949-500-8638

Sponsorships

Home → Sponsorships

Creativity Motivation – What is motivation – Corey K Katir
Advertising From http://www.creativitymotivation.com

Describes motivation process for creativity with emphasis on intrinsic motivation by Corey K Katir

To paraphrase a famous utterance, the financial agreement announced Thursday between the U.S. Olympic Committee and the International is a small step in settling account ledgers and a giant leap in getting past the idea that this was more about…

By Philip Hersh News and comment: News: U.S. Olympic Committee sponsor Proctor & Gamble will announce Wednesday it has become an International Olympic Committee global sponsor as well. Comment: Another plus for the USOC in its efforts to regain international…

The announcement coming Friday in New York about the newest International Olympic Committee global sponsor should be a big part of helping the U.S. Olympic Committee resolve its ongoing problems with the IOC over global sponsorship money. The new sponsor…

For four years after the 1996 Olympics, legendary Moroccan runner Hicham El Guerrouj kept a photo on his bedroom wall of the fall in the 1,500-meter final that likely kept him from winning the race in Atlanta. Haunted by the…

To paraphrase a famous utterance, the financial agreement announced Thursday between the U.S. Olympic Committee and the International is a small step in settling account ledgers and a giant leap in getting past the idea that this was more about…

By Philip Hersh News and comment: News: U.S. Olympic Committee sponsor Proctor & Gamble will announce Wednesday it has become an International Olympic Committee global sponsor as well. Comment: Another plus for the USOC in its efforts to regain international…

The announcement coming Friday in New York about the newest International Olympic Committee global sponsor should be a big part of helping the U.S. Olympic Committee resolve its ongoing problems with the IOC over global sponsorship money. The new sponsor…

For four years after the 1996 Olympics, legendary Moroccan runner Hicham El Guerrouj kept a photo on his bedroom wall of the fall in the 1,500-meter final that likely kept him from winning the race in Atlanta. Haunted by the…

DREAMER shirt.jpgLast week marked the end of the second annual National Coming out of the Shadows Week, a rite of passage for undocumented youth — Americans in all but the eyes of the law — who support enactment of the DREAM Act. 

Publicly proclaiming one’s unauthorized immigration status is clearly a courageous act. As the National Immigrant Youth Alliance explains in its “Guide to ‘Coming Out’ for Undocumented Youth,” revealing to others that you live in this country without legal status can range from “easy to very hard” depending on the way it’s done. An act in defiance of governmental authority, “coming out” can trigger serious repercussions under the immigration laws, including arrest, detention and deportation.

On the other hand, this form of self-revelation can be cathartic and possibly beneficial.  Counterintuitively, the first step from darkness could also set the stage for actions under current law that may well lead the federal government to grant legal benefits and protections unavailable to other DREAMers who remain in the shadows.  Some of these avenues are described in a useful 73-page online resource, ”The Life after College Guide for Undocumented Students,” published by the nonprofit, Educators for Fair Consideration (E4FC). 

Funded in part by benefactors from Silicon Valley, E4FC suggests, for example, the possibility of seeking employer sponsorship for an H-1B visa (for Specialty Occupation Workers), traveling abroad and applying for a “D3″ waiver under Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) § 212(d)(3).  This is a risky proposition.  It requires throwing oneself on the mercy of both a U.S. consular officer (who must recommend the D3 waiver) and the Department of Homeland Security’s Admissibility Review Office (ARO) — a unit of U.S. Customs and Border Protection — which must approve it.  If the waiver is not granted, a DREAMer who’d entered illegally or been in the U.S. in unlawful presence after age 18 would be subject in most cases to a ten-year bar on reentry to the United States.

The E4FC guide also discusses various legal ways of earning a living in the U.S. notwithstanding undocumented status, such as qualifying as an independent contractor, either as a sole proprietor or an incorporated entity. Although E4FC does not cite legal authority, it exists in some situations under Bhakta v. INS, 667 F.2d 771 (1981); Lauvik v. INS, 910 F.2d 658 (1990); and Konishi v. INS, 661 F.2d 818 (1981), cases holding that management of a business which will likely create jobs for American workers does not constitute unauthorized employment under the immigration laws.  

The guide, quite correctly however, cautions DREAMers: 

It is your responsibility to determine whether you may legally pursue these options based on your immigration status. Be sure to consult with an experienced immigration lawyer first.

The E4FC, also laudably, provides links to a free, online service gain a preliminary assessment of whether legal remedies may exist in a particular individual’s unique situation, offering the admonition:

This service should only be used for a preliminary analysis of your possible immigration remedies. We urge you to consult with a reliable immigration attorney for a comprehensive analysis.  

I echo the same cautionary note as E4FC with a disclaimer here, and a reminder that what I am about to suggest is made available for educational purposes only, not to provide specific legal advice.  For legal advice in each individual’s case, DREAMers should consult a competent immigration lawyer, as urged by U.S.Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) here and as explained by the American Immigration Lawyers Association in this FAQ.

With the foregoing very large caveat, here are some additional tips, possible options and information for further research with and through your immigration lawyer that may be helpful and suitable in a given case (yet may fail miserably in other cases).

  1. Build Your Tribe.  No DREAMer should face the federal government alone.  Besides a competent immigration lawyer, your tribe of supporters and resource providers should include, whenever possible, family, friends, fellow students, community activists, faith-based groups working for social justice, wealthy benefactors, an employer willing to sponsor you for a work visa, social media mavens and sympathetic journalists to tell your story to the public and follow you through the immigration process. Though the government may deny that publicity has any effect on their actions, publicity helps.  Paraphrasing Hillary Clinton (even if she didn’t say it first or quite this way), “it takes a village to raise a [DREAM] child.”
  2. Qualify for family-based, employer-based or self-sponsored immigrant visa classification, and apply for permanent residence (a green card) through adjustment of status by invoking the law’s forgiveness provisions. The immigration laws allow foreign citizens to obtain ”immigrant visa classification” in many different ways.  It can be obtained through certain forms of family or marital sponsorship, or through the employment-based visa categories, including a current or prospective employer’s labor certification, as well as through self-sponsorship options under the “Extraordinary Ability” and “National Interest Waiver” avenues.  It can even be obtained by way of the EB-5 employment-creation investor category (say, if a wealthy benefactor provides a lawful gift, or a venture capitalist provides funds for investment by purchasing a DREAMer’s intellectual property, valued at least a half million dollars). Immigrant visa classification can be converted into a green card through the adjustment of status (AOS) process without ever departing the United States.  As an initial prerequisite, AOS requires that the applicant have been inspected and “admitted or paroled.”  Thus, a DREAMer who entered on a visa but overstayed satisfies this preliminary threshold.  If the DREAMer is an EWI (someone who entered without inspection), s/he would need to ask USCIS to grant Parole In Place to satisfy this first step for AOS eligibility. Ordinarily, however, AOS is not available to someone who violated status or worked without permission.  Fortunately, there are two exceptions (forgiveness clauses) under which USCIS can still grant AOS: (1) If the violation of status was for “technical reasons;” or (2) if it was other than through the fault of the applicant.  See my co-authored article, “Imagining the Improbable: Extraordinary Immigration Solutions for the Hapless and Hopeless.” (“Imagining the Improbable”). With the help of an experienced immigration lawyer, more than a few talented and accomplished DREAMers can conceivably present a well-proven case showing that their violation of immigration status was proximately caused by the person(s) who brought them here, or through “technical reasons,” e.g., their inability as minors under law to have the legal capacity or capability to take steps to seek some form of lawful status or discretionary relief under law.
  3. Seek Lawful Nonimmigrant Status without leaving the United States.  Just as the green card AOS procedure contains forgiveness clauses, so too do the nonimmigrant visa categories.  As explained in Imagining the Improbable, someone who entered on a visa but overstayed or fell out of status, but who did not work without permission and who is not in removal proceedings, may be restored to the same or a different nonimmigrant visa status if “extraordinary circumstances” can be established.  Extraordinary circumstances are decided on a case-by-case basis.  As Imagining the Improbable also explains, it may be possible, in addition, to rely on a principle of law known as “equitable tolling” to extend the deadline for filing an extension or change of status. Even a person who came into the U.S. as an EWI may qualify if USCIS can first be persuaded to grant Parole In Place.  INS (and USCIS still today) have exercised authority to convert parole status into H-1B status on the strength of a March 25, 2000 Headquarters policy memorandum.  Thus, conceptually there is no apparent reason why parole-conversion-to-nonimmigrant-status could not also apply to other nonimmigrant categories once Parole In Place is granted.   
  4. lennonnyclogo.jpgApply to USCIS for employment authorization, while presenting evidence of eligibility for “deferred action” status. Grants of prosecutorial discretion (PD) by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) have been abysmally low.  According to a March 9, 2012 email sent to Congress, ICE has found only 1% of detained foreign citizens and 8% of immigrants in Immigration Court proceedings ”provisionally amenable” to a grant of PD.  If a DREAMer is not before the Immigration Court (i.e., has never been served with a Notice to Appear), s/he may nonetheless be eligible for a grant of ”deferred action,” also sometimes known as “deferred departure,” according to Leon Wildes, the lawyer who, in successfully representing ex-Beatle John Lennon, discovered through a Freedom of Information Act request, the existence of a secret procedure then known as the “Non-Priority Program.”   Although the Operations Instructions (OIs) of USCIS’s predecessor, the Immigration and Naturalization Service, have been superseded, “deferred action” status still exists at 8 CFR § 274a.12(c)(14), which provides that a foreign national may apply for employment authorization if s/he ”has been granted deferred action, an act of administrative convenience to the government which gives some cases lower priority, if the alien establishes an economic necessity for employment.”  Here, from the old superseded OIs, is the INS rationale for granting deferred action status and the factors to be considered for this form of relief:

The district director may, in his or her discretion, recommend consideration of deferred action, an act of administrative choice to give some cases lower priority and in no way an entitlement, in appropriate cases. The deferred action category recognizes that the Service has limited enforcement resources and that every attempt should be made administratively to utilize these resources in a manner which will achieve the greatest impact under the immigration laws. In making deferred action determinations, the following factors, among others, should be considered:

(A) the likelihood of ultimately removing the alien, including:

(1) the likelihood that the alien will depart without formal proceedings (e.g., minor child who will accompany deportable parents);

(2) the age or physical condition affecting ability to travel;

(3) the likelihood that another country will accept the alien;

(4) the likelihood that the aliens will be able to qualify for some form of relief which would prevent or indefinitely delay deportation;

(B) the presence of sympathetic factors which, while not legally precluding deportation, could lead to unduly protracted deportation proceedings, and which, because of a desire on the part of the administrative authorities or the courts to reach a favorable result, could result in a distortion of the law with unfavorable implications for future cases;

(C)] the likelihood that because of the sympathetic factors in the case, a large amount of adverse publicity will be generated which will result in a disproportionate amount of Service time being spent in responding to such publicity or justifying actions (emphasis added);

(D) whether or not the individual is a member of a class of deportable aliens whose removal has been given a high enforcement priority (e.g., dangerous criminals, large-scale alien smugglers, narcotic drug traffickers, terrorists, war criminals, habitual immigration violators).

* * *

To be sure, some seasoned immigration lawyers might react to my suggestions with skepticism.  So be it.  My purpose is not to suggest that the immigration benefits available under current law through these strategies are easily won. 

Thoughtful dreamer.jpgRather, this is where your tribe and the tribes of all the DREAMers must spring into action.  Mount a campaign to persuade USCIS to embrace these approaches in individual cases.  Present the most worthy and compelling cases first.  Refrain from filing cases with little hope for success.  Publicize the outcomes of the successes and failures.  Put USCIS (and the Obama Administration as it courts Hispanic-Americans and other hyphenated citizens for votes in November) to the task of explaining why such existing remedies under law are not embraced with gusto and granted with compassionate neutrality. 

The DREAMers, after all, are the innocents.  They landed here without asking for a life full of challenge and hardship. They deserve a chance to be brought into the law’s good graces under remedial provisions that past administrations have created.

If large numbers of self-outed DREAMers were to ask for immigration benefits under current law, the bureaucrats managing and administering the immigration laws would be forced to take the flood of well-publicized filings into account and resolve them.  Just like the plea-bargaining that takes place in every court of the land, where it would crash the system if every defendant exercised the right to a trial, it would shake the unresponsive immigration system into action were the DREAMers — in large numbers – to ask for what the law clearly allows.  

So DREAMers (after consulting with your immigration lawyers and acting only on advice of counsel), stop playing hide and seek.  Instead, come out, come out, wherever you are.   

On Friday March 9, 2012 The Hon. Chris Bowen MP delivered the keynote address at the 6th annual CPD Immigraton Law Conference – ILAA (Immigration Lawyers Association of Australasia).  His address focused on changes to the skilled migration program and the employee sponsored Visas program plus the Government’s anticipated outcomes.

Below is an authorized transcript of the minister’s speech:

Good morning and thank you.

I had the honour of addressing last year’s Immigration Lawyers Association of Australasia conference.

A lot has happened since then and it’s good to be back to give you an update on progress over the last year in relation to our reform of skilled migration.

The last few years have been a period of significant reform when it comes to skilled migration.

We’ve embarked on a series of reforms to make sure Australia’s two-speed economy gets maximum advantage from what is a very significant program.

Skilled migration reforms

Back in 2009, under the stewardship of my predecessor, Chris Evans, we reformed our temporary skilled worker (457) program to make this program more responsive to the business cycle, better protect vulnerable workers and complement local training and employment opportunities.

Because the 457 visa program is our principal and most effective response to skill shortages, last year the Government spent $10 million opening up a new dedicated processing centre in Brisbane, designed to halve the median processing time for complete 457 visa applications.

I am pleased to say that, according to our latest figures, the median processing time for all applications this year has been reduced by 53 per cent on the average processing time when we came to office. It is now 19 calendar days.

Of course, as a median figure, this means that many complete applications will be processed faster than that — and, in fact, of the applications lodged in January this year, the majority were decided within ten working days.

So the 457 visa program is now more efficient and more responsive to changes in the labour market than at any time in its history.

You can play a big role in reducing these processing times further. Every time the department needs to ask for more information in order to assess an application, it results in delays in processing. With resources projects coming on line rapidly, delays mean dollars. So you can help to speed up processing by working with our officers and by using e-lodgement so that we can give Australian businesses the best possible processing times.

Last year, I also announced the introduction of the sponsorship accreditation scheme. The scheme recognises that many 457 sponsors have a long record of compliance with immigration law and should receive streamlined processing to speed up positive outcomes for employers and industry.
While the accreditation scheme is still in its infancy, to date a number of employers — including hospitals and scientific research bodies — have been granted accredited status. I am sure that many more important Australian businesses will take up this opportunity in the coming months and I welcome this development.

Another important reform we introduced — back in 2010 — was the new, more targeted Skilled Occupations List for Independent Migration. The new, shortened List is focused on high-value occupations for the economy over the long term and is underpinned by Skills Australia’s independent analysis.

Then, last year, we introduced a new points test to better select independent migrants who are best equipped to find a place in the labour market through all stages of the economic cycle. The points test focuses on factors such as strong English language proficiency, on-the-job work experience and higher levels of education.

And this year we are introducing Skill Select. Skill Select gives the government the tools to prioritise and rank intending migrants in their order of relative merit. It also allows us to tweak the spread of occupations in any given program year — preventing the situation of recent years where the bulk of the program is dominated by only a handful of occupations.

Skill Select will also connect Australian employers, and state and territory governments, with potential job candidates. Applicants will benefit from online lodgement of Expressions of Interest and can be more confident of a positive outcome when they pay their application fees. All in all, Skill Select provides a more efficient and better-administered program, benefits that will bring productivity improvements for the labour market.

Employer Sponsored Visa reforms: a simplified, stronger program

This brings me to our latest reforms to strengthen and simplify the Permanent Employer Sponsored Program.

The defining characteristic of employer sponsored migration is the use of market-based employer processes to select potential migrants. That is, employers throughout Australia can sponsor foreign workers for permanent residence to fill genuine job vacancies in their businesses.

Because of this, these visas are highly responsive to labour market demands. They are good for Australia — in that they are our best performing permanent visa category in terms of employment and economic outcomes. For example, 96 per cent of Employer Nominated Scheme (ENS) migrants work full-time and their median income is $77 000 per annum.

Given this strong performance, we’ve put a lot of emphasis on growing this program — transforming it into the Government’s main skilled migration program.

It was therefore prudent to take a good look at the program to ensure that it is well placed to meet both our labour market and integrity objectives. In undertaking this review, my department found that, while the employer sponsored program performs very well, there is still room to improve in three key areas:

  • simplifying the program and reducing administrative costs
  • better aligning the program with our broader economic; and
  • limiting the vulnerability of visa holders; and
  • reducing the potential for employers to manipulate the program to access cheap, less skilled labour

Today, therefore, I am pleased to announce reforms to improve the operation and effectiveness of the permanent Employer Sponsored visa categories: the Employer Nominated Scheme and the Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme (RSMS).

Our reforms will address all three areas for improvement. They also deliver on the Government’s commitments to visa simplification and to creating a more efficient pathway to permanent residence for 457 visa holders.

These changes will effectively conclude the comprehensive review of the Skilled Migration program, which has modernised our system of skilled migrant selection.

As I say, it has been a period of significant reform in skilled migration. This reform has been necessary but I also recognise that change is disconcerting and people — both prospective immigrants and employers — need to see these reforms implemented and allowed to work. Once this round of reforms is implemented, I see us then embarking on a considerable period of consolidation.

Most importantly, the reforms will ensure that our Skilled Migration Program remains geared towards delivering significant benefits to the economy through greater productivity and migrant employment outcomes.

What are we doing?

What we’ll be doing is cutting the red tape for all applicants and streamlining the visa for those people who’ve already been through the rigorous 457 visa process and have a proven work record in Australia. That’s about 78 per cent of the entire program or around 15 000 places.

For the remainder of the program — that is, those people seeking direct entry — we’re putting in place improved checks and balances.

We have retained the core strengths of the program while implementing a suite of changes. I’d like to touch on the key elements of the package that will commence on 1 July 2012.

Around half the people who take up a job opportunity on a 457 visa end up staying and becoming permanent residents. Most of these stay with the same employer doing the same job. Our reforms will better align the program with our broader economic objectives and streamline the pathway to permanent residence for these workers. We know they can do the job and are ready to make a commitment to Australia.

In practical terms, this means that the visa applicants skills will not be assessed a second time. Nor will we re-test English skills if they’ve been tested for their 457 visa.
Of course, businesses will still need to comply with their sponsorship obligations and applications will still be considered on their merits.

For those who apply directly for permanent residence and are mostly untested in the Australian labour market, we need to ensure that they can do the job in Australia.

Improved checks and balances will position us to select the best and brightest for the limited number of available visas — those people best equipped to succeed in the labour market and participate in Australian society. It will also mean that these migrants are less vulnerable to exploitation.

In particular, applicants seeking direct entry will be subject to an English requirement of IELTS 6, and an assessment of their qualifications and professional work experience. To reduce the complexity of the system, the current six visa classes for the permanent employer sponsored program will be reduced to two new visas: an ENS and a RSMS visa. This includes eliminating the onshore and offshore legal requirements, removing administrative barriers and simplifying visa rules.

In addition, a single, consolidated ‘sponsored’ occupation list will be introduced to replace three current occupation lists for the Employer Nomination Scheme, subclass 457 and the State and Territory Sponsored General Skilled Migration visas. This consolidated list will make it a lot simpler and clearer for employers and prospective permanent migrants to navigate migration rules.

This approach will be further strengthened with the removal of the subjective ‘exceptional circumstance’ provisions from RSMS.

In fact, last program year, almost 36 per cent of occupations nominated for RSMS claimed ‘exceptional circumstances’. These included skilled trade occupations — such as plumbers and mechanics – and non-trade skilled occupations, such as hotel managers and law clerks. Any system which requires over a third of applicants to prove they face ‘exceptional circumstances’ is in need of reform.

It makes sense to have a more generous ‘standard’ program for RSMS will be available, including a broader range of eligible occupations and skills. The new rules will be simpler, clearer and more objective, thus saving time and expense for migrants, employers and my department.

At the same time, the program will be brought into line with the core premise of the Skilled Migration program — to focus on just that, skilled migration. The single, consolidated occupation list for ENS will concentrate on truly skilled occupations, as will RSMS, while semi-skilled occupations can be negotiated through a new Labour Agreements stream within ENS or RSMS.

Of course, I recognise that there are areas of the country that are crying out for semi-skilled workers. That’s why I recently announced the Regional Migration Agreement program to cater for these needs. I have also taken steps to reduce the time it takes to approve a Labour Agreement, making the program a more viable option for employers.

Overall, the changes that I have announced today will strengthen the Permanent Employer Sponsored Program by attracting those people best-suited to meet Australia’s and employers’ unique labour force needs and make a contribution to Australia. This will provide for a more streamlined, flexible and simplified visa approval process.

I note that a plenary session on the reforms to the Skill stream, including the changes to the Permanent Employer Sponsored Program, will be conducted by departmental officers later this morning. They will provide a more detailed and technical summary of these changes to the Permanent Employer Sponsored Program. If you have any specific questions on the detail of the changes, I’m sure they’ll be happy to answer them.

Conclusion

I have talked a fair bit today about the economic imperatives of our skilled migration program.

However, as you all know, immigration policies also have, at their core, a human dimension — and changes to them have real impacts on real people. It is therefore essential that changes to migration policy settings are made with an understanding of their effects on all facets of our economy and society, and recognition of their real world impacts on our clients and stakeholders. I like to think that our changes are made with this consideration firmly in mind.

Of course, there will always be scope for improvement, as the dynamic nature of our economy dictates that the Migration Program — and the skilled visa categories in particular — have an inherent need to evolve over time to ensure proper calibration of our migration program for current conditions. This does not mean an overhaul to respond to every bump in the economic road but, rather, a strong and durable framework, within which appropriate tweaks can be made.

Indeed, this is why the Government is implementing a Long Term Migration Planning Framework which provides for a more strategic and longer term approach to our immigration policy and settings.

In recent years we have undertaken an ambitious, wide-ranging and effective reform of our skilled migration policy and program settings. This has delivered a more targeted, demand-driven skilled migration program that is better placed to meet our short and medium to long term economic needs, while ensuring that our first priority of jobs for Australians is not compromised.

The employer sponsored migration reform that I have announced today adds to this important body of work. I trust it will provide greater certainty for your clients and better outcomes for Australia’s economy and society.

Thank you.

The Hon. Chris Bowen MP

 

 

 

American Hurdler Lolo Jones won the U.S. Open Indoor 50-meter hurdles championship in her first race back since having surgery. Learn more about Lolo Jones and how to activate a Summer Olympics Sponsorship to build your brand. After winning the U.S. Open Indoor 50-meter hurdles championship, U.S. Hurdler Lolo Jones is officially back. Once one …

While the U.S. Womenas Soccer team is well on their way to qualifying for the 2012 London Olympics, the team will have to continue without one of its key players. During the Americansa 14-0 victory over the Dominican Republic last week, defender Ali Krieger tore her anterior cruciate and medial collateral ligaments. The injuries will …

At this year’s NAB Convention, digital issues were much talked about.  In fact, the NAB held, for the first time, a day and a half session focusing on radio stations and their digital efforts, called the Digital Strategies Exchange.  I was on a panel called the Consultant’s Corner, and discussed legal issues that broadcasters may face as they move more and more into the digital world.  The PowerPoint slides that accompanied my presentation can be found here.

Digital issues for broadcasters go far beyond the streaming royalties for webcasting that we have written about so much in these pages.  Recent cases, like the one that we wrote about here, have imposed the FCC’s disclosure requirements on contests conducted on a station website that is even mentioned on-air.  Broadcasters need to be careful about protecting their branding, as putting a slogan or positioning statement on the Internet makes it available to people worldwide.  If a station has not been careful in picking its branding statement, the worldwide exposure can just be an alert of a potential infringement to a trademark or service mark owner. Using music online in ways other than webcasting can pose legal issues as we explained in our advisory here.  Sponsorship identification obligations like those that apply to broadcasters have been imposed on online media where companies are given any consideration for endorsements or testimonials (see our article here).  And allowing listeners to post videos or music or other content could potentially lead to liability for any copyright violations if a station does not register an agent with the Copyright Office to receive notices of infringement so that the station can take down infringing content (the Copyright Office’s instructions for doing so can be found by clicking here).  These are but a few of the issues covered in my presentation in Las Vegas.  As in any other business endeavor, make sure that you know the rules of the road to avoid the legal issues that might otherwise arise. 

At its meeting today, the FCC voted to require that television stations maintain most of their public inspection files online, in a database to be created by the FCC (see the FCC’s Public Notice here).  While the details about this obligation have not yet been released, from the comments at the FCC meeting, much is already evident.   All TV stations will have to post their files to an online server to be maintained by the FCC.  Proposals for new obligations to post information about sponsorship identification and shared services agreements have been dropped, at least for now.  Most documents not already online at the FCC will need to be uploaded within 6 months of the rule becoming effective.  And, in the most controversial action, broadcaster’s political files will need to be posted to the new online database, though in a process that is to be phased in over time.

The political file obligation will apply at first only to affiliates of the Top 4 TV networks in the Top 50 markets.  And only new information for the political file will need to be posted.  Information in the file before the effective date of the order apparently will not need to be posted online, at least not initially.  The requirement for posting the political file online will be reviewed in a proceeding to begin one year after the effective date of the new rules.  As stations outside the Top 50 markets, and other stations in those large markets, will not need to comply with the political file obligations until July 2014, the FCC will be able to reexamine the impact of the disclosure obligations before the compliance obligation for the political file expands to all stations. 

Issues about the posting of the political file dominated the conversation.  Commissioner McDowell, the lone Republican Commissioner, suggested that the FCC missed an opportunity for compromise.  Broadcasters concerned about the burden of uploading hundred or thousands of documents in the days before an election, and about the specific disclosure of their lowest unit rates in an on-line database available to anyone, anywhere, offered a compromise proposal that would have had them creating a summary of the candidate’s purchases on the station, but would not have given the actual rate information.  McDowell suggested that the FCC start with that level of disclosure, and examine in a further proceeding if specific information about lowest unit rates needed to be disclosed online. 

Commissioner Clyburn seemed to acknowledge the competitive concerns of broadcasters having to give out their lowest rate online, where everyone, everywhere, can see it.  From her days as a newspaper publisher, she stated that she knew how hard it was to negotiate with potential advertisers who were always looking for a better deal on rates.  But the Commissioner said that she thought that the public demand for information – whether it be from candidates, regulators, public interest groups, whistleblowers or just people “with too much time on their hands” – outweighed the burden put on broadcasters.  Commissioner Clyburn suggested that the review after the first year could determine if the publicity of the lowest rates really did cause problems.

FCC Chairman Genachowski was the least sympathetic to broadcaster’s concerns, essentially saying that, as the information was already in the station’s paper files, putting it online was just the modern way to do disclosure.  He dismissed any claims that it would present a burden to broadcasters – claiming that it will actually save broadcasters money in the long run (query why the broadcasters would be objecting so much if the proposal really would save them money).

In fact, the theme that online disclosure was the modern way of doing things, and that it would save broadcasters money, was repeated throughout the presentation.  The Media Bureau attorney who presented the FCC decision suggested that yearly compliance costs would be between $80 and $400 per station (a number that broadcasters I’m sure would find surprising).  This question may well become one that will be crucial to the effective date of the proposal as Commissioner McDowell suggested that a Paperwork Reduction Act analysis of the order might prove troublesome.

More details of the proposal will be available when the FCC releases the full text of its order.  We will update this summary when the text is out and we’ve had a chance to review it. 

Los Angeles Accident Attorney
Advertising From theaccidentattorneylosangeles.com/

Personal Injury Lawyer Los Angeles – FREE CONSULTATION by Personal Injury Attorney Los Angeles – Legal Defenders, Los Angeles Personal Injury Lawyers – Law Offices of Burg and Brock, who have won over $100 million in verdicts and settlements for clients

Page took 3 seconds to load.

 

Capital Online Revenue Introduces Innovate Business Education Techniques


As an alternative to more traditional methods of learning about business and commerce, Capital Online Revenue introduces a new “earn and learn” training program.

Though business colleges remain in great supply, more and more Americans are turning to alternative sources of training and education, particularly during these days of economic upset and uncertainty. The simple truth is that with layoffs so prevalent and incomes so unsteady, investing in a full-time business education simply isn’t a viable option for many entrepreneurs. Instead, they are looking to business training modules that allow for on-the-job training, providing a way to master the tools of the trade even while making a profit. Capital Online Revenue continues to spearhead this movement with the introduction of its new “earn-and-learn” business training techniques.

Different from both traditional business education courses and even other online endeavors, Capital Online Revenue is a service that extends to customers a wealth of resources for learning about online business. What makes Capital Online Revenue services unique, however, is the fact that its training techniques are implemented in real-time. In other words, customers are both learning about online business and establishing their own online business both at the same time.

Though the notion of a make-money-online opportunity is hardly new, the methods being introduced by Capital Online Revenue are unlike anything yet devised by its competitors. What makes this service different is the emphasis it places on its training aspects. Though the long-term goal is for customers to establish their own online business, this comes hand-in-hand with an array of training resources and materials that include not only tutorial videos, but also a unique training component that includes one-on-one coaching from a team of live experts. Capital Online Revenue extends these services through a variety of media, including online chat, e-mail, and phone.

Capital Online Revenue introduction of these features has already met with enthusiasm from its current customer base. The service continues to define its niche, appealing to retirees, stay-at-home-parents, and working professionals who simply lack the time or resources necessary to attend more conventional business classes.