Current Events in March 2018

Craigslist announced on Friday that it’s shutting down its personal ad section.

The global classified ad site made its decision in response to Congress passing the Allow States and Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act of 2017 (FOSTA), which makes websites liable for facilitating sex trafficking.

“US Congress just passed HR 1865, ‘FOSTA’, seeking to subject websites to criminal and civil liability when third parties (users) misuse online personals unlawfully,” Craigslist said in a statement on its site.

“Any tool or service can be misused. We can’t take such risk without jeopardizing all our other services, so we are regretfully taking Craigslist personals offline. Hopefully we can bring them back some day.”

Websites held accountable

The measure -- which was approved by both chambers of Congress -- was passed by the Senate on Wednesday after the House approved it last month. President Trump is expected to sign it into law as soon as this week.

The legislation would create an exception to Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act, which would clear the way for websites to be targeted with legal action for enabling prostitution and sex trafficking.

It would also "enable state law enforcement officials, not just the federal Department of Justice, to take action against individuals or businesses that violate federal sex trafficking laws."

Those in support of the legislation say it will help curb the problem of online sex trafficking. However, numerous tech companies argue that the bill is a form of censorship.

‘Significant unintended consequences’

Last year, 10 tech trade groups co-authored a letter condemning the bill. The groups said the amendment would invite “significant unintended consequences” and create legal ambiguity that would have a "chilling effect."

"Platforms will err on the side of extreme caution in removing content uploaded by their users, while cutting back on proactive prevention measures," they wrote.

In a separate letter, the Consumer Technology Association (CTA) argued that bad actors "could easily escape by changing their URL address or relocating abroad."

"We urge Congress to take a narrow approach that directly targets bad actors,' the CTA said. "Specifically, Congress should urge the Department of Justice to aggressively use its powers to identify and prosecute the limited number of rogue websites that are violating the law."

Best Buy is the latest to banish Huawei phones from its shelves. In January, both AT&T and Verizon announced they were doing the same out of concerns from the CIA, FBI, and NSA that Huawei might be utilizing its phones to harvest sensitive data to pass along to the Chinese government.

The retailer will also pull Huawei’s smartwatches and laptops from its inventory as well.

The growing concern over U.S.-directed security threats was first raised by Congress’ Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence in 2012. The committee’s warning was blunt: Consumers have a  “growing dependence” on a small group of equipment providers and China has the means, opportunity, and motive to use telecommunications companies for malicious purposes.

"We're deeply concerned about the risks of allowing any company or entity that is beholden to foreign governments that don't share our values to gain positions of power inside our telecommunications networks," said FBI Director Christopher Wray in testimony to the Senate Intelligence Committee. He added this would permit “the capacity to maliciously modify or steal information. And it provides the capacity to conduct undetected espionage.”

With Best Buy, AT&T, and Verizon out of the picture, consumers looking to buy Huawei’s new Mate 10 Pro have relatively few options left. A ConsumerAffairs survey of the market showed that the Mate 10 was still available at Amazon, eBay, and Huawei’s own online store, but that was about it. At this juncture, it’s difficult to forecast how taking Huawei out of the retail picture might impact competitors’ prices with one less rival in the mix.

Who is Huawei and why should consumers be concerned?

Huawei Technologies is China’s largest telephone-network equipment maker and one of the world's largest telecom equipment makers. The company’s global footprint is impressive. It moved more than 153 million handsets in 2017, making it the most successful Chinese brand and in the same league as Samsung and Apple.

While American consumers might not recognize the name as a brand, many of the phones they use -- such as T-Mobile, TalkTalk, and Motorola -- employ Huawei’s mechanisms.

The security concerns that Congress has raised tie directly to Huawei’s founder, Ren Zhengfei, who was an engineer in Chinese People's Liberation Army in the early 1980s.

In 1994, Zhengfei convinced the Chinese government that international security is linked to  switching equipment technology and “that a nation that did not have its own switching equipment was like one that lacked its own military." The Chinese government reportedly agreed with this assessment and signed a deal with Huawei to build China’s first national telecommunications network.

Congress has had their eye on Huawei’s desire to establish a presence in the U.S. for a while. In 2008, some members raised questions about the company's proposed merger with 3Com. Concerns over the company’s bid for a Sprint contract were also voiced in 2010. Following a review by the U.S. Committee on Foreign Investment, Huawei decided to back off on its purchase of 3Leaf systems in 2010.

The number of homes for sale rose in the first quarter for the first time in years, according to real estate marketplace Trulia. But it’s not good news for first-time homebuyers.

The increase in housing inventory -- a gain of 3.3 percent -- was due only to the supply of premium homes rising by more than 13 percent. Buyers looking for an entry-level home still have fewer to choose from, and those that are on the market are a lot more expensive than last year.

The Trulia Inventory and Price Watch found the number of homes priced in the entry-level category hit its lowest level in six years, while prices surged nearly 10 percent.

More starter homes will need work

Perhaps more discouraging for consumers hoping to buy their first home is the condition of the available homes in their price range. The report finds that starter homes on the market this spring are much less likely to be in “move-in” condition.

According to Trulia, fixer-uppers now make up 11.2 percent of the market, rising  from 10.3 percent in 2012. On a national basis, starter homes are nine years older on average and about two percent smaller. Average square footage has shrunk from 1,211 six years ago to 1,187 today.

To get into the housing market today, buyers must be prepared to spend a larger percentage of their disposable income. On a national average, paying for the typical starter home now takes 41.2 percent of the buyer’s income.

And buyers looking in California may be completely out of luck. The state is the most expensive for starter homes in the country, with average buyers in San Francisco, San Jose, and Los Angeles needing more than 100 percent of their income to pay for the typical entry-level home in those markets.

Perfect storm

"First-time home buyers face a perfect storm this spring,” said Trulia's senior economist Sheryl Young. “Affordable, move-in ready starter homes have become harder to find amid rising home prices and mortgage rates.”

Young says there are more fixer uppers now because sellers have little incentive to make improvements in such a tight, competitive housing market.

Her advice to buyers is to be very careful when considering a fixer upper. Make sure you know the extent of repairs and improvements that will have to be made and what they will cost. Otherwise, you could end up paying a lot more for your starter home than you intended.

Vitamin Cottage Natural Food Markets of Lakewood, Colo., is recalling Natural Grocers Coconut Smiles Organic.

The product may be contaminated with Salmonella.

Six illnesses have been reported.

The following product, packaged in clear 10-oz. plastic bags, bearing the “Natural Grocers” label and packed-on dates prior to 18-075 (Mar. 16, 2018), are being recalled:

• UPC Code: 8034810
• Description: Coconut Smiles Organic
• Packed on date: ALL PACK DATES PRIOR TO 18-075 (Mar. 16, 2018)

The recalled product was distributed to 145 Natural Grocers stores in Arkansas, Arizona, Colorado, Iowa, Idaho, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, Texas, Utah, Washington and Wyoming. Consumers can find the specific locations of the Natural Grocers stores in those states at: https://www.naturalgrocers.com/storelocations/store-directory/.

What to do

Customers who purchased the recalled product should return it to the store for credit or refund.

Consumers with questions may contact the company at 303-986-4600, ext. 80531, Monday through Friday 8 a.m. – 5 p.m. (MST).

PDX Aromatics, doing business as Kraken Kratom, Phytoextractum, and Soul Speciosa, is expanding its earlier recall of certain kratom white vein powder and capsule products and red vein powder products.

The products may be contaminated with Salmonella.

The expanded recall includes white vein and red vein powder and capsule products shipped between January 18, 2018, and March 8, 2018: 

RED VEIN powder and capsule EXPANDED recalled products:

WHITE VEIN powder and capsule EXPANDED recalled products have any of the following LOT codes:

RED VEIN powder EXPANDED recalled products:

RED VEIN powder EXPANDED recalled products have any of the following LOT codes:

The recalled products were sold directly to internet consumers in the U.S. through the company websites http://phytoextractum.com, http://soulspeciosa.com and http://krakenkratom.com.

What to do

Customers who purchased the recalled products should visit pdxaromatics.com/recall for complete return and refund instructions.

The company is notifying all customers to return products so they can be destroyed.

Consumers with questions may contact PDX Aromatics at 503-850-9225, 9AM – 5PM (PT), Monday through Friday, or by email at recall@pdxaromatics.com.

Three days after a pedestrian was struck and killed by an Uber operating in autonomous mode, Arizona police say video footage of the accident suggests the self-driving car was not at fault for the crash.

Although the human backup driver made no attempt to brake, Sylvia Moir, local police chief in Tempe, Ariz., said the accident would likely have occurred whether or not the vehicle was in autonomous mode.

“It’s very clear it would have been difficult to avoid this collision in any kind of mode (autonomous or human-driven) based on how she came from the shadows right into the roadway,” Moir told the San Francisco Chronicle.

Victim didn’t cross at crosswalk

At the time of the crash, the vehicle was traveling at 38mph in a 35mph zone, according to the initial investigation. The woman hit by the Uber was 49-year-old Elaine Herzberg, who was found unconscious at the scene and later died of her injuries in a local hospital.

Herzberg was pushing a bicycle carrying numerous plastic shopping bags outside of a crosswalk when she walked out in front of the self-driving Volvo XC90. Local authorities suspect Herzberg may have been homeless.

The self-driving car had a human backup driver positioned in the front seat, as required by local regulations. However, the backup driver was unable to take control of the vehicle in time to prevent the crash.

“The driver said it was like a flash, the person walked out in front of them,” Moir told the Chronicle. “His first alert to the collision was the sound of the collision.”

Although the video footage does not conclusively show who is at fault, Moir said that she believes the blame cannot be fully placed on Uber. “I suspect preliminarily it appears that the Uber would likely not be at fault in this accident,” she said.

Video footage released

Tempe police have released portions of the video footage captured from cameras both inside and outside the vehicle. Those who wish to view the video can do so here, but ConsumerAffairs warns that the content is graphic.

The footage seems to show human safety operator Rafael Vasquez distracted and looking down moments before the crash. It also shows the driver's hands were not hovering above the steering wheel, which backup drivers are instructed to do in order to be able to take control of the car quickly in the event of an emergency.

“The video is disturbing and heartbreaking to watch, and our thoughts continue to be with Elaine’s loved ones,” an Uber spokesperson said in a statement. “Our cars remain grounded, and we’re assisting local, state and federal authorities in any way we can.”

The accident is the first known self-driving crash to result in a pedestrian fatality, but not the first death involving self-driving technology.

In 2016, a man was killed while behind the wheel of a Tesla using its Autopilot feature. The vehicle’s computer vision-based vehicle detection system, which is different from what Uber uses, was not at fault in the crash, investigators later ruled.

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerburg has made a public statement in response to the controversy over one of its partner's illegal sale of Facebook data to a third party.

The data, which includes profiles for an estimated 50 million Facebook users, was allegedly used to target political ads in support of Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump during the 2016 election.

"We have a responsibility to protect your data, and if we can't then we don't deserve to serve you," Zukerberg wrote in a nearly 1,000 word post on Facebook. "I've been working to understand exactly what happened and how to make sure this doesn't happen again."

Facebook actually did nothing illegal. It had a partnership with a third party app -- This Is Your Digital Life -- that allowed the app developer to access data about people who downloaded the app, and their friends. People who downloaded the app were informed of the terms.

Violations of terms of service

What happened next is where it gets sticky. Facebook alleges that the owners of the app sold the data to a political marketing firm, Cambridge Analytica, in violation of Facebook's terms of service. Cambridge Analytica then allegedly used the data to target voters on behalf of the Trump campaign.

In his statement, Zuckerberg said Facebook made a number of policy changes in 2014 that would have prevented the unauthorized distribution of Facebook data had they been adopted earlier.

Among the changes:

• Limits were placed on the data that apps could access

• Apps could not access users' friends' data without permission from the friends

• Developers must receive Facebook permission before they can ask for users' data

Learned of the data sale in 2015

Zuckerberg says it was not until 2015 that Facebook learned from journalists that the app developer had sold the data to Cambridge Analytica. It then demanded the data be deleted, and Zuckerberg says Facebook received certifications that the data had, in fact, been destroyed.

"Last week, we learned from The Guardian, The New York Times and Channel 4 that Cambridge Analytica may not have deleted the data as they had certified," Zuckerberg wrote in his post. "We immediately banned them from using any of our services. Cambridge Analytica claims they have already deleted the data and has agreed to a forensic audit by a firm we hired to confirm this. We're also working with regulators as they investigate what happened."

So far, Zuckerberg's public statement has done little to quell the controversy. An appearance on CNN Wednesday night didn't seem to help either.

Critics say Facebook should have informed its users in 2015 that their data may have been sold to a political marketing firm. A Twitter campaign called #deletefacebook is urging angry Facebook users to abandon the social media platform.

But writing on Engadget, technology journalist Nicole Lee says deleting Facebook is easier said than done. She notes that the site has become too important to too many people who depend on it to stay connected to family and friends.

Dutch financial tech firm VI Company uncovered a flaw in digital currency exchange Coinbase’s system that allowed users to add an unlimited amount of the digital currency Ether (ETH) -- a cryptocurrency running on the Ethereum network -- to their Coinbase account.

In technical terms, Coinbase users were able to exploit a “smart contract” to send Ether to as many “wallets” they could set up in their Coinbase account. A smart contract is a computer protocol designed to digitally facilitate the negotiation of a contract.

The bug has been patched, but the exploit is yet another example of how digital cryptocurrency platforms are not yet foolproof when it comes to security or design.

Merry Christmas to… myself!

In the spirit of giving, VI Company’s discovery of the bug came out of designing a Christmas “present” it would give out to clients.

VI’s present was a small amount of Ether, but delivered in a way that gave the recipient a first-person look into how the technology behind Ether, smart contracts, and blockchains worked.

“What we didn’t expect was that one of our colleagues, who decided to use Coinbase as his wallet, told us he received the Ethereum,” wrote blockchain specialist Jesse Lakerveld in a VI blog post. “After checking, we found out that no Ethereum had been sent to our colleague according to the smart contract. But according to his Coinbase wallet, he did receive it.”

Lakerveld decided to try to reproduce the issue on a smaller scale and found that users could indeed add Ethereum to Coinbase wallets without “sending” the asset from a smart contract.

Now what do we do?

The bug VI uncovered was, in the company’s words “quite big.” The conundrum was how to clue in Coinbase in a “proper” way.

VI’s team decided to go with HackerOne, a hacker-powered security platform that connects businesses with cybersecurity researchers. HackerOne is one of the good guys in the hacking world where its clients -- which include GM, Starbucks, Spotify, Nintendo, and the U.S. Department of Defense -- offer bounties to hackers who identify bugs in their systems and products.

Lucky for VI, Coinbase was a HackerOne client. In late January, the platform confirmed that the bug had been fixed and happily paid a bounty of $10,000.

“Analysis of the issue indicated only accidental loss and no exploitation attempts,” Coinbase officials said.

Coinbase hasn’t always been so lucky

Loopholes similar to what VI dug up have put Coinbase in a bind before. In January, a website glitch at Overstock.com allowed users to pay and request refunds in either Bitcoin or Bitcoin Cash. Overstock uses Coinbase’s merchant integration API.

Coinbase was also blamed for a bug that accidentally charged users as many as 17 times for the same purchase. However, the company was found not to be responsible, and both Visa and Worldpay exonerated it. Coinbase has announced that it will issue refunds to any consumer who was affected by the bug.

In a rare show of bipartisan cooperation, lawmakers in Washington have proposed a $1.3 trillion budget bill that would fund the government through September.

Passage before Friday at midnight would head off a government shutdown.

The measure is designed to please both Republicans and Democrats. It contains additional spending on the military but also boosts domestic spending.

'Adults in the room'

Some conservative Republicans in the House oppose the measure because it adds to the deficit. Rep. Mark Walker (R-N.C.) is leading the opposition, saying Washington must be more fiscally responsible.

"We have to be the adults in the room," Walker said. "We have funding requests by the billions every single week – Republicans and Democrats – but someone has to step up. Republicans have to step up to be able to bend this back."

But Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-N.J.), Chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, supports the spending bill, noting that it adheres to the recently enacted budget “caps” agreement while providing an additional $80 billion for the Pentagon.

The measure also provides funding to counter a growing opioid abuse epidemic, promote school safety and mental health, and improve infrastructure.

'Negotiated in good faith'

“This Omnibus Appropriations bill represents thousands of hours of work, consideration, and input by Members of Congress," Frelinghuysen said. "These 12 bills were considered and amended in committee and on the House floor in an open and inclusive process last year, and have been negotiated in good faith by committee leaders, House and Senate Leadership on both sides of the aisle, and the White House."

In the Senate, the measure has the backing of many Democrats, including Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), who praised the bill's increased funding for opioid treatment and rural broadband.

Should the bill pass both the House and Senate, as expected, the White House has indicated President Trump will sign it.

Rewards credit cards are popular with consumers. Some cards pay cash back on purchases while some provide travel perks.

But consumers who load those cards up with debt that they carry month to month will find that interest charges erode many of those rewards. A recent survey by CompareCards.com found that 39 percent of consumers with a rewards card carry a balance. The researchers say the average balance is $2,547.

The net result isn't all that rewarding. Let's assume that the average cash back on those purchases is 1.5 percent; that means a consumer would earn $38.20 in rewards. But with the average credit card interest rate north of 16 percent, the cardholder pays hefty interest on that balance each month.

In a year's time, interest charges would amount to at least $407.52. While it's true that the rewards offset at least a small portion of those charges, the consumer would have been ahead by paying the balance in full each month.

Rewards should be used for something fun, not paying interest. Ironically, the survey found that the most popular use of rewards was paying down debt.

Many consumers have more than one rewards card

The survey also found that while most people with rewards credit cards only had one or two, a quarter of those in the survey said they carried three or more rewards credit cards.

The authors point out that having a lot of rewards cards isn't necessarily a problem, as long as you don't run up debt on all of them. When you do, they don't reward you -- they cost you.

If you have a credit card with a large balance, the most rewarding credit card -- the one that saves the most money -- is a balance transfer card with zero percent interest for a lengthy introductory period.

An example

The Chase Slate Card is just one of several balance transfer cards, but it is attractive because there is no balance transfer fee if the transfer is made within 60 days of opening the account. The cardholder would pay no interest on the transferred balance for 15 months.

Using the example of a $2,547 balance at 16 percent APR, eliminating the $407.52 interest charges beats the cash back rewards most credit cards will pay. Monthly payments of $169.80 would pay off the balance in 15 months without paying any interest.

That’s not a bad reward.

SMI Holdings, doing business as Stampede Meat, of Bridgeview, Ill., is recalling approximately 484,800 pounds of raw beef top sirloin steak.

The products may be contaminated with Salmonella.

There have been no confirmed reports of adverse reactions due to consumption of these products.

The following frozen raw beef top sirloin steak items, produced from February 19, 2018, through March 14, 2018, are being recalled:

• Cases containing 64 6-oz. vacuum-packed packages of “USDA SELECT OR HIGHER BONELESS BEEF TOP SIRLOIN STEAKS,” (item #5404) with lot codes ranging from 05018 to 07318 (inclusive) and “Best By” dates from Feb. 19, 2019 to Mar. 14, 2019 (inclusive).
• Cases containing 64 8-oz. vacuum-packed packages of “USDA SELECT OR HIGHER BONELESS BEEF TOP SIRLOIN STEAKS,” (item #5419) with lot codes ranging from 05018 to 07318 (inclusive) and “Best By” dates from Feb. 19, 2019 to Mar. 14, 2019 (inclusive).

The recalled products, bearing establishment number “EST. 19113” inside the USDA mark of inspection, were distributed to restaurants nationwide.

What to do

Customers who purchased the recalled products should not consume them, but discard them.

Consumers with questions may contact Adam Miller at (800) 401-8317.

Ford Motor Company is recalling 5,357 model year 2015-2016 Ford Focus vehicles equipped with a 1.0L GTDI engine and 6-speed manual transmission, and model year 2013-2014 Ford Fusion vehicles equipped with a 1.6L GTDI engine and 6-speed manual transmission.

The clutch may fracture, resulting in damage to the transmission assembly and possibly a transmission fluid leak.

A transmission fluid leak in the presence of an ignition source such as hot engine or exhaust components can increase the risk of a fire.

What to do

Ford will notify owners, and dealers will update the Focus vehicles with software that detects and prevents prolonged clutch slip, and will replace the clutch, as necessary, free of charge.

Owners of Fusion vehicles will have their clutch assembly replaced free of charge.

Parts are not currently available.

Owners will be notified of the recall with an interim notification beginning March 26, 2018.

A second letter will be mailed when the remedy is available, currently expected to be in the second quarter of 2018.

Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 18S07.

Ticket prices up, seat sizes down, extra charges for almost anything that can be turned into a profit center -- everything seems to be fair game for the airline industry.

While industry-wide revenues from passengers grew 9 percent in 2017 -- leading to earnings estimated at $581 billion -- flyer advocacy groups are saying it’s a win-lose situation for consumers, who are getting the short end of the deal. And there’s even more on the horizon for airlines if the Trump administration’s push for deregulation sees the light of day.

Over the last four years, the seven largest U.S. airlines have averaged $19.65 “profit per passenger” per one-way trip, according to the Wall Street Journal. That’s up from an average post-tax profit per passenger of $2.05 in 2012.

While $19.65 seems like a fair amount, it’s the gravy that’s churned out of everything else -- from seat upgrades and baggage fees to high-priced in-flight services -- that might raise red flags for consumers.

Some examples include:

• Delta Air Lines charging a $200 change fee for domestic flights and up to $500 for international flights;

• Southwest recently canceling its “$5 Happy Hour;” and

• American Airlines charging $75 for award tickets booked less than 21 days prior to departure.

Pushing out third-party sites

You may have thought that every trick in the book has been tried, but not yet. Nearly 50 airlines are now holding auctions for upgrades to business and first class. Some carriers are even considering ripping out the chairback entertainment screens on the assumption that most flyers carry a digital device they can use. In turn, using those devices might call for internet access, which the carrier is probably more than happy to sell them.

To make matters worse, third-party airfare aggregators like Kayak, Momondo, and CheapOair (an Authorized Partner) might also get yanked to the chopping block.

“The airlines are working to eliminate providers of independent travel information through actions including withholding schedules from consumers’ favorite travel websites, or refusing to allow them to display airfares, which are public information,” Kevin Mitchell, Chairman of the Business Travel Coalition, told ConsumerAffairs.

“Some airlines actually demand that travel websites pay the airline for helping them sell you a plane ticket. You read that correctly – the airlines not only want to collect the price of the ticket from you, but on top of that, they want the travel website - that enabled you to easily compare all of your options before selling you a ticket - to pay the airline, too.”

“Wringing” money out of travelers

With airline profits clearly above the clouds, has the industry’s eagerness to fill seats gone too far? There are flyer advocacy groups that think so, and they are trying to keep carriers mindful that the passenger deserves better.

FlyersRights.org has crafted a “passenger bill of rights” that ask for changes on everything from seat size to compensation for excessive flight delays and cancellations. The organization has also proposed several reforms to improve passenger well-being and deal with common issues that often occur in airports.

Those requests include ending the ability of airlines to overschedule flights at popular times (which often creates chronic delays and deceptive schedules) and encouraging the use of larger aircraft to reduce congestion for long haul flights.

FlyersRights also thinks many regulators may be turning a blind eye to how airports are leveraging extra revenue. Among their concerns are airport revenue from parking fees and taxi services and how things like airport shopping and remote car rental centers are “wringing more revenue from passengers.”

Recent estimates show that total airport revenues have grown nearly 50 percent since 2000.

Does anyone really care about the passenger?

One would think that United Airlines’ public relations calamities, which include a passenger getting dragged off a flight and the recent death of a dog, would raise some industry concern on the perceived value of a customer. However, advocates say that getting the attention of airliners is like rolling a boulder up a mountain.

“In short, they want to do what they want, without regard to comfort or well-being of the passenger,” reported Douglas Kidd, executive director of the National Association of Airline Passengers, after attending the US Chamber of Commerce Aviation Summit on March 1. “Both the airline reps and the TSA head spoke in glowing terms of the passenger experience and the passenger perspective, without any real appreciation of either subject.”

But despite the Trump administration’s desire to deregulate the airline industry and kowtow to their wishes, there’s one congressperson who’s taken up at least part of the fight.

U.S. Senator Susan Collins of Maine is spearheading an effort that would require the U.S. Department of Transportation to clearly disclose charges for airline fares, baggage fees, itinerary changes, and anything else that might cost travelers money.

“I’m not trying to dictate what airlines can charge, or what services they can charge for," she said, in an interview with Maine Public. "But I do believe there should be complete transparency.”

Toyota has suspended public road testing of its autonomous car technology after this week's fatal accident involving a driverless car in Arizona. The vehicle in the accident was operated by Uber, which has also suspended its testing.

A female pedestrian in Tempe, Ariz. was struck and killed Sunday night when she was hit by Uber's vehicle that was in self-driving mode at the time. Federal safety regulators have joined state and local police in investigating.

Toyota, which had been testing its driverless car technology on public roads in Michigan and California, announced it is suspending the tests temporarily. Bloomberg News quotes a company spokesman as saying there were concerns about the "emotional effect" the accident might have on test drivers, who ride in the test vehicles but do not control them.

Casting a cloud

The Arizona accident has cast a cloud over the emerging driverless car technology. The results of the investigation may determine whether the fatal accident proves to be a temporary setback or a troubling roadblock as the automotive and technology industries race to replace human drivers.

At issue are the circumstances surrounding the fatal accident. Investigators will determine whether the victim was somehow at fault or whether the vehicle's technology failed.

A number of consumer and auto safety groups, including Consumer Watchdog, have urged government regulators to slow their rush to put driverless cars on the nation's highways.

"There should be a national moratorium on all robot car testing on public roads until the complete details of this tragedy are made public and are analyzed by outside experts so we understand what went so terribly wrong," said John Simpson, Consumer Watchdog's privacy and technology project director.

"Arizona has been the wild west of robot car testing with virtually no regulations in place. That's why Uber and Waymo test there. When there's no sheriff in town, people get killed."

Tap on the brakes

Sen. Edward Markey (D-Mass.), who has been one of the few voices in Washington urging the government to move more deliberately on the issue, said the Arizona accident shows it's time to tap on the brakes.

“If these technologies are to reap their purported safety, efficiency, and environmental benefits, we must have robust safety, cybersecurity, and privacy rules in place before these vehicles are traveling our roadways to prevent such tragedies from occurring," Markey said.

Industry and government advocates of driverless cars have always maintained that the vehicles will be much safer than cars driven by humans, resulting in fewer injuries and deaths on the nation's highways.

Highway safety groups don't dispute that, but they argue the technology is still unproven and should not be tested on public roadways.

Google has made a $300 million commitment to elevate quality journalism and combat the spread of misinformation.

The company is launching what it calls the Google News Initiative (GNI), which will include features to help publishers grow their number of subscribers, adopt innovative technologies, and change their business model to thrive in the digital age.

"Over the next three years, we're committing $300 million toward meeting these goals. We're also deepening our commitment to building products that address the news industry's most urgent needs," Google said in a blog post.

Tacking misinformation

"It's becoming increasingly difficult to distinguish what's true (and not true) online," the company said. "Business models for journalism continue to change drastically. The rapid evolution of technology is challenging all institutions, including the news industry, to keep pace."

To combat the spread of misinformation during elections and breaking news moments, Google teamed up with Harvard University’s fact-checking organization First Draft to create a “Disinfo Lab.”

Disinfo Lab will identify inaccurate news stories and remove them from Google News rankings.

To help publishers garner more paying subscribers, Google will offer a “Subscribe with Google” tool that lets consumers subscribe to multiple outlets via Google. The tech giant will take a minor cut of the subscription cost while publishers get a majority.

The company has also partnered with the Poynter Institute, Stanford University, and the Local Media Association to develop MediaWise, an initiative to help middle and high school students be smarter consumers of news and information online.

Boosting consumer trust

The $300 million commitment towards elevating and strengthening quality journalism comes amid growing concern over “fake news.”

The 2018 Edelman Trust Barometer found that trust in traditional media is still on the higher end at 61 percent. However, the study found that more than half (59 percent) of consumers said they worried about fake news being used as a “weapon.”

"The commitments we're making through the Google News Initiative demonstrate that news and quality journalism is a top priority for Google," Google said. "We know that success can only be achieved by working together, and we look forward to collaborating with the news industry to build a stronger future for journalism."