|Day's Range||0.1100 - 0.1200|
Transportation secretary, Elaine Chao, may have high U.S. status. However, the New York Times released an article stating her family's connection not only to the U.S. but to China as well, with access to two of the world's largest economies. Yahoo Finance's Adam Shapiro and Julie Hyman discuss with the panel.
New York Times Smarter Living editor Tim Herrera says people should consider giving themselves permission to actually take the day off when they have the opportunity. Herrera joins "CBS This Morning" to discuss the benefits of taking a day to do nothing.
(Bloomberg Opinion) -- A report in the New York Times that the U.S. Cyber Command has intensified secret efforts to hack the Russian power grid is less interesting for its content than because of U.S. officials’ apparent cooperation in publicizing the activity. Like any power grid undergoing a digital transformation, the Russian one is quite hackable – but why would the U.S. want public discussion of the matter?The New York Times story talks about “implants” – the placement of malware in networks involved in managing the Russian power grid that could be activated in case of a major conflict. It’s careful to avoid any detail, but Russians know better than many others how vulnerable power grids are to attack.Kaspersky Lab JSC, the cybersecurity firm, has been running grid equipment hacking contests for years. In 2016, a hacking group from Yekaterinburg described in a blog post how it won points in the competition by taking over a substation and causing a short circuit on a power transmission line, without any prior knowledge of the specific industrial system or even much general understanding about how substations work. Russian researchers have identified numerous vulnerabilities in so-called smart grid equipment, which constantly analyzes consumption data and helps manage systems flexibly and efficiently. Many elements of electrical grids are accessible from the internet. A relatively successful, and likely Russian, attack that shut down 27 substations in Ukraine in 2015 showed that primitive methods like sending spear-phishing emails to employees of regional energy companies are effective in getting hackers into parts of national grids.The Russian grid is particularly vulnerable for several reasons. First, it’s vast. Russian Grids PJSC runs 2.35 million kilometers of transmission lines and 507,000 substations. Second, it’s in the process of an ambitious digital transformation. The state-controlled company’s digitization plan, adopted last year, is meant to achieve major cuts in transmission losses and breakdown numbers by 2030. The plan talks about creating a cybersecurity unit, but that’s a work in progress. As my colleague David Fickling has pointed out, making a grid “smart” creates new avenues of attack, and big technology rollouts can be messy and increase the risks. In the case of Russia, the problem is exacerbated by the Western origin of three quarters of all the equipment and pretty much all of the software. If U.S. intelligence puts in the implants before the equipment is supplied or en route, there’s no guarantee they can be detected.In other words, securing the Russian grid is a mammoth task even with Russians’ superior expertise when it comes to detecting (and likely exploiting) vulnerabilities. U.S. cyberattacks are certainly possible. How crippling they can be is another matter. The 2015 attack on the Ukrainian regional energy companies left some 225,000 customers without electricity for a few hours; that’s not a lot of damage given the wide array of techniques involved (the attackers even flooded an energy company’s call center with automated calls to make it impossible for customers to report outages). Unless critical equipment is irreparably damaged, it’s usually possible to switch to manual mode, which is what the Ukrainians did.It would be naive, however, to think the Russian government hasn’t been worried about U.S. cyberattacks on the country's critical infrastructure. So President Donald Trump’s vehement reaction to the New York Times story – he called publishing it “a virtual act of treason” in a tweet – is a little overdone. What’s more telling, though, is the newspaper’s response: It says the Times “described the article to the government” before publication and got no objections.This raises the question what purpose the article might serve for the government officials who talked to the newspaper and those who vetted the publication. My theory is that they wanted to send a message to the Kremlin – but not specifically that the Cyber Command has increased its activity in the Russian power grid. The Russian political leadership, intelligence and cybersecurity professionals are already aware of these efforts. Rather, the message concerns the approval procedure for the offensive efforts. The Times story says they occur under new, obscure legislation passed by Congress last summer that allows the defense secretary to authorize “clandestine military activity” in cyberspace without going to the president for approval. It’s one thing for the Russians to know the U.S. is working to infiltrate their country’s infrastructure, but quite another to be aware that intrusions and attacks don’t require White House approval and can happen routinely and without much ado. The U.S. officials are effectively telling Russian President Vladimir Putin not to remonstrate with Trump in case of attack – the U.S. president may not even know what’s happening, and it’ll be perfectly legal.To contact the author of this story: Leonid Bershidsky at firstname.lastname@example.orgTo contact the editor responsible for this story: Tobin Harshaw at email@example.comThis column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.Leonid Bershidsky is Bloomberg Opinion's Europe columnist. He was the founding editor of the Russian business daily Vedomosti and founded the opinion website Slon.ru.For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com/opinion©2019 Bloomberg L.P.
The New York Times Company (NYT) has been contemplating new avenues of revenue generation. The company is fast acclimatizing to the changing face of the multiplatform media universe.
The following are the top stories on the New York Times business pages. - Boeing Co Chief Executive Officer Dennis Muilenburg said on Sunday that the company made a "mistake" in how it handled a cockpit warning light on the 737 Max. Muilenburg made the comments while addressing reporters on the eve of the Paris Air Show, one of the most important sales events for aircraft manufacturers around the world. - Food delivery has become a multibillion-euro business as the American ride-hailing giant Uber Technologies Inc, the London-based delivery platform Deliveroo and ambitious rivals battle to capture markets and consumers.
New York Times Co NYSE:NYTView full report here! Summary * Perception of the company's creditworthiness is neutral * ETFs holding this stock have seen outflows over the last one-month * Bearish sentiment is moderate and declining * Economic output in this company's sector is contracting Bearish sentimentShort interest | PositiveShort interest is moderate for NYT with between 5 and 10% of shares outstanding currently on loan. However, this was an improvement in sentiment as investors who seek to profit from falling equity prices reduced their short positions on May 23. Money flowETF/Index ownership | NegativeETF activity is negative. Over the last one-month, outflows of investor capital in ETFs holding NYT totaled $69.13 billion. Additionally, the rate of outflows appears to be accelerating. Economic sentimentPMI by IHS Markit | NegativeAccording to the latest IHS Markit Purchasing Managersâ€™ Index (PMI) data, output in the Consumer Servicesis falling. The rate of decline is significant relative to the trend shown over the past year, and is accelerating. Credit worthinessCredit default swap | NeutralThe current level displays a neutral indicator. NYT credit default swap spreads are within the middle of their range for the last three years.Please send all inquiries related to the report to firstname.lastname@example.org.Charts and report PDFs will only be available for 30 days after publishing.This document has been produced for information purposes only and is not to be relied upon or as construed as investment advice. To the fullest extent permitted by law, IHS Markit disclaims any responsibility or liability, whether in contract, tort (including, without limitation, negligence), equity or otherwise, for any loss or damage arising from any reliance on or the use of this material in any way. Please view the full legal disclaimer and methodology information on pages 2-3 of the full report.
(Bloomberg) -- Makan Delrahim, the chief of the Justice Department’s antitrust division, gave a speech on Tuesday arguing that his department had everything it needed to pursue legal action against technology companies who wield their market power in nefarious ways. “Those who say we need new or amended antitrust laws to address monopoly concerns should look to history and take heart,” he said. Several hours later, Representative David Cicilline, a Democrat from Rhode Island, seemed to brush Delrahim back. “Congress — not the courts, agencies, or private companies — enacted the antitrust laws,” said Cicilline, at a hearing of the House Judiciary subcommittee focused on competitive issues in the digital economy. "And Congress must be responsible for determining whether they are equipped for the competition problems of our modern economy.” The jostling for position shows how much the politics of antitrust, which have basically been a non-issue throughout the digital age, have shifted. Anger at Silicon Valley may now be the only significant area of bipartisan agreement in Washington. Federal regulators recently divided responsibility for antitrust investigations into technology companies, and state attorneys general have been laying the groundwork for their own investigations. Democratic presidential hopefuls, most prominently Senator Elizabeth Warren, have been taking an increasingly hard line on Silicon Valley. President Donald Trump’s continued attacks on the industry, meanwhile, create political space for Republican lawmakers to do the same. Cicilline, chair of the House Judiciary’s subcommittee on antitrust, is emerging as a key player in the fight against big tech. Now 57, Cicilline was elected to Congress in 2011 after serving as the mayor of Providence, his hometown. He became the ranking member of the antitrust subcommittee in 2017, and began pushing for stronger action on the issue. He gained little traction at first; he couldn't convince Congress to hold hearings on Amazon's $14 billion of Whole Foods later that year. But he kept at it. In March, he wrote an essay in the New York Times calling on the Federal Trade Commission to investigate Facebook for antitrust violations. He wrote that Facebook has already “repeatedly shown contempt for its legal commitments,” and that the commission should consider forcing the company to replace executives or board members, and to make changes to its business model. In an interview this week with CNN, Cicilline disputed the suggestion that he had called to break up the company. Cicilline doesn’t seem inclined to wait and see what happens. On Tuesday, he told a group of reporters that he hadn’t heard Delrahim’s speech, but added he hadn’t been impressed so far with what he described as the “enthusiasm of the antitrust agencies.” Cicilline says he hasn’t formed a clear idea of what changes should be made to the law, but he doesn’t share Delrahim’s sanguine view of the rules as they currently stand. “It’s hard for me to believe there won’t be some ways to improve an antitrust statute that was written more than 100 years ago,” he said. One way that a congressional antitrust inquiry will be distinct will be in its volume. Cicilline says he plans to pull together a record of the damage wrought by anti-competitive behavior, by gathering documentary evidence and holding numerous public hearings through next year. While he hasn’t yet requested that any company executives appear, he says he’s leaving the option open. Facebook Inc. and Google both worry that Cicilline’s hearings will be embarrassing in a way regulatory proceedings will not be, according to three people familiar with the thinking at those companies. This could build momentum for new policies forcing real changes to their business models. Neither Facebook nor Alphabet Inc.’s Google responded to a request for comment. Groups that want aggressive action against tech companies basically agree. “This investigation provides a channel for uncovering so much material that makes clear those kinds of solutions are necessary,” said Sarah Miller of the Open Markets Institute, a group pushing for a wholesale reconsideration of antitrust enforcement. As he ramped up his criticism of the tech industry, Cicilline hired Lina Khan, a recent graduate of Yale Law School who has become an unlikely darling in antitrust circles. (She also worked at the Open Markets Institute for a time.) In 2017 Khan published an article in the Yale Law Journal called “Amazon’s Antitrust Paradox.” The name was a play on the title of a 1978 book by Robert Bork that became the foundational text for a looser approach to antitrust enforcement that has continued until today. Khan used Amazon to argue that this approach had failed.It was a compelling idea that came at just the right time. Khan became a near-instant celebrity — at least by the standards of antitrust lawyers. At the same time, detractors questioned the rigor or novelty of her theories. The term “hipster antitrust” quickly emerged as a shorthand way to signal disapproval with Khan’s ideas. The hearing this week focused on tech’s relationships with the news industry. The subject also featured in a paper Khan published recently in the Columbia Law Review, where she used Google and Facebook’s sway over news publishers to illustrate what she sees as a key problem of monopoly power in the digital economy: the way that tech companies have created platforms for other businesses, while also competing on those platforms. Publishers rely on Google and Facebook as a key way to distribute their content. But they also compete with the technology companies for advertising dollars. It’s been a pretty one-sided battle, largely because tech companies have such granular information about customers they can use to help target ads. The tech companies have visibility into practically all news consumption online, even on news publications’ own websites, through the code publishers place there to allow readers to share articles and videos on social media. Matt Schruers, vice president of law and policy for the Computer & Communications Industry Association, a trade group whose members include Facebook and Google, said in Tuesday’s hearing that the collapse of local news businesses was an unfortunate but organic result of technological changes, not the result of explicit action by technology companies. News consumption has never been higher, and revenues began declining long before Google and Facebook became their primary concerns. In Khan’s view, publishers relying on Google and Facebook don’t have a chance. She doesn’t make a specific argument about how best to address this imbalance of power in the news industry. But she does draw a distinction between behavioral remedies (where government forbids companies from using power in one market for leverage in another) and structural remedies (where businesses aren’t allowed to operate in markets where the potential to act abusively). She says trying to install behavioral remedies will inevitably push enforcement agencies into conflicts in which they are vastly outgunned. “Targeting the firm’s incentives, rather than attempting to police its behavior, may make more sense,” wrote Khan, who declined an interview request. “It’s not clear that anything short of a full structural separation would be sufficient.”Just before Cicilline began questioning witnesses on Tuesday, Khan walked up to him and spent a minute or two whispering in his ear, while he nodded along. Then she returned to her seat, while Cicilline peppered Schruers with questions. Cicilline wanted an acknowledgement that Google dominated the search market, asked Schruers to assess the potential for abuse when a company that distributes products for other businesses also made products to compete with those partners. Schruers declined to oblige. “I would be concerned about a rule that says, for example, a grocery store can’t put its own grocery store brand products at eye level in the store — ” he said. Cicilline cut him off. “I don’t think anyone is contemplating a rule that does that,” he said. He added that he wasn’t sure what actions made sense, but that Congress wasn’t just going to continue doing nothing. “You encouraged caution when enforcing antitrust against big tech platforms,” he told Schruers. “But in many ways our caution is what we’ve had for the last decade, which has resulted in the emergence of advertising monopolies. I think many of us think it’s time to try something different.” \--With assistance from Kurt Wagner, Naomi Nix and Ben Brody.To contact the author of this story: Joshua Brustein in New York at email@example.comTo contact the editor responsible for this story: Emily Biuso at firstname.lastname@example.org, Andrew PollackFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2019 Bloomberg L.P.
The following are the top stories on the New York Times business pages. - A network of computers in China bombarded Telegram, a secure messaging app used by many of the Hong Kong protesters, with a huge volume of traffic that disrupted service. The app's founder, Pavel Durov, said the attack coincided with the Hong Kong protests, a phenomenon that Telegram had seen before.
One of the best investments we can make is in our own knowledge and skill set. With that in mind, this article will...
New Front in Trade War Over Hong Kong? The Trump Administration appears to be getting involved in the Hong Kong-China extradition crisis. Yesterday the U.S. expressed “grave concern” over legislation that would allow extradition from Hong Kong to China. Hong Kong’s Chief Executive Carrie Lam, whose leadership is stamped by Beijing, says the bill is […]The post Market Morning: US Concerned on Hong Kong, Beyond Meat Beyond Stratosphere, Times Ditches Cartoons appeared first on Market Exclusive.
Scores of technology, media and fashion executives took out a full-page advertisement in the New York Times on Monday to denounce restricting access to abortion and other reproductive healthcare. The advertisement follows a string of company executives in recent weeks who threatened to pull investments in states enacting new laws that limit abortion rights. Nine states, including Alabama, Georgia and Missouri have passed abortion laws this year that all but ban the procedure.
We at Insider Monkey have gone over 738 13F filings that hedge funds and prominent investors are required to file by the SEC The 13F filings show the funds' and investors' portfolio positions as of March 31st. In this article, we look at what those funds think of The New York Times Company (NYSE:NYT) based […]
New York Times (NYT) reported earnings 30 days ago. What's next for the stock? We take a look at earnings estimates for some clues.
New York Times bestselling author, three-time Golden Globe winner, and eight-time Oscar nominee Ben Mezrich will join FreightWaves LIVE Chicago as a keynote speaker this November. Mezrich's ability to dive deep into the data to tell the compelling stories behind real-life economic events makes him a perfect fit for FreightWaves LIVE. An author of 19 books, Mezrich is no stranger to bestseller lists across the globe—The Accidental Billionaire topped the bestselling lists in over a dozen countries for 18 weeks, and Bringing Down the House remained on the New York Times Best Seller list for 63 weeks.
The following are the top stories on the New York Times business pages. Reuters has not verified these stories and does not vouch for their accuracy. - Gmail, YouTube and other services that rely on Alphabet ...
Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison said on Monday aluminium exporters are complying with the terms of a deal with the United States after the New York Times reported President Donald Trump had considered imposing tariffs on Canberra. The New York Times, citing unidentified sources, said Trump had been urged to impose tariffs on Australian steel and aluminium in response to an increase in exports of aluminium to the United States over the past year.
After developing an AI system that can beat Go and chess, Google-ownedDeepMind started tackling a different class of games: multiplayer ones, whichusually require teamwork
The following are the top stories on the New York Times business pages. Reuters has not verified these stories and does not vouch for their accuracy. - Walt Disney Co's chief executive, Bob Iger, said ...
The New York Times Company (NYT) announced today that it will participate in the 21st Annual Credit Suisse Communications Conference in New York City on Tuesday, June 4. The company’s presentation is scheduled for 1:45 p.m. E.T. A link to the live webcast of the presentation will be available via the company’s website at http://investors.nytco.com/investors/events-and-presentations, and an archive of the webcast will be available for 90 days.
The following are the top stories on the New York Times business pages. Reuters has not verified these stories and does not vouch for their accuracy. - Lawyers for Oklahoma, a state brought to its knees ...