Looming Health Crisis: Wireless Technology and the Toxification of America

By James F. Tracy
Project Censored


As a multitude of hazardous wireless technologies are deployed in homes, schools and workplaces, government officials and industry representatives continue to insist on their safety despite growing evidence to the contrary. A major health crisis looms that is only hastened through the extensive deployment of “smart grid” technology.


In October 2009 at Florida Power and Light’s (FPL) solar energy station President Barack Obama announced that $3.4 billion of the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act would be devoted to the country’s “smart energy grid” transition. Matching funds from the energy industry brought the total national Smart Grid investment to $8 billion. FPL was given $200 million of federal money to install 2.5 million “smart meters” on homes and businesses throughout the state.[1]

By now many residents in the United States and Canada have the smart meters installed on their dwellings. Each of these meters is equipped with an electronic cellular transmitter that uses powerful bursts of electromagnetic radiofrequency (RF) radiation to communicate with nearby meters that together form an interlocking network transferring detailed information on residents’ electrical usage back to the utility every few minutes or less. Such information can easily be used to determine individual patterns of behavior based on power consumption.

The smart grid technology is being sold to the public as a way to “empower” individual energy consumers by allowing them to access information on their energy usage so that they may eventually save money by programming “smart” (i.e, wireless enabled) home appliances and equipment that will coordinate their operability with the smart meter to run when electrical rates are lowest. In other words, a broader plan behind smart grid technology involves a tiered rate system for electricity consumption that will be set by the utility to which customers will have no choice but to conform.

Because of power companies’ stealth rollout of smart meters a large majority of the public still remains unaware of the dangers they pose to human health. This remains the case even though states such as Maine have adopted an “opt out” provision for their citizens. The devices have not been safety-tested by Underwriters Laboratory and thus lack the UL approval customary for most electronics.[2] Further, power customers are typically told by their utilities that the smart meter only communicates with the power company “a few times per day” to transmit information on individual household energy usage. However, when individuals obtained the necessary equipment to do their own testing they found the meters were emitting bursts of RF radiation throughout the home far more intense than a cell phone call every minute or less.[3]

America’s Telecom-friendly Policy for RF Exposure
A growing body of medical studies is now linking cumulative RF exposure to DNA disruption, cancer, birth defects, miscarriages, and autoimmune diseases. Smart meters significantly contribute to an environment already polluted by RF radiation through the pervasive stationing of cellular telephone towers in or around public spaces and consumers’ habitual use of wireless technologies. In the 2000 Salzburg Resolution European scientists recommended the maximum RF exposure for humans to be no more than one tenth of a microwatt per square centimeter. In the United States RF exposure limits are 1,000 microwatts per centimeter, with no limits for long term exposure.[4] Such lax standards have been determined by outdated science and the legal and regulatory maneuvering of the powerful telecommunications and wireless industries.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ceased studying the health effects of radiofrequency radiation when the Senate Appropriations Committee cut the department’s funding and forbade it from further research into the area.[5] Thereafter RF limits were codified as mere “guidelines” based on the EPA’s tentative findings and are to this day administered by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).

These weakly enforced standards are predicated on the alleged “thermal effect” of RF. In other words, if the energy emitted from a wireless antenna or device is not powerful enough to heat the skin or flesh then no danger is posed to human health.[6] This reasoning is routinely put forward by utilities installing smart meters on residences, telecom companies locating cellular transmission towers in populated areas, and now school districts across the US allowing the installation of cell towers on school campuses.[7]

The FCC’s authority to impose this standard was further reinforced with the passage of the 1996 Telecommunications Act that included a provision lobbied for by the telecom industry preventing state and local governments from evaluating potential environmental and health effects when locating cell towers “so long as ‘such facilities comply with the FCC’s regulations concerning such emissions.’”[8]

In 2001 an alliance of scientists and engineers with the backing of the Communications Workers of America filed a federal lawsuit hoping the Supreme Court would reconsider the FCC’s obsolete exposure guidelines and the Telecom Act’s overreach into state and local jurisdiction. The high court refused to hear the case. When the same group asked the FCC to reexamine its guidelines in light of current scientific studies the request was rebuffed.[9] Today in all probability millions are suffering from a variety of immediate and long-term health effects from relentless EMF and RF exposure that under the thermal effect rationale remain unrecognized or discounted by the telecom industry and regulatory authorities alike.

Growing Evidence of Health Risks From RF Exposure
The main health concern with electromagnetic radiation emitted by smart meters and other wireless technologies is that EMF and RF cause a breakdown in the communication between cells in the body, interrupting DNA repair and weakening tissue and organ function. These are the findings of Dr. George Carlo, who oversaw a comprehensive research group commissioned by the cell phone industry in the mid-1990s.

When Carlo’s research began to reveal how there were indeed serious health concerns with wireless technology, the industry sought to bury the results and discredit Carlo. Yet Carlo’s research has since been upheld in a wealth of subsequent studies and has continuing relevance given the ubiquity of wireless apparatuses and the even more powerful smart meters. “One thing all these conditions have in common is a disruption, to varying degrees, of intercellular communication,” Carlo observes. “When we were growing up, TV antennas were on top of our houses and such waves were up in the sky. Cell phones and Wi-Fi have brought those things down to the street, integrated them into the environment, and that’s absolutely new.”[10]

In 2007 the BioInitiative Working Group, a worldwide body of scientists and public health experts, released a 650-page document with over 2000 studies linking RF and EMF exposure to cancer, Alzheimer’s disease, DNA damage, immune system dysfunction, cellular damage and tissue reduction.[11]

In May 2011 the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer categorized “radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans based on an increased risk for glioma, a malignant type of brain cancer, associated with wireless cellphone use.”[12]

In November 2011 the Board of the American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM), a national organization of medical and osteopathic physicians, called on California’s Public Utilities Commission to issue a moratorium on the continued installation of smart meters in residences and schools “based on a scientific assessment of the current available literature.” “[E]xisting FCC guidelines for RF safety that have been used to justify installations of smart meters,” the panel wrote,

“only look at thermal tissue damage and are obsolete, since many modern studies show metabolic and genomic damage from RF and ELF exposure below the level of intensity which heats tissues … More modern literature shows medically and biologically significant effects of RF and ELF at lower energy densities. These effects accumulate over time, which is an important consideration given the chronic nature of exposure from ‘smart meters.’”[13]

In April 2012 the AAEM issued a formal position paper on the health effects of RF and EMF exposure based on a literature review of the most recent research. The organization pointed to how government and industry arguments alleging the doubtful nature of the science on non-thermal effects of RF were not defensible in light of the newest studies. “Genetic damage, reproductive defects, cancer, neurological degeneration and nervous system dysfunction, immune system dysfunction, cognitive effects, protein and peptide damage, kidney damage, and developmental effects have all been reported in the peer‐reviewed scientific literature,” AAEM concluded.[14]

Radiating Children
The rollout of smart meters proceeds alongside increased installation of wireless technology and cell phone towers in and around schools in the US. In 2010 Professor Magda Havas conducted a study of schools in 50 US state capitols and Washington DC to determine students’ potential exposure to nearby cell towers. A total 6,140 schools serving 2.3 million students were surveyed using the antennasearch.com database. Of these, 13% of the schools serving 299,000 students have a cell tower within a quarter mile of school grounds, and another 50% of the schools where 1,145,000 attend have a tower within a 0.6 mile radius. The installation of wireless networks and now smart meters on and around school properties further increases children’s RF exposure.[15]

Many school districts that are strapped for cash in the face of state budget cuts are willing to ignore the abundance of scientific research on RF dangers and sign on with telecom companies to situate cell towers directly on school premises. Again, the FCC’s thermal effect rule is invoked to justify tower placement together with a disregard of the available studies.

The School District of Palm Beach County, the eleventh largest school district in the US, provides one such example. Ten of its campuses already have cell towers on their grounds while the district ponders lifting a ban established in 1997 that would allow for the positioning of even more towers. When concerned parents contacted the school district for an explanation of its wireless policies, the administration assembled a document, “Health Organization Information and Academic Research Studies Regarding the Health Effects of Cell Tower Signals.” The report carefully selected pronouncements from telecom industry funded organizations such as the American Cancer Society and out-of-date scientific studies supporting the FCC’s stance on wireless while excluding the long list of studies and literature reviews pointing to the dangers of RF and EMF radiation emitted by wireless networks and cell towers. [16]

The Precautionary Principle / Conclusion
Surrounded by the sizable and growing body of scientific literature pointing to the obvious dangers of wireless technology, utility companies installing smart meters on millions of homes across the US and school officials who accommodate cell towers on their grounds are performing an extreme disservice to their often vulnerable constituencies. Indeed, such actions constitute the reckless long term endangerment of public health for short term gain, sharply contrasting with more judicious decision making.

The 1992 Rio Declaration on Environment & Development adopted the precautionary principle as a rule to follow in the situations utilities and school districts find themselves in today. “Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.”[17] In exercising the precautionary principle, public governance and regulatory bodies should “take preventive action in the face of scientific uncertainty to prevent harm. The focus is no longer on measuring or managing harm, but preventing harm.”[18]

Along these lines, the European Union and the Los Angeles School District have prohibited cell phone towers on school grounds until the scientific research on the human health effects of RF are conclusive. The International Association of Fire Fighters also interdicted cell towers on fire stations pending “’a study with the highest scientific merit and integrity on health effects of exposure to low-intensity [radio frequency/microwave] radiation is conducted and it is proven that such sitings are not hazardous to the health of our members.’”[19]

Unwitting families with smart meters on their homes and children with cell towers humming outside their classrooms suggest the extent to which the energy, telecom and wireless industries have manipulated the regulatory process to greatly privilege profits over public health. Moreover, it reveals how the population suffers for want of meaningful and conclusive information on the very real dangers of RF while the telecom and wireless interests successfully cajole the media into considering one scientific study at a time.

“When you put the science together, we come to the irrefutable conclusion that there’s a major health crisis coming, probably already underway,” George Carlo cautions. “Not just cancer, but also learning disabilities, attention deficit disorder, autism, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, and psychological and behavioral problems—all mediated by the same mechanism. That’s why we’re so worried. Time is running out.”[20]
Notes
[1] Energy.gov, “President Obama Announces $3.4 Billion Investment to Spur Transition to Smart Energy Grid,” October 27, 2009, http://energy.gov/articles/president-obama-announces-34-billion-investment-spur-transition-smart-energy-grid
[2] Ilya Sandra Perlingieri, “Radiofrequency Radiation: The Invisible Hazards of Smart Meters,” August 19, 2011, GlobalReserach.ca, http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=26082
[3] Dr. Bill Deagle, “Smart Meters: A Call for Public Outrage,” Rense.com, August 30, 2011, http://www.rense.com/general94/smartt.htm. Some meters installed in California by Pacific Gas and Electric carry a “’switching mode power-supply’ that ‘emit sharp spikes of millisecond bursts’ around the clock and is a chief cause of ‘dirty electricity.’” See Perlingieri, “Radiofrequency Radiation: The Invisible Hazards of Smart Meters.” This author similarly measured bursts of radiation in excess of 2,000 microwatts per meter every 30 to 90 seconds during the day, and once every two-to-three minutes at night.
[4] Magda Havas, BRAG Antenna Ranking of Schools, 2010, http://electromagnetichealth.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/BRAG_Schools.pdf
[5] Susan Luzzaro, “Field of Cell Phone Tower Beams,” San Diego Reader, May 18, 2011, http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2011/may/18/citylights2-cell-phone-tower/?page=1&
[6] FCC Office of Engineering and Technology, http://www.fcc.gov/oet/rfsafety
[7] Luzzaro, “Field of Cell Phone Tower Beams”; Marc Freeman, “Cell Towers Could Be Coming to More Schools,” South Florida Sun Sentinel, January 5, 2012, http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2012-01-05/news/fl-cell-towers-schools-palm-20120105_1_cell-towers-cellular-phone-towers-stealth-towers
[8] Amy Worthington, “The Radiation Poisoning of America,” GlobalResearch.ca, October 9, 2007, http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7025
[9] Worthington, “The Radiation Poisoning of America.”
[10] Sue Kovach, “The Hidden Dangers of Cell Phone Radiation,” Life Extension Magazine, August 2007, http://www.lef.org/magazine/mag2007 /aug2007_report_cellphone_radiation_01.htm
[11] Susan Luzzaro, “Field of Cell Phone Tower Beams”; Bioinitiative Report: A Rationale For a Biologically-based Public Exposure Standard For Electromagnetic Fields, http://www.bioinitiative.org/freeaccess/report/index.htm.
[12] World Health Organization International Agency for Research on Cancer, “IARC Classifies Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields as Possibly Carcinogenic,” May 31, 2011, www.iarc.fr/en/media-centre/pr/2011/pdfs/pr208_E.pdf; Joseph Mercola, “Be Aware: These Cell Phones Can Emit 28 Times More Radiation,” Mercola.com, June 18, 2011, http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/06/18/finally-experts-admit-cellphones-are-a-carcinogen.aspx.
[13] American Academy of Environmental Medicine, “Proposed Decision of Commissioner Peevy [Mailed 11/22/2011] Before the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California,” January 19, 2012. www.aaemonline.org
[14] American Academy of Environmental Medicine, “The American Academy of Environmental Medicine Calls for Immediate Caution regarding Smart Meter Installation,” April 12, 2012, http://www.aaemonline.org/
[15] Havas, BRAG Antenna Ranking of Schools, 31-38.
[16] Donna Goldstein, “Health Organization Information and Academic Research Studies Regarding the Health Effects of Cell Tower Signals,”Planning and Real Estate Development, Palm Beach County School District, January 30, 2012.
[17] Havas, BRAG Antenna Ranking of Schools, 17.
[18] Multinational Monitor, “Precautionary Precepts: The Power and Potential of the Precautionary Principle: An Interview with Carolyn Raffensperger,” September 2004, http://multinationalmonitor.org/mm2004/09012004/september04interviewraffen.html.
[19] Luzzaro, “Field of Cell Phone Tower Beams.”
[20] Kovach, “The Hidden Dangers of Cell Phone Radiation.”

Apple Has Destroyed 490,000 American Jobs

Eric Platt and Ben Duronio | May 1, 2012 - Business Insider

After taking heat for shipping jobs to China and contracting to employers with questionable labor conditions, Apple (rather publicly) took credit for creating more than half a million jobs in the U.S.

514,000 to be exact.


That figure included nearly 50,000 employees in its retail network and its corporate headquarters, where products are designed.

But it also included FedEx and UPS employees who deliver its products and employees at Corning who make glass for iPads and iPhones.

So Apple basically counts anyone vaguely associated with the company or its products as a job that Apple created.

But what about the competitors Apple has bumped off in its relentless move to the top? What about the once-profitable markets, products, and companies it has destroyed? What happened to those jobs?

Business Insider analyzed data on Bloomberg, went through dozens of 10-Ks, and read through layoff announcements to see how Apple's peers have done.

What we found:

Apple has destroyed nearly as many jobs as it helped create, eliminating some 490,570 positions.

Click here to see the jobs that Apple has destroyed >

So even if Apple had created all the jobs it takes credit for creating, its chest-thumping would be misplaced, to say the least.

The truth, of course, is it is not "companies" or "entrepreneurs" who create jobs--it is healthy economic ecosystems that create jobs. (If Apple's customers couldn't afford to buy Apple's products, Apple wouldn't create a single job, no matter how cool Apple's products were). Companies are an important element of those ecosystems, but to credit them for job-creation is to give them a lot more credit than they deserve.

But that's another story.

For now, let's take a detailed look at all the jobs Apple has destroyed or helped destroy.

Here's our methodology:

Business Insider identified some 50 companies that Apple's success has impacted, including big names like IBM and HP, and smaller ones like Barnes & Noble and Adobe.

Some companies and peers prospered. Most did not, announcing a combined 306,606 layoffs over the past several years.

In choosing the companies, Business Insider took a liberal approach to the businesses hit by Apple. Could you attribute all of Circuit City's problems to Apple? Probably not. BI used similar definitions as Apple to identify these companies.

Apple was unresponsive to repeated request for comment.

Those layoffs include direct competitors like Cisco's flip camera business, which the company shuttered after poor sales, and companies like AOL,  which lose out on lucrative search traffic because of Apple's choice to default to Google.

We also looked at Apple's decision to contract to private companies like UPS and FedEx instead of using public services like the U.S. Postal Service, as well as loopholes it uses in U.S. tax law to save billions of dollars a year.

The figure above does not include the jobs Apple could have created had it manufactured its products in America — instead of at Foxconn plants in China — because the corporate mantra to cut costs and build products overseas is not simply tied to the Cupertino, Calif., based company.

Business Insider also considered the ripple effect of layoffs in the U.S. When a company fires hundreds of employees, it curtails regional spending, causing restaurants and retailers to close their doors, decreases tax collection at the state, local, and federal level, and can trigger other rounds of layoffs elsewhere in the economy.

Using data from the Economic Policy Institute, coupled with average pay in industries that saw lay offs because of Apple's success, Business Insider estimated the additional loss to the employment picture at some 180,000 jobs.

Taking that into account with the 306,000 layoffs from competitors, Apple has destroyed some 490,570 positions in the U.S.

Circuit City Layoffs: 42,974 

At its peak, Circuit City employed more than 42,000 people in its stores and corporate offices, offering the only real competing electronics network to Best Buy. But as Apple took greater share of the PC market, and had sustainable margins, Circuit City had difficulty keeping up. Add in the collapse of LCD TV prices and by the holiday season in 2008, Circuit City filed for bankruptcy and laid off its staff.

Source: Bloomberg and Company Filings

Federal Government Layoffs: 42,105

One of the biggest revelations from the recent New York Times piece was the amount of money Apple saved by using tax loop-holes. Sullivan estimated that number at $2.4 billion in 2011 (Federal Taxes). Divide that by the average rate of pay for public employees in 2011 and you get to some 42,000 lost jobs.

Source: Economic Analysis by former Treasury economist Martin Sullivan 

Kodak Layoffs: 28,000

Kodak has had problems for a number of years - with total employment declining from more than 100,000 to just 17,100 today. The iPhone and other mobile devices have eliminated the demand for stand alone cameras, and Kodak was a company that suffered greatly from the link between cameras and phones. The 131-year-old company filed for bankruptcy in January. 

Source: Company Filings

Hewlett Packard Layoffs: 16,995

The iPad has made what was once a dominant PC builder an afterthought. HP attempted to enter the tablet game, but their touchpad was a disaster and they have laid off thousands of employees over the past few years (especially after costly purchases like Compaq).

Source: Bloomberg

Motorola Layoffs: 16,474

Motorola has had a painful decade after the success of its Razr - only recently regaining some strength in mobile. But after the Razr fizzled, Motorola hemorrhaged money, as well as headcount, as it tried to create a product that could compete with the iPhone.

Source: Company Filings

Borders Layoffs: 16,600
Apple hardware made a number of businesses obsolete: including the need to buy physical copies of books, movies and music. Borders went bankrupt after consumers moved to digital downloads and streaming online, all fueled by Apple.
Source: Company Filings

Sprint Layoffs: 14,600
Sprint struggled to gain post-paid subscribers for years because it did not offer a device comparable to the iPhone. After AT&T and Verizon exclusivity deals finally expired, it gained the iPhone and saw some growth in subscribers.
Source: Bloomberg

IBM Layoffs: 12,668
IBM conducted a number of layoffs over the past several years, including several thousand people in research in development roles and those in certain hardware businesses that it could not compete in - on the consumer side, that was fueled by gains at companies like Apple.
Source: Bloomberg

Musical Group Layoffs: 12,500
Performing art and spectator sport employment declined from a peak of 415,000 in 2007, to a preliminary estimate of 402,500 in March of 2012. The music industry has faced substantive difficulty since Napster hit (and continues with the lower share groups are paid on iTunes), making it harder for music groups to sign with a label and get backing.
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics (ID: CES7071100001)

Ericsson Layoffs: 10,690
GlassdoorIn the 1990's Ericsson actually had abot 35 percent of the cell phone market. Needless to say, they did not keep up with the technology to compete with Apple and the rest.
Source: Bloomberg

U.S. Postal Service Layoffs: 10,615
Apple attributed part of its 514,000 job creation figure to shipping giants UPS and FedEx. But the truth is, it just moved the needle away from the U.S. Postal Service by using the private providers. According to Bloomberg estimates, Amazon accounts for 1.9 percent of big brown's revenue. Using that as a reference point, and the fact that Apple revenues are more than twice Amazon's, Business Insider constructed the number of jobs Apple could have sustained if it shipped its products through the USPS.
Source: Business Insider Estimate 

Barnes & Noble Layoffs: 9,000
The Nook has kept Barnes & Noble around as competitors like Borders failed, but its core business remains significantly challenged as Apple's products have moved consumers away from traditional physical units. BKS has closed a number of stores and employs 9,000 fewer people today than it did in 2007.
Source: Company Filings

Blockbuster Layoffs: 7,200
Streaming services have butchered the DVD and VHS business, and Blue Ray has not been the boon many industry analysts thought it would. Since 2007, Blockbuster has laid off more than 20,000 employees. BI attributed a third of those who lost their jobs to Apple.
Source: Company Filings

CompUSA Layoffs: 6,300
It's a repeat of Circuit City, just on a smaller scale. The computer superstore withered in the face of intense electronic retail competition and closed 126 stores, as Apple prospered and gained share.
Source: Business Insider Estimate

Sony Layoffs: 6,000
Sony once held a dominant market position in the portable music business with the Sony Walkman and other entertainment devices. The iPod made the Walkman the new 8-track player, and Apple has pressured Sony in the laptop market as well with the iPad and its Mac lineup. (These figures do not include mobile layoffs, attributed to Ericsson).
Source: Bloomberg

RadioShack Layoffs: 6,000
This retailer has faced significant challenges over the past few years as its main wireless offerings (Sprint, T-Mobile) did not sell the iPhone. RadioShack did have AT&T, and recently switched T-Mobile for Verizon Wireless. Still, its shelves are purgatory for HDMI cables and old electronics Apple seems to have made obsolete.
Source: Company Filings

Microsoft Layoffs: 5,827
Microsoft has struggled in the ancillary businesses Apple is prospering in, such as mobile, portable music, and the tablet industry. These struggles forced the software juggernaut to make cuts over the past few years.
Source: Bloomberg

Yahoo! Layoffs: 5,780
Yahoo! has struggled over the years as it has been outmoded by Google. So why is Apple to blame? The default search engine on all of Apple's products are Google, which gives the search giant a nice leg up.
Source: Bloomberg

Xerox Layoffs: 5,400
Xerox has laid off thousands of employees as its printer business steadily declined. Part of that has to do with difficulty within both the PC and inkjet sectors — industries you don't need when you use a Mac. The Xerox layoffs are based on total company announced firings, multiplied by the company's long-term asset base in the U.S. as a percent of global operations (to exclude impact to its international offices).
Source: Bloomberg

AMD Layoffs: 4,460
Apple uses intel chips in their Mac computers, which means AMD misses out on a huge potential market.
Source: Bloomberg

Best Buy Layoffs: 3,400
With Apple retail stores opening (and intense competition from Amazon) Best Buy has struggled to turn weak comparable store sales around. The company recently announced 400 layoffs in corporate as well as the closing of 50 stores.
Source: Company Filings, Business Insider Estimate

Tower Records Layoffs: 3,000
Apple's assault on the music industry hit retailers particularly hard, with stateside closings of Virgin, HMV and Sam Goody. The iPod greatly accelerated the losses of record stores as consumers switched to digital downloads (whether legal or through sites like Napster and LimeWire).
Source: New Reports

Trans World Entertainment (Sam Goody, F.Y.E.) Layoffs: 2,900
Tower Records part two. Trans World, the owner of chain stores including Coconuts, Sam Goody, and Record Town, has closed hundreds of stores and laid off thousands. Blame the iPod.
Source: Company Filings

Gateway (Acer) Layoffs: 2,500
Gateway once ran quite the successful retail chain, but a crowded environment made its PCs seem outmoded and overly expensive. Gateway ultimately closed its entire 188-store division, invested in eMachines and was then bought out by Acer during a period of consolidation. Apple did not have the same problem with its growing Mac business.
Source: News Reports

EMI Layoffs: 2,000
EMI is another record label drastically hurt by the world's move away from CDs. As the big five record companies became four, and now three, EMI had to layoff thousands and cut costs. Universal Music Group purchased EMI as greater consolidation became necessary to eek out some profits from online sales. Apple's role in the shift to digital (even as it offers a new revenue source) is pretty clear.
Source: News Reports

Lenovo Layoffs: 2,000
Lenovo was on the up when it purchased the ThinkPad unit from IBM with the goal to turn it into a dominant PC player. Unfortunately, PC sales were challenged during the recession, even as consumers scooped up Apple's Mac line up. Lenovo announced more than 2,000 layoffs to prop up margins (not included in figures for IBM).
Source: Bloomberg

Adobe Layoffs: 1,950
Adobe's issues with Apple are well documented. The company started a viral campaign to convince Apple to put Flash in its mobile devices. But Steve Jobs didn't warm to that approach, firing off a memo on his thoughts of Adobe (not too flattering). Adobe ultimately had to layoff some 1,950 as it focused on core operations and curtailed special projects.
Source: Bloomberg

T-Mobile Layoffs: 1,900
T-Mobile has lost share without having the iPhone in its device lineup, a sore point for the company that pinned its hopes on joining forces with the carrier that first offered it. But with the FCC blocking the AT&T merger, T-Mobile has had to pare back its operations to invest in 4G technology.
Source: Bloomberg

EMC Layoffs: 1,476
The very profitable cloud computing company has had to issue job cuts after competitors gained share in the market it helped create. Those competitors, like DropBox, have leveraged Apple's iOS platform and taken share through strong offerings on the iPad and iPhone.
Source: Company Filings

Palm Layoffs: 1,247
Palm hoped that the Pre and Pixi smartphones could compete with the iPhone and that it could offer some semblance of a comeback. After first sales looked promising, the products withered as Apple (and Android), continued to grow. Palm was then purchased by HP, before the company decided to shutter the whole unit. (Palm layoffs not included in HP figures).
Source: Company Filings

Virgin Megastores Layoffs: 1,060
Virgin Megastores had a surprisingly profitable run, with giant stores in Times Square generating healthy margins. But when digital sales decimated book, movie and music sales, Virgin decided to cut its losses and sell off its coveted real estate holdings which housed the Megastores.
Source: News Reports

Dell Layoffs: 905
Against Apple's strong gains with its Mac computers, Dell has seemed staid. The company has difficulty competing with Apple's premium offerings, and when demand for its PCs slumped, it saw margins substantively pressured. Dell has yet to find a way to successfully compete with any of Apple's other products — including mobile, mp3 players, and tablets.
Source: Bloomberg

AOL Layoffs: 800 
AOL was supposed to be the darling of the Internet age, until it wasn't. Torn up by larger competitors like Google, AOL has forged ahead with a push into content. But what the company used to bet on, search, is stymied by Apple's choice to default to Google on its iPad, iPhone and MacBook lines.
Source: Bloomberg 

Cisco Layoffs: 500
Networking giant Cisco has tried to push into the consumer sphere for sometime, and it thought it had a hit with the well priced flip camera business. But the camera never took off as consumers defaulted to their iPhones to take photos. Cisco ended up closing the business and laying off the employees in the division.
Source: Bloomberg

Warner Music Group Layoffs: 300
Warner Music Group is yet another music company hit by the move to digital and purchases on iTunes (you could argue that it performed better than most of the industry during the transition). Warner was forced to lay off 300 employees as revenues struggled.
Source: Company Filings

Hasbro Layoffs: 200
Who needs board games when you can use an iPad or iPhone to entertain yourself? Hasbro decided to close its board-game manufacturing plant in Massachusetts after demand dried up. You can blame that on the success of games like Words With Friends on your iPhone.
Source: Bloomberg

IAC (Ask.com) Layoffs: 170
Ask.com was once a powerhouse in search (depending on how you define powerhouse) but as the iPhone and iPad grew mobile search, Ask lost out. The company decided to axe some 170 employees over two different periods as it gave up on the product.
Source: Bloomberg

Universal Music Group Layoffs: 110
Universal, much like Warner, is one of the three main remaining music companies. The company has laid off some 110 employees as traditional CD sales tumbled. Recording companies have been upset with Apple's pricing strategy for some time, but that has lessened as Apple changed it's $0.99 per song requirement.
Source: News Reports

Verizon's Cozy Deal With Cable Would Create a Wireless Duopoly

Tuesday, 03 April 2012

By Mike Ludwig, Truthout | Report
Verizon Wireless and America's biggest cable companies want to sell you everything in one package: wireless, broadband, cable TV and a telephone landline. This might sound like an easy option, but consumer groups say that the consolidation deals behind these service bundles could crush competition in the market and raise prices for everyone.

Verizon Wireless plans to purchase $3.6 billion worth of unused wireless spectrum from a joint venture representing the big cable providers Comcast, Time Warner and Bright House Networks. Verizon is also buying $315 million worth of spectrum from the Cox cable company. In a separate deal that anti-trust watchdogs brought to the attention of regulators, Verizon and the four cable companies will also market each others' products under a controversial joint-marketing agreement. Consumers could, for instance, buy a wireless plan from Verizon when purchasing cable Internet from Comcast.

Verizon claims it's trying to boost 4G coverage, meet the growing demand created by smartphone technology and offer customers some one-stop shopping. Opponents of the deal, however, say Verizon already holds the greatest amount of prime mobile broadband spectrum. If the proposed deal goes through, Verizon and its biggest competitor, AT&T, would hold more wireless spectrum nationally than all other providers combined and essentially become a market duopoly, according to Parul Desai of the Consumer Union, which publishes Consumer Reports.

Desai said the whole deal would reduce competition among all the companies involved. Verizon is essentially giving the cable companies control of the landlines and the cable companies are giving Verizon control of the wireless spectrum. Verizon would have little incentive to compete with the cable companies with its FiOS high-speed wired Internet service, and cable companies would have little incentive to compete for wireless service. Time Warner, Cox and Comcast already operate as monopolies in some regions, Desai said, and the deal could leave consumers with little or no choice in landline and broadband providers.

Desai said the cable companies had begun to invest in wireless, which is why the companies have unused spectrum to sell, but once they realized it would be tough to compete with Verizon Wireless and AT&T, they decided to sell out their holdings in exchange for a firmer grip on landlines.

"The wireless side will be dominated by Verizon Wireless, and they'll get out of the landline game, and cable will get out of the wireless game so they can dominate the landline game," Desai said. "... So what happens when you sell the spectrum and it continues to go to the top two players? It makes it easier to squeeze out some of the smaller players."

Two smaller telecommunication firms, Level 3 Communications and MetroPCS, have filed briefs with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) opposing the deal. Desai said the deal isn't just bad for smaller firms; it's also bad for consumers, who will be left with fewer options and could eventually pay higher prices because Verizon and the cable companies will not be competing with one another.

Rural consumers could be especially affected because the companies will have less incentive to expand infrastructure to underserved areas, and by reducing competition, rural consumers could pay higher prices and even lose services, according to Edyael Casaperalta, who works to bring high-speed Internet access to rural areas with the Center for Rural Strategies. Rural residents are often low income, Casaperalta said, and may not be able to afford bundled packages offered under the joint-marketing agreement.

"Knowing that there's a lack of interest in rural customers, there's already less competition for rural customers to be able to get better services and better prices, and this type of transaction will create even less competition, if any at all," Casaperalta said.

The Justice Department and the FCC are currently reviewing the proposed deal, and the FCC must approve the spectrum transfers. In December, just days before Verizon announced its deal with the cable companies, AT&T and T-Mobile abandoned a $39 billion merger andplaced the blame on regulators. AT&T canceled the acquisition, which critics feared would also create a wireless duopoly, after resistance in the FCC and legal challenges spooked investors.

Congress is also weighing in on the Verizon deal. On March 21, the Senate Antitrust Committee held a hearing on the deal titled "The Verizon/Cable Deals: Harmless Collaboration or a Threat to Competition and Consumers?" The hearing featured Comcast and Verizon executives butting heads with consumer advocates.

Verizon Executive Vice President Randal Milch told the committee that Verizon needs more spectrum to respond to the growing demand caused by the "explosive" use of smartphones, tablets, and other data-intensive devices.

"We are only buying spectrum not currently in commercial use in order to put it to use serving customers, and no customer will see fewer choices or increased prices as a result of this transaction," Milch said.

Joel Kelsey of the Free Press, a media policy group, told the committee that it's always dangerous to consumers when media consolidations reduces competition.

"Allowing for further consolidation in this marketplace will only drive prices higher, reduce consumer choice, and have drastic consequences on the rate of innovation as the companies involved are freed from competition and find diminishing value in investing in better infrastructure," Kelsey said.

The proposed deal also raised ire among unions, but instead of outright opposing a deal that labor groups see as a potential job killer, two unions have proposed stipulations to the FCC. The Communications Workers of America and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers have asked the FCC to only approve the deal if Verizon agrees to continue developing its FiOS Internet service, which they fear could go under if Verizon decides not to compete in the landline market. The unions also asked the FCC to prohibit cross-marketing services in Verizon territory and require that the companies allow customers to buy individual services at bundle prices without buying the whole service bundle.