Archived version: https://archive.ph/hroNJ

Bradley Cooper is facing criticism for performing in “Jewface” after the release of the trailer for his biopic of Leonard Bernstein, which revealed the facial prosthetics he employed for the role.

Bernstein, the son of Jewish-Ukrainian immigrants to the US, was a hugely talented conductor and composer, best known for writing the music for West Side Story as well as composing three symphonies and becoming music director of the New York Philharmonic. Cooper, who directs, co-writes and stars in Maestro, is not Jewish, and can be seen in the trailer with a noticeably prominent fake nose opposite Carey Mulligan, who plays Bernstein’s wife Felicia Montealegre.

British actor and activist Tracy-Ann Obermann criticised Cooper on social media, writing: “If [Cooper] needs to wear a prosthetic nose then that is, to me and many others, the equivalent of Black-Face or Yellow-Face … if Bradley Cooper can’t [play the role] through the power or acting alone then don’t cast him – get a Jewish Actor.”

Obermann added, referencing Cooper’s performance on stage in 2014 as John Merrick in The Elephant Man: “Bradley Cooper managed to play the ELEPHANT MAN without a single prosthetic then he should be able to manage to play a Jewish man without one.”

The Hollywood Reporter’s chief TV critic Daniel Fienberg called the prosthetics “problematic” when photos from the set emerged in May, and subsequently described the film as “ethnic cosplay”.

In a statement posted on social media, Bernstein’s children Jamie, Alexander, and Nina defended Cooper, saying: “It breaks our hearts to see any misrepresentations or misunderstandings of [Cooper’s] efforts … Bradley chose to use makeup to amplify his resemblance, and we’re perfectly fine with that. We’re also certain that our dad would have been fine with it as well.”

The controversy follows objections to the casting of Cillian Murphy as nuclear physicist J Robert Oppenheimer – again, a non-Jewish actor playing a notable Jewish figure – in the biopic directed by Christopher Nolan, with David Baddiel describing such casting as “complacent” and “doubl[ing] down” on “Jewish erasure”. Baddiel also criticised the casting of Helen Mirren as Israeli prime minister Golda Meir, writing in the Guardian that “over a period of extreme intensification of the progressive conversation about representation and inclusion and microaggression and what is and isn’t offensive to minorities, one minority – Jews – has been routinely neglected”.

Archived version: https://archive.ph/Feh55

For two years, workers have embraced the concept of “quiet quitting,” as they reject hustle-culture and prioritize work-life balance.

But for a long time, you’ve probably known co-workers who are the “noisier cousins” of quiet quitters — they’re sometimes called “loud laborers,” a term coined by André Spicer, an organizational behavior professor and dean of Bayes Business School.

These are employees who place more emphasis on making their work known, rather than “focusing on the work itself,” said Nicole Price, a leadership coach and workplace expert.

“They use various methods of self-promotion, talking more about what they are doing or plan to do rather than getting on with their tasks.”

According to Price, there are two easy ways to tell who’s a loud laborer: You don’t see much work getting done, and they talk “an awful lot” about the work they are “doing.”

“Loud laborers are often quite politically savvy and are very active on professional social networks, where they publicize their tasks and achievements,” she added.

Vicki Salemi, a career expert at jobs portal Monster.com, makes the distinction between someone who confidently asserts themselves at work and a loud laborer: “The former picks and chooses when to speak up to shine a spotlight on their work.”

“Whereas the latter may crave attention and love to hear themselves talk even when it was nothing extraordinary, they were simply doing their jobs,” she added.

Why some workers ‘focus on visibility and self-promotion’

Why do loud laborers exist?

“Believe it or not, some people talk too much about their accomplishments — or lack thereof — because they lack self-esteem or are insecure. Therefore, they overcompensate,” explained Price.

“Also, some people are motivated by external rewards and recognition rather than the inherent satisfaction of the work itself. This can lead to a focus on visibility and self-promotion in order to attract these rewards.”

Salemi pointed out that these workers may feel the need to self-promote constantly because they are not getting the recognition or attention from bosses or colleagues.

“Or it could be the other extreme: they’re overly confident about their work and brag about it, but here’s the thing — there are stellar performers, but boasting about every project every day is usually not exemplary,” she added.

Impact on team dynamics

Unfortunately, if you are a loud worker, your behavior could negatively impact your team and even your career, experts said.

“It can be ingratiating and put people off, especially your peers, to always toot your own horn,” said Salemi.

Furthermore, a 2021 study found that having a self-promotion climate within work groups can “diminish work group cohesion.”

Loud laborers may create a work environment where visibility and self-promotion are valued more than actual results, which could demotivate employees who are quieter or prefer to let their work speak for itself, said Price.

“The constant self-promotion may create an atmosphere of competition rather than collaboration,” she added.

“It may lead to an imbalance in perceived effort and recognition, which could impact team morale negatively.”

What you can do about loud laborers

While loud laborers in the workplace may be irksome, it is important to set boundaries as best you can, said Salemi.

“If you’re leading a team call or participating on one and your colleague won’t be quiet about something irrelevant … you can say, ‘I want to be aware of everyone’s time — we only have 10 minutes left, so we need to be direct about the work itself only.’”

For Price, loud working is persistent in a workplace because such behavior has been rewarded or validated by leadership.

“A leader can ensure that all team members are evaluated on their actual performance and not just their ability to promote themselves,” she explained.

“This encourages everyone to focus on their work and helps to ensure that quieter team members are recognized for their contributions.”

Here’s what she suggests companies and leaders can do to tackle loud workers in the workplace:

1. Recognize effort, not just showmanship

Often the quiet and unflashy work is what keeps an organization running.

Leaders should look beyond the noise and recognize the contributions of those who may not be as vocal about their work. This encourages a culture where actual productivity and results are valued, not just visibility.

2. Understand different work styles

Some are more vocal about their efforts, while others are quieter and more focused on the tasks at hand.

A good leader should value and acknowledge both approaches, recognizing that different styles can contribute to a diverse and effective team.

3. Communicate and provide feedback

If you notice a team member who consistently emphasizes their work more than the actual results, have a conversation with them about it, Price advised.

Provide constructive feedback that encourages a balance between self-promotion and productive work. This not only helps the individual but benefits the whole team.

Archived version: https://archive.ph/3PdeS

We’ve been focused on creating a great gaming experience for our members since 2021 when we added mobile games to Netflix. Our goal has always been to have a game for everyone, and we are working hard to meet members where they are with an accessible, smooth, and ubiquitous service. Today, we’re taking the first step in making games playable on every device where our members enjoy Netflix — TVs, computers, and mobile.

We are rolling out a limited beta test to a small number of members in Canada and the UK on select TVs starting today, and on PCs and Macs through Netflix.com on supported browsers in the next few weeks. Two games will be part of this initial test: Oxenfree from Night School Studio, a Netflix Game Studio, and Molehew’s Mining Adventure, a gem-mining arcade game. To play our games on TV, we're introducing a controller that we already have in our hands most of the day — our phones. Members on PCs and Macs can play on Netflix.com with a keyboard and mouse.

This limited beta is meant to test our game streaming technology and controller, and to improve the member experience over time. Games on TV will operate on select devices from our initial partners including: Amazon Fire TV Streaming Media Players, Chromecast with Google TV, LG TVs, Nvidia Shield TV, Roku devices and TVs, Samsung Smart TVs, and Walmart ONN. Additional devices will be added on an ongoing basis.

By making games available on more devices, we hope to make games even easier to play for our members around the world. While we’re still very early in our games journey, we’re excited to bring joy to members with games. We look forward to hearing feedback from our beta testers and sharing more as we continue on the road ahead.

Archived version: https://archive.ph/3PdeS

We’ve been focused on creating a great gaming experience for our members since 2021 when we added mobile games to Netflix. Our goal has always been to have a game for everyone, and we are working hard to meet members where they are with an accessible, smooth, and ubiquitous service. Today, we’re taking the first step in making games playable on every device where our members enjoy Netflix — TVs, computers, and mobile.

We are rolling out a limited beta test to a small number of members in Canada and the UK on select TVs starting today, and on PCs and Macs through Netflix.com on supported browsers in the next few weeks. Two games will be part of this initial test: Oxenfree from Night School Studio, a Netflix Game Studio, and Molehew’s Mining Adventure, a gem-mining arcade game. To play our games on TV, we're introducing a controller that we already have in our hands most of the day — our phones. Members on PCs and Macs can play on Netflix.com with a keyboard and mouse.

This limited beta is meant to test our game streaming technology and controller, and to improve the member experience over time. Games on TV will operate on select devices from our initial partners including: Amazon Fire TV Streaming Media Players, Chromecast with Google TV, LG TVs, Nvidia Shield TV, Roku devices and TVs, Samsung Smart TVs, and Walmart ONN. Additional devices will be added on an ongoing basis.

By making games available on more devices, we hope to make games even easier to play for our members around the world. While we’re still very early in our games journey, we’re excited to bring joy to members with games. We look forward to hearing feedback from our beta testers and sharing more as we continue on the road ahead.

Archived version: https://archive.ph/3PdeS

We’ve been focused on creating a great gaming experience for our members since 2021 when we added mobile games to Netflix. Our goal has always been to have a game for everyone, and we are working hard to meet members where they are with an accessible, smooth, and ubiquitous service. Today, we’re taking the first step in making games playable on every device where our members enjoy Netflix — TVs, computers, and mobile.

We are rolling out a limited beta test to a small number of members in Canada and the UK on select TVs starting today, and on PCs and Macs through Netflix.com on supported browsers in the next few weeks. Two games will be part of this initial test: Oxenfree from Night School Studio, a Netflix Game Studio, and Molehew’s Mining Adventure, a gem-mining arcade game. To play our games on TV, we're introducing a controller that we already have in our hands most of the day — our phones. Members on PCs and Macs can play on Netflix.com with a keyboard and mouse.

This limited beta is meant to test our game streaming technology and controller, and to improve the member experience over time. Games on TV will operate on select devices from our initial partners including: Amazon Fire TV Streaming Media Players, Chromecast with Google TV, LG TVs, Nvidia Shield TV, Roku devices and TVs, Samsung Smart TVs, and Walmart ONN. Additional devices will be added on an ongoing basis.

By making games available on more devices, we hope to make games even easier to play for our members around the world. While we’re still very early in our games journey, we’re excited to bring joy to members with games. We look forward to hearing feedback from our beta testers and sharing more as we continue on the road ahead.

Archived version: https://archive.ph/3PdeS

We’ve been focused on creating a great gaming experience for our members since 2021 when we added mobile games to Netflix. Our goal has always been to have a game for everyone, and we are working hard to meet members where they are with an accessible, smooth, and ubiquitous service. Today, we’re taking the first step in making games playable on every device where our members enjoy Netflix — TVs, computers, and mobile.

We are rolling out a limited beta test to a small number of members in Canada and the UK on select TVs starting today, and on PCs and Macs through Netflix.com on supported browsers in the next few weeks. Two games will be part of this initial test: Oxenfree from Night School Studio, a Netflix Game Studio, and Molehew’s Mining Adventure, a gem-mining arcade game. To play our games on TV, we're introducing a controller that we already have in our hands most of the day — our phones. Members on PCs and Macs can play on Netflix.com with a keyboard and mouse.

This limited beta is meant to test our game streaming technology and controller, and to improve the member experience over time. Games on TV will operate on select devices from our initial partners including: Amazon Fire TV Streaming Media Players, Chromecast with Google TV, LG TVs, Nvidia Shield TV, Roku devices and TVs, Samsung Smart TVs, and Walmart ONN. Additional devices will be added on an ongoing basis.

By making games available on more devices, we hope to make games even easier to play for our members around the world. While we’re still very early in our games journey, we’re excited to bring joy to members with games. We look forward to hearing feedback from our beta testers and sharing more as we continue on the road ahead.

Archived version: https://archive.ph/3PdeS

We’ve been focused on creating a great gaming experience for our members since 2021 when we added mobile games to Netflix. Our goal has always been to have a game for everyone, and we are working hard to meet members where they are with an accessible, smooth, and ubiquitous service. Today, we’re taking the first step in making games playable on every device where our members enjoy Netflix — TVs, computers, and mobile.

We are rolling out a limited beta test to a small number of members in Canada and the UK on select TVs starting today, and on PCs and Macs through Netflix.com on supported browsers in the next few weeks. Two games will be part of this initial test: Oxenfree from Night School Studio, a Netflix Game Studio, and Molehew’s Mining Adventure, a gem-mining arcade game. To play our games on TV, we're introducing a controller that we already have in our hands most of the day — our phones. Members on PCs and Macs can play on Netflix.com with a keyboard and mouse.

This limited beta is meant to test our game streaming technology and controller, and to improve the member experience over time. Games on TV will operate on select devices from our initial partners including: Amazon Fire TV Streaming Media Players, Chromecast with Google TV, LG TVs, Nvidia Shield TV, Roku devices and TVs, Samsung Smart TVs, and Walmart ONN. Additional devices will be added on an ongoing basis.

By making games available on more devices, we hope to make games even easier to play for our members around the world. While we’re still very early in our games journey, we’re excited to bring joy to members with games. We look forward to hearing feedback from our beta testers and sharing more as we continue on the road ahead.

A new report into the fatal shooting on the set of the movie Rust appears to cast doubt over star and producer Alec Baldwin's accounts of events.

Mr Baldwin denies pulling the trigger of the prop gun which went off, killing cinematographer Halyna Hutchins.

Weapons experts have now said the trigger would have "had to be pulled".

The actor's representatives told the PA news agency they had no comment to make on the latest development in the ongoing case.

Charges of involuntary manslaughter against Mr Baldwin were dropped in April, but prosecutors said it did not "absolve Mr Baldwin of criminal culpability".

They said charges against the star could be refiled over the October 2021 shooting, which occurred on the set of the western movie.

A new report, written by weapons experts Lucien Haag and Mike Haag, was given prosecutors in New Mexico on Tuesday.

According to the documents, prosecutors previously stated that they had information that there had been an alleged modification of the gun used by Baldwin on the Rust set.

Lawyers for Rust armourer Hannah Gutierrez Reed, who was also charged with involuntary manslaughter, said the Haags' report "does not indicate any modification to the gun" and "specifies that the trigger had to be pulled".

"Although Alec Baldwin repeatedly denies pulling the trigger, given the tests, findings and observations reported here, the trigger had to be pulled or depressed sufficiently to release the fully cocked or retracted hammer of the evidence revolver," said an excerpt of the weapons report included in the court documents.

"If the hammer had not been fully retracted to the rear, and were to slip from the handler's thumb without the trigger depressed, the half cock or quarter cock notches in the hammer should have prevented the firing pin from reaching any cartridge in the firing chamber."

It continued: "If these features were somehow bypassed, a conspicuously off-centre firing pin impression would result."

Last week, Ms Gutierrez-Reed pleaded not guilty to involuntary manslaughter and evidence tampering charges, related to the shooting.

Her plea came ahead of a jury trial scheduled for 6 December looking into the death of Ms Hutchins at the age of 42.

It is not yet clear whether or not the findings of the new report will result in charges against Mr Baldwin being refiled.

Archived version: https://archive.ph/HGJKo

In April 2012, Tim Meeks was at a music product trade show in Anaheim, California, when he got a tap on the shoulder. Stevie Wonder was in town. He had heard about the instrument Meeks had invented – a guitar-piano hybrid called the harpejji – and wanted to give it a go. Minutes later, the two men were hunched over the instrument flanked by five bodyguards, as Meeks moved the blind musician’s thumbs and forefingers across the fretboard to demonstrate how to play. “I love it,” said Wonder. “How soon can I get one?”

This was a turning point for Meeks, who has built and sold harpejjis from a workshop in Maryland since 2007. Initially, sales were slow. But a decade’s worth of harpejji performances by Wonder – plus support from Jacob Collier, Harry Connick Jr and jazz producer Cory Henry – have changed that. Now, Marcodi Musical Products, Meeks’ company, has sold nearly 1,500 of them, making him one of the few people alive to have invented a successful new instrument.

“I’m a very average musician. The thought of me showing Stevie Wonder how to play something is just absurd,” says Meeks. “But it’s all about the artists. Stevie can choose any instrument he wants to, and if he wants to play this one, people better pay attention.”

A full-size harpejji is about a metre long and sells for £5,100. The flat, birch body holds 24 strings with frets beneath. It works a bit like a piano – but instead of pressing a key you’re pressing the strings – and a bit like an electric guitar, where magnetic pickups send the sound to an amplifier. “I wanted it to sound like an organic stringed instrument, but use my piano chops rather than learn guitar for three years,” Meeks says. “I guess a lot of the best inventions come out of laziness.”

The timbre is guitar-like; the notes run in whole tones across the strings and semitones up the frets, yielding fresh harmonic possibilities. “I had thousands of sounds available on a keyboard but none of them felt right,” Meeks says. “I wasn’t trying to dazzle the world with a new sound, rather find a fresh way to think about playing music.”

Instrument design is a fast-evolving field. Whole schools are even devoted to it. Queen Mary University and Imperial College London jointly run The Augmented Instruments Laboratory, where researcher Lia Mice has developed, among other things, a one-handed violin (designed for people with disabilities) and chaos bells – a 4 sq metre frame of steel tubes that the player touches, tilts and strikes to produce a cacophonous metallic feedback loop.

There is even a gold-standard annual contest for inventors: the Guthman Musical Instrument Competition, run by the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta. This year’s winner was the zen flute: via a mouthpiece, it digitally translates the shape of your mouth into sound. There was also a synthesiser controlled by an abacus, and a microtonal clarinet that, rather than using tone holes, has a flexible electromagnetic strip to control pitch.

Nonetheless, even the most esteemed inventions rarely make it past the prototype stage. While the 20th century brought electric guitars, drum machines and synthesisers, popularising a new instrument is now trickier.

Part of the problem is that artists can produce any sound under the sun using a computer, says Steve Dunnington, product development chief at Moog, the company that developed the first commercially available synthesiser in 1964. “For many musicians, making music happens by typing lines of code or creating sounds on a DAW [digital audio workstation, such as GarageBand],” he says. “We just tend not to think of it as ‘instrumental’ in the same way because they’re not holding something, blowing air into it or whacking it.”

Meeks thinks many inventors are going down technological rabbit holes rather than making something usable. Most musicians “just want to have a voice”, he says. “A lot of these [instruments] are cool, they have features and they are powerful. But does anybody really want to play them, learn them or go and see someone else perform on them?”

Of course, not all inventions are dreamed up with others in mind. For Mice, the chaos bells inventor, crafting the instrument is part of making her music. “Plus,” she adds, “there’s something super punk rock about making your own instrument.”

The harpejji, meanwhile, is on course to exceed $1m of sales in 2023 – a record year – and Marcodi Musical Products recently moved to bigger premises near Baltimore. Meeks even had another “monumental” moment at the end of July, working in his new office with a Spotify-curated playlist on in the background. “About six songs in I realised: ‘Wait a minute, I recognise that sound.’”

The track was Harpejji I by Vulfmon (AKA Jack Stratton, drummer of the cult funk outfit Vulfpeck), which features the instrument. “That’s the first time since founding the company that harpejji music came to my ears randomly without me seeking it out,” he says. “Now I truly feel like it’s got a life of its own.”

Archived version: https://archive.ph/HGJKo

In April 2012, Tim Meeks was at a music product trade show in Anaheim, California, when he got a tap on the shoulder. Stevie Wonder was in town. He had heard about the instrument Meeks had invented – a guitar-piano hybrid called the harpejji – and wanted to give it a go. Minutes later, the two men were hunched over the instrument flanked by five bodyguards, as Meeks moved the blind musician’s thumbs and forefingers across the fretboard to demonstrate how to play. “I love it,” said Wonder. “How soon can I get one?”

This was a turning point for Meeks, who has built and sold harpejjis from a workshop in Maryland since 2007. Initially, sales were slow. But a decade’s worth of harpejji performances by Wonder – plus support from Jacob Collier, Harry Connick Jr and jazz producer Cory Henry – have changed that. Now, Marcodi Musical Products, Meeks’ company, has sold nearly 1,500 of them, making him one of the few people alive to have invented a successful new instrument.

“I’m a very average musician. The thought of me showing Stevie Wonder how to play something is just absurd,” says Meeks. “But it’s all about the artists. Stevie can choose any instrument he wants to, and if he wants to play this one, people better pay attention.”

A full-size harpejji is about a metre long and sells for £5,100. The flat, birch body holds 24 strings with frets beneath. It works a bit like a piano – but instead of pressing a key you’re pressing the strings – and a bit like an electric guitar, where magnetic pickups send the sound to an amplifier. “I wanted it to sound like an organic stringed instrument, but use my piano chops rather than learn guitar for three years,” Meeks says. “I guess a lot of the best inventions come out of laziness.”

The timbre is guitar-like; the notes run in whole tones across the strings and semitones up the frets, yielding fresh harmonic possibilities. “I had thousands of sounds available on a keyboard but none of them felt right,” Meeks says. “I wasn’t trying to dazzle the world with a new sound, rather find a fresh way to think about playing music.”

Instrument design is a fast-evolving field. Whole schools are even devoted to it. Queen Mary University and Imperial College London jointly run The Augmented Instruments Laboratory, where researcher Lia Mice has developed, among other things, a one-handed violin (designed for people with disabilities) and chaos bells – a 4 sq metre frame of steel tubes that the player touches, tilts and strikes to produce a cacophonous metallic feedback loop.

There is even a gold-standard annual contest for inventors: the Guthman Musical Instrument Competition, run by the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta. This year’s winner was the zen flute: via a mouthpiece, it digitally translates the shape of your mouth into sound. There was also a synthesiser controlled by an abacus, and a microtonal clarinet that, rather than using tone holes, has a flexible electromagnetic strip to control pitch.

Nonetheless, even the most esteemed inventions rarely make it past the prototype stage. While the 20th century brought electric guitars, drum machines and synthesisers, popularising a new instrument is now trickier.

Part of the problem is that artists can produce any sound under the sun using a computer, says Steve Dunnington, product development chief at Moog, the company that developed the first commercially available synthesiser in 1964. “For many musicians, making music happens by typing lines of code or creating sounds on a DAW [digital audio workstation, such as GarageBand],” he says. “We just tend not to think of it as ‘instrumental’ in the same way because they’re not holding something, blowing air into it or whacking it.”

Meeks thinks many inventors are going down technological rabbit holes rather than making something usable. Most musicians “just want to have a voice”, he says. “A lot of these [instruments] are cool, they have features and they are powerful. But does anybody really want to play them, learn them or go and see someone else perform on them?”

Of course, not all inventions are dreamed up with others in mind. For Mice, the chaos bells inventor, crafting the instrument is part of making her music. “Plus,” she adds, “there’s something super punk rock about making your own instrument.”

The harpejji, meanwhile, is on course to exceed $1m of sales in 2023 – a record year – and Marcodi Musical Products recently moved to bigger premises near Baltimore. Meeks even had another “monumental” moment at the end of July, working in his new office with a Spotify-curated playlist on in the background. “About six songs in I realised: ‘Wait a minute, I recognise that sound.’”

The track was Harpejji I by Vulfmon (AKA Jack Stratton, drummer of the cult funk outfit Vulfpeck), which features the instrument. “That’s the first time since founding the company that harpejji music came to my ears randomly without me seeking it out,” he says. “Now I truly feel like it’s got a life of its own.”

Archived version: https://archive.ph/JsTV6

The US broadband industry is united in opposition to a requirement that Internet service providers list all of their monthly fees. Five lobby groups representing cable companies, fiber and DSL providers, and mobile operators have repeatedly urged the Federal Communications Commission to eliminate the requirement before new broadband labeling rules take effect.

The trade associations petitioned the FCC in January to change the rules and renewed their call last week in a filing and in a meeting with FCC officials. The requirement that ISPs list all their monthly fees "would add unnecessary complexity and burdens to the label for consumers and providers and could result in some providers having to create many labels for any given plan," the groups said in the filing on Friday.

The trade groups said the FCC should instead "require providers to include an explanatory statement that such fees may apply and that they vary by jurisdiction, similar to the Commission's treatment of government-imposed taxes," or require "the display of the maximum level of government-imposed fees that might be passed through, so that consumers would not experience bill shock with respect to such fees."

The filing was submitted by NCTA-The Internet & Television Association, which represents Comcast, Charter, Cox, and other cable companies. The NCTA's ex parte filing described a meeting with FCC officials that also included wireless industry trade group CTIA and USTelecom, which represents telcos including AT&T, Verizon, Lumen (formerly CenturyLink), Frontier, and Windstream.

The meeting was attended by two other groups representing smaller ISPs: NTCA-The Rural Broadband Association and ACA Connects-America's Communications Association. The trade groups met on Wednesday with the legal advisors to FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel and Commissioner Brendan Carr, according to the filing.

Comcast accused of “trying to create loopholes”

Comcast submitted its own filing urging the FCC to scrap the rules in June. The calls to weaken the FCC's truth-in-billing rules angered consumer advocates, as we wrote at the time. "The label hasn't even reached consumers yet, but Comcast is already trying to create loopholes. This request would allow the big ISPs to continue hiding the true cost of service and frustrating customers with poor service," Joshua Stager, policy director at media advocacy group Free Press, told Ars.

Congress required the FCC to implement broadband labels with exact prices for Internet service plans in a 2021 law, but gave the FCC some leeway in how to structure the rules. The FCC adopted specific label rules in November 2022.

The labels must be displayed to consumers at the point of sale and include monthly price, additional charges, speeds, data caps, additional charges for data, and other information. The FCC rules aren't in force yet because they are subject to a federal Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review under the US Paperwork Reduction Act.

ISPs object to a portion of the FCC order that says, "providers must list all recurring monthly fees" including "all charges that providers impose at their discretion, i.e., charges not mandated by a government." The five trade groups complain that this would require ISPs "to display the pass-through of fees imposed by federal, state, or local government agencies on the consumer broadband label."

But just because an ISP says a fee is related to a government charge doesn't mean that ISPs have to break them out separately. ISPs could instead include all costs in their advertised rates to give potential customers a clearer idea of how much they would have to pay each month.

"A provider that opts to combine all of its monthly discretionary fees with its base monthly price may do so and list that total price. In that case, the provider need not separately itemize those fees in the label," the FCC order said.

Non-mandatory fees

Discretionary charges "include those the provider collects to recoup from consumers its costs associated with government programs but where the government has not mandated such collection, e.g., USF [Universal Service Fund] contributions," according to the FCC. Comcast said the non-mandatory fees also include pass-through of state and local government fees.

The FCC order said the requirement to list "all charges that providers impose at their discretion" is meant to help broadband users "understand which charges are part of the provider's rate structure, and which derive from government assessments or programs." These fees must have "simple, accurate, [and] easy-to-understand name[s]," the FCC order said.

"Further, the requirement will allow consumers to more meaningfully compare providers' rates and service packages, and to make more informed decisions when purchasing broadband services. Providers must list fees such as monthly charges associated with regulatory programs and fees for the rental or leasing of modem and other network connection equipment," the FCC said.

Harold Feld, senior VP of consumer advocacy group Public Knowledge, told Ars in June that the FCC "should reject the request to create loopholes which would obscure what fees providers decide to pass on versus those that are mandated by state law. It is an effort to pass blame to the state which properly belongs to the ISP."

Debate over record-keeping rule

ISPs also object to a record-keeping requirement designed to ensure that ISPs follow the rules when they provide labels through "alternate sales channels" such as retail stores or customer service phone calls. ISPs can meet the label requirement in alternate sales channels either by providing a hard copy of the label or by "directing the consumer to the specific web page on which the label appears."

ISPs that don't provide hard copies of the label to prospective customers in those sales channels must document each instance in which they direct a consumer to a label.

"Requiring that providers collect identifying information and document every customer interaction would be highly disruptive to consumers seeking information through alternative sales channels and would impose significant burdens on providers of all sizes," the trade groups told the FCC. The trade groups want the FCC to "clarify that a provider satisfies these rules by developing appropriate business practices to promote distribution of the label through alternative sales channels and retaining documentation of these practices for two years."

Latino advocacy group ALLvanza also objected to the data-collection rule on privacy grounds, saying, "Many Latinos are already hesitant and/or unwilling to provide identifying information to companies or the government due to privacy concerns, fear of discrimination, potential immigration status issues, mistrust of institutions, and cultural preferences for privacy."

ISPs could avoid the requirement to collect identifying information from consumers in retail stores by providing hard copies of the label. The FCC defended the compliance plan in a submission to the OMB last month as part of the Paperwork Reduction Act review, saying it needs detailed information to ensure ISPs follow the rules.

When ISPs choose not to provide hard copies of the labels in alternate sales channels, the FCC said it needs details on each customer interaction to "allow the Commission to investigate and enforce providers' obligation to make the label available to consumers at each point of sale."

The FCC also defended itself against industry accusations that the rule is too vague. "The Commission stated in the Broadband Label Order that '[p]roviders must document each instance when it directs a consumer to a label at an alternate sales channel and retain such documentation for two years.' We believe it is unambiguous that this would include the identity of each consumer," the FCC said.

Two American tourists have been found sleeping inside the Eiffel Tower after getting stuck while drunk, according to prosecutors.

The two men were found by security guards in the early hours of Monday.

They paid to scale the Parisian landmark at around 22:40 (21:40 BST) on Sunday and hopped security barriers while climbing down, police said.

They were found in an area normally closed to the public between the tower’s second and third levels.

The men “appear to have got stuck because of how drunk they were”, Paris prosecutors told the AFP news agency.

A specialist firefighter unit for rescuing people from heights were sent to recover the men, the agency reported.

The usual opening time of 09:00 was delayed due to the discovery of the inebriated pair.

They did not pose any threat, said Sete, the publicly-owned Eiffel Tower operator.

Both men were questioned by police in Paris, while Sete said it would file a criminal complaint.

It comes after two bomb scares at the tower on Saturday forced the monument to be evacuated twice in the same day.

French police have launched an investigation after the false bomb threats were made via posts on a gaming site and a platform for online contact between citizens and police.

The Eiffel Tower, which was built in the 1880s and stands at 984ft (300m), attracted 5.8 million visitors last year.