Best printers for Home

Best Mixer Grinder

Best wired Earphones

Best 43 Inch TV in India

Best Wi Fi Routers

Best Home Theatre in India

Smart Watch under 5000

Best Laptops for Education

Best Laptop for Students

After the <keyword id="479174" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Karnataka-cabinet" source="Orion">Karnataka cabinet</keyword> approved a bill that mandates 100% <keyword id="19914887" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="reservation" source="keywords">reservation</keyword> for Kannadigas in Category C and D <keyword id="19914922" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="jobs" source="keywords">jobs</keyword> in all industries in the state, businessman and philanthropist TV <keyword id="20076594" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Mohandas-Pai" source="keywords">Mohandas Pai</keyword> slammed the state government saying that <keyword id="20374219" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="skilling" source="keywords">skilling</keyword> Kannadigas is the only way to promote them for jobs rather than giving them reservation. "If you want to promote Kannadigas for jobs, spend more money on higher education. Give training to them. Spend more money on skill development. Spend more money on internships, spend more money on apprenticeship programs. So they all become skilled. Not like this. What are you trying to achieve by this?," Pai said, speaking on Wednesday. Pai, the Chairman of <keyword id="22445179" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Manipal-Global-Education-Services" source="keywords" meta.keywordsubtype="org" meta.entityname="Manipal Global Education Services" meta.hostid="261" meta.entityid="Manipal Global Education Services">Manipal Global Education Services</keyword> said that the Bill is "fascist" and also unconstitutional. "This bill should be junked. It is discriminatory, regressive and against the constitution @Jairam_Ramesh is govt to certify who we are? This is a fascist bill as in Animal Farm, unbelievable that @INCIndia can come up with a bill like this- a govt officer will sit on recruitment committees of the private sector? People have to take a language test?" he had earlier said in a post on 'X'. <keyword id="19896017" type="General" weightage="100" keywordseo="Karnataka" source="keywords">Karnataka</keyword> minister Priyank Kharge however, assuaged the fears of the industrialists saying that wide consultation will be held before the rules of the bill are formulated. "The bill has been brought in by the labour department. They are yet to consult with the industry, the Minister of Industry and the Department of Information Technology. I am sure that before coming up with the rules of the bill, they will have due consultations with the respective ministries and more importantly, a wider consultation with the industry. So there is no need to panic. We are going to safeguard the jobs for the state as well as encourage investments in the industries with their consultation," Kharge said. <keyword id="20582906" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="karnataka-industries" source="keywords">Karnataka Industries</keyword> Minister MB Patil said any apprehensions will be resolved in meetings with the Chief Minister "I have seen that many people have apprehension regarding this. We will resolve this confusion. We will sit with the CM and resolve this so that it does not have any adverse effect," Patil told ANI. On Tuesday, the Karnataka cabinet approved a Bill that seeks to reserve 50% of management jobs and 75% of non-management jobs for locals in the private sector. The bill also seeks 100% reservation for locals in "C&amp;D" grade government jobs. On Wednesday, several industry leaders in the state objected to the move saying that it is "discriminatory" and raised apprehensions that the tech industry may suffer.

Spend money on skilling, says Mohandas Pai on Karnataka bill seeking job reservations for Kannadigas

Singapore-based investment firm <keyword id="6367519" type="General" weightage="80" keywordseo="temasek" source="Orion">Temasek</keyword> will acquire an additional 41 per cent stake in <keyword id="533812" type="General" weightage="100" keywordseo="manipal-health-enterprises" source="Orion">Manipal Health Enterprises</keyword>, to take majority control of the Bengaluru-based firm, as per a joint statement issued by the entities on Monday. The companies did not share financial details of the deal. Sources, however, said Temasek stake buyout would be for over Rs 16,300 crore valuing Manipal Health Enterprises (MHE) at around Rs 40,000 crore, making it the largest deal in the Indian healthcare sector. Following the closing of the transaction, <keyword id="6379586" type="General" weightage="50" keywordseo="manipal-group" source="Orion">Manipal Group</keyword> will hold about 30 per cent in Manipal Health Enterprises. Sheares Healthcare Group, a wholly-owned subsidiary and independently-managed portfolio company of Temasek, will retain its existing 18 per cent stake, it said. Besides, global alternative asset management firm <keyword id="6367884" type="General" weightage="80" keywordseo="tpg" source="Orion">TPG</keyword>, which first invested in MHE through TPG Asia VI in 2015, will fully exit. But, TPG will hold an interest of 11 per cent in the healthcare chain, through its new Asia fund - TPG Asia VIII, it added. National Investment &amp; Infrastructure Fund (NIIF) will exit its holding from MHE, the statement said. "We are very glad for Temasek's acquisition of a significant stake in Manipal Health Enterprises and its support to the management team in building out the platform to its full potential," Manipal Group Chairman <keyword id="354291" type="General" weightage="50" keywordseo="ranjan-pai" source="Orion">Ranjan Pai</keyword> said in a statement. Investing in healthcare requires a long-term outlook as well as a sensitivity to social responsibility, he noted. "I am glad that we have partners like Temasek and TPG who resonate with these values and will continue to be a part of the journey ahead. "I am also grateful to NIIF who partnered with us at a critical juncture, at the peak of the Covid-19 pandemic and supported us as we continued to provide high-quality healthcare," Pai added. Headquartered in Bengaluru, Manipal Hospitals currently serves over fifty lakh patients a year through its network of 29 hospitals. SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/news/most-common-passwords-can-be-easily-cracked-by-ai-in-under-a-minute/articleshow/99379900.cms">AI chatbots are cracking the code: How PassGAN can break into 51% of common passwords in under a minute</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/news/google-makes-it-easier-for-users-to-delete-their-account-and-data-from-applications/articleshow/99289621.cms">Google makes it easier for users to delete their account and data from applications</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/news/ipl-2023-to-drive-fantasy-sports-companies-to-2900-3100-crore-revenue/articleshow/99285556.cms">IPL 2023 to drive fantasy sports companies to ₹2,900-3,100 crore revenue, fueled by Tier-2 cities and exciting prizes</a>

Temasek to buy additional 41% stake in Manipal Health Enterprises for ₹16,300 crore

Online job platform <keyword id="188512" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="monster-com" source="Orion">Monster.com</keyword> on Wednesday said that it has raised Rs 137.5 crore in a funding round led by <keyword id="6491998" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="mohandas-pai" source="Orion">Mohandas Pai</keyword> of Meridian Investments and Akash Bhanshali of Volrado Venture Partners, with participation from Quess, its parent company. The online talent platform said that the funds will be utilised towards enhanced investments on product development and marketing in India, SEA and Middle-East markets. Post the funding, Monster.com is now valued at $100 million. "The last year has been incredible for the company, achieving very healthy growth across all metrics. We have an exciting product and business road map in line with our view on how hiring will evolve in the next few years," said Sekhar Garisa, CEO, Monster.com, APAC &amp; ME. In 2018, Quess Corp acquired Monster.com's businesses in India, Singapore, Malaysia, Philippines, Hong Kong, Vietnam, Thailand, Indonesia, the UAE and Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. According to Pai, the next two years will see a huge increase in available jobs, thanks to high economic growth, and job seekers will find a high-quality platform to plan their careers. "As employers also prepare for a new decade and an employee-first mindset, the platform will help them create a differentiated experience and build deeper relationships with their teams from day one," Pai said. Monster.com has over 60 million active users in India. "Quess acquired Monster for an investment of Rs 145 crore and embarked on a 'Digital First' journey with the objective of creating long-term value for our shareholders and clients," said Ajit Isaac, Executive Chairman, Quess. SEE ALSO <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/startups/news/check-out-snapdeal-top-executives-like-kunal-bahl-rohit-bansal-salary-for-year-2021/slidelist/88426612.cms" data-type="tilCustomLink">Snapdeal cofounders Kunal Bahl and Rohit Bansal will take home up to ₹5 crore in salaries from this year</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/enterprise/news/apple-and-its-patents-in-2021-heres-what-the-tech-giant-could-bring-to-you-in-the-future/articleshow/88426551.cms" data-type="tilCustomLink">Apple and its patents in 2021: Here’s what the tech giant could bring to you in the future</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/science/space/news/scientists-find-more-evidence-of-possible-life-on-venus/articleshow/88425043.cms" data-type="tilCustomLink">Scientists find more evidence of possible life on Venus</a>

Job hunt platform Monster.com raises ₹137.5 crore from Mohandas Pai, others

<ul class="summary-list"><li>The CALM Act banned excessively loud television <keyword id="25225" type="PERSON" weightage="60" keywordseo="commercials">commercials</keyword>, but it doesn't apply to streaming TV.</li><li>Consumers lodge thousands of complaints annually about loud commercials, and they're on the rise.</li><li>The <keyword id="160638" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="60" keywordseo="FCC">FCC</keyword> almost enforced the act twice in the past decade. Audio engineer experts are trying to fix it.</li></ul>On July 1, 1941, New York's NBC station <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/watch-the-first-commercial-in-tv-history-bulova-watch-2016-7#:~:text=On%20July%201%2C%201941%2C%20the,go%20into%20effect%20July%201.">made history</a> by airing the world's first television commercial.With about 4,000 televisions in the region at the time, audience-wise it was not all that different from paying a guy to yell about a product in Times Square. The ad for Bulova watches cost $9 and ran for 10 seconds. But the world changed forever.A decade year later, in 1954, a similar moment occurred in the annals of television history. The Federal Communications Commission got its first consumer complaints about loud commercials on television.Needless to say, it's pretty much all gone downhill since.The pandemic has forced people to spend more time in front of the television than they have in ages. Simple questions like "Is it just me or are the ads way louder than 'Jeopardy!' every night?" provoke evocative answers. Casually asking people if they've experienced loud commercials yields one of two general responses: "It's so annoying!" and "It's way worse on my streaming TV service."If you're hearing things, you're not alone: the four-month period from November 2020 to February 2021 saw FCC complaints of loud commercials up 140% compared to the same period a year ago, more than double the volume of complaints.There is a law on the books - the <a href="https://www.fcc.gov/media/policy/loud-commercials">CALM Act</a>, passed in 2011 - that is supposed to rein in loud commercials. But the FCC hasn't done any enforcement on it in the better part of a decade.Most significantly of all, for the people angry about explosively loud ads on streaming, there's absolutely nothing the FCC can do about that even if they were enforcing it. What's more, it's not entirely clear there's any way to do anything about that even through Congress.<h2>The CALM Act is supposed to regulate loud commercials but the FCC hasn't enforced it</h2><div type="image" title="Anna Eshoo Sheldon Whitehouse loud tv commercials" height="1667" width="2500" msid="81725985" hostid="261"></div>The story goes that Rep. Anna Eshoo wrote the CALM Act <a href="https://www.latimes.com/opinion/la-xpm-2012-dec-13-la-ol-calm-act-nixes-loud-tv-commercials-20121213-story.html">after a loud television commercial interrupted dinner</a>, which may be the single best argument for being an elected member of Congress I have ever heard.It cascaded through the legislature, passing the Senate unanimously and the House in a voice vote before then-President Barack Obama signed it. Eshoo <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704008704575638850947058366">remarked at the time</a> it was the most popular piece of legislation she had ever introduced in Congress.The CALM act is actually fairly simple; it doesn't say "commercials must be this loud" and it doesn't get into the nitty gritty of how to measure that or enforce it or what consequences shall befall an operator who violates it. It's fairly clever: <a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/111th-congress/house-bill/1084/text">all it actually says</a> is that broadcasters and cable operators have to abide by the A/85 standard approved by the Advanced Television Systems Committee, and that the FCC has to enforce that.A/85 is essentially an intricate, <a href="https://www.atsc.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Techniques-for-establishing-and-maintaining-audio-loudness-1.pdf">72-page technical document</a> that gets extremely specific about how things should sound. It's not written for most of us to understand. But it does set acceptable bounds for the soundscape of television.The experts wrote A/85, and Congress passed a law that said A/85 is mandatory, so Congress doesn't have to learn about audio and the problem gets solved.It's a smart approach, because Congress is home to lawyers, doctors, activists, and people with all manner of expertise, but conspicuously no audio engineers, and the Advanced Television Systems Committee is understandably full of them. Congress took a standard that industry professionals had approved, and simply started requiring it.A/85 required the average loudness of a commercial should be about as loud as the dialnorm, or the average dialogue level of a show. Because commercials can appear on your screen through a number of different ways from a number of different sources - such as being inserted by the local station or television provider, or embedded with the content itself - a standard for the whole system, top to bottom, at least formalizes the acceptable volume.After an initial surge in complaints about loud commercials to the FCC following the Act's passage and implementation, the bill largely had the desired impact, with complaints leveling off after a few years."FCC data I've seen shows consistent annual decreases in complaints since 2014," Eshoo told Insider. "If that trend has changed, investigations are warranted."The past several months show complaints on the rise, according to an Insider analysis of <a href="https://opendata.fcc.gov/Consumer/CGB-Consumer-Complaints-Data/3xyp-aqkj">the FCC database of complaints</a>. Should the current rate hold, 2021 is poised to be the worst year since the initial rollout.All that said, on a practical level, the CALM Act is not enforced.There is no pipe exiting a cable company that says "out" and there is no meter on that imaginary pipe that says "too loud." In reality, large stations and providers were <a href="https://www.broadcastlawblog.com/2011/12/articles/a-summary-of-the-fcc-rules-implementing-the-calm-act-to-regulate-loud-tv-commercials/">supposed to spot-check once a year</a> during the first two years of the rollout, doing 24 hours of monitoring over a seven-day period. If they found a problem, they were supposed to tell the FCC. You will be positively shocked to discover that only two small stations asked for a waiver while they fixed issues they found.And since then? The FCC doesn't audit stations. The agency will only investigate in the event that a pattern or trend emerges based on consumer-submitted complaints. From 2012 to 2019, consumers submitted 47,909 complaints to the FCC about loud commercials."In 2013, the Enforcement Bureau sent letters of inquiry to two separate companies addressing potential violations of the CALM Act and associated regulations," an FCC spokesperson told Insider in an email, drawing from a 2020 letter from <a href="https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-366308A1.pdf">FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai</a> responding to <a href="https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-366308A2.pdf">questions</a> from Eshoo. "There were no violations found in either case and there are no public documents associated with these letters of inquiry. Since the 2013 letters of inquiry, the Enforcement Bureau analyses have not uncovered any pattern or trend of complaints supporting further inquiry."That is to say, the sum total of FCC enforcement on disproportionately loud commercials in the decade since the CALM Act has amounted to two letters - and no enforcement.<div type="image" title="Federal Communications Commission (FCC) commissioner Ajit Pai arrives at a FCC Net Neutrality hearing in Washington February 26, 2015. REUTERS/Yuri Gripas" height="604" width="800" msid="81725986" hostid="261"></div>In 2014, the FCC did update their technical standards to address a clever workaround that some commercials had discovered. Basically, if the average volume of your commercial has to be on par with the average volume of the program, then you could hypothetically craft a 30-second advertisement that is 15 seconds of silence and 15 seconds at twice the volume of the program and technically not violate the standard, as you've technically maintained the average. The 2014 update discouraged this.Despite thousands of complaints per year, the FCC has not discerned the kind of "pattern or trend of complaints" to support further inquiry.The FCC declined to answer Insider's questions regarding what precisely would qualify as a pattern or trend of complaints, whether the recent rise in complaints would qualify as a pattern or trend, or a question regarding the number of people working on CALM Act enforcement at a given time."If CALM Act-related complaints are increasing, the FCC should analyze the complaints to understand what is driving the shift," Eshoo said. "If an analysis of the complaint data shows a pattern of legitimate complaints against specific companies, the FCC must investigate those companies. If the Commission finds violations through its investigations, it should bring enforcement actions."Increased enforcement could stymie the surge in complaints. However, as streaming television rises and cords are cut, more and more Americans are getting their television from services that are not covered by the CALM act, which applies to MVPDs, or multichannel video programming distributors, which is the official legal name for cable providers.So, why not just pass a CALM Act for streaming?<h2>The government can't actually regulate streaming services</h2><div type="image" title="loud tv commercials" height="2000" width="3000" msid="81725989" hostid="261"></div>When Insider asked that question of experts in government, legislature, and the industry, the response was similar to asking "Why not legalize civil unions for leprechauns" or "When will the Federal Aviation Administration crack down on Pogo sticks," in that it reveals a fundamental misunderstanding about what the FCC is."The FCC's subject matter jurisdiction is communication by wire or radio," said Gigi Sohn, a Distinguished Fellow at the Georgetown Law Institute for Technology Law &amp; Policy. "The FCC doesn't have jurisdiction over devices.""Neither the FCC nor the courts have ever found that the agency has jurisdiction over Internet applications, content and services."The streaming landscape is vastly different from television. It may look like television, but it's legally something else entirely, and while the offerings of a virtual over-the-top service may look nearly identical to the offerings of a traditional cable television service, legally it's completely different, and not under the regulation of the FCC.Streamers such as Netflix, Disney+, HBO Max, Youtube TV, FuboTV, Sling TV, and Hulu with Live TV may look aesthetically similar to a cable package, but from the perspective of the FCC, you may as well ask them to regulate your toaster. The FCC simply lacks jurisdiction over streaming services.One side effect of this lack of jurisdiction is that for loud commercials, the FCC can't do a thing. And the agency can't address any of the other anxieties of modern streaming, including local blackouts, delivery issues, billing, usage caps, content exclusivity, bans, or any of the other policies enacted by fiat by the largest media companies on the planet.Toward the end of the Obama administration, niche virtual streaming services sought classification as MVPDs. The companies - Pluto TV and Sky Angel - wanted the <a href="https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/60001039056.pdf">FCC to expand the definition of MVPD</a> to include streamers like them, arguing that they should be under the FCC's direction. In 2014, FCC chairman Tom Wheeler supported the move and the FCC began considering the shift."They determined the benefits that accrue to them justified the FCC oversight," said Sohn, who was working for Wheeler at the time.<div type="image" title="fcc chairman tom wheeler" height="2728" width="3952" msid="81725993" hostid="261"></div>But the move to expand the definition was opposed both by legacy MVPDs, as well as larger streaming companies, <a href="https://www.nexttv.com/news/amazon-warns-fcc-about-ott-redefinition-144188">such as Amazon</a>, which did not want the FCC encroaching on their business, with the main fear being that any regulation would open the door to further regulation.Proponents of the change needed three of the five commissioners of the FCC to approve it."We didn't have the votes," Sohn said. The <a href="https://www.fcc.gov/fcc-invites-public-comment-updating-definition-multichannel-video-programming-distributor">move never went through</a>.Commissioner <keyword id="1702548" type="PERSON" weightage="60" keywordseo="Ajit-Pai">Ajit Pai</keyword>, <a href="https://nscreenmedia.com/fcc-commissioner-says-no-to-ott-mvpd-regulation-change/">who opposed the move</a>, shortly after became the FCC chair, functionally killing the proposal. Last year there was <a href="https://www.tvtechnology.com/news/tv-networks-want-fcc-to-reexamine-ott-regulation">some movement from network affiliates to reconsider it</a>, but for the foreseeable future the virtual streaming services are unregulatable, and part of that means they can run commercials however loud they please.While there is nothing to stop the FCC from adapting a definition of multi-channel video provider that would include the virtual providers, or even streaming services, the result would likely be a massive lawsuit that they would probably lose very badly.In order for the FCC to have any authority over streamers, Sohn said, Congress would have to pass a law."I think this is a huge fight that might happen some day," she said. "It'll be a battle royale. Streaming services don't want to be regulated."However, the difficulties that Congress faces in regulating streaming television doesn't mean erratic commercial volumes on streaming is going to be a problem forever.<h2>The small committee you've never heard of that might actually end loud annoying streaming ads</h2><div type="image" title="watching tv snack" height="2663" width="3995" msid="81725995" hostid="261"></div>When Congress passed the CALM Act, they passed a law that essentially took an existing audio industry standard and instructed the FCC to take the necessary steps to enforce that standard.Right this moment, the Audio Engineering Society is designing a new audio standard for streaming television.<a href="https://www.aes.org/aes/davidbialik">David Bialik</a> is a systems engineer and the co-chair of the Audio Engineering Society's Technical Committee on Broadcast &amp; Online Delivery. If you've never heard of them, you've definitely heard them. This is the group of audio engineers who design the standards for much of how America's media diet sounds.The reason you change the channel and one isn't materially louder than another, or if you've gone to a concert and not seen drastically different sounds between sets - all of that is genuine scientific work agreed upon by pros and at times set as standards.And those standards may be the ticket to a better experience on web-based streaming.The process by which an idea becomes a standard is not entirely like the serpentine process by which a bill becomes law. Think of it as a version of the Schoolhouse Rock song "I'm Just A Bill," but instead of a bill it's an intricate technical document, instead of congressional committees it's a technical committee of audio experts, and in lieu of congressional votes it's approval by the broader audio committee.The equivalent of the presidential signature that makes it "law" is a vote that elevates the technical document to an official Standard, a move that in A/85's case was carried out by the Advanced Television Systems Committee, but other standards go different routes.Right now, the Audio Engineering Society's technical committee is working on a new technical document that would address loudness on streaming services. And if it works, the issues of variable volumes on digital television could be solved without Congress at all."My hope is to see this released within the next 4 to 5 months," Bialik told Insider. The gist is that programming material will come with loudness controls within metadata, indicating precisely how loud programming should be. They're now getting comments from the 90 members of the committee. "It is our hope that our work gets elevated to a standard.""This isn't something we're taking lightly," he added. The bigger players have good reason to play ball, namely because a unified consumer sound experience is good for the field as a whole."You want your content to be the same level as everyone else's, on a level playing field," Bialik said. A user touching the volume knob is bad. "When you invite the audience to touch the volume knob, you invite them to touch other knobs, too."Despite the many issues, Congress has been mulling an update to the 1992 Cable Act, which was the last major overhaul of the cable system. Needless to say, in the intervening years the landscape of television has changed somewhat, and to that end Republican Rep. Steve Scalise and Democratic Rep. Eshoo jointly introduced the Modern Television Act of 2019.There's little consumers can do outside of sending in official FCC complaints, or even just complaining about it on social media. In fact, those techniques are genuinely effective."I periodically hear from constituents about the annoyance of loud ads on streaming services and that worries me. I've also seen complaints on social media," Eshoo said."Right now, I'm examining how large of a problem it is. If there is a real problem that we see beyond anecdotal reports, I will certainly consider legislation to address it."

Americans hate loud commercials. There's a law to ban them but the FCC isn't enforcing it - and streaming TV has a loophole.

<ul class="summary-list"><li><keyword id="160638" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="60" keywordseo="FCC">FCC</keyword> Chairman <keyword id="1702548" type="PERSON" weightage="60" keywordseo="Ajit-Pai">Ajit Pai</keyword> will step down on January 20, 2021.</li><li>Pai was controversial for his role in repealing <keyword id="6391709" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="Net-neutrality">net neutrality</keyword> rules.</li><li>Online reactions showed that people expect a relitigation of net neutrality under a Biden-appointed FCC chairman. </li></ul>Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Ajit Pai announced that he plans to step down on January 20, 2021, the day <a href="https://www.theverge.com/2020/11/30/21726572/ajit-pai-fcc-step-down-date-trump-telecom-net-neutrality">Joe Biden will be inaugurated.</a>Pai was appointed to the role by President Trump in 2017, after previously <a href="https://variety.com/2020/digital/news/fcc-ajit-pai-leave-january-2021-biden-president-1234842166/">serving as commissioner</a> under the Obama administration. His five-year term was set to end in July 2021. Pai was a controversial figure, and under his leadership the FCC ended <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/fcc-net-neutrality-repeal-will-lead-to-higher-prices-fewer-choices-2017-12">net neutrality</a> rules that had governed the internet and been encoded in 2015. In short, net neutrality is the idea that ISPs should treat all data the same, without giving preference to certain websites or slowing down others.Other notable industry developments under Pai included the merger of <a href="https://www.theverge.com/2020/11/30/21726572/ajit-pai-fcc-step-down-date-trump-telecom-net-neutrality">T-Mobile and Sprint</a>, and the FCC adding new anti-robocall measures.So far, not many big names in <keyword id="6358815" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="tech">tech</keyword> and privacy have reacted to the announcement. Most reactions so far indicate that people expect a renewed fight around net neutrality.Digital Rights advocacy group Fight for the Future released a <a href="https://www.fightforthefuture.org/news/2020-11-30-goodbye-ajit-pai-the-senate-should-reject-nathan/">statement</a> on "the most unpopular FCC Chairman in history" stepping down. The statement condemned Pai and emphasized the need for a "functional FCC that will quickly repair the damage done by Ajit Pai and get to work protecting the public from ISP abuses."As of 2018, a majority of registered voters were in favor of net neutrality, based on <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/vast-majority-voters-against-net-neutrality-repeal-charts-2018-5">data from Statista.</a>The other main reaction found on Twitter were proponents of repealing net neutrality, mocking fears that repealing the rule would have disastrous effects.Biden has not announced any plans to replace Pai, but <a href="https://www.protocol.com/joe-biden-possible-fcc-picks">Protocol</a> put together a list of possible nominees back in September.

Ajit Pai is leaving the FCC in January, and digital rights groups are preparing to restart the fight for net neutrality

<ul class="summary-list"><li>The Federal Communications Commission will "clarify the meaning" of <keyword id="2742716" type="PERSON" weightage="60" keywordseo="section-230">Section 230</keyword> of the US Communications Act, its chairman <keyword id="1702548" type="PERSON" weightage="60" keywordseo="Ajit-Pai">Ajit Pai</keyword> said Thursday.</li><li>Section 230 grants internet companies power to moderate the content that appears on their platforms, and protects them from liability for illegal content posted by users.</li><li>President Trump has railed against Section 230, arguing that it allows tech companies like Facebook to censor lawful speech and target conservatives.</li><li>"<keyword id="6354632" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="social-media">Social media</keyword> companies have a First Amendment right to free speech," Pai said. "But they do not have a First Amendment right to a special immunity denied to other media outlets, such as newspapers."</li><li>Internet rights charity Access Now also condemned Pai's decision, calling him a "puppet" for the Trump administration.</li></ul>The Federal Communications Commission (<keyword id="160638" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="60" keywordseo="FCC">FCC</keyword>) is re-examining the part of US law that lets tech companies decide what people are allowed to say on their platforms, acting on demands from President <keyword id="6354484" type="PERSON" weightage="60" keywordseo="Donald-Trump">Donald Trump</keyword> and both Republican and Democrat lawmakers.FCC Chairman Ajit Pai announced Thursday the Commission would "clarify the meaning" of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996. Section 230 offers two main legal shields to tech companies: It gives them power to moderate the content that appears on their platforms, and protects them from liability for illegal content posted by users."Members of all three branches of the federal government have expressed concerns about the prevailing interpretation of the immunity set forth in Section 230 of the Communications Act. There is bipartisan support in Congress to reform the law," Pai said in a <a href="https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-367567A1.pdf">statement</a>.Both Democrat and Republican lawmakers have called for reforms to Section 230, though for very different reasons.Republicans, including Trump, have argued Section 230 allows tech companies like Facebook to censor lawful speech and target conservatives.Democrats, <a href="https://www.theverge.com/2020/1/17/21070403/joe-biden-president-election-section-230-communications-decency-act-revoke">including presidential candidate Joe Biden</a>, take issue with the protection from legal liability for harmful content that flourishes on social media platforms.<h3>Pai: 'Many advance an overly broad interpretation' of Section 230</h3>Pai said that his decision to clarify Section 230 was in part prompted by Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, who <a href="https://www.axios.com/clarence-thomas-wants-to-reel-in-section-230-fad81180-1f50-48a6-b638-f9386221f4f2.html">on Tuesday wrote</a> that the prevailing interpretation of the law didn't match with what's laid out in the text.Pai said that "as elected officials consider whether to change the law, the question remains: What does Section 230 currently mean?""Many advance an overly broad interpretation that in some cases shields social media companies from consumer protection laws in a way that has no basis in the text of Section 230," he said."The Commission's General Counsel has informed me that the FCC has the legal authority to interpret Section 230. Consistent with this advice, I intend to move forward with a rulemaking to clarify its meaning."Social media companies have a First Amendment right to free speech. But they do not have a First Amendment right to a special immunity denied to other media outlets, such as newspapers and broadcasters," he added.Trump has been trying to get Section 230 revoked.The president signed an <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-signs-executive-order-threatening-twitter-facebook-conservative-bias-2020-5">executive order in May targeting Section 230</a>, two days after Twitter placed fact-checking labels on two of his tweets.He again railed against the law <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/new-york-post-hunter-biden-trump-facebook-twitter-section-230-2020-10">on Wednesday</a>, calling for Section 230 to be revoked after Twitter and Facebook limited the spread of a dubious New York Post story about Joe Biden's son, Hunter Biden.Speaking at a campaign event in Greenville, North Carolina on Thursday, Trump claimed big tech companies conspire with mainstream media outlets against him. "If Big Tech persists in coordination with the mainstream media, we must immediately strip them of their Section 230 protections," Trump said.Following the executive order, the <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/doj-asks-congress-to-weaken-section-230-2020-9">Department of Justice in September submitted proposed legislation</a> to Congress to alter Section 230. Trump has also been trying to stack the FCC in his favor, in September <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-rigs-fcc-to-target-facebook-twitter-2020-9">nominating a loyal advisor</a> to replace Republican FCC Commissioner Mike O'Rielly, who has expressed doubt over the president's executive order.<h2>Pai's announcement splits the FCC</h2>"We're in the midst of an election. The President's Executive Order on #Section230 was politically motivated and legally unsound. The FCC shouldn't do the President's bidding here," <a href="https://twitter.com/GeoffreyStarks/status/1316815066042372096">tweeted</a> Commissioner Geoffrey Starks on Thursday. He was joined by Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel. "The FCC has no business being the President's speech police," she <a href="https://twitter.com/JRosenworcel/status/1316817248493940747">tweeted</a>. Both Starks and Rosenworcel are Democrat members of the FCC.Republican FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr disagreed. "The FCC's General Counsel is right. The FCC has authority to interpret Section 230, and now is the time to move forward with clarifying its meaning," Carr <a href="https://twitter.com/BrendanCarrFCC/status/1316853677542592513">tweeted</a>.O'Rielly did not publicly comment on the decision.Digital rights nonprofit Access Now also <a href="https://www.accessnow.org/democracy-in-demise-trump-puppet/">condemned Pai's decision</a>, calling him a "puppet" for the Trump administration."It is unbelievable that the FCC, an independent agency that recently completely deregulated broadband internet providers, is taking its cues from the president and will proceed with a rulemaking that could significantly degrade the First Amendment protections for people and the platforms they use," said Eric Null, Access Now's US policy manager."The Trump Administration's allies will stop at nothing to protect the president's flagrant lies that seek to undermine political processes," added Jennifer Brody, legislative manager at Access Now."This is yet another attempt to prevent social media platforms from removing harmful hate speech and disinformation off their sites in this politically charged time," she said. "It is a disgrace and must be stopped."

The FCC is examining whether to roll back Section 230 laws that protect social media firms, drawing fire for being Trump's 'puppet'

Expectations from Modi's package - Here's what Raghuram Rajan, Amitabh Kant, and others expect

<keyword id="6448574" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="n-r-narayana-murthy">N R Narayana Murthy</keyword>, the co-founder of software giant <keyword id="6354512" type="COMPANY" weightage="20" keywordseo="Infosys">Infosys</keyword> who chairs a Sebi panel on alternate investment policy advisory, on Tuesday pitched for pension funds and banks to invest money in Indian startups. Speaking at the annual Tiecon event, Murthy said a bulk of the money which gets invested as risk capital in the upcoming companies is from abroad and there is a need for domestic money to play an important role in this. At the same event, Murthy's former colleague at Infosys T V <keyword id="6491998" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="mohandas-pai">Mohandas Pai</keyword>, who is now associated with Ispirit, an advocacy group for startups, said only a tenth of the USD 60 billion invested into Indian startups since 2014 has come from domestic investors. Pai warned that "we risk the prospect of turning into a digital colony" by 2025, seeking to draw parallels with imperialism.
 He said there will be 1 lakh startups in India with a collective valuation of over USD 500 billion by 2025. There will be at least 100 unicorns among them and over 65 of them will be majorly owned by foreign investors.
 "This is one of the most important issues that we have been discussing (at the Sebi panel). That is, what are the policy changes that are required to make sure that there is more of Indian and domestic money coming into the startup sector because today it is by and large from abroad," Murthy said.
 "To do that, pension funds must be allowed, corporations must be allowed, banks must be allowed," he added.
 Pai sounded more disappointed with Indian billionaires who are willing to invest in real estate and even bank deposits, but have a tendency to overlook the startup sector.
 In an apparent reference to the spate of frauds, Pai said the billionaires also tend to pass the risk on money invested to banks.
 He said the biggest letdown has been from financiers in Mumbai, and asked startup entrepreneurs to educate such professionals on the need of the hour. 
 Pai said why Indian pension funds or insurance companies cannot invest, questioning how companies in the same sector from abroad are coming in and taking interests here.
 Meanwhile, Murthy also clarified on a recent controversy over cutting short his speech at an event where he shared stage with American e-commerce giant Amazon's chief executive <keyword id="191583" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Jeff-Bezos">Jeff Bezos</keyword>. He said Bezos had come on time to the venue, but the "indisciplined" crowd at the venue in New Delhi mobbed the entry gates which resulted in the delayed start for the event.
 Bezos was very understanding and smiled at the act of cutting short the speech, Murthy said, adding that this is so because the visiting honcho is himself a disciplinarian. See also: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/news/with-kapil-wadhawans-arrest-the-family-is-now-accused-of-scams-worth-over-a-billion-dollars/articleshow/73713230.cms?src=hp_ts">With Kapil Wadhawan’s arrest, the family is now accused of scams worth over a billion dollars</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/budget/news/union-budget-2020-what-can-finance-minister-nirmala-sitharaman-do/articleshow/73691622.cms?src=hp_wh">Watch: India’s ‘make or break’ budget 2020⁠— once-in-a-career crisis offers Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman a fertile ground for creativity</a>

India's tech icon Narayana Murthy says India may become a 'digital colony' if startups have to rely on foreign funds

<ul><li><keyword id="2623347" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Biocon-chief-Kiran-Mazumdar-Shaw">Biocon chief Kiran Mazumdar Shaw</keyword> and former Infosys Director <keyword id="6491998" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="mohandas-pai">Mohandas Pai</keyword> told a newspaper that they were told hold back their criticism of the Modi government by an official.</li><li><keyword id="33278" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Rahul-Bajaj">Rahul Bajaj</keyword>, chairman of Indian conglomerate Bajaj Group, said that the auto industry’s going through a rough patch because of lack of demand and no private investment. </li><li>Over the months, more and more stock market investors have taken to Twitter to talk about the government’s unfriendly market policies. </li><li>Adi Godrej, chairman of the Godrej group, had said that the Budget presented by Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman is not “growth-oriented”.</li></ul>Indian companies have been betting big on PM <keyword id="6354477" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Narendra-Modi">Narendra Modi</keyword>. And why not? In 2017-18, a lion’s share of <a href="https://www.business-standard.com/article/economy-policy/data-shows-bjp-bagged-92-of-corporate-donations-to-political-parties-119011701405_1.html">corporate</a> political donations went to his party, BJP. Now, they are livid. The latest to join the bandwagon of angry corporates is Kiran Mazumdar shaw who made a shocking revelation on Sunday. A government official reportedly told her not to speak of harassment by tax officials in relation to <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/rip-vg-siddharthas-death-and-why-former-prime-minister-hd-deve-gowda-cried/articleshow/70464431.cms" data-type="tilCustomLink" target="_blank">the unfortunate death of VG Siddhartha</a>, the founder of <keyword id="46195" type="COMPANY" weightage="20" keywordseo="Cafe-Coffee-Day">Cafe Coffee Day</keyword> outlets. "“He just said that ‘please don’t make such statements. Even Mohandas Pai should not. I am telling you as a friend’,” the Biocon chief told The Telegraph. Even Mohandas Pai, the former Infosys director who is currently a private investor who backs startups, chimed in. "Lots of people get such threats," he told the newspaper. Both of them have been avid supporters of Narendra Modi in the past and bitter critics of the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance government that ruled from 2004 to 2014. “I used to speak out always. It doesn’t matter if UPA is in power or the NDA,” Shaw said urging the corporate world to speak up. Earlier, Rahul Bajaj, the chairman of Indian conglomerate Bajaj Group. During his company’s Annual General Meeting, he spoke of the government’s role in the weak sales of the auto industry. Fall from Heavens “There is no demand and no private investment, so where will growth come from? It doesn’t fall from the heavens. The auto industry is going through a very difficult period. Cars, commercial vehicles and two-wheelers are going through a rough patch,” Bajaj added. The Budget has not cheered them either. The government imposed a tax on super rich, and <a href="https://www.business-standard.com/article/markets/sebi-s-separate-fpi-registration-plan-draws-flak-from-investors-119061901134_1.html">Business Standard</a> had reported that market regulator SEBI mandated separate registrations for Foreign Portfolio Investors. The resentment against these rules is rising. The slow pace of economic growth, and their credibility isn’t helping either. Until now, corporate giants stayed out of the debate over credibility of government's growth data between <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/131-cas-respond-to-letter-from-economists-disputing-govt-gdp-data/articleshow/68463411.cms">108 economists</a> and 131 chartered accountants. But, now they are not holding back. “The government may or may not be saying this but there are clear cut markings from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank, which shows a decrease in growth in the last three-to-four years. Like any government they would like to show a happy face, but reality is reality” Rahul Bajai <a href="https://www.moneycontrol.com/news/technology/auto/angry-rahul-bajaj-criticises-centre-for-falling-demand-private-investment-4259711.html">said.</a> Meanwhile, his son Rajiv Bajaj had said government’s policies on<a href="https://www.moneycontrol.com/news/technology/auto/governments-policy-on-electric-vehicles-has-left-everybody-confused-rajiv-bajaj-4252151.html"> electric vehicles</a> had left everyone confused. Complaints in chorus The Bajajs, Kiran Mazumdar Shaw, and Mohandas Pai are not alone. Adi Godrej, chairman of the Godrej group, too <a href="https://www.firstpost.com/business/industry-leaders-reaction-on-budget-2019-adi-godrej-says-budget-is-not-growth-oriented-stock-market-comes-down-considerably-6940161.html">said</a> that the Budget presented by Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman is not “growth-oriented”. <a href="https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/adi-godrej-rising-intolerance-hate-crimes-can-seriously-damage-growth-2068996">Godrej also touched upon a sensitive subject </a>saying that rising intolerance in the country is also affecting growth. Investor and author Basant Maheshwari recently took to Twitter to say, “Lowering GST and other charges on Electric Vehicles won’t create demand. There is just no infrastructure. People won’t change preferences like that plus EVs aren’t cheap. However, it will surely lead to a fresh bout of short selling in the frontline auto names? That’s all.” This is an unexpected move for top corporates who had stayed away from government bashing even during demonetisation in 2016. Clearly, the tables have now turned. Porinju Veliyath, founder and CEO of Equity Intelligence, after the Budget said, “India dreams a $5 trillion, graft-free, double-digit, free-market-driven, rule-based and liberal economy by 2025! This is very much doable, but I am afraid parts of the Budget - the direction it points, can take us back to 4% GDP growth rate!” Center of the Left Veliyath had even written a letter to his investors, explaining the poor performance of his portfolio. "Some of the budget provisions did not acknowledge the cardinal principles of a free-market economy," Veliyath said in his letter on Thursday (July 18) adding that the positives of the continuity in government <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/india-market-news-porinju-veliyath-blames-the-budget-for-bear-market-in-smaller-stocks/articleshow/70277012.cms">has been lost with the market unfriendly provisions in the Budget. </a> When big money backed Modi with hopes of market reform, they made a bad bet on a party whose ideology is rooted in ‘Swadeshi’, which can be loosely translated to home-grown conservatism. As the commentator and author <a href="http://www.newindianexpress.com/opinions/columns/shankkar-aiyar/2019/jul/21/the-bjps-socialistic-conservatism-2006971.html">Shakar Aiyar argued recently</a>, “In popular perception, the BJP was seen as the home of right of centre economics. And the centre continues shifting to the left.” SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/rip-vg-siddharthas-death-and-why-former-prime-minister-hd-deve-gowda-cried/articleshow/70464431.cms" data-type="tilCustomLink" target="_blank">A former Prime Minister cried on national TV for VG Siddhartha-- the untold tales of politics and privilege may die with India’s coffee baron</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/cafe-coffee-day-founder-vg-siddhartha-letter-to-board-of-directors/articleshow/70443951.cms" data-type="tilCustomLink" target="_blank">Full text of the letter written by Cafe Coffee Day founder VG Siddhartha before he went missing</a>

Narendra Modi has a new problem – big corporates and moneybags are angry

<keyword id="6354512" type="CITY" weightage="100" keywordseo="Infosys">Infosys</keyword>' former CFO, T V <keyword id="6491998" type="PERSON" weightage="100" keywordseo="Mohandas-Pai">Mohandas Pai</keyword> today exhorted institutional investors to raise questions about the huge cash pile on the company's books and governance issues, as investors have an obligation to protect their investment. 
 "Capital allocation is very important. Institutional investors should raise those questions. They have a duty...institutional investors should raise questions on governance because it concerns the company's reputation," <keyword id="249145" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Pai">Pai</keyword> told <keyword id="6367495" type="COMPANY" weightage="20" keywordseo="PTI">PTI</keyword> in an interview. <a href="http://www.businessinsider.in/infosys-employees-in-stresspromotions-and-increments-may-take-a-hit/articleshow/57095393.cms">ALSO READ: ​ Infosys employees in stress: Promotions and Increments may take a hit</a> 
 
Infosys had liquid assets, including cash and cash equivalents and investments worth Rs 35,697 crore (about $5.25 billion) on its books at the end of <a href="http://www.businessinsider.in/infosys-employees-in-stresspromotions-and-increments-may-take-a-hit/articleshow/57095393.cms">December 2016</a>. 
 
He asserted that founders, who hold 13% stake in the Bengaluru-based company, had raised these questions like any other investor would. 
 "The founders are investors like anybody else. They hold 13 per cent stake. They have every right to question the <keyword id="6364382" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Board">Board</keyword>... Since the largest shareholder has sought clarification, they must also seek detailed clarification," he said. 
 
Pai, along with former colleague <a href="http://www.businessinsider.in/infosys-employees-in-stresspromotions-and-increments-may-take-a-hit/articleshow/57095393.cms">V Balakrishnan</a>, had sought a USD 1.8 billion buyback in 2014 just as CEO <keyword id="6369763" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Vishal-Sikka">Vishal Sikka</keyword> was taking over. 
 
"We had raised the issue. We hope that other institutional investors will also raise their voice because the institutional investors have an obligation to protect their investment," he said. 
 
Pai explained that shareholders all over the world ask questions about capital allocation when growth slows down for listed companies, that have too much cash on books. 
 
"All over the world, for listed companies when growth slows down and there is too much cash, shareholders will ask what are they doing with the cash...about capital allocations. Most Boards around the world will respond with a buyback to show confidence in the company and stabilise the stock price," he said. 
 
Pai expressed hope that institutional investors who have a "fiduciary responsibility" to their unit holders, will also ask the same questions, as has been in the case of <a href="http://www.businessinsider.in/infosys-employees-in-stresspromotions-and-increments-may-take-a-hit/articleshow/57095393.cms">Cognizant</a>. 
 Last week, <keyword id="28721" type="CITY" weightage="20" keywordseo="Cognizant">Cognizant</keyword>'s Board approved a plan to return USD 3.4 billion to shareholders over the next two years through share buybacks and dividend, following investor activism. 
 
"Why can't Infosys do something like Cognizant has done. That is very important for shareholders. I hope they ask him that at a time when growth is slowing down," he said. 
 
He said that while reports of the rift would not impact the company's performance but there is "some reputational damage because of this" and pointed out that the board "has to remedy this situation". 
 Over the last few days, Infosys has come under fire from founders like N R <keyword id="6355623" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Narayana-Murthy">Narayana Murthy</keyword> who have publicly raised concerns on alleged corporate governance lapses at <a href="http://www.businessinsider.in/infosys-employees-in-stresspromotions-and-increments-may-take-a-hit/articleshow/57095393.cms">Infosys.</a> 
 
Infosys, however, has denied the allegations and said that its board is fully aligned with the strategic <a href="http://www.businessinsider.in/infosys-employees-in-stresspromotions-and-increments-may-take-a-hit/articleshow/57095393.cms">direction of Sikka </a>and is very "appreciative of the initiatives taken by him in pursuance of this transformation".

You Searched For "Pai" and got 10 results

Spend money on skilling, says Mohandas Pai on Karnataka bill seeking job reservations for Kannadigas

ANI

Temasek to buy additional 41% stake in Manipal Health Enterprises for ₹16,300 crore

PTI

Job hunt platform Monster.com raises ₹137.5 crore from Mohandas Pai, others

IANS

Americans hate loud commercials. There's a law to ban them but the FCC isn't enforcing it - and streaming TV has a loophole.

Walt Hickey

Ajit Pai is leaving the FCC in January, and digital rights groups are preparing to restart the fight for net neutrality

Mary Meisenzahl

The FCC is examining whether to roll back Section 230 laws that protect social media firms, drawing fire for being Trump's 'puppet'

Isobel Asher Hamilton

Expectations from Modi's package - Here's what Raghuram Rajan, Amitabh Kant, and others expect

India's tech icon Narayana Murthy says India may become a 'digital colony' if startups have to rely on foreign funds

PTI

Narendra Modi has a new problem – big corporates and moneybags are angry

BI India Bureau

Infosys should clarify capital allocation policy: Mohandas Pai tells investors

BI India Bureau

Popular Keywords

Buying Guides