WEBVTT - Tech News: Cisco Gets Hacked

0:00:04.400 --> 0:00:07.800
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to tech Stuff, a production from I Heart Radio.

0:00:11.840 --> 0:00:14.400
<v Speaker 1>Hey there, and welcome to tech Stuff. I'm your host

0:00:14.480 --> 0:00:17.560
<v Speaker 1>Jonathan Strickland. I'mint executive producer with I Heart Radio and

0:00:17.880 --> 0:00:20.400
<v Speaker 1>how the tech are you. It's time for the tech

0:00:20.440 --> 0:00:26.400
<v Speaker 1>news for Thursday, August eleven, twenty twenty two. Cisco, company

0:00:26.440 --> 0:00:31.479
<v Speaker 1>that primarily focuses on networking hardware and telecommunications equipment, as

0:00:31.520 --> 0:00:34.600
<v Speaker 1>well as some I T security products, has admitted that

0:00:34.640 --> 0:00:38.840
<v Speaker 1>it was hit by a ransomware attack that, as they say,

0:00:39.080 --> 0:00:41.960
<v Speaker 1>is a tough pill to swallow, but it also illustrates

0:00:41.960 --> 0:00:44.879
<v Speaker 1>how there's no such thing as a bulletproof defense when

0:00:44.960 --> 0:00:49.440
<v Speaker 1>it comes to data security. Fortunately, according to Cisco reps,

0:00:49.479 --> 0:00:53.080
<v Speaker 1>the attackers only gained access to some non critical information.

0:00:53.520 --> 0:00:56.640
<v Speaker 1>The company released a statement that says, quote Cisco did

0:00:56.640 --> 0:00:59.720
<v Speaker 1>not identify any impact to our business as a result

0:00:59.760 --> 0:01:04.320
<v Speaker 1>of the incident, including Cisco products or services, sensitive customer

0:01:04.440 --> 0:01:09.399
<v Speaker 1>data or sensitive employee information, intellectual property, or supply chain

0:01:09.440 --> 0:01:13.440
<v Speaker 1>operations end quote. The statement did recognize that the hackers

0:01:13.520 --> 0:01:16.959
<v Speaker 1>released on the dark web a list of files that

0:01:17.040 --> 0:01:19.640
<v Speaker 1>they were able to access, and it included stuff like

0:01:19.720 --> 0:01:24.319
<v Speaker 1>nondisclosure agreements and some sketches and stuff. The attack actually

0:01:24.360 --> 0:01:27.400
<v Speaker 1>happened back in May, we're just hearing about it now,

0:01:27.840 --> 0:01:30.720
<v Speaker 1>and Cisco reps say the company has already taken action

0:01:30.760 --> 0:01:33.720
<v Speaker 1>to limit access to any other file systems, and that

0:01:33.800 --> 0:01:38.440
<v Speaker 1>the attackers got access by compromising and employee's account. Apparently,

0:01:38.920 --> 0:01:41.920
<v Speaker 1>they first were able to gain control of the employee's

0:01:41.959 --> 0:01:45.280
<v Speaker 1>personal Google account and that allowed them to use the

0:01:45.400 --> 0:01:50.600
<v Speaker 1>SINC credentials in Chrome to access Cisco systems. They also

0:01:50.680 --> 0:01:54.960
<v Speaker 1>tricked the employee into revealing a multi factor authentication code.

0:01:55.560 --> 0:01:57.720
<v Speaker 1>You know, it's the kind of thing that when you

0:01:57.760 --> 0:01:59.920
<v Speaker 1>put in your password, it says, all right, we're sending

0:02:00.040 --> 0:02:03.040
<v Speaker 1>a a code to your cell phone. That sort of stuff,

0:02:03.280 --> 0:02:05.120
<v Speaker 1>And that just goes to show that you can employ

0:02:05.320 --> 0:02:09.400
<v Speaker 1>very secure processes, but they only work if people, you know,

0:02:10.120 --> 0:02:15.880
<v Speaker 1>follow them. And that's really why we can't have bulletproof defenses. So,

0:02:16.000 --> 0:02:19.240
<v Speaker 1>for one thing, creating something that has no vulnerabilities, that's

0:02:19.240 --> 0:02:22.080
<v Speaker 1>pretty darn hard. They are creating a system that has

0:02:22.080 --> 0:02:26.000
<v Speaker 1>no footholds for hackers, very difficult to do. But another

0:02:26.120 --> 0:02:28.680
<v Speaker 1>is that people are frequently the weakest link in the

0:02:28.720 --> 0:02:31.960
<v Speaker 1>security chain, as was in this case, So you don't

0:02:32.160 --> 0:02:34.720
<v Speaker 1>have to be the most leait hacker in the world

0:02:34.800 --> 0:02:37.040
<v Speaker 1>if you can convince someone to hand you the keys

0:02:37.080 --> 0:02:40.760
<v Speaker 1>to the kingdom. The attackers then used various tools to

0:02:40.840 --> 0:02:44.760
<v Speaker 1>create backdoor access points within the system, so that even

0:02:44.800 --> 0:02:48.240
<v Speaker 1>when the Cisco security team detected them and gave them

0:02:48.280 --> 0:02:51.720
<v Speaker 1>the boot, they could worm their way back in, and

0:02:51.800 --> 0:02:54.359
<v Speaker 1>it took some time to weed out all those issues.

0:02:54.680 --> 0:02:58.440
<v Speaker 1>The attackers did, not, however, encrypt Cisco's files, which is

0:02:58.480 --> 0:03:02.240
<v Speaker 1>something we typically see with somewhere attacks. The attackers were

0:03:02.280 --> 0:03:05.320
<v Speaker 1>identified as being part of the Jan Lua Wong gang.

0:03:05.960 --> 0:03:09.359
<v Speaker 1>Yon Lua Wong is the name of a particular type

0:03:09.360 --> 0:03:12.919
<v Speaker 1>of ransomware, so Cisco reps say they suspect that the

0:03:12.960 --> 0:03:17.120
<v Speaker 1>group were likely planning on deploying ransomware, but had not

0:03:17.200 --> 0:03:20.480
<v Speaker 1>actually gone that far before they got weeded out. Over

0:03:20.520 --> 0:03:24.960
<v Speaker 1>at Google, employees are feeling a quote unquote real vibe change.

0:03:25.320 --> 0:03:27.880
<v Speaker 1>At least according to one unnamed source who talked with

0:03:28.000 --> 0:03:32.880
<v Speaker 1>Business Insider, Google has extended its hiring freeze, which began

0:03:32.960 --> 0:03:36.520
<v Speaker 1>in late July and continues on today, and there are

0:03:36.640 --> 0:03:41.040
<v Speaker 1>growing concerns that Google could initiate layoffs or institute tougher

0:03:41.080 --> 0:03:45.320
<v Speaker 1>performance measures that employees will have to meet, and if

0:03:45.320 --> 0:03:49.320
<v Speaker 1>they don't meet them, they might be considered for termination.

0:03:49.960 --> 0:03:52.840
<v Speaker 1>Sindar pach I, the CEO of Google, has said that

0:03:52.880 --> 0:03:55.960
<v Speaker 1>the company's head count and its productivity don't seem to

0:03:56.000 --> 0:04:00.240
<v Speaker 1>match up, so essentially suggesting that Google has two many

0:04:00.280 --> 0:04:02.880
<v Speaker 1>employees for the amount of work that's actually being done.

0:04:03.280 --> 0:04:06.880
<v Speaker 1>So the worry is that the tougher performance measures could

0:04:06.880 --> 0:04:09.119
<v Speaker 1>be a way to judge which employees are pulling more

0:04:09.160 --> 0:04:11.880
<v Speaker 1>weight than others, and then the company might move to

0:04:11.960 --> 0:04:15.000
<v Speaker 1>eliminate the employees who are seen to be falling behind.

0:04:15.920 --> 0:04:18.880
<v Speaker 1>This kind of echoes something that met US CEO Mark

0:04:18.960 --> 0:04:22.640
<v Speaker 1>Zuckerberg said a couple of months back about Meta, namely

0:04:22.720 --> 0:04:25.560
<v Speaker 1>that quote there are probably a bunch of people at

0:04:25.600 --> 0:04:28.279
<v Speaker 1>the company who shouldn't be here end quote. Now, in

0:04:28.360 --> 0:04:32.000
<v Speaker 1>Meta's case, the strategy appears to be to turn up

0:04:32.040 --> 0:04:35.600
<v Speaker 1>the pressure on employees and then see who sticks around.

0:04:35.920 --> 0:04:38.680
<v Speaker 1>The idea being that the folks who aren't best suited

0:04:38.800 --> 0:04:40.800
<v Speaker 1>for the company will drop off first. You know, if

0:04:40.800 --> 0:04:42.599
<v Speaker 1>you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen

0:04:42.680 --> 0:04:46.200
<v Speaker 1>kind of thing. Now, personally, I don't think that's the

0:04:46.240 --> 0:04:49.599
<v Speaker 1>best strategy because you could end up alienating some of

0:04:49.640 --> 0:04:52.960
<v Speaker 1>your best employees who figure they can just go somewhere

0:04:52.960 --> 0:04:56.280
<v Speaker 1>else and have be treated better. Right. That's getting increasingly

0:04:56.360 --> 0:04:59.839
<v Speaker 1>difficult during these tough economic times. So maybe you could

0:05:00.000 --> 0:05:02.600
<v Speaker 1>amble with that, but you can really end up with

0:05:02.760 --> 0:05:05.800
<v Speaker 1>a lower head count without a guarantee that the people

0:05:05.800 --> 0:05:09.120
<v Speaker 1>who stuck around are you know, the best ones. But

0:05:09.200 --> 0:05:11.480
<v Speaker 1>what do I know? Anyway, We're seeing these sort of

0:05:11.520 --> 0:05:17.560
<v Speaker 1>attitudes across the entire tech sector, particularly in these larger organizations.

0:05:17.600 --> 0:05:19.920
<v Speaker 1>And you know, just as a rule, I have noticed

0:05:19.960 --> 0:05:25.360
<v Speaker 1>that as organizations grow to gargantuan size, workload can end

0:05:25.440 --> 0:05:27.799
<v Speaker 1>up spreading out over to a point where your average

0:05:27.839 --> 0:05:32.000
<v Speaker 1>employee might not have that much actual work to do

0:05:33.000 --> 0:05:35.440
<v Speaker 1>um And in fact, you see this with government agencies

0:05:35.480 --> 0:05:38.400
<v Speaker 1>a lot, where some government employees spend most of their

0:05:38.400 --> 0:05:40.880
<v Speaker 1>work days trying to look busy to justify the fact

0:05:40.880 --> 0:05:44.040
<v Speaker 1>that they have a position. Now, to be clear, that

0:05:44.240 --> 0:05:47.159
<v Speaker 1>is not the employee's fault. It's more of a sign

0:05:47.320 --> 0:05:50.840
<v Speaker 1>of poor management and planning. And it just stinks when

0:05:50.839 --> 0:05:53.320
<v Speaker 1>you realize that you've reached that point and then you

0:05:53.360 --> 0:05:56.360
<v Speaker 1>have to make moves to correct course, because frequently that

0:05:56.400 --> 0:06:00.320
<v Speaker 1>means you've got to let some folks go, and that's tough.

0:06:01.279 --> 0:06:04.840
<v Speaker 1>On a similar note Microsoft is shutting down a department

0:06:04.880 --> 0:06:08.120
<v Speaker 1>it first established in two thousand eighteen. The group is

0:06:08.160 --> 0:06:12.320
<v Speaker 1>called the Modern Life Experiences Team, which I mean that

0:06:12.440 --> 0:06:15.080
<v Speaker 1>name doesn't give you much of a hint about what

0:06:15.120 --> 0:06:17.640
<v Speaker 1>the heck is going on over there, right Well, as

0:06:17.680 --> 0:06:20.560
<v Speaker 1>it turns out, the role of the Modern Life Experiences

0:06:20.600 --> 0:06:26.600
<v Speaker 1>Team was to win back professional consumers or pro sumers.

0:06:26.640 --> 0:06:30.160
<v Speaker 1>So this was kind of a customer retention group, although

0:06:30.920 --> 0:06:33.560
<v Speaker 1>more than retention, because retention just sounds like you're trying

0:06:33.600 --> 0:06:36.240
<v Speaker 1>to keep folks there. Their job was to convince folks

0:06:36.279 --> 0:06:40.040
<v Speaker 1>who had actively moved away from Microsoft products and services

0:06:40.120 --> 0:06:44.200
<v Speaker 1>to come back into the fold. Anyway, the group consists

0:06:44.320 --> 0:06:47.719
<v Speaker 1>of around two people, and those folks now are being

0:06:47.760 --> 0:06:50.599
<v Speaker 1>told they have to find another position within Microsoft, so

0:06:50.640 --> 0:06:54.480
<v Speaker 1>they can apply to work somewhere else within the company,

0:06:54.640 --> 0:06:58.200
<v Speaker 1>or they can leave and take severance and at least

0:06:58.200 --> 0:07:01.880
<v Speaker 1>they're gonna get several so that's something. So this isn't

0:07:01.920 --> 0:07:04.320
<v Speaker 1>a case of Microsoft turning up the heat to try

0:07:04.320 --> 0:07:07.240
<v Speaker 1>and get people to jump ship, because if they did that,

0:07:07.520 --> 0:07:09.800
<v Speaker 1>then you know, people who are leaving they might not

0:07:09.960 --> 0:07:13.280
<v Speaker 1>be qualified to get a severance package if they're leaving

0:07:13.280 --> 0:07:17.000
<v Speaker 1>on their own. So that's something. It's a pretty tarnished

0:07:17.120 --> 0:07:21.400
<v Speaker 1>silver lining, but it's better than nothing. You know. There's

0:07:21.440 --> 0:07:24.360
<v Speaker 1>been a ton of business news lately because all the

0:07:24.400 --> 0:07:28.120
<v Speaker 1>big public companies have been holding their various earnings calls

0:07:28.360 --> 0:07:30.360
<v Speaker 1>for the end of a quarter. Most of them it's

0:07:30.400 --> 0:07:32.720
<v Speaker 1>Q two, for some it might be Q three. It

0:07:32.720 --> 0:07:36.560
<v Speaker 1>all depends on where they're their UH fiscal year starts,

0:07:36.560 --> 0:07:38.840
<v Speaker 1>because it doesn't always start at the same time as

0:07:38.880 --> 0:07:41.240
<v Speaker 1>the calendar year. And we've learned a lot of things

0:07:41.240 --> 0:07:44.680
<v Speaker 1>in this process. We learned like how Warner Brothers Discovery

0:07:44.760 --> 0:07:49.240
<v Speaker 1>merger has led to the superhero film bat Girl being

0:07:49.320 --> 0:07:55.280
<v Speaker 1>shelved permanently. Reportedly, David Zaslov, who's the CEO of this

0:07:55.440 --> 0:07:59.760
<v Speaker 1>merged company, felt that bat Girl was more valuable as

0:07:59.800 --> 0:08:03.240
<v Speaker 1>a hacks right off than as a film, since it

0:08:03.280 --> 0:08:05.800
<v Speaker 1>was destined really to just go to streaming rather than

0:08:05.840 --> 0:08:09.800
<v Speaker 1>a theatrical release, and reportedly it would need more money

0:08:09.840 --> 0:08:12.440
<v Speaker 1>to finish the film, and it had already gone over

0:08:12.480 --> 0:08:17.239
<v Speaker 1>its initial million dollar budget up to ninety million, and

0:08:17.520 --> 0:08:20.400
<v Speaker 1>so I guess the call was made that rather than

0:08:20.440 --> 0:08:23.840
<v Speaker 1>pour more money into it, they could just write it off. Now,

0:08:23.880 --> 0:08:27.160
<v Speaker 1>the story goes that the company only will receive the

0:08:27.200 --> 0:08:30.440
<v Speaker 1>tax right off if bat Girl never gets a commercial

0:08:30.480 --> 0:08:35.640
<v Speaker 1>release in any form, streaming or otherwise. If that's true,

0:08:35.720 --> 0:08:38.480
<v Speaker 1>that means there's no hope for folks to ever see

0:08:38.520 --> 0:08:43.240
<v Speaker 1>this movie unless the footage got leaked somehow. And there

0:08:43.240 --> 0:08:44.840
<v Speaker 1>are a lot of people who are curious about it,

0:08:44.960 --> 0:08:48.000
<v Speaker 1>some because they love the character back Girl, some because

0:08:48.160 --> 0:08:51.600
<v Speaker 1>Michael Keaton is supposed to be in the movie as Batman,

0:08:51.880 --> 0:08:54.760
<v Speaker 1>and of course he was Batman in the early nineties

0:08:54.760 --> 0:08:57.920
<v Speaker 1>with the Tim Burton films, the the to that Tim

0:08:57.920 --> 0:09:01.280
<v Speaker 1>Burton directed. So they're been a lot of curiosity about

0:09:01.280 --> 0:09:05.280
<v Speaker 1>this movie, but it sounds like there's no chance of

0:09:05.360 --> 0:09:07.640
<v Speaker 1>anyone actually seeing it, and it's caused a lot of

0:09:07.679 --> 0:09:11.040
<v Speaker 1>folks to get angry. And obviously the filmmakers and the

0:09:11.040 --> 0:09:13.720
<v Speaker 1>people involved in the project are disappointed. No one wants

0:09:13.720 --> 0:09:15.920
<v Speaker 1>to work on something only to be told that work

0:09:16.000 --> 0:09:19.040
<v Speaker 1>is never going to be seen. And let me tell

0:09:19.080 --> 0:09:21.800
<v Speaker 1>you has someone who has once worked for David Zaslov.

0:09:22.200 --> 0:09:25.680
<v Speaker 1>Though I was way way, way, way way under his radar,

0:09:26.240 --> 0:09:29.160
<v Speaker 1>I can understand getting a little miffed at some of

0:09:29.280 --> 0:09:33.160
<v Speaker 1>Zaslov's decisions. I got miffed at some of his decisions

0:09:33.720 --> 0:09:38.400
<v Speaker 1>back when I was working for Discovery Communications. Zaslov has

0:09:38.440 --> 0:09:41.600
<v Speaker 1>said that the plan is to cut around three billion

0:09:41.679 --> 0:09:45.360
<v Speaker 1>dollars of costs out from this merged company, and he

0:09:45.400 --> 0:09:48.480
<v Speaker 1>says that that might actually be on the conservative side,

0:09:48.480 --> 0:09:50.880
<v Speaker 1>and that has a lot of folks worried. I can

0:09:50.920 --> 0:09:54.120
<v Speaker 1>actually right now think of an entire company, a content

0:09:54.200 --> 0:09:56.959
<v Speaker 1>company that could be on the chopping block. I would

0:09:56.960 --> 0:09:59.320
<v Speaker 1>think the most likely fate for it would be to

0:09:59.679 --> 0:10:03.280
<v Speaker 1>have gets sold off to some other entity, but it's

0:10:03.280 --> 0:10:07.080
<v Speaker 1>too early to make any actual predictions. Zaslov has also

0:10:07.120 --> 0:10:09.840
<v Speaker 1>indicated that it makes no economic sense to make high

0:10:09.960 --> 0:10:13.199
<v Speaker 1>cost content for streaming platforms because you don't get a

0:10:13.320 --> 0:10:16.439
<v Speaker 1>very big return on that investment. It ends up costing

0:10:16.480 --> 0:10:18.920
<v Speaker 1>you more than you can make. And this is something

0:10:18.920 --> 0:10:23.199
<v Speaker 1>that we see echoed on other streaming platforms, including on Netflix.

0:10:23.640 --> 0:10:25.760
<v Speaker 1>And it's really no secret. I mean, everyone knew that

0:10:25.800 --> 0:10:29.480
<v Speaker 1>Netflix was pouring truckloads of money into producing content in

0:10:29.520 --> 0:10:33.880
<v Speaker 1>an effort to attract subscribers, and once those subscriber numbers

0:10:33.920 --> 0:10:37.840
<v Speaker 1>began flagging a bit, investors got really worried. And we'll

0:10:37.840 --> 0:10:41.040
<v Speaker 1>talk about other streaming services that have also had to

0:10:41.080 --> 0:10:43.960
<v Speaker 1>reckon with the high cost of doing business after we

0:10:44.000 --> 0:10:47.079
<v Speaker 1>come back from the break. Meanwhile, zas Lov has indicated

0:10:47.120 --> 0:10:50.920
<v Speaker 1>that expensive productions really should just be targeted toward theatrical release,

0:10:51.320 --> 0:10:53.720
<v Speaker 1>where a healthy box office could produce a good return.

0:10:54.280 --> 0:10:58.000
<v Speaker 1>How to make streaming work from a profitability standpoint is

0:10:58.040 --> 0:11:02.240
<v Speaker 1>a high priority because cable and satellite TV subscription numbers

0:11:02.280 --> 0:11:05.520
<v Speaker 1>continue to drop, particularly here in the United States, and

0:11:05.679 --> 0:11:08.480
<v Speaker 1>Zaslav is a cable guy through and through. That's the

0:11:08.520 --> 0:11:11.240
<v Speaker 1>world he comes from, and that means he has to

0:11:11.240 --> 0:11:15.359
<v Speaker 1>find a new model before the old one goes completely

0:11:15.400 --> 0:11:18.760
<v Speaker 1>belly up. While he didn't go into detail, the general

0:11:18.800 --> 0:11:22.160
<v Speaker 1>takeaway is that this new company, Warner Brothers Discovery, is

0:11:22.200 --> 0:11:27.320
<v Speaker 1>going to combine HBO Max within the Discovery Plus streaming

0:11:27.360 --> 0:11:30.840
<v Speaker 1>service or perhaps create a new merged one have a

0:11:30.920 --> 0:11:34.800
<v Speaker 1>unified streaming service with different verticals or channels of content.

0:11:34.880 --> 0:11:37.959
<v Speaker 1>So HBO Max isn't gonna go away. In fact, Zaslav

0:11:38.000 --> 0:11:41.280
<v Speaker 1>called it the crown Jewel, but it will be incorporated

0:11:41.320 --> 0:11:44.320
<v Speaker 1>into something bigger. At least that's the assumption right now,

0:11:45.080 --> 0:11:48.520
<v Speaker 1>and also that there are expected layoffs coming from across

0:11:48.559 --> 0:11:51.920
<v Speaker 1>both Discovery and Warner Brothers units in the not too

0:11:51.960 --> 0:11:55.000
<v Speaker 1>distant future. We've got a lot more to talk about today.

0:11:55.000 --> 0:12:06.360
<v Speaker 1>Before we get to it, let's take a quick break. Okay,

0:12:06.440 --> 0:12:11.280
<v Speaker 1>we're back. Let's talk about Disney, because Disney also held

0:12:11.360 --> 0:12:15.000
<v Speaker 1>an earnings call recently, and there's tons we could talk

0:12:15.040 --> 0:12:17.920
<v Speaker 1>about there, but I'm really gonna look more at streaming services.

0:12:18.720 --> 0:12:22.200
<v Speaker 1>Disney subscriber numbers for its digital streaming services totaled two

0:12:22.960 --> 0:12:26.920
<v Speaker 1>one million people. That means, for the first time, a

0:12:27.120 --> 0:12:30.600
<v Speaker 1>streaming service or collection of them really has posted higher

0:12:30.640 --> 0:12:35.800
<v Speaker 1>subscriber numbers than Netflix. Netflix is behind Disney's services by

0:12:35.840 --> 0:12:40.200
<v Speaker 1>about five hundred thousand subscribers total. But you heard the

0:12:40.240 --> 0:12:44.480
<v Speaker 1>caveat there. This is not a single streaming service from

0:12:44.520 --> 0:12:47.720
<v Speaker 1>Disney we're talking about. It's a collection of them. So

0:12:47.800 --> 0:12:51.640
<v Speaker 1>Disney achieved this by having multiple streaming services. Netflix is

0:12:51.679 --> 0:12:56.679
<v Speaker 1>just Netflix, but at Disney you've got Disney Plus, ESPN Plus,

0:12:56.880 --> 0:13:00.240
<v Speaker 1>and Hulu. Now, out of those three, Disney Plus as

0:13:00.320 --> 0:13:03.720
<v Speaker 1>the greatest number of subscribers at a hundred fifty two million.

0:13:04.400 --> 0:13:07.240
<v Speaker 1>So if we break it down by service, Netflix is

0:13:07.280 --> 0:13:11.800
<v Speaker 1>still way ahead. It's ahead of even Disney Plus. But

0:13:11.880 --> 0:13:14.160
<v Speaker 1>it's not all good news anyway, and at least not

0:13:14.200 --> 0:13:18.520
<v Speaker 1>to customers, because the rising costs of production. You know,

0:13:18.600 --> 0:13:21.360
<v Speaker 1>those Marvel series ain't cheap, even if snarky folks do

0:13:21.440 --> 0:13:24.120
<v Speaker 1>poke fun at the c g I at times. That

0:13:24.160 --> 0:13:27.360
<v Speaker 1>means that Disney is going to pass those costs down

0:13:27.440 --> 0:13:31.120
<v Speaker 1>to you, the viewer. Yep, a Disney Plus subscription is

0:13:31.160 --> 0:13:34.520
<v Speaker 1>going to get more expensive starting December eight. Right now,

0:13:34.760 --> 0:13:38.000
<v Speaker 1>a basic subscription costs seven dollars nine cents per month

0:13:38.040 --> 0:13:41.000
<v Speaker 1>here in the US, and on December eight, that's going

0:13:41.080 --> 0:13:43.960
<v Speaker 1>to increase to ten dollars and nine cents per month,

0:13:44.000 --> 0:13:48.160
<v Speaker 1>which is a thirty eight percent increase. But hey, if

0:13:48.160 --> 0:13:51.600
<v Speaker 1>you want, you could just stick with seven dollars cents

0:13:51.640 --> 0:13:54.400
<v Speaker 1>a month, because Disney is introducing a tier at that

0:13:54.480 --> 0:13:59.319
<v Speaker 1>price that will be including commercials, so it's ads supported,

0:13:59.520 --> 0:14:02.200
<v Speaker 1>So if you don't mind ads in your programming, you

0:14:02.240 --> 0:14:05.160
<v Speaker 1>can just keep paying what you're paying right now, you know,

0:14:05.360 --> 0:14:08.720
<v Speaker 1>for an ad free experience. So in a way you

0:14:08.800 --> 0:14:13.240
<v Speaker 1>get extra content because you get commercials too. Starting to

0:14:13.240 --> 0:14:16.120
<v Speaker 1>sound like as lot who lose prices also going up.

0:14:16.200 --> 0:14:19.600
<v Speaker 1>The ads supported tier will go from six dollars cents

0:14:19.640 --> 0:14:22.960
<v Speaker 1>to seven dollars nine cents per month, and the ad

0:14:23.040 --> 0:14:27.960
<v Speaker 1>free version will go from twelve to four that is

0:14:28.000 --> 0:14:32.240
<v Speaker 1>effective October tenth. Disney previously had already announced that ESPN

0:14:32.280 --> 0:14:35.680
<v Speaker 1>plus rates would increase by so they're all going up.

0:14:36.120 --> 0:14:40.000
<v Speaker 1>I'm definitely grumpy about this, you know, just to keep

0:14:40.000 --> 0:14:42.960
<v Speaker 1>it in the Disney family. But at the same time,

0:14:43.080 --> 0:14:45.640
<v Speaker 1>it's kind of hard to protest this move. I mean,

0:14:46.800 --> 0:14:50.920
<v Speaker 1>Disney's numbers reveal that the streaming divisions have been losing

0:14:51.000 --> 0:14:55.880
<v Speaker 1>money collectively across all three platforms. They have lost one

0:14:55.920 --> 0:14:59.800
<v Speaker 1>point one billion dollars in this most recent quarter. That's

0:14:59.840 --> 0:15:03.880
<v Speaker 1>more than three million dollars over what analysts had predicted,

0:15:04.280 --> 0:15:07.240
<v Speaker 1>and it shows that these services have really gone all

0:15:07.320 --> 0:15:10.960
<v Speaker 1>out in an effort to attract subscribers by funding this

0:15:11.240 --> 0:15:16.680
<v Speaker 1>very expensive programming that's on the services. Unfortunately, the number

0:15:16.720 --> 0:15:20.720
<v Speaker 1>of incoming subscribers is not offsetting the investment being made

0:15:20.760 --> 0:15:23.840
<v Speaker 1>to get them in the first place. So that only

0:15:23.880 --> 0:15:26.800
<v Speaker 1>opens up a few options. Right, You could scale way

0:15:26.880 --> 0:15:29.800
<v Speaker 1>back on production, which is what Zaslov is doing over

0:15:29.800 --> 0:15:34.160
<v Speaker 1>at Warner Brothers Discovery, or you could hike up prices

0:15:34.240 --> 0:15:36.880
<v Speaker 1>to your customers, which is what we're seeing at Disney.

0:15:37.000 --> 0:15:40.000
<v Speaker 1>Or you might do a combination of both. This may

0:15:40.040 --> 0:15:42.880
<v Speaker 1>mean that we will eventually enter into an era of

0:15:43.240 --> 0:15:48.280
<v Speaker 1>fewer prestige productions for streaming platforms that the business just

0:15:48.400 --> 0:15:51.640
<v Speaker 1>won't support it. And that's gonna be rough for creators

0:15:51.760 --> 0:15:55.280
<v Speaker 1>and for audiences, but it might also be necessary. The

0:15:55.280 --> 0:15:57.920
<v Speaker 1>balance of art and commerce is never an easy one,

0:15:58.000 --> 0:16:01.080
<v Speaker 1>and often we'll see the scales tipe direction or the other,

0:16:01.640 --> 0:16:04.880
<v Speaker 1>and then things will eventually level out, and then we

0:16:04.920 --> 0:16:08.760
<v Speaker 1>typically started up all over again. Under the Trump administration,

0:16:08.840 --> 0:16:12.640
<v Speaker 1>the Federal Communications Commission held an auction for companies to

0:16:12.720 --> 0:16:15.440
<v Speaker 1>win a bid that would give them a portion of

0:16:15.480 --> 0:16:19.800
<v Speaker 1>the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund, and that funds purpose is

0:16:19.840 --> 0:16:23.520
<v Speaker 1>to provide money for Internet service providers to extend connectivity

0:16:23.520 --> 0:16:28.920
<v Speaker 1>service to unserved and underserved communities, primarily rural communities that

0:16:28.960 --> 0:16:31.800
<v Speaker 1>have limited or no access to Internet service providers. As

0:16:31.800 --> 0:16:35.840
<v Speaker 1>it stands, one company that one a bid was Starlink,

0:16:36.080 --> 0:16:39.200
<v Speaker 1>the space X unit that uses a network of tiny

0:16:39.280 --> 0:16:43.200
<v Speaker 1>satellites to provide Internet connectivity to customers. But now the

0:16:43.320 --> 0:16:46.600
<v Speaker 1>FCC has effectively changed its mind now. To be fair,

0:16:46.640 --> 0:16:51.200
<v Speaker 1>the FCC changes dramatically from one presidential administration to the next,

0:16:51.600 --> 0:16:55.000
<v Speaker 1>and it's a very different organization under Biden than it

0:16:55.120 --> 0:16:58.360
<v Speaker 1>was under Trump. The f C C has now rejected

0:16:58.400 --> 0:17:03.320
<v Speaker 1>Starlinks bid, which would have seen the unit of SpaceX

0:17:03.400 --> 0:17:06.600
<v Speaker 1>received more than eight hundred eighty million dollars in government

0:17:06.640 --> 0:17:10.959
<v Speaker 1>aid to flesh out its broadband offerings. So why the

0:17:11.080 --> 0:17:16.080
<v Speaker 1>change of mind, Well, the FCC chair Jessica Rosenworzel said

0:17:16.119 --> 0:17:19.560
<v Speaker 1>that Starlink wasn't really a proven entity and that's relying

0:17:19.640 --> 0:17:23.879
<v Speaker 1>on quote developing technology end quote, meaning that the company

0:17:23.920 --> 0:17:26.840
<v Speaker 1>cannot assure the f c C that it will live

0:17:26.920 --> 0:17:30.520
<v Speaker 1>up to its part of the deal. Specifically, she said, quote,

0:17:30.800 --> 0:17:34.160
<v Speaker 1>we cannot afford to subsidize ventures that are not delivering

0:17:34.200 --> 0:17:37.040
<v Speaker 1>the promise speeds or are not likely to meet program

0:17:37.080 --> 0:17:40.680
<v Speaker 1>requirements end quote. She also pointed out that starlinks model

0:17:40.720 --> 0:17:44.000
<v Speaker 1>requires customers to purchase a six hundred dollar dish that

0:17:44.080 --> 0:17:47.280
<v Speaker 1>definitely prices out a large number of households. And if

0:17:47.320 --> 0:17:50.919
<v Speaker 1>your goal is to extend internet connectivity to unserved or

0:17:51.080 --> 0:17:55.600
<v Speaker 1>underserved communities, part of that usually includes making sure that

0:17:55.600 --> 0:17:59.160
<v Speaker 1>the solutions are going to be affordable to lower income households.

0:17:59.560 --> 0:18:01.520
<v Speaker 1>It would be a bad look, as they say, to

0:18:01.600 --> 0:18:05.000
<v Speaker 1>subsidize a company that had a really high initial price

0:18:05.040 --> 0:18:07.840
<v Speaker 1>for customers, and that's before you start factoring in things

0:18:07.880 --> 0:18:11.400
<v Speaker 1>like monthly service fees. The FCC also denied a bid

0:18:11.440 --> 0:18:14.840
<v Speaker 1>from a company called lt D Broadband, which had won

0:18:15.040 --> 0:18:19.119
<v Speaker 1>a one point three billion dollar bid back in the

0:18:19.160 --> 0:18:22.520
<v Speaker 1>reason for the fccs rejection of that bid was that

0:18:22.720 --> 0:18:26.879
<v Speaker 1>lt D failed to receive eligible telecommunications carrier status in

0:18:27.040 --> 0:18:30.119
<v Speaker 1>seven of the fifteen states where it bid, and the

0:18:30.200 --> 0:18:33.159
<v Speaker 1>FCC determined that lt D would be unable to actually

0:18:33.200 --> 0:18:36.280
<v Speaker 1>deploy a network on the scale that the winning bids

0:18:36.320 --> 0:18:39.360
<v Speaker 1>had been based upon. As the FCC pointed out, there

0:18:39.440 --> 0:18:42.159
<v Speaker 1>is a limited amount of government money set aside to

0:18:42.240 --> 0:18:46.320
<v Speaker 1>help extend broadband access, and so it's of chief importance

0:18:46.320 --> 0:18:49.480
<v Speaker 1>that what little money there is be spent effectively. Though

0:18:49.520 --> 0:18:51.000
<v Speaker 1>how you do that in the country where there are

0:18:51.040 --> 0:18:53.600
<v Speaker 1>so few viable options for I sp S is beyond me.

0:18:54.280 --> 0:18:56.720
<v Speaker 1>And that's all the news I have for today, Thursday,

0:18:56.760 --> 0:19:00.960
<v Speaker 1>August eleven two. I hope that you are all well.

0:19:01.119 --> 0:19:02.879
<v Speaker 1>Reach out to me if you have any suggestions for

0:19:02.960 --> 0:19:05.399
<v Speaker 1>future topics on tech Stuff, and I'll talk to you

0:19:05.440 --> 0:19:14.600
<v Speaker 1>again really soon. Yes, tex Stuff is an I Heart

0:19:14.680 --> 0:19:18.440
<v Speaker 1>Radio production. For more podcasts from my Heart Radio, visit

0:19:18.480 --> 0:19:21.560
<v Speaker 1>the i Heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you

0:19:21.600 --> 0:19:22.960
<v Speaker 1>listen to your favorite shows,