and recanted them. Trump read the article and began asking staff about Walsh.

Goldmacher added that then-chief of staff Reince Priebus and White House staff secretary Rob Porter have tried to implement a system to manage and document the paperwork Trump receives. How'd that work out?

Kelly is trying to do the same thing, three months later. Perhaps he will prove a more effective manager than Priebus, but Trump is still his impulsive self, and his aides are still vying for influence. Those immutable factors will make Kelly's mission very difficult.

Read more from the original source:
Trump's new chief of staff plans to restrict the president's media diet. Others have tried and failed. - Washington Post