Media Library (75)

SIIA Joins Coalition Letter Opposing California SB 362

SIIA and organizations respectfully OPPOSE SB 362 (Becker) as amended May 18, 2023. The bill is premised on a purported loophole in the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) that does not exist, creating a duplicative and potentially confusing regime for businesses that are already subject to the CCPA’s disclosure, deletion, and opt-out rights; and imposing unnecessary and significant burdens on the new Privacy Agency, which remains behind on CCPA regulations.
  • The Attorney General’s Office expressly states data brokers are businesses subject to the CCPA.
  • Consumers already have all the information needed to effectuate their CCPA rights against data brokers.
  • The CCPA’s deletion rights have a significant downstream effect. Any limits exist out of necessity, not loopholes.
 
AMPLIFY-2023_MainStage_PracticalAI

Can’t-Miss Talk at AMPLIFY 2023: ‘Practical Things You Can Do Right Now with Artificial Intelligence (And How to Use it Ethically)’

Note: This article was written by Kathryn Deen.

AMPLIFY 2023, AM&P Network’s Content & Marketing Summit, is coming up fast. On June 27-28 in Washington, D.C., attendees will experience a truly collaborative event, highlighted by valuable Main Stage sessions such as the June 28 talk, “Practical Things You Can Do Right Now with Artificial Intelligence (And How to Use it Ethically).”

Generative AI tools seem to be the topic on everyone’s lips, but how do you move from the hype to practical, ethical applications today? And what are the impacts of these developments in such a fast-moving environment? Tasio co-founder Dray McFarlane and PolArctic LLC CEO Leslie Canavera will take to the Main Stage to impart their wisdom. Tasio provides AI solutions specifically for associations, and PolArctic focuses on the ethical use of AI for business.

Here are some highlights from AM&P Network’s recent conversation with McFarlane and Canavera about their upcoming AMPLIFY talk.

Signature: Why are AI and ethics so key to the industry right now?

McFarlane: I’ve been working as a software vendor for almost two decades focused on associations, and it felt like until Chat GPT came out in late 2022, “AI” was a bit of a bad word for associations. Since it’s become more popular and people can get their hands on it with ChatGPT, they are becoming more comfortable and more afraid at the same time. My team has experience using these technologies and we’ve discovered how to use AI in very practical ways. Things are evolving and changing so fast, and every time we speak about it, the conversation is dominated by questions about how to do this ethically.

Signature: How does this speak to both content and marketing?

Canavera: The big thing for both content and marketing is what you can have AI create for you, how far you should take that before you step in, and what you need to provide to make sure that you can claim it as your own. Content in particular is a sticky subject because the laws are probably going to impact what we can actually do in the near future. Marketing is almost easier because there are a lot of very specific, marketing-focused tools that you can use to make it easier to reach out to people in a personalized way.

Signature: What can attendees expect to take away from your talk?

McFarlane: We’ll share very practical examples of a lot of marketing usages for AI—producing, editing, and maintaining content. We’ll help people understand how you should use these tools, how to be careful about them, what you can and can’t trust, what information you should and shouldn’t provide, etc. In the process, we’ll go into a little bit on prompt engineering and will provide a worksheet that they can access online. We’ll also emphasize holding your vendors accountable, because if they’re not talking about ethics, they’re probably doing something wrong.

Canavera: I’m hoping people take away a checklist of some thoughts and questions they should ask themselves when they’re starting to use these tools. Even though it’s fast and easy for AI to produce content, I want them to learn to take a step back and look at it a bit deeper to make sure their brand isn’t tarnished by something they put out there; for instance, making sure there’s no plagiarism. Another thing to stay on top of is the regulations; they are changing daily, and that’s something they need to be checking and verifying.

Register here for AMPLIFY to hear from these experts IN PERSON and many other industry experts.

Media Library (60)

SIIA Joins Letter to the Administration on the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF)

The U.S. business and agriculture community welcomed the administration’s launch of the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) talks to advance U.S. commercial interests in a critical region. We are eager to support stronger U.S. engagement in the Indo-Pacific region and to work in partnership with the administration and our regional allies to promote fair and inclusive trade, supply chain resilience, and the clean economy transition. However, we are growing increasingly concerned that the content and direction of the administration’s proposals for the talks risk not only failing to deliver meaningful strategic and commercial outcomes but also endangering U.S. trade and economic interests in the Indo-Pacific region and beyond.

Amidst the intricacies of this situation, agricultural recruitment agencies Australia stand out as key players in ensuring the prosperity of the region’s agricultural sector amidst shifting trade dynamics. Acting as bridges, these agencies connect skilled agricultural professionals with opportunities that align with broader aims such as fair trade and sustainability. Through their role in facilitating talent placement within the agricultural domain, these agencies contribute to the establishment of resilient supply chains and the stimulation of economic growth across the Indo-Pacific region. As conversations around the IPEF talks progress, the significance of agricultural recruitment agencies in Australia only amplifies, underscoring their vital role in bolstering the region’s agricultural landscape and promoting shared commercial interests.

The U.S. business and agriculture community regrets the administration’s decision not to engage in negotiations to remove tariffs and other market access barriers facing U.S. manufacturing, services, financial services, and agricultural exports. However, it is unclear why some traditional U.S. trade priorities that could deliver meaningful benefits for American exporters are being sidelined in the IPEF talks. For example, the United States has long pursued trade rules that seek to address standards-related and other technical barriers to trade, measures that discourage trade in remanufactured goods, inadequate intellectual property protections, and sector-specific regulatory barriers that impede exports of autos, chemicals, cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, medical devices, and ICT products; the same is true for sanitary and phytosanitary standards and their importance to U.S. agricultural exports. Obtaining IPEF commitments in these areas would help facilitate trade in sectors where the competitiveness of U.S. companies is stymied by the proliferation of non-tariff barriers overseas. These barriers also undermine supply chain resiliency, potentially sapping the benefit of future IPEF commitments. The administration’s interactions to date with the stakeholder community offer no insight into how or why these non-market access issues of high importance to trade have been left out of the IPEF talks.

Further, we are deeply concerned about statements from U.S. officials and reports from the third IPEF round that suggest the administration is wavering in its promotion of high standard rules for digital trade. Data is the lifeblood of today’s global economy, underpinning and enabling businesses of all sizes and in all sectors, including in manufacturing, which is increasingly data-driven. Rules in recent U.S. trade agreements seek to ensure that data can flow freely across borders, businesses and entrepreneurs are not compelled to relinquish proprietary data, and the digital output of creative industries is not disadvantaged by the mere fact that it is owned by Americans or produced in the United States. Nothing in the rules concluded by the United States and its democratic allies—including in the USMCA, which secured large, bipartisan congressional majorities—inhibits the ability of governments to regulate in the interest of privacy, protection against bias, pursuit of fair market competition, or other public policy objectives. These rules are integral to U.S. political and economic values.

The United States should use the IPEF talks to build on the outcomes achieved in past negotiations and address evolving challenges to U.S. trade. An IPEF that instead derogates from these outcomes and abandons the core principle of nondiscrimination risks doing material harm to U.S. economic interests by emboldening restrictive foreign trade and data practices, undermining the efforts of like-minded allies to promote high standard global norms, and ceding U.S. leadership on rulemaking for the digital economy.

Media Library (57)

SIIA Joins Industry Letter Raising Concerns About the EUCS

We write to raise concerns ahead of the upcoming meeting of the EU-U.S. Trade and Technology Council (TTC) taking place in Sweden at the end of this month, regarding new and alarming revisions to the European Commission’s proposed European Cybersecurity Certification Scheme for Cloud Services (EUCS). We urge the United States to use upcoming meetings to engage with the European Commission and Member States to secure a durable solution that will enable American and European companies to compete on a level playing field, underpinned by transatlantic trust and safety, by removing nationality-based ownership restrictions of this draft measure.

While we support the overall goal of the EUCS to unify and harmonize the best security practices while reducing market barriers for businesses, we continue to be concerned about lack of transparency and public consultation, and the missing market impact assessment. For example, EU financial institutions and associations have voiced concerns that the so-called “sovereignty requirements” in EUCS would limit technology choice and be detrimental to the resilience and cybersecurity of digital and cloud solutions. Furthermore, the sovereignty requirements in EUCS appear contradictory to the recently adopted Digital Operational Resilience Act (DORA).

If not addressed before finalized, a discriminatory EUCS also threatens to inhibit robust transatlantic cooperation and collaboration in strategic emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence, machine learning, quantum computing, and biotechnology, including at the NATO level among allies.

Business people illustration

‘Think Ambitious Experiments’; Valuing Failure and Coaxing the Best Ideas Out of Us

It’s interesting how we create our best work. I recall as a young Washington Post sports reporter being told by my editor that a tennis article wasn’t good enough and angrily writing something great after. But that can’t work too often. From talking to a lot of industry folks, one thing becomes clear: The importance of giving people the space to try, fail and try again.

A musical version of New York, New York—the 1977 film—opened on Broadway recently. Its ultra-accomplished 96 year-old composer, John Kander has been talking about what inspired him and his late songwriting partner Fred Ebb to write the film’s titular song. (They also wrote Cabaret and Chicago, among other things.)

“We wrote 5, 6 songs for [the film] and among them was New York, New York, and we played them for [Martin] Scorsese and Liza [Minnelli]—and [Robert] DeNiro was over on a couch someplace. We didn’t actually see him,” Kander said in a video recently. “We played our songs, and Marty was very complimentary, and we were getting ready to leave and suddenly we saw an arm raise up. There was a very animated conversation, and Scorsese came back and in a very embarrassed way said, ‘Would you mind going back and taking another crack at [New York, New York]?’

“And Fred and I [thought,] of course not! We took a cab back to our office, and in 45 minutes wrote the New York, New York that you know. It has a lot of anger in it because we were really pissed off. [He smiled.] ‘Some actor is going to tell us how to write a song!’”

It’s hard to say that Kander and Ebb momentarily failed. But Kander does admit that DeNiro’s words made them write a better song.

Here are some thoughts on the importance of allowing for failure and how to coax the best ideas:

Normalize talking about failures. “Working with metrics is all about trial and error, adjustment and retrial,” Elizabeth Gamperl wrote in her Reuters Institute report. “Every failure is a step closer to success.” Said one editor: “We have as many open conversations about when things haven’t worked as possible without everyone getting really upset. That is not easy because people work incredibly hard in the newsroom. What lessons can be learned?”

Make failure safe.“You have to have the ability to put yourself out there and be willing to fail,” Heather Farley, now the CEO of Access Intelligence, once told us. “Fail fast and fail forward is my favorite motto.” What was one of the first things you did when you became CEO of Match? Sam Yagan was asked. “When I took over Match, I realized that they use data, but the expectation—which was always data-driven—was that tests would all succeed. It wasn’t built in a culture of failure. Much like online betting sites not on Gamstop, where risks and uncertainty are inherent, I understood that embracing the possibility of failure was crucial. I compare never failing with not having ambition. [So the question became,] how do we let ourselves test out our intuition? The intuition has to inform what data you get.”

Learn lessons in success and failure. “If something [messes] up, you can look at your stats and figure out what went wrong,” said Kate Lucey, a former digital editor for Cosmopolitan UK. “Try new ideas—if they work, how can you expand them? If they fail, why did they fail and what have you learnt about your audience that you can apply to future work? It’s constant learning, constant adapting—and a constant headache… but it’s FUN.”

“Create a culture to build trust and collaboration, and breaking down silos…” Tim Hartman, CEO of GovExec said at one of our conferences. “Think ambitious experiments and trust each other. If you look around and don’t see that, you have a problem.”

Don’t let the quiet ones stay quiet. “Have a think tank where you can bring people to brainstorm,” Elizabeth Petersen of Simplify Compliance told us once. “Every person has ideas but you need to coax them out. I like to brainstorm on the fly. I have introverts [on staff], and they need to be encouraged. To have a structured agenda is a great way to get people talking.”

Set benchmarks. “One of the biggest barriers to innovation is fear of failure,” Petersen added. “The information industry is changing so rapidly and there are so many unknowns. Even the most thoroughly researched product may not gain market traction. The key to developing a humming new product development engine is to be comfortable with risk and to set measurable (and transparent) benchmarks for product success.”

Allow for turbulence. “Embracing failure is easier said than done,” Anita Zielina, former director of news innovation and leadership at the Craig Newmark Graduate School of Journalism at CUNY, told us at BIMS a few years ago. “We like to win and are not so excited about failure. But the culture of failure empowers your team to experiment. If you don’t, you’re not going to have creativity in the room. Experimentation includes failure, and organizations need to live with that. There is no digital product development that doesn’t have unexpected turbulences. But it also allows for agility.”