<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Business &#38; MoneyCategory: Media &#124; Business &#38; Money &#124; TIME.com</title>
	<atom:link href="http://business.time.com/category/technology-media/media-technology-media/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://business.time.com</link>
	<description>The latest news and commentary on the economy, the markets, and business</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Jun 2013 21:33:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
<cloud domain='business.time.com' port='80' path='/?rsscloud=notify' registerProcedure='' protocol='http-post' />

	<atom:link rel="search" type="application/opensearchdescription+xml" href="http://business.time.com/osd.xml" title="Business &#38; Money" />
	<atom:link rel='hub' href='http://business.time.com/?pushpress=hub'/>
		<item>
		<title>Jay-Z, Samsung and the 21st-Century Patrons of the Arts</title>
		<link>http://business.time.com/2013/06/18/jay-z-samsung-and-the-21st-century-patrons-of-the-arts/</link>
		<comments>http://business.time.com/2013/06/18/jay-z-samsung-and-the-21st-century-patrons-of-the-arts/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Jun 2013 09:45:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Christopher Matthews</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Music Industry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology & Media]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://business.time.com/?p=82029</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[When you&#8217;re locked in a global war to dominate the smartphone market, every little advantage helps. And now Samsung has enlisted one of the most brilliant musicians and promoters of the past two decades to its arsenal: Jay-Z. During game 5 of the the NBA finals on Sunday, Samsung aired a three-minute ad announcing the release of the rapper&#8217;s upcoming album Magna Carta Holy Grail, due out on July 4. According to The Wall Street Journal, the cellphone maker is paying the rapper $5 per album to issue his newest LP, through a dedicated app, to the first million Samsung Galaxy users 72 hours before its wider release. For Jay-Z, the deal will provide a nice supplement to the wider album sales, which even in this age of rampant piracy should be significant. Jay-Z&#8217;s last LP, Watch The Throne, sold 436,000 copies in its first week, according to Nielsen Soundscan. (MORE: Why YouTube is Launching a Music Service) Samsung&#8217;s motivation, however, is a bit more complex. As TIME contributor Eliot Van Buskirk has pointed out, content distributors are increasingly vying to have exclusive access to new music as it debuts, before it&#8217;s proliferated widely via radio, satellite radio, streaming services, and piracy. But surely Samsung doesn&#8217;t believe that offering access to a rap album three days early is going to generate enough extra Galaxy sales to justify the $5 million investment. Indeed, Samsung probably just views this deal as another advertising expense, and a way to get its brand associated with one of the biggest and hippest names in music. This is the same strategy that companies like Mountain Dew and Converse have taken by launching their own record labels. These companies aren&#8217;t getting into the music business so much as trying burnish their image by linking their brands to hip, young musicians. In fact, when you look at it that way, and consider the staggering amount of money Samsung spends on marketing each year, the deal begins to look like a real coup for Samsung. Industry analyst Horace Deidu estimates that Samsung Electronics spends more than $10 billion per year on ads, sales promotions,<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=business.time.com&#038;blog=31173800&#038;post=82029&#038;subd=timebusinessblog&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://business.time.com/2013/06/18/jay-z-samsung-and-the-21st-century-patrons-of-the-arts/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Music Industry</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://business.time.com/category/technology-media/music-industry-technology-media/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/151128253-copy.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/151128253-copy.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/151128253-copy.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Budweiser Made In America Festival Benefiting The United Way - Day 1</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://2.gravatar.com/avatar/8f9a71742e964af96ca58c01a0577a0d?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2F2.gravatar.com%2Favatar%2Fad516503a11cd5ca435acc9bb6523536%3Fs%3D96&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">christopherrmatthews</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Superman the Sellout? Man of Steel Has Over 100 Promotional Partners</title>
		<link>http://business.time.com/2013/06/04/superman-the-sell-out-man-of-steel-has-over-100-promotional-partners/</link>
		<comments>http://business.time.com/2013/06/04/superman-the-sell-out-man-of-steel-has-over-100-promotional-partners/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Jun 2013 15:25:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brad Tuttle</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Advertising]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Companies & Industries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hollywood]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marketing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology & Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Walmart]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Army National Guard]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Burgers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[comic books]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gillette]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hardee's]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hersey]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kevin Smith]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Man of Steel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[movie tie-ins]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nokia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[product placement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[razor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[superhero]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[superheroes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Superman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Lorax]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Twizzlers]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://business.time.com/?p=81199</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Movie fans are surely excited by the soon-to-be-released Superman reboot, Man of Steel. But the film might be even more eagerly anticipated by its 100-plus corporate promotional partners, which are using the movie to help sell razors, cell phones, fast-food burgers, Twizzlers, a career in the armed forces and more. Until now, the animated 2012 film The Lorax, which had a strong environmental, antimaterialist message, was probably the movie best known for over-the-top promotional tie-ins. It wasn&#8217;t just the sheer number of promotional partners — more than 70 — but that some of the products tied to the movie seemed inappropriate, like an SUV. This summer, Ad Age reported, Man of Steel blows The Lorax away with more than 100 global partners adding up to around $160 million. (The movie was made by Warner Bros., which is owned by Time Warner, the corporate parent of TIME.) Among the companies hoping to ride Superman&#8217;s cape, the hip eyeglass seller Warby Parker unveiled a Man of Steel collection, inspired by Clark Kent&#8217;s famous spectacles. Walmart is selling tickets for advance screenings (one day in advance) in its stores. Nokia&#8217;s new phone, the Lumia 925, is featured in the film for a brief moment. Several scenes in the movie take place at Sears in another brand-partnership moment. The latest oversize burger from Hardee&#8217;s and Carl&#8217;s Jr. is the Super Bacon Cheeseburger, featuring &#8220;six full bacon strips woven together into a crispy bacon nest&#8221; in yet another tie-in to the new Superman movie. (Come on, is this something Superman would even consider eating?) Chrysler, Hershey, Army National Guard and Gillette are among the many other Man of Steel partners. (MORE: Stealth Celebrity Endorsement: No Money Changing Hands, Just Free Burritos) Could the film be overdoing things, with so many promotions that consumers tune out or are turned off? According to one expert quoted by Ad Age: The studio and marketers &#8216;can achieve success when the marketing tie-ins are separate and distinct both in message and in target audience,&#8217; said Tom Meyer, president of the entertainment<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=business.time.com&#038;blog=31173800&#038;post=81199&#038;subd=timebusinessblog&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://business.time.com/2013/06/04/superman-the-sell-out-man-of-steel-has-over-100-promotional-partners/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Marketing</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://business.time.com/category/marketing-2/</primary_category_link>
		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/f8de938518e7b986d552694ed99aa54d?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2F0.gravatar.com%2Favatar%2Fad516503a11cd5ca435acc9bb6523536%3Fs%3D96&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">bradtuttle</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>A Q&amp;A With the Real-Life Maker of &#8216;Arrested Development&#8217;s&#8217; Bluth&#8217;s Frozen Bananas</title>
		<link>http://business.time.com/2013/05/15/a-qa-with-the-real-life-maker-of-arrested-developments-bluths-frozen-bananas/</link>
		<comments>http://business.time.com/2013/05/15/a-qa-with-the-real-life-maker-of-arrested-developments-bluths-frozen-bananas/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 May 2013 13:00:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Josh Sanburn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Companies & Industries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Entrepreneurship]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Future of TV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hollywood]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Small Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology & Media]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://business.time.com/?p=79989</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[To coincide with the release of Season 4 of &#8220;Arrested Development&#8221; on May 26, the Bluth&#8217;s Original Frozen Banana Stand is popping up in locations around New York and London. But these frozen bananas aren’t being hand-dipped by George-Michael. They’re made by Chuck Pheterson, the founder and president of Florida-based Totally Bananas, a man who hadn’t watched a single episode of the show when he started the company in 2009 and didn’t even realize his frozen bananas were the frozen bananas being handed out to &#8220;Arrested Development&#8221; fans this week – until I e-mailed him to set up the following interview. How did you get involved with the Netflix plan to offer frozen bananas at the replica Bluth&#8217;s Frozen Banana Stand? We sell through distribution channels, so for the most part, we don&#8217;t know where our product ends up. We started sending our product out last week, and another order this week for a total of about 14,000 bananas. We knew it was Netflix, but we didn’t really know what this was all about. Wait. So you didn’t know this was for the Bluth Booth? When I got your e-mail, we looked at it and said, holy moly! That’s when I found out. I thought this was a Netflix party. (WATCH: TIME on the Scene at &#8216;Arrested Development&#8217;s&#8217; Bluth&#8217;s Banana Stand) That would be quite the party. We have companies that buy thousands of bananas. So this wasn’t an unusual order for you guys. That’s mostly what we do. We supply all the Niagara Falls concessions on the Canadian side. We have products at CVS, at Shell stations throughout the state of Florida. Major zoos like the Bronx Zoo or the Audubon Zoo in New Orleans order from us. For me, this was just another order that I thought was for a company party. In our e-mail exchange, you said your phone was ringing off the hook. Do you now think it was related to Netflix and you didn’t realize it? Now, yeah. When we found out, we started sending out<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=business.time.com&#038;blog=31173800&#038;post=79989&#038;subd=timebusinessblog&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://business.time.com/2013/05/15/a-qa-with-the-real-life-maker-of-arrested-developments-bluths-frozen-bananas/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Entrepreneurship</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://business.time.com/category/small-business/entrepreneurship-small-business/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/cera.jpeg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/cera.jpeg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/cera.jpeg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">cera</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/d88247e41871fc555c4a2747167091d2?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2F1.gravatar.com%2Favatar%2Fad516503a11cd5ca435acc9bb6523536%3Fs%3D96&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">jsanburn</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>How MTV Decided to Abandon Rebellion</title>
		<link>http://business.time.com/2013/05/14/how-mtv-decided-to-abandon-rebellion/</link>
		<comments>http://business.time.com/2013/05/14/how-mtv-decided-to-abandon-rebellion/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 May 2013 15:27:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Josh Sanburn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Companies & Industries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Future of TV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology & Media]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://business.time.com/?p=79845</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Not so long ago, reality programs featuring wealthy teens and twenty-somethings &#8212; shows like &#8220;The Hills&#8221; and &#8220;Laguna Beach,&#8221; both set in affluent California communities &#8212; were garnering strong ratings for MTV. By the time Stephen Friedman became the network&#8217;s president in 2008, however, viewer tastes were beginning to change. In particular, the 43-year-old Friedman found that these programs simply weren&#8217;t resonating with so-called millennials, the generation of Americans born between 1980 and 2000. So Friedman launched an across-the-network reinvention of MTV&#8217;s programming, quickly dropping the two shows and replacing them with programs like &#8220;Teen Mom,&#8221; which became one of MTV’s highest-rated shows during its three-year run and led to &#8220;Teen Mom 2;&#8221; and &#8220;Awkward,&#8221; now the network’s longest-running scripted comedy. We recently spoke with Friedman about the kind of programming that appeals to millennials; the reason that he toned down the network&#8217;s long-standing ethos of rebellion; and why it suddenly became OK to acknowledge the existence of parents on MTV. You’ve spearheaded a reinvention of MTV to target millennials. How exactly have you changed the network&#8217;s programming? When I got the job in 2008, one of the first things I did was partner up with our research department to do a very deep dive into where our audience was. We really wanted to look at this generational shift that was very much in process, and what we found was that our programming was still too focused on Generation X. How so? &#8220;The Hills&#8221; was an example of a show that was pioneering at the time. It looked unlike any other reality show with its cinematic quality. That show was still very popular, but our audience started questioning, &#8220;Is this really reality?&#8221; What became clear is that this audience seemed to be looking for something that was much more authentic to their experience. So while there were a lot of fans of a show like &#8220;The Hills,&#8221; we saw the age range moving up. Our typical average age of a show now is around 21. Then it was much closer to<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=business.time.com&#038;blog=31173800&#038;post=79845&#038;subd=timebusinessblog&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://business.time.com/2013/05/14/how-mtv-decided-to-abandon-rebellion/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Media</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://business.time.com/category/companies-industries/media-companies-industries/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/tm2-final-logo_full.jpeg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/tm2-final-logo_full.jpeg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/tm2-final-logo_full.jpeg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">TM2 FINAL LOGO_FULL</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/d88247e41871fc555c4a2747167091d2?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2F1.gravatar.com%2Favatar%2Fad516503a11cd5ca435acc9bb6523536%3Fs%3D96&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">jsanburn</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Charles Ramsey-McDonald&#8217;s Episode: How a Viral Marketing Opportunity Can Backfire</title>
		<link>http://business.time.com/2013/05/08/the-charles-ramsey-mcdonalds-episode-how-a-viral-marketing-opportunity-can-backfire/</link>
		<comments>http://business.time.com/2013/05/08/the-charles-ramsey-mcdonalds-episode-how-a-viral-marketing-opportunity-can-backfire/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 May 2013 23:50:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brad Tuttle</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Advertising]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marketing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology & Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Twitter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Amanda Berry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Big Bird]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Charles Ramsey]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Chipotle]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cleveland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gina DeJesus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[McDonalds]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Oreo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Poland Spring]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sesame Street]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[viral]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://business.time.com/?p=79583</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Using a story about women being kidnapped and held against their will for years for marketing purposes is questionable enough. Now that the hero in the story turns out to have a history of domestic violence convictions, the Charles Ramsey-McDonald&#8217;s episode is shaping up as an argument that perhaps brands should respond to viral marketing opportunities slowly, cautiously—and sometimes not at all. The accepted wisdom today is that when a brand is suddenly front and center in the news for almost any reason whatsoever, the company must seize the moment and take advantage of the situation as a marketing opportunity. Responding with speed is deemed to be absolutely essential. Oreo, for instance, was widely lauded for its quick-thinking Tweet during the Super Bowl blackout. The Tweet, featuring a photo of the iconic cookie and the caption &#8220;You can still dunk in the dark,&#8221; was put up in 10 minutes—before the lights were back on at the New Orleans Superdome—and was immediately retweeted and liked on Facebook tens of thousands of times. (MORE: Stealth Celebrity Endorsement: No Money Changes Hands, Just Free Burritos) The Etch a Sketch toy and Sesame Street&#8217;s Big Bird both had big moments in the news during last year&#8217;s presidential campaign, and Poland Spring bottled water received plenty of attention thanks to Marco Rubio&#8217;s &#8220;Gulpgate&#8221; during the Republican Address to the Nation in February. These odd spectacles were all viewed as prime branding opportunities that fell into the laps of their respective marketing departments—an opportunity that Poland Spring, for one, was criticized for botching. This week, McDonald&#8217;s was suddenly, bizarrely in the news in a big way, when a man named Charles Ramsey became a viral sensation. Ramsey is the neighbor who helped rescue three women who had been abducted and held captive for a decade in a home in downtown Cleveland. In interviews that have been shown on TV stations around the world—and viewed millions of times online—Ramsey mentioned that he was &#8220;eating my McDonald&#8217;s&#8221; when he heard screaming, leading him to save a woman trying<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=business.time.com&#038;blog=31173800&#038;post=79583&#038;subd=timebusinessblog&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://business.time.com/2013/05/08/the-charles-ramsey-mcdonalds-episode-how-a-viral-marketing-opportunity-can-backfire/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Marketing</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://business.time.com/category/marketing-2/</primary_category_link>
		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/f8de938518e7b986d552694ed99aa54d?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2F0.gravatar.com%2Favatar%2Fad516503a11cd5ca435acc9bb6523536%3Fs%3D96&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">bradtuttle</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Murdoch&#8217;s News Corp. Threatens to Pull Fox Off the Air in Aereo Dispute</title>
		<link>http://business.time.com/2013/04/09/news-corp-threatens-to-pull-fox-off-the-air-in-aereo-dispute/</link>
		<comments>http://business.time.com/2013/04/09/news-corp-threatens-to-pull-fox-off-the-air-in-aereo-dispute/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Apr 2013 09:45:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Sam Gustin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Future of TV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://business.time.com/?p=77171</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[News Corp.&#8217;s flagship Fox network might cease broadcasting over the U.S. public airwaves if the company&#8217;s dispute with upstart challenger Aereo isn&#8217;t resolved, a senior company official warned Monday. News Corp. COO Chase Carey said Fox &#8212; home of &#8220;The Simpsons,&#8221; &#8220;Glee&#8221; and &#8220;American Idol&#8221; &#8212; might simply move to pay-for-TV cable as a result of its legal dispute with Aereo, a New York-based startup backed by billionaire media mogul Barry Diller. Diller knows what it&#8217;s like to challenge entrenched media behemoths. He helped launch the Fox broadcasting network nearly three decades ago. At the time, it sounded crazy: who would want to challenge the three dominant U.S. broadcast networks? Since then, Fox has achieved what was then unthinkable, by regularly beating out NBC, ABC, and CBS in the ratings. Fast forward a couple of decades and Diller is once again the disruptor, only this time he&#8217;s doing it against the company &#8212; and the industry &#8212; that made him famous. New York-based Aereo picks up free, over-the-air broadcast signals using an array of tiny antennas &#8212; each antenna theoretically &#8220;leased&#8221; to one customer &#8212; and then sends the signals to customers via the Internet. It pays nothing to perform this service. Aereo maintains that because each user receives programming via his or her own antenna, its system is legal. The broadcasters say this is straight-up theft. “We believe that Aereo is pirating our broadcast signal,&#8221; News Corp. COO Carey told an industry conference Monday. &#8220;We won’t just sit idle and allow our content to be actively stolen.&#8221; (MORE: Game On! Why Rupert Murdoch Wants to Tackle ESPN) Aereo launched in 2012 after raising more than $20 million from Diller&#8217;s Internet conglomerate IAC and other investors. Shortly thereafter, the major broadcasters &#8211; Comcast-owned NBC, News Corp.-owned Fox, Disney-owned ABC, and CBS &#8212; launched a joint legal challenge to shut down the company. Thus far the broadcasters have failed to win an injunction halting the service. The Aereo drama is playing out against the backdrop of the broader &#8220;cord-cutting&#8221; debate, as users shift toward services like Netflix and Hulu. Today, most consumers receive basic broadcast programming through cable TV packages.<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=business.time.com&#038;blog=31173800&#038;post=77171&#038;subd=timebusinessblog&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://business.time.com/2013/04/09/news-corp-threatens-to-pull-fox-off-the-air-in-aereo-dispute/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Media</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://business.time.com/category/technology-media/media-technology-media/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/rtr32ip3.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/rtr32ip3.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/rtr32ip3.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Carey, deputy chairman, president, and COO of News Corporation, participates in a panel session at The Cable Show in Boston</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/60187828ab0bda2734e1a17a173fabde?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2F0.gravatar.com%2Favatar%2Fad516503a11cd5ca435acc9bb6523536%3Fs%3D96&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">shgustin</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obama Administration: Mobile Phone &#8216;Unlocking&#8217; Should Be Legal</title>
		<link>http://business.time.com/2013/03/05/obama-administration-mobile-phone-unlocking-should-be-legal/</link>
		<comments>http://business.time.com/2013/03/05/obama-administration-mobile-phone-unlocking-should-be-legal/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Mar 2013 10:45:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Sam Gustin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mobile]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology & Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://business.time.com/?p=73565</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Obama administration will push to reverse a new prohibition on mobile phone unlocking, after an online White House petition protesting the ban drew more than 100,000 signatures. The ban makes it a federal crime for consumers to “unlock” newly purchased mobile phones in order to use a different wireless network without their current carrier&#8217;s permission. Despite the Obama administration&#8217;s opposition, however, Congress will most likely need to change federal copyright law for the ban to be reversed. Public interest groups have opposed the unlocking ban because it frequently means that consumers have to buy new phones if they want to switch networks after their contracts have expired. Unlocking also allows consumers to resell their phones for use on another carrier after their contracts are over, and to use second-hand phones on the carrier of their choice, which may not be the network on which the device was originally activated. These actions are now illegal without the permission of the carrier. Derek Khanna, a former House Republican Study Committee staffer who is a leading advocate against the ban, argues that it violates the property rights of phone owners. &#8220;If you bought a phone then you own it,&#8221; Khanna wrote in an email to TIME. &#8220;Your contractual relationship with your provider is between you and your provider. But by the federal government coming and saying that unlocking your phone is a federal crime, they are removing your property rights to do what you please with your own device.&#8221; (MORE: As FCC Chief’s Term Nears End, Speculation Grows Over Successor) In response to the petition, the Obama administration announced Monday that it believes phone unlocking should be legal. &#8220;Neither criminal law nor technological locks should prevent consumers from switching carriers when they are no longer bound by a service agreement or other obligation,&#8221; wrote R. David Edelman, White House Senior Advisor for Internet, Innovation, &#38; Privacy. &#8220;This is particularly important for secondhand or other mobile devices that you might buy or receive as a gift, and want to activate on the wireless network that meets your needs &#8212; even if it<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=business.time.com&#038;blog=31173800&#038;post=73565&#038;subd=timebusinessblog&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://business.time.com/2013/03/05/obama-administration-mobile-phone-unlocking-should-be-legal/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Tech Policy</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://business.time.com/category/technology-media/tech-policy/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/163082639.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/163082639.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/163082639.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">President Barack Obama</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/60187828ab0bda2734e1a17a173fabde?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2F0.gravatar.com%2Favatar%2Fad516503a11cd5ca435acc9bb6523536%3Fs%3D96&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">shgustin</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>What&#8217;s an Oscar Worth at the Box Office?</title>
		<link>http://business.time.com/2013/02/22/whats-oscar-worth-at-the-box-office/</link>
		<comments>http://business.time.com/2013/02/22/whats-oscar-worth-at-the-box-office/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Feb 2013 19:08:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Victor Luckerson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business of Creativity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hollywood]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Academy Awards]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Argo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[best picture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lincoln]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Oscar bump]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Oscars]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Silver Linings Playbook]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://business.time.com/?p=72803</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Is winning a coveted Academy Award a priceless experience? Come on, this is Hollywood. Movie studios don’t tailor their release schedules around Oscar season and pour money into Oscar-bait films just for that warm, fuzzy feeling of a job well done. They’re hoping that having a film, director or actor take home a golden statuette will boost a movie’s box-office returns. In the right circumstances, a Best Picture victory can add tens of millions of dollars to a film’s final gross. A statistical analysis by the film blog BoxOfficeQuant of Best Picture winners from 1990 to 2009 found that a typical winning movie gains an additional $14 million in box-office returns compared with a movie that merely receives a Best Picture nomination. But not all Oscar winners are created equal. Leveraging an Oscar win into bonus box-office dollars requires a confluence of factors, the primary one being the timing of a release. Movie studios cram all their most prestigious films into December or January so that if a film nets a big award, curious movie fans will still be able to see it at the local theater. Slumdog Millionaire, which had a wide release just a month before the 2009 Academy Awards, saw its revenue jump 43% the weekend after winning Best Picture. On the other hand, 2010 Best Picture The Hurt Locker was originally released in July 2009 and saw little box-office movement because it was already available on DVD when it won. (MORE: Oscars 2013: Richard Corliss Picks Best Picture) It’s also important that a winning film have the potential to appeal to a mass audience. Slumdog offered Americans a window into the world of Indian Bollywood movies and featured pop culture references as varied as Who Wants to Be a Millionaire and M.I.A.’s song “Paper Planes,” so it was bound to resonate with moviegoers. IMDB managing editor Keith Simanton says the Best Picture winners that manage a big boost are those that pique the curiosity of the award show&#8217;s viewers. “You haven’t caught it, and now it’s got this seal<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=business.time.com&#038;blog=31173800&#038;post=72803&#038;subd=timebusinessblog&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://business.time.com/2013/02/22/whats-oscar-worth-at-the-box-office/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Hollywood</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://business.time.com/category/technology-media/hollywood/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/139778756.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/139778756.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/139778756.jpg?w=240" medium="image" />

		<media:content url="http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/40c4f40351434bf8e04405d4231aaecd?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2F1.gravatar.com%2Favatar%2Fad516503a11cd5ca435acc9bb6523536%3Fs%3D96&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">vluck2012</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Comcast&#8217;s NBCUniversal Deal: As One Media Era Ends, Another Begins</title>
		<link>http://business.time.com/2013/02/14/comcasts-nbcuniversal-deal-as-one-media-era-ends-another-begins/</link>
		<comments>http://business.time.com/2013/02/14/comcasts-nbcuniversal-deal-as-one-media-era-ends-another-begins/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Feb 2013 13:00:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Sam Gustin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Future of TV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Information Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Real Estate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War for the Web]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://business.time.com/?p=70612</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Comcast&#8217;s $16.7 billion deal to purchase the remaining half of NBCUniversal from General Electric solidifies the cable and broadband giant&#8217;s role as a media titan and represents a triumph for CEO Brian Roberts, whose father founded Comcast in 1963 by buying a 1,200-subscriber cable TV company in Tupelo, Miss. for $500,000. Since then, Comcast has steadily grown through acquisitions and savvy business deals. It is now the largest cable company in the United States, and one of the largest providers of broadband Internet and home phone service. GE&#8217;s sale of its remaining NBCUniversal stake marks a symbolic milestone in the history of American broadcast media, and the arrival of a new, digital era in which cable-giant Comcast has emerged as a dominant force in entertainment and communications. By assuming full ownership of NBC Universal &#8212; which includes NBC&#8217;s famed &#8220;Peacock Network,&#8221; NBC News, MSNBC, CNBC, Universal Pictures, the Universal theme parks and resorts, and several popular cable channels, including Bravo &#8212; Comcast takes full control of a crown jewel of American news and entertainment, whose history mirrors the emergence of modern broadcast media in the 20th Century. For Comcast, the deal represents a clear commitment to cable and broadcast television, even as the Internet revolution has given consumers more entertainment choices than ever before. Despite past fears that the Internet would eviscerate TV advertising, much as it has done to print media, television &#8212; especially cable TV &#8212; remains a highly profitable and growing business. (MORE: Liberty’s Virgin Deal Sets Up Media Clash Between Malone and Murdoch) &#8220;Our decision to acquire GE&#8217;s ownership is driven by our sense of optimism for the future prospects of NBCUniversal and our desire to capture future value that we hope to create for our shareholders,&#8221; Roberts said in a statement. Comcast shares jumped 3% Wednesday in response to the deal, touching a multi-year high; the company&#8217;s stock price has increased 46% over the past year and 68% over the past two years. For GE, divesting its remaining NBCUniversal stake is part of CEO Jeffrey Immelt&#8217;s plan to focus on the company&#8217;s industrial businesses. GE,<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=business.time.com&#038;blog=31173800&#038;post=70612&#038;subd=timebusinessblog&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://business.time.com/2013/02/14/comcasts-nbcuniversal-deal-as-one-media-era-ends-another-begins/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Media</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://business.time.com/category/companies-industries/media-companies-industries/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/biz-nbc-comcast-0215.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/biz-nbc-comcast-0215.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/biz-nbc-comcast-0215.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">A pedestrian walks in front of NBC Studios on 50th Street in New York City, Dec. 1, 2009.</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/60187828ab0bda2734e1a17a173fabde?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2F0.gravatar.com%2Favatar%2Fad516503a11cd5ca435acc9bb6523536%3Fs%3D96&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">shgustin</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Liberty&#8217;s Virgin Deal Sets Up Media Clash Between Malone and Murdoch</title>
		<link>http://business.time.com/2013/02/08/libertys-virgin-deal-sets-up-media-clash-between-malone-and-murdoch/</link>
		<comments>http://business.time.com/2013/02/08/libertys-virgin-deal-sets-up-media-clash-between-malone-and-murdoch/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Feb 2013 13:00:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Sam Gustin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology & Media]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://business.time.com/?p=70109</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Liberty Global&#8217;s $16 billion deal to buy British cable giant Virgin Media will create one of the largest broadband companies in the world, and sets up Liberty mogul John Malone, the famed U.S. cable financier, in a clash of the media titans against longtime rival Rupert Murdoch and his News Corp. conglomerate. The deal is yet another sign that the media and tech mergers and acquisitions market is revving up to levels not seen since the financial crisis. Earlier this week computer giant Dell announced plans to go private in a $24.4 billion deal. Virgin Media is the second largest pay-TV company in the U.K. behind European satellite giant BSkyB, which is majority controlled by News Corp., so the merger instantly pits Malone against Murdoch in the European media market. The Financial Times was first to report news of the impending deal, which is worth a total of $23 billion including debt. Virgin Group&#8217;s Richard Branson, the colorful billionaire impressario, stands to make about $316 million from the Liberty takeover, according to Bloomberg. Liberty Global already has nearly 20 million customers, making it the second largest U.S. cable company after Comcast. By adding Virgin Media&#8217;s 4.9 million subscribers, the combined entity would vault ahead of Comcast to become the largest broadband company in the U.S. and Europe. (BSkyB has 10.7 million customers.) (MORE: What News Corp.’s Breakup and the Demise of ‘The Daily’ Mean for the Future of Murdoch’s Media Empire) Malone has made no secret about Liberty&#8217;s plans to expand in Europe, where it is already a powerful player in over a dozen markets. For example, Liberty recently increased its stake in Belgian operator Telenet to 58%, although it failed in its attempt to take over the company outright. As part of the Virgin deal, Liberty plans to relocate its legal place of business to the U.K., though it intends to keep its Colorado headquarters as well as its presence on the Nasdaq stock exchange. Virgin Media will retain its brand name in the U.K. Here&#8217;s how Reuters describes Malone, a legendary figure in U.S. telecom and media markets: Dubbed everything<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=business.time.com&#038;blog=31173800&#038;post=70109&#038;subd=timebusinessblog&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://business.time.com/2013/02/08/libertys-virgin-deal-sets-up-media-clash-between-malone-and-murdoch/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Media</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://business.time.com/category/companies-industries/media-companies-industries/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/rtr3de8k.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/rtr3de8k.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/rtr3de8k.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">File of chairman of Liberty Media Malone attending the Allen &#38; Co Media Conference in Sun Valley, Idaho</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/60187828ab0bda2734e1a17a173fabde?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2F0.gravatar.com%2Favatar%2Fad516503a11cd5ca435acc9bb6523536%3Fs%3D96&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">shgustin</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>As the Dow Soars, How High Can Tech Stocks Go?</title>
		<link>http://business.time.com/2013/02/04/as-the-dow-soars-how-high-can-tech-stocks-go/</link>
		<comments>http://business.time.com/2013/02/04/as-the-dow-soars-how-high-can-tech-stocks-go/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Feb 2013 14:00:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Sam Gustin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Apple]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mobile]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Silicon Valley]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology & Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wall Street & Markets]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War for the Web]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://business.time.com/?p=69618</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Last Friday, the Dow Jones Industrial Average &#8212; the benchmark stock index of America&#8217;s blue chip companies &#8211; closed above 14,000 for the first time since the financial meltdown sent the U.S. economy into the worst crisis in decades. The continued resurgence of the U.S. auto industry and growing optimism about the overall economy helped propel the Dow above the psychologically important 14,000 point level. The surging Dow is an indication of the increasing financial health of the largest American companies, a bright spot in an otherwise shaky U.S. economic recovery, particularly with respect to unemployment. America&#8217;s blue chip firms &#8212; including industrial giants, banks, and auto companies &#8212; are healthier than they&#8217;ve been in years. But what about the largest U.S. tech companies? Like the other major stock indices, the tech-heavy Nasdaq index is at or near multi-year highs. On Friday alone, the Nasdaq rose 1%, nearly touching the index&#8217;s five-year high, which it hit last September, driven in part by tech juggernaut Apple, which had just released the iPhone 5. But Wall Street sentiment has soured on Apple in recent months, somewhat tempering the Nasdaq&#8217;s continued ascent. (MORE: Apple Shares Plunge 10% on Slowing Growth, New Product Jitters) How high can tech stocks go? Given Apple&#8217;s size &#8212; it&#8217;s the largest tech company in the world &#8212; it makes sense to begin any forward-looking evaluation of the Nasdaq with the Cupertino, Calif.-based cash machine. Apple constitutes about 12% of the Nasdaq&#8217;s valuation, and there&#8217;s no question the company&#8217;s recent stock swoon has placed a drag on the tech-heavy index. Let&#8217;s take a look at Apple and three other important Nasdaq companies. Two weeks ago, for the third consecutive quarter, Apple fell short of analyst estimates, sending the company’s stock down 10% in after-hours trading, wiping out nearly $50 billion in shareholder value. Although it reported record financial results, Apple’s slowing growth rate has spooked investors, who are growing increasingly concerned about the next stage in the company’s epic story. Can Apple maintain its heretofore astonishing growth-rate on the back of existing products like the iPhone and<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=business.time.com&#038;blog=31173800&#038;post=69618&#038;subd=timebusinessblog&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://business.time.com/2013/02/04/as-the-dow-soars-how-high-can-tech-stocks-go/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Technology &amp; Media</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://business.time.com/category/technology-media/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/rtr358q3.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/rtr358q3.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/rtr358q3.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">A man takes a photo outside the Nasdaq Market site in New York&#039;s Times Square</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/60187828ab0bda2734e1a17a173fabde?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2F0.gravatar.com%2Favatar%2Fad516503a11cd5ca435acc9bb6523536%3Fs%3D96&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">shgustin</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Testing the Science of Sharing at the Super Bowl: Can Viral Ads Be Manufactured?</title>
		<link>http://business.time.com/2013/02/04/testing-the-science-of-sharing-at-the-super-bowl-can-viral-ads-be-manufactured/</link>
		<comments>http://business.time.com/2013/02/04/testing-the-science-of-sharing-at-the-super-bowl-can-viral-ads-be-manufactured/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Feb 2013 13:00:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Josh Sanburn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business of Creativity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Companies & Industries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Future of TV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology & Media]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://business.time.com/?p=69262</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In 2003, before Facebook and Twitter and YouTube, before Keyboard Cat and Charlie Bit My Finger and Justin Bieber, before viral wasn’t much more than a medical term, start-up ad agency Mekanism was approached by now defunct music-sharing service Napster about creating an advertising campaign centered on its relaunch. The firm had yet to make an impact in the ad world — Napster was its first big client — so it wanted to try something bold. What they came up with was a series of ambitious, animated ads showing the Napster mascot escaping from jail, being revived in a hospital bed and preparing to rock out to hair metal. The ads were an overnight success, eventually watched more than 2 million times, making them one of the very first viral hits in the Internet’s social-media infancy — to some extent, admits Mekanism president Jason Harris, because there wasn’t a lot of interesting online content competing with it. Soon after, Microsoft came calling, hoping Mekanism could do the same for the software giant. “Microsoft said, ‘Well, aren’t you guys the viral guys? Can’t you just make it go viral? Just push a button and do whatever you do to make it happen,’” Harris says. The result: another highly successful campaign featuring a series of videos in which then up-and-coming comedian Demetri Martin searched for spiritual “clearification” — meant to portray Windows Vista’s ability to clear up a user’s desktop. (MORE: Why Beyoncé Will Make No Bills, Bills, Bills for Her Super Bowl Performance) Of course, Mekanism didn’t have a viral button — and still doesn’t. But the firm has perhaps gotten as close as any to being able to manufacture viral content on demand. The agency has created dozens of campaigns over the past decade, featuring a claymation Eminem drinking Brisk Iced Tea, a surprisingly hilarious Charles Schwab (yes, Charles Schwab) giving strange and financially misguided folks money advice, and a trailer for Rise of the Planet of the Apes with an all-too-realistic primate firing an AK-47. In fact, after years of trial and error, many advertising and marketing agencies<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=business.time.com&#038;blog=31173800&#038;post=69262&#038;subd=timebusinessblog&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://business.time.com/2013/02/04/testing-the-science-of-sharing-at-the-super-bowl-can-viral-ads-be-manufactured/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Media</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://business.time.com/category/companies-industries/media-companies-industries/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/screen-shot-2013-02-01-at-11-32-17-am.png?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/screen-shot-2013-02-01-at-11-32-17-am.png?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/screen-shot-2013-02-01-at-11-32-17-am.png?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Viral Ad by Mekanism</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/d88247e41871fc555c4a2747167091d2?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2F1.gravatar.com%2Favatar%2Fad516503a11cd5ca435acc9bb6523536%3Fs%3D96&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">jsanburn</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Most Buzzed-About Super Bowl Ads of 2013, A Sneak Preview</title>
		<link>http://business.time.com/2013/01/31/the-most-buzzed-about-super-bowl-ads-of-2013-a-sneak-preview/</link>
		<comments>http://business.time.com/2013/01/31/the-most-buzzed-about-super-bowl-ads-of-2013-a-sneak-preview/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Jan 2013 13:00:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Josh Sanburn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business of Creativity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Companies & Industries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Future of TV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology & Media]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://business.time.com/?p=68939</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Forget the days when you were totally surprised by the ads airing on Super Bowl Sunday. More than ever, companies are releasing ads weeks before the big game, often creating ad teasers (yes — that&#8217;s an ad for an ad) as part of a broader viral campaign. The reason? As TIME&#8217;s Brad Tuttle explained, releasing ads early can extend the lifespans of those staggeringly expensive Super Bowl ad spots, which this year are costing advertisers about $3.8 million per 30-second commercial. A number of ads are creating pre-game buzz and even mild controversy this year. Kate Upton is &#8220;washing cars&#8221; for Mercedes-Benz. Tracy Morgan is spewing profanity for water enhancer Mio Fit. Amy Poehler is trying to give a boost to ailing big-box retailer Best Buy. Even Psy is hawking Wonderful Pistachios. But collectively, automakers seem to be releasing the most interesting ad teasers so far, with Volkswagen, Toyota, and Hyundai all launching interest-piquing pre-game spots. To see those and more, check out this sneak preview of the year&#8217;s most buzzed-about Super Bowl ads.<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=business.time.com&#038;blog=31173800&#038;post=68939&#038;subd=timebusinessblog&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://business.time.com/2013/01/31/the-most-buzzed-about-super-bowl-ads-of-2013-a-sneak-preview/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Media</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://business.time.com/category/companies-industries/media-companies-industries/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/10176379.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/10176379.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/10176379.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Superbowl</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/d88247e41871fc555c4a2747167091d2?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2F1.gravatar.com%2Favatar%2Fad516503a11cd5ca435acc9bb6523536%3Fs%3D96&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">jsanburn</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Is Broadband Internet Access a Public Utility?</title>
		<link>http://business.time.com/2013/01/09/is-broadband-internet-access-a-public-utility/</link>
		<comments>http://business.time.com/2013/01/09/is-broadband-internet-access-a-public-utility/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Jan 2013 13:00:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Sam Gustin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Apple]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Future of TV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hollywood]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Information Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mobile]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Music Industry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Silicon Valley]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tech Policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology & Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Telecom]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War for the Web]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AT&T]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Captive Audience]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Captive Audience: The Telecom Industry and Monopoly in the New Guilded Age]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Comcast]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[digital divide]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regulatory capture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sprint]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Susan Crawford]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[time warner cable]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Verizon]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://business.time.com/?p=66067</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Should broadband Internet service be treated as a basic utility in the United States, like electricity, water, and traditional telephone service? That&#8217;s the question at the heart of an important and provocative new book by Susan Crawford, a tech policy expert and professor at Cardozo Law School. In Captive Audience: The Telecom Industry and Monopoly in the New Guilded Age, released Tuesday by Yale University Press, Crawford argues that the Internet has replaced traditional phone service as the most essential communications utility in the country, and is now as important as electricity was 100 years ago. &#8220;Truly high-speed wired Internet access is as basic to innovation, economic growth, social communication, and the country&#8217;s competitiveness as electricity was a century ago,&#8221; Crawford writes, &#8220;but a limited number of Americans have access to it, many can&#8217;t afford it, and the country has handed control of it over to Comcast and a few other companies.&#8221; Because the U.S. government has allowed a small group of giant, highly profitable companies to dominate the broadband market, Crawford argues, American consumers have fewer choices for broadband service, at higher prices but lower speeds, compared to dozens of other developed countries, including throughout Europe and Asia. &#8220;In Seoul, when you move into an apartment, you have a choice of three or four providers selling you symmetric fiber access for $30 per month, and installation happens in one day,&#8221; Crawford told TIME in an interview Tuesday. &#8220;That&#8217;s unthinkable in the United States. And the idea that the country that invented the Internet can&#8217;t get online is beyond my imagination.&#8221; Crawford, who has been a visiting professor at Harvard, Yale and Michigan, spent a year on the National Economic Council as a top telecommunications advisor to President Obama. In her book, she directs much of the blame for the sorry state of the U.S. broadband market at the federal government. &#8220;Instead of ensuring that everyone in America can compete in a global economy,&#8221; she writes, &#8220;instead of narrowing the divide between rich and poor, instead of supporting competitive free markets for American inventions that use information &#8212; instead, that is, of ensuring that America will<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=business.time.com&#038;blog=31173800&#038;post=66067&#038;subd=timebusinessblog&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://business.time.com/2013/01/09/is-broadband-internet-access-a-public-utility/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Tech Policy</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://business.time.com/category/technology-media/tech-policy/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/crawford-susan.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/crawford-susan.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/crawford-susan.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Crawford, Susan</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/60187828ab0bda2734e1a17a173fabde?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2F0.gravatar.com%2Favatar%2Fad516503a11cd5ca435acc9bb6523536%3Fs%3D96&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">shgustin</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Google Brings Free Public WiFi to Its New York City Neighborhood</title>
		<link>http://business.time.com/2013/01/09/google-brings-free-public-wifi-to-its-new-york-city-neighborhood/</link>
		<comments>http://business.time.com/2013/01/09/google-brings-free-public-wifi-to-its-new-york-city-neighborhood/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Jan 2013 10:45:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Sam Gustin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Future of TV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mobile]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Silicon Valley]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tech Policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology & Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War for the Web]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Charles Schumer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Chrtistine Quinn]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Michael Bloomberg]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New York City]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WiFi]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://business.time.com/?p=66241</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Tech giant Google announced Tuesday that it has begun offering free public WiFi internet access in the southwest Chelsea neighborhood of New York City, close to its mammoth headquarters. According to Google, the new service &#8212; which was the product of a public-private effort by the company, city officials, and a local nonprofit development ogranization &#8211; will provide free Internet access to hundreds of thousands of people each year, making it the largest such WiFi network in New York City. Google said that free WiFi is now available &#8212; today &#8212; outdoors, &#8220;roughly between Gansevoort St. and 19 St. from 8th Ave to the West Side Highway, as well as the neighborhood’s public spaces, including the Chelsea Triangle, 14th Street Park, and Gansevoort Plaza.&#8221; The WiFi network will not require a password. “Google is proud to provide free WiFi in the neighborhood we have called home for over six years,&#8221; Ben Fried, the company&#8217;s chief information officer, said in a statement. &#8220;This network will not only be a resource for the 2,000+ residents of the Fulton Houses, it will also serve the 5,000+ student population of Chelsea as well as the hundreds of workers, retail customers and tourists who visit our neighborhood every day.&#8221; (MORE: Is Broadband Internet Access a Public Utility like Electricity and Water?) New York officials praised Google&#8217;s move, calling it a another step toward the city&#8217;s ambitious goal of becoming one of the most important technology hubs in the world. “New York is determined to become the world’s leading digital city, and universal access to high-speed Internet is one of the core building blocks of that vision,” New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg said in a statement. “Thanks to Google, free WiFi across this part of Chelsea takes us another step closer to that goal.” At a press conference, Bloomberg said that he&#8217;d ultimately like to see similar WiFi service throughout the city. Since moving into 111 Eighth Avenue, the former Port Authority building and one of the most important “telecom carrier hotels” on the East Coast, Google has been working with local<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=business.time.com&#038;blog=31173800&#038;post=66241&#038;subd=timebusinessblog&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://business.time.com/2013/01/09/google-brings-free-public-wifi-to-its-new-york-city-neighborhood/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Google</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://business.time.com/category/technology-media/google/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/rtr3c7s7.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/rtr3c7s7.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/rtr3c7s7.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Google signage seen at the company&#039;s headquarters in New York.</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/60187828ab0bda2734e1a17a173fabde?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2F0.gravatar.com%2Favatar%2Fad516503a11cd5ca435acc9bb6523536%3Fs%3D96&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">shgustin</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>What Google&#8217;s FTC Deal Means for the Patent Wars</title>
		<link>http://business.time.com/2013/01/07/what-googles-ftc-deal-means-for-the-patent-wars/</link>
		<comments>http://business.time.com/2013/01/07/what-googles-ftc-deal-means-for-the-patent-wars/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Jan 2013 13:00:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Sam Gustin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Apple]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Information Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mobile]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Wars]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Silicon Valley]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tech Policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology & Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War for the Web]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Android]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Blackberry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Trade Commission]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FRAND]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FTC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intellectual property]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[iPad]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[iPhone]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Microsoft]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Motorola]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patents]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[research in motion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Xbox]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://business.time.com/?p=65945</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Google&#8216;s landmark deal with the U.S. government, which was announced last week and ends a two-year federal investigation, has gotten a lot of attention, primarily for the Federal Trade Commission&#8217;s conclusion that Google has not violated antitrust law. But the second component of the pact, in which Google agreed to grant rivals access to certain basic technology patents, is worth scrutiny as well, because it could have important ramifications in the ongoing intellectual property wars that have roiled the technology industry over the last several years. During a press conference, FTC chairman Jon Leibowitz asserted that the patent agreement with Google could serve as a &#8220;template&#8221; for other patent disputes, and could reduce patent litigation &#8212; and litigation costs &#8212; for companies throughout the tech industry. That, of course, would be a good thing, because there is general agreement among tech and legal experts that there is something seriously wrong with the current U.S. intellectual property system, at least with respect to technology patents. Several of the largest tech companies in the world &#8212; including Apple, Google, and Samsung &#8212; are engaged in very costly and time-consuming patent litigation in multiple jurisdictions around the world. And in a remarkable milestone, last year Apple and Google spent more money on intellectual property &#8212; both litigation and defensive acquisitions &#8212; than on research and development. (MORE: Google’s Federal Antitrust Deal Cheered by Some, Jeered by Others) Google&#8217;s $12.5 billion acquisition of Motorola Mobility was one such defensive acquisition &#8212; Google bought the company in part for its vast stable of some 17,000 tech patents &#8212; and that purchase is at the center of the FTC&#8217;s deal with the search giant. In the tech world, there is a certain category of patents called &#8220;standard-essential patents,&#8221; which cover widely used technologies based on industry standards that allow high-tech devices to work together. &#8220;These essential patents and others like them are the cornerstone of the system of interoperability standards that ensure that wireless internet devices and mobile phones can talk to each other,&#8221; Leibowitz said. For example, Motorola owns standard-essential<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=business.time.com&#038;blog=31173800&#038;post=65945&#038;subd=timebusinessblog&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://business.time.com/2013/01/07/what-googles-ftc-deal-means-for-the-patent-wars/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>War for the Web</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://business.time.com/category/technology-media/war-for-the-web/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/rtr2yuel.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/rtr2yuel.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/rtr2yuel.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">The Federal Trade Commission building is seen in Washington</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/60187828ab0bda2734e1a17a173fabde?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2F0.gravatar.com%2Favatar%2Fad516503a11cd5ca435acc9bb6523536%3Fs%3D96&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">shgustin</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Reports of the Death of the Movies Have Been Greatly Exaggerated</title>
		<link>http://business.time.com/2013/01/04/reports-of-the-death-of-the-movies-have-been-greatly-exaggerated/</link>
		<comments>http://business.time.com/2013/01/04/reports-of-the-death-of-the-movies-have-been-greatly-exaggerated/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Jan 2013 13:00:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brad Tuttle</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Companies & Industries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hollywood]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Saving & Spending]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Smart Spending]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology & Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[3-D]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Batman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[entertainment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[film]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hollywood.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hunger Games]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IMAX]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[movie studios]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Movie Theaters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[movies]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://business.time.com/?p=65596</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[For quite some time, the assumption has been that year in, year out, fewer and fewer people would bother seeing movies in the theater. Then a funny thing happened in 2012. Against trend, consumers went back to the movies, in fairly large numbers. What&#8217;s more, a repeat performance is expected for 2013. The rise of tablets, home theaters, Redbox, Netflix, and other forms of easy, affordable entertainment that doesn&#8217;t involve the cost or hassle of going to the movies has a lot to do with why movie theater attendance had been waning. The number of movie tickets sold annually in the U.S. has largely been on the decline since 2002; in 2011, for example, ticket sales dropped 4.5% compared to the year before. Total box office takes might have been rising during this time period, but that was only because ticket prices had gotten more expensive—thanks largely to surcharges tacked onto films shown in 3-D and IMAX formats. Consumer surveys conducted in early 2012 showed that most Americans said they rarely or never go to the movies anymore. And after an especially bad year in movie ticket sales in 2011, many analysts and executives offered a solution that would surely wind up chasing away even more would-be moviegoers: raising ticket prices yet again. (MORE: 10 Big Retail Trends from the 2012 Holiday Shopping Season) For the most part, studios and theaters didn&#8217;t follow that advice in 2012, and it wound up being a strong year in terms of total tickets sold and box office revenues alike. Despite a less-than-stellar summer season—compared to the Memorial Day-Labor Day period 10 years ago, 100 million fewer tickets were sold in 2012—the industry gets to brag that 2012 was its best ever. At least in terms of total dollars worth of tickets sold, that is. As the Associated Press, Entertainment Weekly, and others have reported, domestic movie ticket sales reached an all-time high of $10.84 billion in 2012, surpassing the previous hit set in 2009 ($10.59 billion). What may be more important for the<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=business.time.com&#038;blog=31173800&#038;post=65596&#038;subd=timebusinessblog&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://business.time.com/2013/01/04/reports-of-the-death-of-the-movies-have-been-greatly-exaggerated/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Hollywood</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://business.time.com/category/technology-media/hollywood/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/200158993-001-e13353724655551.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/200158993-001-e13353724655551.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/200158993-001-e13353724655551.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Young people at the movies</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/f8de938518e7b986d552694ed99aa54d?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2F0.gravatar.com%2Favatar%2Fad516503a11cd5ca435acc9bb6523536%3Fs%3D96&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">bradtuttle</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Google&#8217;s Federal Antitrust Deal Cheered by Some, Jeered by Others</title>
		<link>http://business.time.com/2013/01/04/googles-federal-antitrust-deal-cheered-by-some-jeered-by-others/</link>
		<comments>http://business.time.com/2013/01/04/googles-federal-antitrust-deal-cheered-by-some-jeered-by-others/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Jan 2013 13:00:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Sam Gustin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Wars]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Silicon Valley]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tech Policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology & Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War for the Web]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[antitrust]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Trade Comission]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FTC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Microsoft]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[monopoly]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Yelp]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://business.time.com/?p=65771</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The U.S. government&#8217;s decision not to file an antitrust lawsuit against Google is a major victory for the search giant, which has been under investigation by the Federal Trade Commission for nearly two years. After what FTC chairman Jon Leibowitz described as &#8220;an incredibly thorough and careful investigation,&#8221; the five commissioners concluded unanimously that they lacked sufficient evidence to charge Google with antitrust violations, in a vindication for legal experts and industry observers who argued repeatedly that the FTC&#8217;s case was weak. The settlement between Google and the FTC, announced Thursday, represents a bitter blow to several of the search giant&#8217;s rivals, including Microsoft, that have been urging government action against the search titan for several years. There is no doubt that Google is dominant. The Web titan based in Mountain View, Calif., accounted for 74.5% of all U.S. search advertising revenues in 2012, according to research firm eMarketer. By contrast, Microsoft&#8217;s share of U.S. search advertising revenues reached just 8% in 2012. Google&#8217;s critics have alleged that the company unfairly demotes rivals in its search-engine results in order to steer users toward Google’s own competing products. But as legal experts have observed, a monopoly in a given market is not, by itself, illegal. What’s illegal is seeking to achieve or maintain a monopoly through anticompetitive practices. And after a long and in-depth investigation — the FTC reviewed more than 9 million pages of documents — federal regulators charged with policing antitrust abuses concluded that Google has not violated U.S. antitrust law. (MORE: In Major Victory, Google Dodges Federal Antitrust Lawsuit with FTC Deal) Reasonable people can and do disagree about whether Google&#8217;s conduct has been anticompetitive, especially with respect to its effort to leverage its Web dominance to make inroads in search verticals such as travel, dining and shopping. And the debate over Google&#8217;s search market power will no doubt continue for years. But as a matter of federal law and policy, this issue is over, at least for now. &#8220;Even though people would like us to bring a big search-bias case, the<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=business.time.com&#038;blog=31173800&#038;post=65771&#038;subd=timebusinessblog&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://business.time.com/2013/01/04/googles-federal-antitrust-deal-cheered-by-some-jeered-by-others/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Tech Policy</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://business.time.com/category/technology-media/tech-policy/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/158914455.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/158914455.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/158914455.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">image: U.S. Federal Trade Commission Chairman Jon Leibowitz speaks during a news conference regarding the agency&#039;s 21-month-long investigation on Google January 3, 2013 at the FTC headquarters in Washington, DC.</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/60187828ab0bda2734e1a17a173fabde?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2F0.gravatar.com%2Favatar%2Fad516503a11cd5ca435acc9bb6523536%3Fs%3D96&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">shgustin</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>2013: Six Tech/Media Stories to Watch</title>
		<link>http://business.time.com/2013/01/02/tech-and-media-6-business-predictions-for-2013/</link>
		<comments>http://business.time.com/2013/01/02/tech-and-media-6-business-predictions-for-2013/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Jan 2013 10:45:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Sam Gustin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Facebook]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Future of TV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hollywood]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mobile]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Wars]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Silicon Valley]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tech Policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology & Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Twitter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Venture Capital]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War for the Web]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://business.time.com/?p=65452</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In 2013, most tech consumers will be asking if it&#8217;s smart to buy a new computer, smartphone, or tablet device. As the structural shift from desktop to mobile computing races forward, hardware and software manufacturers are searching for an integrated solution. Apple and Google lead the pack on the software front &#8212; even as their surrogates engage in costly and time-consuming patent litigation around the world. Samsung (a key Google partner) is the global handset leader. Apple makes the best-designed consumer devices in the world. Here are six tech/media predictions for 2013. Google Will Settle Antitrust Probe With the Feds &#8212; It&#8217;s time for this nearly two-year investigation to end. As I wrote three months ago, the federal government’s probe of Internet search giant Google will most likely conclude with a settlement that averts a major lawsuit. The Federal Trade Commission has been exploring whether Google has used its search power &#8212; 70% market share &#8212; to harm rival companies unfairly. Google has offered a set of voluntary concessions addressing complaints about its search practices. But after European officials said that they were preparing even harsher sanctions for Google, the FTC punted the probe into this year (2013). If Google and the feds reach a deal, it would represent a huge victory for Google, and a major defeat for the companies that have accused it of acting unfairly. (MORE: Will Google Escape a Federal Antitrust Lawsuit Over Web Search?) Patent Progress Continues &#8211; Isn&#8217;t it just about time for the patent wars to end? Consumers want to see tech giants Apple, Google, and Samsung compete in the marketplace fair-and-square, not bicker in courtrooms around the world. The real winners of the patent wars are the $1,000-per-hour lawyers who represent these global behemoths around the world. For the first time, Apple and Google spent more last year on intellectual property than research and development. That&#8217;s not a good sign. Apple’s $1 billion victory over Google&#8217;s key Android partner Samsung in August was the most decisive victory in Apple’s patent proxy war against Google. Is patent peace possible? It’s worth noting that neither Apple CEO Tim Cook nor Google CEO<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=business.time.com&#038;blog=31173800&#038;post=65452&#038;subd=timebusinessblog&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://business.time.com/2013/01/02/tech-and-media-6-business-predictions-for-2013/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Technology &amp; Media</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://business.time.com/category/technology-media/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/rtr3azr9-1.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/rtr3azr9-1.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/rtr3azr9-1.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Senator Charles Schumer  arrive at a joint news conference on Hurricane Sandy Federal Aid Request on Capitol Hill</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/60187828ab0bda2734e1a17a173fabde?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2F0.gravatar.com%2Favatar%2Fad516503a11cd5ca435acc9bb6523536%3Fs%3D96&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">shgustin</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Top 5 Tech Biz Stories of 2012</title>
		<link>http://business.time.com/2012/12/28/the-top-5-tech-biz-stories-of-2012/</link>
		<comments>http://business.time.com/2012/12/28/the-top-5-tech-biz-stories-of-2012/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Dec 2012 14:12:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Sam Gustin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Facebook]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Future of TV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hollywood]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mobile]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Wars]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tech Policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology & Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Telecom]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Twitter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War for the Web]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Apple]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[facebook]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FTC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Larry Page]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marissa Mayer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Steve Jobs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tim Cook]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Yahoo]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://business.time.com/?p=65235</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[For the first time ever, smartphones outnumber basic mobile phones. Apple&#8216;s iPhone and Google&#8217;s Android devices &#8212; which are more powerful than the top consumer PCs of just a decade ago &#8212; are changing our habits. Consumers are using smartphones to compare prices at brick-and-mortar retailers. Innovative startups are using these devices to make entrenched markets more efficient. And the &#8220;social networking&#8221; phenomenon continues forward, as people everywhere join Facebook and Twitter to connect and share content with friends, relatives, and strangers. In 2012, tech titans Apple and Google solidified their market power, even as questions percolated about how each company plans to remain on top of its respective market. (Google is currently staring down the barrel of a major federal antitrust investigation.) Meanwhile, relative upstarts Facebook, Zynga, and Groupon tested the public stock market and each encountered a harsh response from investors. Far from an apocalypse, 2012 was a year of ascension, as Apple CEO Tim Cook asserted his leadership following the passing of his mentor Steve Jobs, and Marissa Mayer became CEO of Yahoo, in an appointment that highlighted the lack of female CEOs at America&#8217;s most high-profile companies. (MORE: Lessons from Facebook’s Instagram Photo Flap) Apple vs. Google Tech War &#8211; In 2012, it become clear that the most high-profile battle in technology is between Apple and Google, two tech juggernauts that bring radically different visions to the marketplace. As the locus of computing shifts from the desktop to the mobile device, Apple&#8217;s iPhone and Google&#8217;s Android have emerged as dominant platforms. This fight is bigger than just a commercial clash between two tech titans. It’s a war between two fundamentally different visions of technology, described in simplistic terms as closed vs. open. Apple’s model is end-to-end control over the iPhone process, from hardware to software, while Google’s strategy has been to distribute the Android system for free in order to leverage innovation from hardware makers and the software developer community. Each company has been wildly successful: Apple generates over $10 billion in profit annually on iPhone sales, while Google&#8217;s Android is now the top mobile operating system on the planet. Given the intensity<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=business.time.com&#038;blog=31173800&#038;post=65235&#038;subd=timebusinessblog&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://business.time.com/2012/12/28/the-top-5-tech-biz-stories-of-2012/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>War for the Web</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://business.time.com/category/technology-media/war-for-the-web/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/rtr38nna.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/rtr38nna.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/rtr38nna.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg looks on before a meeting with Russian Prime Minister Medvedev at Gorki residence outside Moscow</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/60187828ab0bda2734e1a17a173fabde?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2F0.gravatar.com%2Favatar%2Fad516503a11cd5ca435acc9bb6523536%3Fs%3D96&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">shgustin</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
