Sunday, June 29, 2014

Aereo Goes Dark After Major Supreme Court Loss

On Saturday, Aereo CEO Chet Kanojia announced that his company would "pause our operations temporarily" after a Supreme Court decision struck a major blow to its business model.

The 2-year-old startup threatened to upend the broadcast television industry by setting up small antennas in about dozen U.S. cities to pick up broadcast TV channels and streams those signals to computers, smartphones and other devices. The service was available for $8 a month.

Those broadcast signals from Fox, ABC, NBC and CBS are available for free to anyone with an antenna, but cable companies like Comcast are required to pay billions in fees for the right to include their channels in cable packages. In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court reversed a lower court ruling, maintaining that Aereo was infringing broadcasters' copyrights by retransmitted their programming.

The ruling was a big victory for broadcasters and cable companies, who worried that a decision favoring Aereo would open the floodgates for similar businesses that would drive consumers away from high-cost TV packages. Critics contend that services like Aereo gave consumers more choices and that the Supreme Court decision gives broadcasters more power to raise prices.

Read Kanoija's entire blog post below:

"The world hates change, yet it is the only thing that has brought progress." – Charles Kettering, inventor, entrepreneur, innovator & philanthropist

A little over three years ago, our team embarked on a journey to improve the consumer television experience, using technology to create a smart, cloud-based television antenna consumers could use to access live over the air broadcast television.

On Wednesday, the United States Supreme Court reversed a lower Court decision in favor of Aereo, dealing a massive setback to consumers.

As a result of that decision, our case has been returned to the lower Court. We have decided to pause our operations temporarily as we consult with the court and map out our next steps. You will be able to access your cloud-based antenna and DVR only until 11:30 a.m. ET today. All of our users will be refunded their last paid month. If you have questions about your account, please email support@aereo.com or tweet us @AereoSupport.

The spectrum that the broadcasters use to transmit over the air programming belongs to the American public and we believe you should have a right to access that live programming whether your antenna sits on the roof of your home, on top of your television or in the cloud.

On behalf of the entire team at Aereo, thank you for the outpouring of support. It has been staggering and we are so grateful for your emails, Tweets and Facebook posts. Keep your voices loud and sign up for updates at ProtectMyAntenna.org – our journey is far from done.

Yours truly,

Chet Kanojia

Thursday, June 26, 2014

People Are Clamoring For Jobs At The Gap, And That's A Problem

President Obama pays for clothing at the Gap after the company announced it would raise its minimum wage.

Just a few months after announcing plans to raise its minimum wage to $9 an hour this year (and $10 an hour by 2015), Gap Inc. is already cheering the success of the initiative, citing a surge in job applicants.

A spokesperson for Gap Inc. confirmed to The Huffington Post Tuesday that all of the company's brands have seen an uptick in job applications since last year at this time. For Gap and Old Navy, that percentage increase is in the double-digits, the spokesperson said.

The news that people are clamoring for a job that pays $9 an hour -- while good news for Gap -- is an indication of just how low American wages are today, David Cooper, an economic analyst at the Economic Policy Institute, told HuffPost. A job that pays $9 only amounts to $18,720 a year for someone working 40 hours a week, 52 weeks a year -- a salary that puts a family of three below the federal poverty threshold, he noted.

That said, Cooper applauded the apparel chain's move.

"Gap's story is another good example of one of the positive examples that come from businesses that pay higher wages," he said. "Those businesses are able to attract and maintain a better work force."

Gap's ability to attract more qualified, skilled workers for such low pay is yet another sign that America's uneven recovery is taking a serious toll on Americans.

"A lot more people are having to take lower-paying jobs," Cooper said. "The Recession exacerbated this trend, but it's something that's been going on for a long time."

As low-paying jobs have replaced middle-class opportunities lost in the economic downturn, getting a low-paying job at the Gap, or at McDonald's, has become much more competitive. Today, Walmart has a lower acceptance rate than Harvard.

But not all successful retailers pay poverty wages. Take the successful big box store Costco, which pays a starting hourly wage of $11.50. By upping its minimum wage now, Cooper says Gap is getting ahead of other retailers as the country considers raising the federal minimum wage from $7.25 to $10.10 an hour, a proposal President Barack Obama has backed.

"It's reasonable to think we could get a minimum wage increase in the next two years," Cooper said. "By raising wages now, Gap gets first dibs on the best workers who would be out there looking for jobs."

Tuesday, June 24, 2014

Cadillac's Tesla Challenger Is Not For 'Tree-Huggers'

Cadillac's answer to Tesla's revolutionary electric car is not for tree-huggers.

In a profile published Monday in AdAge, Cadillac’s marketing chief Uwe Ellinghaus said the brand is positioning its new ELR plug-in electric hybrid as a luxury product that won't eat away at sales of the gas-guzzlers sold by Cadillac’s parent company, General Motors.

“Tesla teaches us a message: If you offer cars with an electric drive-train that have superb driving characteristics and a beautiful [interior], they find customers,” he said. “What doesn’t work is to position a car for people who are tree-huggers and green-wash an entire brand.”

To Ellinghaus, successful electric cars are status symbols for the wealthy, not climate change solutions for environmentalists.

“These are not cars for tree-huggers,” Ellinghaus said of Cadillac's ELR in April, “as tree-huggers do not buy new luxury cars.”

His bravado matches the brazenness of the car’s widely panned marketing campaign that trumpeted Americans’ working habits and scoffed at Europeans for taking August “off.”

But it’s that fear of embracing change that may make Cadillac’s path forward a bumpy road. So far, sales of the ELR are paltry -– the 52 cars sold last month brought the total to 293 so far this year. According to InsideEVs, which tracks monthly electric car sales, Tesla sold 1,000 cars last month.

Tree-hugger or not, neither car is really affordable for your average middle-class family. The Cadillac ELR starts at $75,000 and the Tesla Model S starts at around $71,000.

Earlier this month, Tesla CEO Elon Musk freed up most of his company’s patents in hopes of getting companies like BMW and Nissan to build cars compatible with its superchargers, and encouraging more startups to enter the market with more affordable electric cars. He said traditional automakers’ “small to non-existent” electric car investments have disappointed.

“We felt compelled to create patents out of concern that the big car companies would copy our technology and then use their massive manufacturing, sales and marketing power to overwhelm Tesla,” Musk wrote in a blog post. “We couldn’t have been more wrong.”

Tesla spokeswoman Alexis Georgeson declined to comment to The Huffington Post. A Cadillac spokesperson did not reply to a request.

This post has been updated to include Tesla's response.

Friday, June 20, 2014

Barbie Just Got A Brand New Job, And It Could Be Her Toughest Yet

Barbie has over 150 jobs on her resume. She’s been a football coach, a doctor and even president. But her latest gig might be her toughest challenge yet.

Entrepreneur Barbie's "'smartphone,' tablet and briefcase are the tools of her trade and always by her side."

Mattel, all-powerful Barbie maker, announced Wednesday that Barbie will be trying her luck as a tech entrepreneur. But compared to Ken, Barbie's life as a woman in Silicon Valley will be quite the challenge.

For one, she’ll be outnumbered.

The hub of the tech industry in Silicon Valley is male-dominated, plain and simple. While the exact share of female engineers working in Silicon Valley is hard to pin down, a recent attempt by Pinterest Engineer Tracy Chou found that just 12.4 percent of engineers at major tech companies are women.

What’s more, 43 percent of the 150 largest Silicon Valley companies by sales have no female representation on their board of directors.

Not into statistics? Just take a look at the bathroom line at Apple's recent Worldwide Developers Conference. Yes, that is a long line for the men's room, and no line whatsoever for the women's room. Only in Silicon Valley.

She'll also have to overcome a widespread culture of sexism.

Evidence of sexism within the tech industry is pervasive. Just look at "brogrammer" culture. Or the executives who resigned in the wake of multiple sexist tweets. Or overtly sexist apps like Titstare, which is supposedly a “parody."

Need further proof? Last Halloween, a “Hackers and Hookers” party in Silicon Valley occurred in spite of widespread disgust. Alleged confessions from female tech employees on the anonymous app Secret paint an even grislier picture.

And she'll face discrimination while raising funds for her startup.

Entrepreneur Barbie's startup ideas include an Etsy-like online crafts store, according to the PowerPoint. But she may have a hard time winning venture capital funding over her male competitors. Just 7 percent of venture capital funding goes to female-led startups, even though women found 60 percent of small businesses.

Part of the reason is that just 3 percent of venture capital funders are women, according to Forbes, and male investors have said that they prefer to invest in entrepreneurs with profiles similar to those with proven track records. (Read: white, Ivy League-educated men like Mark Zuckerberg.)

A recent study also found that women were less likely than men to win investment dollars, especially if those men look like a Ken doll.

Ironically, women-led private technology companies also see higher returns on investment than ones led by men, according to a report last year. If only all those male investors would pay attention.

But not all hope it lost for Barbie. In fact, some female tech startup entrepreneurs are finding more and more success, and tech industry executives like Marissa Meyer and Sheryl Sandberg are paving the way for more female-led tech companies. For examples, look no further than Barbie’s so-called "Chief-Inspiration Officers" -- 10 female entrepreneurs like Reshma Saujani of Girls Who Code -- that Mattel has signed on for the launch.

Entrepreneur Barbie is also joining a number of recently released toys designed to encourage girls’ interest in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics), most notably Lego and Goldieblox.

"Barbie is uniquely equipped for this challenge because she's a trendsetter," Saujani wrote in an email to The Huffington Post. "If she can bring the next generation of girls with her on her journey into entrepreneurship -- the whole landscape will change.”

Still, it's unclear whether Entrepreneur Barbie will really help pave the way for American girls. A recent study found that playing with Barbie, even if she’s wearing an outfit associated with a specific career, such as a doctor’s lab coat, limits girls' perception of what careers are open to them.

Here’s to hoping Entrepreneur Barbie bucks the trend.

Wednesday, June 18, 2014

How Moms Became A Force Corporate America Can't Ignore

The message from Beyonce and other outspoken feminists is clear. Women today can be, and do, just about anything. Yet when it comes to social activism, there's one role that women are increasingly falling back on: Mother.

In recent months, a women's gun control group called Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America successfully pressured Chipotle, Starbucks and other major companies into taking a stand against firearms in their restaurants. A group of workers and activists identifying as “Walmart Moms” riled up Walmart by demanding the retail behemoth pay a fair wage. And women affiliated with Corporate Accountability International have used their “MomsNotLovinIt” campaign to pressure McDonald’s to stop marketing to children.

Moms are taking up conservative causes too. One Million Moms slammed Hotwire and Nabisco this year for featuring gay families in ads.

Moms Demand Action protest outside Target's shareholders meeting last week.

Mothers have been cajoling huge companies into changing their ways for more than a century. Though American women now have far greater choices and opportunities, the power of the "mom" has only increased. In part, that's because women are a huge consumer force. Globally, they control about $29 trillion in spending, according to a recent study from the Boston Consulting Group. And companies obsessively focus on pleasing women and mothers. In the U.S., women are responsible for about 73 percent of consumer spending, said Michael Silverstein, the author of the study and a book called Women Want More.

Yet, the idea of "mom" that these companies and groups seem to rally around can seem a little old-fashioned. Companies often direct their marketing to women simply by “hiring a female spokesperson and coloring the product pink,” Silverstein said. A few years ago, Dell saw huge backlash after launching a line of pink laptops aimed at women.

Still, part of the success of this mom-led consumer activism is because companies are so eager to attract a more "traditional" image of moms to their brand.

“The companies that all these moms have been organizing around see moms as a demographic they explicitly target, which is part of the reason moms organizing is both so important and so effective,” said Anna Lappe, a mother of two who has helped organize the MomsNotLovinIt campaign.

"We may still be holding on to expectations of what motherhood means and we may feel like we have to play out a particular role," said Jenny Darroch, a marketing professor at Claremont Graduate University's Peter F. Drucker and Masatoshi Ito Graduate School of Management. "So when women protest in favor of things that favor their children, people may support them because they're acting in a way that people expect them to behave."

Companies’ obsessive focus on satisfying an outdated mom image -- like a 2012 McDonald’s ad featuring a mom watching her kids play at home and then rewarding their good behavior with McDonald’s -- may be costing them though, Darroch said, because many women toggle between roles as workers, moms and partners.

"What's saddening is that (companies) put all women in the same bracket, they stereotype us in the '60s and '70s and they market to us in the role as mother, but they forget that we have other roles that we fulfill," said Darroch, the author of the forthcoming Why Marketing to Women Doesn't Work.

This approach also leaves out dads, who increasingly are taking on more parenting duties, which may include choosing products that are best for their families and kids. The number of dads who are staying at home has skyrocketed in recent years to 2 million in 2012, according to the Pew Research Center. Fathers made up about 16 percent of stay-at-home parents in 2012, according to Pew.

Still, mothers have more experience playing up their demographic power, and have been doing it for centuries. As early as 1880, they organized largely successful boycotts of local businesses that paid workers low wages or wouldn’t allow them to unionize, said Lawrence Glickman, the author of Buying Power: A History of Consumer Activism in America. In the early 20th century, New York City Jewish women famously used their position as “respected figures in the neighborhood” to organize a boycott of kosher meat sellers that they accused of price gouging, writes Judith Reesa Baskin in Jewish Women in Historical Perspective.

“One of the things that consumer activists have tried to do is take abstract issues and make them very concrete,” said Glickman, the chair of the history department at the University of South Carolina. “I do think the issue of the mom as a political actor is one way that consumer activists have been very successful over time in doing that.”

That tradition of women holding their grocery stores and meat producers accountable for too-high prices continued throughout the 1960s and '70s. While historically many of these groups primarily identified as women and not as moms, that’s likely because at the time, motherhood was assumed to be the primary identity for most women, Glickman said.

“When I look at those movements, I don’t recall a lot of emphasis on motherhood per se, but clearly there’s a lot of emphasis on women as family leaders and as the lever of consumption in the family,” Glickman said.

Protesters riot outside a butcher shop during an early 20th century meat boycott.

Women have also figured largely in consumer movements that affect them less directly, like temperance, Japanese silk boycotts during World War II, and the late-1960s and early-1970s grape boycott aimed at improving conditions for migrant farmers, Glickman said. Mothers Against Drunk Driving claims drunk driving has been cut in half since its founding in 1980 by a California mom whose daughter was killed by an intoxicated driver.

“Over the course of the 19th and 20th century as consumption became seen as the force that drove the economy and therefore a very powerful force with unique kinds of power, this potential power seemed to be accruing to (women), because women were seen as the primary consumers for families,” Glickman said.

That dynamic remains true.

The result is that women are likely paying more attention to what companies are saying and doing and are therefore more likely to engage with them, according to Brayden King, an associate professor at Northwestern University’s Kellogg School of Management.

In addition to paying attention, King said moms are great at building consensus and generating publicity, a power that’s been enhanced by social media, given that mothers are some of the most active users of Facebook, according to a November 2013 study from Experian.

Shannon Watts, the founder of Moms Demand Action For Gun Sense in America -- the group that's pushed gun policy changes at Starbucks, Chipotle, Target and others -- started her organization by launching a Facebook page the day after a gunman killed 26 people at Sandy Hook elementary school in December 2012.

“I live in Zionsville, Indiana, and I thought what can I do from here? And what I knew how to do was create a Facebook page,” said Watts, a mother of five. “Because of the strength of social media among women and mothers, I very quickly had thousands of offers of support.”

The Facebook page of Moms Demand Action.

But probably moms’ biggest asset in enacting corporate change is their ability to make a good story, King said. “When moms get behind something and are trying to cast blame on the company, it creates a nice story to tell for journalists and usually there's going to be some moral outrage behind the boycott, which makes for a nice narrative,” said King, whose research focuses on how social movement activism influence corporate responsibility.

That’s important, since the success of a boycott nowadays is very rarely determined by how many people protesters can convince to stop shopping at a store and instead by the level of negative publicity the campaign generates for the company, King said.

“Among those boycotts that get at least some national media attention, 25 percent lead to some sort of public concession on the part of the firm thats being boycotted,” King said. “The key to that is the national media attention. Boycotts that don’t get any kind of national media attention are completely ineffective.”

Monday, June 16, 2014

America's Dying Factories Are Widening Income Inequality

READING, Pa. (AP) — In August 2008, factory workers David and Barbara Ludwig treated themselves to new cars — David a Dodge pickup, Barbara a sporty Mazda 3. With David making $22 an hour and Barbara $19, they could easily afford the payments.

A month later, Baldwin Hardware, a unit of Stanley Black & Decker Corp., announced layoffs at the Reading plant where they both worked. David was unemployed for 20 months before finding a janitor job that paid $10 an hour, less than half his previous wage. Barbara hung on, but she, too, lost her shipping-dock job of 26 years as Black & Decker shifted production to Mexico. Now she cleans houses for $10 an hour while looking for something permanent.

They still have the cars. The other trappings of their middle-class lifestyle? In the rear-view mirror.

The downfall of manufacturing in the U.S. has done more than displace workers and leave communities searching for ways to rebuild devastated economies. In Reading and other American factory towns, manufacturing's decline is a key factor in the widening income gap between the rich and everyone else, as people like the Ludwigs have been forced into far lower-paying work.

It's not that there's a lack of jobs, but gains often come at either the highest end of the wage spectrum — or the lowest.

"A loss of manufacturing has contributed to the decline of the middle class," said Howard Wial, an economist with the Brookings Institution and the University of Illinois at Chicago. "People who are displaced from high-paying manufacturing jobs spend a long time unemployed, and when they take other jobs, those jobs generally pay substantially less."

Globalization, automation and recession destroyed nearly 6 million manufacturing jobs between 2000 and 2009. In Pennsylvania, between 2001 and 2011, 258,000 middle-income factory jobs were lost. At the same time, Pennsylvania added jobs at the lower end of the wage spectrum — in health care and social services — and at the highest end, in sectors like management and finance.

Berks County, of which Reading (pronounced REH'-ding) is the county seat, is a mirror of that larger problem.

Decades ago, Reading was a mighty manufacturing town where the Reading Railroad — once the world's largest company, now a spot on the Monopoly board — built a 19th-century transportation empire, and factories produced everything from hats to hardware. At one time, the city boasted so many manufacturing jobs that you could quit one, cross the street and easily land another, longtime residents say.

"You made a very, very good middle-class living. You could get a new car every couple years, send kids to college," recalled Ed McCann, Berks County's longtime director of workforce development.

Then the factories shut down. The wealthy fled to the suburbs, their grand Gilded Age mansions carved up into apartments, and poor immigrants moved in. Now Reading, population 88,000, is one of the nation's neediest cities, with more than 40 percent of its residents living in poverty, up from 19 percent in 1990.

As poverty grew, so too did the gap between the rich and everyone else. The difference between the income earned by the wealthiest 5 percent in Berks County and by a median-income household rose 13.2 percent in 20 years, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Nationally, the wealth gap became even more pronounced, increasing 15.8 percent.

Six years after David Ludwig lost his factory job, the couple have exhausted their retirement savings. They don't go out to eat or spend on their grandchildren.

Barbara, 56, said she has applied for more than 200 jobs since January and gotten one offer, as a shipping clerk, for $7.50 an hour. She has lost 40 pounds, blaming it on the stress.

"I don't mind wearing the big baggy clothes, but just to put money aside to buy one or two bras because I lost too much weight, I couldn't even do that. It sounds silly, but it's true," she said.

The toll can also be seen at the Greater Berks Food Bank. It distributed 7.2 million pounds last year, up from 2.5 million pounds in 2001, and the food bank plans to move into a larger building to accommodate the surging demand.

The latest wave of plant closures, beginning around the turn of the millennium, hit companies like Dana Corp., Agere Systems, Luden's, Glidden and Baldwin Hardware. Some 9,300 jobs evaporated between 2001 and 2011 — nearly a quarter of Berks County's manufacturing base, according to Penn State economists Theodore Alter and Theodore Fuller. They were replaced by jobs in lower-wage sectors like education and especially health care, a phenomenon that has played out around the state and nation.

"The manufacturing sector was decimated, and the people who had those skills had no place to go," said Karen Rightmire, a longtime United Way official who now runs the Wyomissing Foundation, a private philanthropy outside Reading. "The days of the factory job that just required a strong back are gone."

Nationally, manufacturing declines accounted for 40 percent of the increase in joblessness from 2000-2011, according to labor economist Erik Hurst. And the middle class was hit hardest.

For high-income college graduates, "It doesn't look like there was a recession," said Hurst, of the University of Chicago. "For lower-skilled (manufacturing) workers, the recession comes along, you get a big decline in employment, and it hasn't rebounded at all."

The jobs picture isn't entirely dark. Manufacturing is still the No. 1 employer in Berks County, led by battery maker East Penn Manufacturing Co. and a specialty steel company. Economic development officials say they've seen a recent uptick in factory hiring, and graduates of local technical career programs are virtually guaranteed a job. Berks County has placed a huge bet on worker training, launching a "Career in 2 Years" marketing campaign that encourages people to become certified in high-skilled manufacturing fields like precision machining and robotics.

But not everyone has the aptitude or desire.

Vicki Henshaw serves on a rapid-response team that helps laid-off factory workers. She said they are typically older, with high school diplomas and outdated skills.

"You know the struggle they are going to have to even come close to the wage they were receiving," said Henshaw, executive director of labor-affiliated United Community Services in Reading. "You look at them and you feel the despair. Their lives are now in utter turmoil."

While the manufacturing picture has brightened a bit nationally — with the U.S. adding hundreds of thousands of jobs in recent years — it's an open question whether the sector is truly making a comeback or the gains are merely cyclical following the recession.

Brian Waldbiesser, for one, isn't betting on a manufacturing renaissance.

The 41-year-old father of two saw little choice but to go back to school after losing his $19.50-an-hour job at battery maker Exide Technologies, where he had put in 19 years. After a year of unemployment, he is struggling to pay the bills, and he no longer considers himself middle class.

Waldbiesser, who has tapped a federal program for workers hurt by foreign competition, is studying psychology — and psyching himself up for better times.

"I don't want this to be a sob story about me," he said. "What I would like for people to take from my story is that even though I am struggling, and it is radically different from where I was, if you seize the opportunities that are in front of you, there are opportunities out there to better yourself."