Latest news with #TomUmberg
Yahoo
12-07-2025
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
Shhh, don't wake the baby: New bill aims to dial down excessively loud commercials
Turn it down. It's too loud. Where's the remote? You have it. I don't have it. Why is it so loud? We've all been there—streaming a show when a commercial suddenly blares at an ear-splitting volume. Now, a new bill making its way through the California Legislature aims to change that. Senate Bill 576 would prohibit video streaming services that serve California consumers from airing commercial advertisements at audio levels louder than the primary video content. The bill was authored by state Sen. Tom Umberg (D-Santa Ana) who told CalMatters the inspiration came from a baby—Samantha Rose. 'He said his legislative director, Zach Keller, has an infant daughter named Samantha Rose. The baby had finally settled down to sleep and her parents, in turn, settled down to relax and watch a show when an ad came on so loud it woke the baby.' The bill contends that consumers are increasingly subjected to loud, disruptive ads with no regulatory safeguards. 'This bill enhances the viewing experience and protects individuals with hearing sensitivities—including seniors, children, and those with auditory processing disorders—from sudden and jarring noise spikes,' the bill states. If this sounds familiar, it's because similar legislation already exists at the federal level. The Commercial Advertisement Loudness Mitigation (CALM) Act was passed in 2010 after the Federal Communications Commission received more than 130,000 complaints—most about excessively loud commercials. But that law applied only to broadcast and cable TV. Streaming services didn't exist at the time and have since operated in a 'loudness loophole.' But times have changed. Umberg says 83% of U.S. households now use at least one streaming service, and ad-free streaming is becoming less common 'Many platforms have introduced tiered subscription models that require consumers to pay a premium to avoid commercials, bringing ad-supported viewing, and the loudness of those ads, back into focus for millions of users,' he argues. While the bill appears to have strong support in the California State Legislature, it also faces opposition. Groups including the Motion Picture Association and the Streaming Innovation Alliance argue that streaming is fundamentally different from traditional broadcast and cable, and that federal standards shouldn't be unilaterally applied to streaming platforms. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Politico
24-06-2025
- Entertainment
- Politico
Don't touch that sound dial!
Presented by California Resources Corporation QUIET ON SET: State Sen. Tom Umberg just wants to watch TV without being subjected to blaring commercials. Hollywood's biggest streaming platforms wish he'd keep his hands off the volume dial. The Santa Ana Democrat wants to ban platforms like Netflix and Hulu from airing ads louder than the shows and movies they accompany. His SB 576, would close a loophole in a 2010 federal law (authored by former California Rep. Anna Eshoo) that already bans ear-splitting ads on cable and broadcast TV but doesn't cover streaming services. Umberg argues it's a simple way to solve a recent spike in volume complaints and preserve peace of mind for people like Zach Keller, his legislative staffer who said loud streaming commercials are waking up his infant daughter. 'The golden rule is you've got to keep the baby asleep, and anything that wakes that baby up should be closely scrutinized — as should streaming services,' Umberg testified today, minutes before his bill cleared the Assembly Privacy Committee. And given California's outsized sway in the entertainment industry, there's a chance Umberg's bill could set a de facto nationwide standard if he emerges victorious. 'It's disruptive and an annoyance,' Umberg told California Decoded in an interview. 'If we can [ban] it at the federal level … we certainly can do it for streaming services.' Hollywood begs to differ. The Motion Picture Association and Streaming Innovators Alliance, which together represent entertainment giants including Disney, Paramount, Amazon and Netflix, have barged in with last-minute objections, urging lawmakers to derail Umberg's effort. In a four-page letter sent last week, the groups argued they're already exploring ways to address ad volume issues. Yet they also said streaming platforms have 'no ability' to control volume settings on every device where their content is offered — much less regulate 'ready-to-watch commercials sourced from thousands of advertisers.' 'Unlike in the broadcasting [and] cable network environment, where advertisers sell their ads directly to the networks, streaming ads come from several different sources and cannot necessarily or practically be controlled by streaming platforms,' Melissa Patack, the MPA's vice president of state government affairs, testified Tuesday. So can streamers control ad volumes, or can't they? Patack told the committee that's beyond streamers' grasp for now, but that platforms could address the issue if given time to work on a solution with audio engineers, free from legal repercussions outlined in Umberg's bill. But Umberg thinks streamers are more than capable of turning down the volume — it's just a question of whether they want to. 'They know how old I am. They know what cereal I like,' he testified. 'They can figure out how not to increase volume.' A version of this report first appeared in California Decoded, POLITICO's morning newsletter for Pros about how the Golden State is shaping tech policy within its borders and beyond. Like this content? POLITICO Pro subscribers receive it daily. Learn more at IT'S TUESDAY AFTERNOON. This is California Playbook PM, a POLITICO newsletter that serves as an afternoon temperature check on California politics and a look at what our policy reporters are watching. Got tips or suggestions? Shoot an email to lholden@ WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW TODAY PUT IT IN WRITING: Legislative leaders and Gov. Gavin Newsom reached a budget agreement that delays cuts to Medi-Cal and safety net programs while closing a $12 billion spending gap, our Eric He reports for POLITICO Pro subscribers. One unresolved piece of the deal, a housing proposal by state Sen. Scott Wiener to exempt many types of urban housing projects from environmental review, will be taken up by legislators later this week. The rest of the budget agreement, which lawmakers are expected to approve on Friday before sending to Newsom for his signature, largely reflects the priorities of the Democratic supermajority in the state Legislature that rejected many of the governor's proposed slashes. Amid fierce backlash from progressives and advocacy groups, Democratic state lawmakers sought to stave off many of Newsom's proposed cuts, turning instead to deferrals and borrowing from state reserves. They are banking on California's economic outlook improving in future years, allowing the state to reduce the severity of the reductions. 'Under very difficult circumstances, we passed a solid budget that protects California's values,' Wiener said in an interview. 'And I'm proud of the result.' IN OTHER NEWS TAKING CHARGE: California Rep. Robert Garcia won his bid to become the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, beating out Massachusetts Rep. Stephen Lynch in today's caucus vote, our Nicholas Wu reports. Garcia, 47, secured a first-ballot majority after winning the backing of the caucus' powerful Steering and Policy Committee on Monday evening. 'We'll get immediately to work,' he told reporters following the vote. First on the agenda, Garcia added, was meeting with the Oversight Committee staff 'to let them know that we're ready for consistent leadership.' MILEAGE MAY VARY: Senate Democrats introduced a bill today that would significantly overhaul how California regulates transportation fuels amid concerns about high gas prices and closing refineries, our Alex Nieves reports for Pro subscribers. State Sen. Tim Grayson, a moderate Bay Area Democrat, amended SB 237 — which previously dealt with property transfers — into a sweeping proposal that would cap the price of credits that fuel manufacturers can buy and sell through the state's low-carbon fuel standard. It would potentially transition California away from its unique gasoline blend and instead align gas specifications with other western states. State Sens. Melissa Hurtado, Jerry McNerney and Laura Richardson are signed on as joint authors. WHAT WE'RE READING TODAY — Members of Congress continue to buy pharmaceutical stocks, even as President Donald Trump's administration slams the industry. California Rep. Ro Khanna leads his party in purchases. (POLITICO) — A DoorDash executive was among the eight people killed on Lake Tahoe after a powerboat capsized during a sudden storm. (San Francisco Chronicle) — Soldiers and their families have been calling the GI Rights Hotline with concerns about Trump's deployment of the California National Guard to Los Angeles. (Los Angeles Times) AROUND THE STATE — The San Diego City Council finalized compromise budget funding for brush management, flood prevention and recreation programs that Mayor Todd Gloria tried to veto. (San Diego Union-Tribune) — A state audit revealed that a charter school in Sacramento received more than $180 million in state funds that it was not eligible for following little oversight by state and local educational agencies. (Sacramento Bee) — The San Mateo County Board of Supervisors used for the first time its newly granted power to remove an elected sheriff for misconduct, among other violations. (East Bay Times) — compiled by Juliann Ventura
Yahoo
31-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
California Senators Suggest Paramount-Trump Settlement Would Amount to a Bribe and Harm Independent Press
Two California state senators have called for a hearing on the settlement talks between Paramount Global and President Trump, alleging that such a deal would amount to a bribe in order to obtain regulatory approval for the studio's merger with Skydance Media. In a letter sent Friday, Sens. Tom Umberg and Josh Becker suggest that a settlement could violate state and federal law, as well as have a 'chilling effect' on investigative and political journalism. The senators invited Wendy McMahon and Bill Owens, top CBS News executives who have resigned in recent weeks, to testify. More from Variety PBS Sues Trump, Claims Defunding Order Violates First Amendment Trump Lawyers Claim '60 Minutes' Harris Interview Caused Him 'Mental Anguish,' Argue That the 'First Amendment Is No Shield to News Distortion' in Motion to Deny Paramount Bid to Dismiss Lawsuit 'Comics Unleashed' Returns to CBS Late-Night Schedule Following 'Midnight' Cancellation The senators said they were at the beginning stage of an inquiry focused on 'ensuring that public-facing media enterprises compete based on content and quality, not influence, capitulation, or political appeasement.' The letter was first reported by Semafor. Trump sued CBS last October for $10 billion, alleging that the network had engaged in consumer fraud by editing out a portion of a '60 Minutes' interview with Kamala Harris. Though CBS has argued in court that the suit is without merit, Paramount controlling shareholder Shari Redstone has nevertheless reportedly pushed for a settlement, in hopes that doing so will help expedite the pending $8 billion Skydance. Trump later amended the suit to seek $20 billion in damages. The Wall Street Journal reported this week that Paramount is willing to pay up to $15 million, though Trump has held out for a higher amount. Three Democratic U.S. senators — Elizabeth Warren, Ron Wyden and Bernie Sanders — raised alarms earlier this month about the discussions, suggesting that a corrupt quid pro quo may violate the federal bribery statute. Umberg is a former federal prosecutor. In their letter, he and Becker, both Democrats, suggest a settlement would also violate California's unfair competition law, and expose board members to shareholder lawsuits. 'Paramount's capitulation would also undermine two essential pillars of a liberal democracy: a free press and an impartial, rule-of-law regulatory system,' the senators wrote. Owens, the executive producer of '60 Minutes,' stepped down in April, citing interference with CBS' corporate overseers at Paramount. McMahon, the president of CBS News who also oversaw local stations, resigned May 19, also citing conflicts with Paramount honchos. The letter invites both to testify as 'friendly witnesses,' suggesting they may be able to offer insight about the talks and pushback from the news division. The Paramount board was copied on the letter. Some ethics experts have indicated it would be difficult to prove a bribery charge in court, given the challenge of demonstrating an explicit quid pro quo. Best of Variety What's Coming to Netflix in June 2025 New Movies Out Now in Theaters: What to See This Week 'Harry Potter' TV Show Cast Guide: Who's Who in Hogwarts?
Yahoo
30-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
California lawmakers ask former CBS leaders to testify on proposed settlement with Trump
California state Sens. Tom Umberg and Josh Becker are asking former CBS leaders to testify in a probe into Paramount's offer to settle a legal fight with President Donald Trump for $15 million. The Democrats said in a letter Friday that they are opening an inquiry into whether the CBS parent company violated California anti-competitiveness law or breached ethical boundaries by caving to a 'frivolous' suit. In the letter to former CBS News CEO Wendy McMahon and ex-60 Minutes Executive Producer Bill Owens the senators questioned if the company considered settling 'to secure favorable regulatory treatment' and said such behavior would raise 'deeply troubling implications not just for journalism, but for the rule of law and the integrity of corporate governance.' Semafor first reported the development. Key context: Owens left the network in April citing concerns about his show's independence amid the legal battle with Trump, in which the president claimed an interview with former Vice President Kamala Harris was deceptively edited. Paramount officials disputed the claim but nevertheless offered Trump a $15 million settlement, according to the Wall Street Journal, but Trump reportedly refused the deal, seeking more money. McMahon abruptly stepped down from her role earlier this month, saying she disagreed with the company on how to proceed. Details: Umberg and Becker, who chair their chamber's judiciary and energy committees, respectively, raised concerns that the settlement could be illegally anticompetitive, putting in-state media outlets that could not afford such a settlement at a disadvantage. They also said they're seeking to find out whether Paramount violated federal anti-bribery laws, breached its duty to shareholders or misused corporate funding by offering it to Trump. 'Your recent resignations from CBS's leadership, amid public reports of internal concern about the editorial and ethical implications of the proposed settlement, suggest that you may possess important, first-hand knowledge relevant to our legislative oversight responsibilities,' they wrote to the former CBS leaders. A Paramount spokesperson declined to comment. What's next: The senators haven't yet set a date for the joint hearing, but said it would be only the beginning of their inquiry and asserted their committees' subpoena power under state law.
Politico
30-05-2025
- Business
- Politico
California lawmakers ask former CBS leaders to testify on proposed settlement with Trump
California state Sens. Tom Umberg and Josh Becker are asking former CBS leaders to testify in a probe into Paramount's offer to settle a legal fight with President Donald Trump for $15 million. The Democrats said in a letter Friday that they are opening an inquiry into whether the CBS parent company violated California anti-competitiveness law or breached ethical boundaries by caving to a 'frivolous' suit. In the letter to former CBS News CEO Wendy McMahon and ex-60 Minutes Executive Producer Bill Owens the senators questioned if the company considered settling 'to secure favorable regulatory treatment' and said such behavior would raise 'deeply troubling implications not just for journalism, but for the rule of law and the integrity of corporate governance.' Semafor first reported the development. Key context: Owens left the network in April citing concerns about his show's independence amid the legal battle with Trump, in which the president claimed an interview with former Vice President Kamala Harris was deceptively edited. Paramount officials disputed the claim but nevertheless offered Trump a $15 million settlement, according to the Wall Street Journal, but Trump reportedly refused the deal, seeking more money. McMahon abruptly stepped down from her role earlier this month, saying she disagreed with the company on how to proceed. Details: Umberg and Becker, who chair their chamber's judiciary and energy committees, respectively, raised concerns that the settlement could be illegally anticompetitive, putting in-state media outlets that could not afford such a settlement at a disadvantage. They also said they're seeking to find out whether Paramount violated federal anti-bribery laws, breached its duty to shareholders or misused corporate funding by offering it to Trump. 'Your recent resignations from CBS's leadership, amid public reports of internal concern about the editorial and ethical implications of the proposed settlement, suggest that you may possess important, first-hand knowledge relevant to our legislative oversight responsibilities,' they wrote to the former CBS leaders. A Paramount spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment. What's next: The senators haven't yet set a date for the joint hearing, but said it would be only the beginning of their inquiry and asserted their committees' subpoena power under state law.
