The PROTECTS Initiative – supported by AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile, and Sprint at launch – has two main components. First, within 6 months, consumers will have a new option when calling their carrier to report their device stolen. Upon receiving a report of a stolen device, the carrier can permanently block the devices from being used again. Second, within 18 months the carriers will launch a shared database of stolen devices, further diminishing their value. The Initiative will also include a consumer education campaign, urging consumers to use passcodes on their phones, learn how to perform a remote wipe of their data, and be aware of situations that pose an elevated risk of theft. As FCC Chairman Genachowski said at the launch of the Initiative:

“[W]e’re sending a message to consumers that we’ve got your back, and a message to criminals that we’re cracking down on the stolen phone and tablet re-sale market and making smartphone theft a crime that doesn’t pay.”

Our cell phones have become so intertwined with our daily lives that having one stolen can be a fairly traumatic experience. Hopefully, this new Initiative will make the blow of cell phone theft a little less severe for consumers and eliminate the allure of this type of crime for some would-be thieves.

Be sure to review the FCC’s tip sheets on the new Initiative below:

PROTECTS Initiative Fact Sheet
Stolen Phone Consumer Tip Sheet (English)
Stolen Phone Consumer Tip Sheet (Spanish) 

Aldo Pisano, 2012 NHMC/NLMC Writers Program Alum, writes about his experience while in the program.

I was accepted into the NHMC’s TV Writers Program after sending in my “Hung” spec.  Previously, I had a background in acting and playwriting.  In five weeks you’ll write at least one TV spec, getting feedback at every stage of writing.  This will culminate in a table read of your script.

You’ll also receive valuable coaching on how to brand and convey your unique skills and experiences. Meetings with showrunners and staff writers give further insight into the “writers room” and how to best foster a long-lasting career as a writer.

Geoff’s leadership and mentorship is second to none.  The creative execs you’ll meet from ABC and NBC are extremely supportive.  The NHMC TV Writers Program will jumpstart your career!

Since the program, my “Big Bang Theory” spec script was selected for Nickelodeon’s Writers Script Review; my short film “Soap Man” was produced and is currently in post-production; I was asked to write a feature film for 2zero1 Productions; and I just completed my new pilot “Yo Moses!”.

If you would like to apply or would like more information on the 2012 NHMC/NLMC Writers Program, please visit http://nhmc.org/writersprogram.

A core concern for NHMC is that service providers, like your cable company or cell phone service provider, should not be able to speed up or slow down websites based on how much money they are paid by content producers. For instance, a popular online news website should not be able to pay a wireless company so that it’s website is delivered to consumers faster than its competitors. Allowing deals like this to exist could relegate the rest of us to the “slow lane” and significantly impact the Internet experience to which we have all become accustomed.

In December 2010, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) passed rules designed to protect consumers from a number of potentially harmful practices. However, those rules do not apply equally to the wired connection that we use on our computers and the wireless connection we use on our cell phones. As many Latinos and other people of color use a cell phone as their only means of Internet access, the inequity of the FCC’s rules could lead to an inferior Internet being delivered to those who could most benefit from access.

In an effort to take matters into their own hands, a number of shareholders of major wireless companies are attempting to secure change from the inside by putting pro-net neutrality proposals up for a vote at the annual shareholders’ meetings of these companies in April and May of this year. Although the companies attempted to get these initiatives removed from the ballot, the Securities and Exchange Commission said that the proposals must be put up for a vote stating:

“In view of the sustained public debate over the last several years concerning net neutrality and the Internet and the increasing recognition that the issue raises significant policy considerations, we do not believe that [the wireless companies] may omit the proposal from its proxy materials.”

While this is a major victory, the work is not done yet. We must now urge other shareholders at these companies to vote for these proposals, so that these companies will be forced to publicly commit to operating their networks in a way consistent with net neutrality principles.

Click here to make your voice heard by signing a petition telling shareholders that they should stand with us to protect the Internet, regardless of how users choose to access it.

A sample shareholder resolution is reproduced below:

NETWORK NEUTRALITY ON WIRELESS NETWORKS

 WHEREAS:

The open (non-discriminatory) architecture of the Internet is critical to the prosperity of our economy and society. Non-discrimination principles are commonly referred to as “network neutrality” and seek to ensure equal access and non-discriminatory treatment for all content.

As President Obama and Federal Communication Commission Chairman Genachowski have pointed out, an open Internet plays a pivotal role in solving critical national problems such as healthcare, education, energy, and public safety and is necessary “to preserve the freedom and openness that have allowed the Internet to become a transformative and powerful platform for speech and expression.”

Network neutrality rules are also needed to “facilitate the growth of the Internet and give private companies the correct incentives to continue investing in this significantly valuable good,” according to a January 2010 report by the Institute for Policy Integrity at New York University. This report and others find that an open Internet accounts for billions of dollars of value for the economy.

We believe this economic and social value is an important factor in the growth of our economy and widely diversified investment portfolios.

Open Internet policies on wireless networks (the fastest growing segment of the Internet) have particular importance for minority and economically disadvantaged communities.  People of color access the Internet via cell phones at a much greater rate than their white counterparts, according to a report by the Pew Internet & American Life Project. In 2010, the report found, 33% of whites accessed the Internet on cell phones compared to 51% of Latinos and 46% of African-Americans; 30% of whites sent or received e-mail on cell phones compared to 47% of Latinos and 41% of African-Americans.

In 2011 Pew reported “Smartphone owners under the age of 30, non-white smartphone users, and smartphone owners with relatively low income and education levels are particularly likely to say that they mostly go online using their phones.” It found that almost a third of the “mostly cell” users lack any traditional broadband Internet access. The author of the report concluded, “For businesses, government agencies and nonprofits who want to engage with certain communities, they will find them in front of a four-inch screen, not in front of a big computer in their den.”

According to Colorofchange.org, an organization representing African-Americans, “The digital freedoms at stake are a 21st century civil rights issue.”

Whether or not the proposed merger of AT&T and T-Mobile is completed, network neutrality principles on wireless networks are needed to protect open access to the Internet by millions of Americans.

Resolved, shareholders request the company publicly commit to operate its wireless broadband network consistent with network neutrality principles – i.e., operate a neutral network with neutral routing along the company’s wireless infrastructure such that the company does not privilege, degrade or prioritize any packet transmitted over its wireless infrastructure based on its source, ownership or destination.

Ninety percent of Americans use radio at least once a week, making it the most common point of connection today.  And thanks to the passage of the Local Community Radio Act, groups will soon have the opportunity to start community radio stations in cities and towns across the country—as early as next summer.  This marks the largest expansion of community radio in U.S. history, and in many areas, will be the first such opportunity in more than 30 years.

Community radio brings new voices and perspectives to the media.  It enriches diverse communities with local arts and culture, enables neighbors to share local news and events, and helps residents participate in decisions that impact their lives.  For communities with low literacy rates or where English is not spoken as a first language, radio can also be the primary source of vital information.  In recent years, community radio stations have been key players in addressing water pollution,preserving indigenous languages, and even saving lives in natural disasters and other emergencies.

Community radio is also easy to produce, free to consume, and stations cost as little as $10,000 to launch—putting this powerful organizing tool well within the reach of most community groups.  That’s why the Prometheus Radio Project is leading a broad coalition of groups to get the word out and help groups apply for, build, and sustain new stations.

There is a tight timeline, however, for community groups to seize this historic opportunity. The application window—which could be as early as June 2012—may only be five days long and announced a few months in advance.  If groups aren’t prepared, they may lose their chance to apply.

Here’s a simple checklist of what to do before you apply:

• Be registered as a non profit with the state or ally with a nonprofit.
• Find an open channel in your area. For rural and suburban areas preliminary research can be done at RecNet. Note: There will likely be greater urban availability once the rules are determined by the FCC.
• Identify and partner with other groups in your area – the FCC will likely give priority to groups that cooperate.
• Secure funding: The application and license are free, but some groups will need to do an engineering study (approx. $500-3000) for your application. If a group gets a license, you have 18 months to build, which can cost $10,000+.

The process will be competitive; it is important that these new radio licenses be awarded to groups that have the ability to organize and engage their communities for deep and lasting impact.

Learn more about how to support community radio projects here.

About the Author

Danielle Chynoweth, Director of Planning at the Prometheus Radio Project, has 20 years of experience in community media and building grassroots social justice organizations. She co-founded the Urbana-Champaign Independent Media Center and led its purchase and conversion of the downtown post office building into a Community Media and Arts Center, home to Radio Free Urbana 104.5 LPFM.  

From 2001-2008, she served as a City Council Member and then as Mayor Pro Tem for Urbana, Illinois. During that time she served on the Telecommunications and Public Access TV commissions and instigated public wireless, broadband, and arts programs.

By: Fabiola Rivas, NHMC’s 2011 Google Policy Fellow

This past summer, I had the honor of working as a Google Policy Fellow with the National Hispanic Media Coalition (NHMC), an organization that opens the doors for Latinos in the media. I had the opportunity to work closely with Jessica Gonzalez, NHMC’s President of Policy & Legal Affairs, and Michael Scurato, NHMC’s Policy Counsel, to advance NHMC’s agenda in Washington, DC. I worked on a wide variety of projects and utilized a broad range of skills, legal and non-legal. I had my first real taste of non-profit, civil rights advocacy. For me, this fellowship has given me the perfect foundation upon which I can build my career and my future.

Interning with NHMC has been, without a doubt, the best experience of my law school career. I had the opportunity to delve into cutting-edge legal policy questions. Not only did I engage in a diverse array of substantive, meaningful work, but also the mentorship that I received and the supportive environment were extraordinary. As a result, I have established lasting connections that will be both personally and professionally invaluable throughout my career.

In every way, this internship has been a positive experience and I am excited to see the internship program continue to grow. NHMC reinforced my strong interest and passion in pursuing a career in media, communications, and intellectual property law, specifically with issues that affect the Latino community. I have greatly appreciated the opportunity to work with NHMC, on projects both large and small, and I hope my contributions will make a difference.

Thanks for having me!

–The Google Policy Fellowship program offers undergraduate, graduate, and law students interested in Internet and technology policy the opportunity to spend the summer contributing to the public dialogue on these issues, and exploring future academic and professional interests. Fellows will have the opportunity to work at public interest organizations at the forefront of debates on broadband and access policy, content regulation, copyright and trademark reform, consumer privacy, open government, and more. Fellows will be assigned a lead mentor at their host organizations, but will have the opportunity to work with several senior staff members over the course of the summer. Fellows will be expected to make substantive contributions to the work of their organization, including conducting policy research and analysis; drafting reports and analyses; attending government and industry meetings and conferences; and participating in other advocacy activities. For more information, or to apply, please visit http://www.google.com/policyfellowship.

by Omaira Galarza

This fall I was fortunate enough to be a part of the NHMC/NLMC  Writers Program.  In television the saying, “It’s all about who you know,” is an undeniable fact.  With this writers program NHMC/NLMC provides upcoming television writers from all over the nation, the opportunity to improve their skill set and meet valuable industry resources along the way.  Under the guidance of our mentor, Geoff Harris, the 11 of us who completed the program this year benefitted from the workshop, the networking, and every moment in between.

As a writer, being surrounded by writers, talking about writing, and actually writing every day is invaluable.  The NHMC/NLMC program has the added bonus of an instant familia.   Every morning for five weeks we would set up our makeshift writers room with two long tables, twelve chairs, and everyone making sure everyone else was well caffeinated and fed.  The room was “home” and the group was a “family” by week one.

During the program we were each required to write a spec episode of an existing television show.  We  began with everyone’s pitches, followed by treatments, outlines, and full-length sitcom or drama teleplays.  Having gone to film school, I’ve written specs before, but never in a writers room -style situation.  I loved the creative, focused, and unfiltered environment.  It was an added bonus that the room was split between sitcom and drama writers.  Drama needs laughs and comedy needs emotion, so we were all able to learn from each other’s strengths.

Along the way we met former members like Spiro Skentzos (“Grimm”) and Sierra Ornelas (“Happy Endings”).  Seeing the growing success rate of the program and its previous members is inspirational to those of us who are trying to figure out when or how we will “make it”.  Listening to speakers like Ed Bernero (“Criminal Minds”), the ABC/Disney and NBC diversity executives talk about the many paths to becoming a television writer and the opportunities that exist for Hispanics was refreshing.

No doubt I speak for all the members of this year’s NHMC/NLMC Television Writers Program when I say I am grateful to have been a part of this fellowship.  The experience gave me a new family, expanded my network, and helped my writing continue to grow.  I’m excited to see where this will lead for myself and my talented classmates.

So what happened, in the midst of the tryptophan fog of Thanksgiving that was so important? Earlier that week, the FCC informed AT&T that, after 7 months of reviewing the evidence, it had determined that an administrative hearing was necessary to fully consider the proposed transaction. Essentially, that means that the FCC thought that AT&T didn’t show enough to prove that its proposed transaction is in the public interest in its initial round of filings and would be required to prove its case in the context of something like a trial. Upon finding out that the FCC was set to have its Commissioners vote on an order to initiate a hearing, AT&T took the bold move of withdrawing its entire merger application from the FCC, in hopes that the FCC’s damning analysis would never see the light of day.

There was something about the audacity of AT&T’s maneuver that struck a chord with me that Thanksgiving morning. It seemed so… familiar. Flipping through the channels later that evening, I came across “A Charlie Brown Thanksgiving” and I figured it out. AT&T was simply acting out the iconic opening scene in which Lucy holds a football for Charlie Brown and asks him to kick it, only to pull it away at the very last moment, causing great embarrassment and dismay.

Good grief!

Not content to play the role of Charlie Brown, the FCC reconvened the following week and provided a moment of catharsis to all of us who have suffered along with Charlie Brown for all these years. They kicked the football!! The FCC allowed AT&T to walk away (for now), but decided that it would be unfair and against the public interest to allow months of work, at the taxpayers’ expense, to fall by the wayside.

The FCC decided that, although AT&T pulled its merger application, a report containing the staff analysis should be released. The report prepared by the FCC, the expert agency in all matters telecom, included a scathing analysis of AT&T’s claims that the merger would be in the public interest. The FCC emphatically came to many of the same conclusions as the Department of Justice and NHMC, finding that the merger would lead to a drastic reduction of American jobs, higher prices, and less competition and innovation in the wireless industry. Often, the FCC relied upon the incongruence between confidential documents submitted by AT&T and the public statements made by the company, finding that AT&T often told the public one thing while knowing the opposite to be true.

Although this was only one in a string of setbacks for AT&T over the course of the past few months, AT&T and a handful of supporters continue to press on with claims of victimization and unfair treatment at the hands of anybody who would question their fantasy. Here are a few of the more popular ones:

“The FCC report contains no analysis and cherry picks facts.”

It is ludicrous to say that the report contains no analysis. It worked with the record provided by AT&T and others, and fully examined each claim. After discussion, it determined whether or not each claim had merit. That is called analysis. Had the report accepted AT&T’s claims at face value and pushed them out, word for word, without any other thought or discussion – that would be indicative of a lack of analysis.

“The FCC staff analysis is premature and incomplete”

The analysis is only “premature and incomplete” by AT&T’s measure. Luckily, AT&T is not the one that gets to tell federal agencies how to do their jobs. Three out of four FCC Commissioners released statements praising the analysis, meaning that the Commission likely could have adopted it, as is, had AT&T not attempted to pull the rug out.

“The FCC failed to acknowledge that, without the merger, T-Mobile would disappear from the market.”

First, as the FCC analysis recognized, T-Mobile has aggressively attempted to grow market share and offer competitive products leading up to the merger proposal, and there is no evidence to indicate that it will disappear from the market absent this merger.

Further, there are a number of other companies that were interested in acquiring T-Mobile when it went up for sale – 5 other companies, to be exact, according to the Chief Financial Officer of T-Mobile’s parent company, Deutsche Telecom. Just because the sale of the company to AT&T would run counter to the public interest and antitrust law doesn’t necessarily mean that it can’t be sold to somebody else.

“The FCC ignored the impact of AT&T’s pledge to expand its advanced wireless service (4G LTE) to 97 percent of the U.S. population. Without the merger, many Americans won’t be covered by the next gen network.”

The FCC didn’t “ignore” this claim – it said that AT&T was lying when it claimed that it would not be able to increase deployment without the merger. We were all privy to the accidentally filed AT&T confidential document that destroyed this claim. In fact, the claim was destroyed months ago – so this assertion displays nothing more than a failure to follow the case.

Beyond that, Verizon has already pledged to deploy next gen wireless to a similar portion of the population in the coming years, so people wouldn’t necessarily be left out if AT&T decides that it doesn’t want to compete for that business.

“The FCC is attempting to block the efforts of AT&T to build out wireless broadband.”

This is a laughable claim. AT&T is free to make any efforts to build out broadband it wants. I think what this line means to say is that “AT&T is attempting to hold broadband deployment hostage in exchange for regulatory favors and the FCC is calling AT&T’s bluff.” I’d call that bluff too.

“The FCC ignored the jobs that AT&T would create as a result of this merger.”

Again, the FCC didn’t ignore this fact, it analyzed the confidential documents that AT&T was required to file and determined that AT&T’s jobs claims were overstated or untrue. In fact, by simply reading internal documents filed by AT&T, the Commission saw in black and white that AT&T was planning massive layoffs as a result of the transaction.

“The FCC released this report without giving AT&T an opportunity to respond to the claims made in it.”

The original purpose of the document that eventually became the staff analysis was to afford AT&T a hearing where it could argue its case. AT&T withdrew its application because it did not want this opportunity and decided that it would try its luck in court with the DOJ. This is purely a strategic decision on the part of AT&T and it would have set a terrible precedent for AT&T to get away with it, unscathed.

Not only that, but there was a 7 month window in which AT&T and others submitted thousands of documents to the FCC. Many times, AT&T was asked, pointedly, to back up certain assertions and it failed to do so. That would suggest that one of two things happened: (1) AT&T made every argument it could and still failed to persuade the FCC; or (2) AT&T was waiting until the very last minute to submit evidence that would overwhelmingly prove its points. If it were the former, I would say, “Sore loser.” If it were the latter, I would refer them to something my father usually says, as he eats the last Christmas cookie: “You snooze, you lose.” Either way, they lose.

Despite all the kicking and screaming from AT&T and merger supporters for not getting their way, it is becoming increasingly clear that the end is near for this terrible transaction. AT&T’s tried and true method of throwing vast amounts of money at a situation does not appear to be working this time. In fact, it seems that AT&T’s maneuver at the FCC, supposedly designed to give it a better chance in court, seems to have backfired in more ways then one as the DOJ has indicated that it believes that the withdrawal of applications from the FCC means that there is no deal to consider in court. DOJ intends to file a motion saying as much in court this week. Judge Huvelle, the judge assigned to the antitrust case, seems inclined to agree and called AT&T out for following a path that would waste the time of the court and the money of taxpayers.

All in all, not a bad Thanksgiving for consumers across the country.

UPDATE: Shortly after this blog was posted, AT&T and DOJ filed a joint motion to stay the court case. The case will resume in mid-January after AT&T issues a report detailing the status of the transaction.

A recent book by Juan Gonzalez and Joseph Torres, News for all the People, narrates the role media has played in the U.S. in regards to race.  The authors of this important and timely book state:

“It is our contention that newspapers, radio, and television played a pivotal role in perpetuating racists’ views among the general population.  They did so by routinely portraying non-white minorities as threats to a white society and by reinforcing racial ignorance, group hatred, and discriminatory government policies.”

Unfortunately, the U.S. media’s portrayal of people of color and immigrants as a threatening influence continues to wax and wane. The media needs an enemy, especially during a time of crisis, and the enemy of choice is often “the other.”  Undocumented immigrants come to take our jobs, Muslims kill U.S. citizens, African-Americans lower our quality of life.  We’ve heard them all.

The National Hispanic Media Coalition’s (NHMC) mission includes fighting negative portrayals of Latinos in media.  This is an important effort because perception is reality, especially for children.  Throughout its 25-year history, NHMC has fought numerous incidents of hate speech in media, focusing on the most egregious of cases.  In 1996, Sacramento disk jockey, Jeff Katz, on KSTE-AM, suggested that drivers “should be awarded a sombrero bumper sticker” for hitting undocumented immigrants attempting to cross into the United States from Mexico.  Katz said that for every 10 bumper stickers collected a motorist would “earn a free drink or meal at Taco Bell.”  NHMC mobilized the community against Katz and the station.  Ultimately, Katz was fired.  In 2009, NHMC joined community coalitions fighting against CNN Lou Dobbs’ hateful immigration rhetoric.  NHMC’s President & CEO, Alex Nogales, met with CNN’s President, Jon Klein, to urge him to have Dobbs return to being a credible journalist or to fire him immediately.  Less than a week after Nogales met with Klein, Lou Dobbs announced his resignation.  NHMC has benefited from the lessons of these and other public campaigns and has refined its strategy on hate speech in media.  If the broadcasters ignore the public’s complaint, then the public has the right to go to the advertisers and educate them on the collision of their brand with hate speech.  No smart corporation wants, or needs, that brand conflict.

This is exactly what NHMC is now doing with its current campaign in Los Angeles targeting John Kobylt and Ken Chiampou, two local shock jocks who for years have made a profit by trafficking hate.   John and Ken’s modus operandi is to target vulnerable groups and their advocates, vilify them and make a call to action to their angry listeners.  Throughout the years, they have perfected hate speech, while their station managers have enjoyed the high ratings and turned a blind eye to the unsubstantiated and harmful rhetoric.  On many occasions, John and Ken have released personal phone numbers knowing full well that their irate listeners would take action.  Most recently, John and Ken released the phone number of an advocate who, subsequently, received over 500 calls, some of the calls life threatening.  It turns out that this latest incident was the straw that broke the camel’s back for many community leaders in Los Angeles.  Over forty national and local organizations and more than one thousand individuals have joined NHMC in asking KFI, the profiteers of John and Ken’s hate, to stop the hate.  KFI is not ready to do what is right, but so far 10 major corporations have agreed to distance themselves from The John and Ken Show. Many small businesses have stopped advertising on the show as well. As KFI frantically recruits new replacement advertisers, the campaign will continue to educate the advertisers on what and whom they are supporting.

There comes a time when the conventional wisdom shifts, and the time is now for our society to take a stand against hate speech in media.  Unsubstantiated rhetoric and dehumanizing metaphors targeting vulnerable groups have become the norm for some media outlets.  Yes, the First Amendment is alive and well in this country but this doesn’t mean that broadcasters are entitled to give the microphone to anybody willing to whip people into a frenzy for the sake of ratings.  There comes a time when the public must take a stand and demand that broadcasters recognize that vilifying a community is a dangerous game to play.  Broadcasters are given a federal license for the privilege to use the public airwaves and they have a responsibility to serve the public.  Rwanda should be a constant reminder of the power that media can have on society and we all must be vigilant that this power not go too far.  As Malcolm X once said, “If you’re not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing.”

For years John and Ken of KFI AM 640 have created an atmosphere of hate and intolerance in Los Angeles, with their incendiary rhetoric legitimizing violence and discrimination against people of color and others.

The most recent example is their attacks on Jorge-Mario Cabrera. On September 1st John and Ken began ranting about immigrants, and targeted Mr. Cabrera for his advocacy on their behalf. John and Ken provided Mr. Cabrera’s office and personal cell phone numbers and encouraged their listeners to call and harass him. Mr. Cabrera proceeded to receive over 450 abusive and threatening calls. Many of the callers repeated John and Ken’s exact words, and then wished death upon Mr. Cabrera and/or threatened his physical safety. And indeed, many callers directly referenced John and Ken in their nasty messages.

We have tried to have a conversation about this with KFI AM and its parent company, Clear Channel, but they have ignored our concerns and hid behind John and Ken’s “right” to desecrate the public airwaves and spread hate and racism. We also have the First Amendment right to object, protest and demand that these hate speech purveyors be taken off the air.

You can help by raising your voice! To support our campaign, please sign a quick and easy online petition by clicking here.

For more information or to follow this campaign, please visit our website by clicking here.

Below you find a news release NHMC sent out yesterday.

Thank you,

Alex Nogales

President and CEO, NHMC

PASADENA—(NHMC – Sep 28, 2011)— The President and CEO of the National Hispanic Media Coalition, NHMC, received the Everett C. Parker Award in recognition for his work on public interest media and telecommunications advocacy during a ceremony held in Washington, DC.

“UCC OC Inc. is delighted to honor Alex Nogales with the Everett C. Parker Award.  Named after our founder, it honors the highest achievement in public interest media and telecommunications advocacy.  Alex and the entire staff at NHMC are at the forefront of current efforts to hold media companies accountable to the communities they serve and hew to the goals of finding the intersection between civil rights and media reform,” comments Cheryl A. Leanza, Policy Advisor, United Church of Christ, OC Inc.

In 1959, Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. prompted Rev. Dr. Everett C. Parker to reform television stations in the South, which were doing a poor job on covering the Civil Rights Movement. The Everett C. Parker Ethics in Telecommunications Award was created in 1983 to honor individuals who exemplify Dr. Parker’s pioneering work as an advocate for civil rights.

Alex Nogales, President and CEO of the National Hispanic Media Coalition, collects over thirty commendations for excellence in television production and three Emmy Awards earned during his thirteen-year tenure at KCBS TV. Elected NHMC’s President in the late nineties, Alex has led high-profile demonstrations against major media corporations for their exclusion of American Latinos. Likewise, Alex has been instrumental in the signing of agreements with the major television networks to guarantee their commitment to diversity. When Latinos were undercounted by the A.C. Nielsen Research Company, Alex led efforts to force Nielsen to address this shortfall, so Latinos would be taken into consideration. Under Alex’s leadership NHMC has increasingly engaged in media and telecommunications policies that impact Latinos, and has filed over fifty petitions to deny broadcast licenses with the FCC. He recently was one of the seven Latino leaders who negotiated a MOU with Comcast diversity to include the American Latino community.

Nogales joins a list of renowned past recipients, among them, Henry Geller, former FCC General Counsel; Andrew Schwartzman, Media Access Project; Judith Moyers, PBS Producer; Pamela Illott, CBS Religious Producer; Neil Hickey, TV Guide Editor;  Wade Henderson, Leadership Conference on Civil Rights; Peggy Charren, Action for Children’s Television; David Honig, Minority Media and Telecommunications Council; Katherine Grincewich, U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops; and Carol Pierson, President and CEO, retired, National Federation of Community Broadcasters.

Also recognized was Joseph W. Waz Jr., former senior vice president of external affairs and public policy counsel of Comcast, who received a Donald M. McGannon Award for his work to promote opportunities in the cable industry for young women and persons of color. Additionally, retiring FCC Commissioner Michael Copps received a Newton Minow Award for 10 years of exemplary work at the commission in support of the public interest and the goal of preserving diverse media voices in the United States. This year’s Lecturer was Steven Waldman, Special Advisor to the Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission and principal author of the FCC’s Future of the Media Report.