Pro-net neutrality internet activists at a rally in 2014. Reuters/Jonathan Alcorn

Net neutrality advocates may seem like they're on the opposite side of the debate from AT&T and other big telecommunications firms — but that's not how Ma Bell sees it.

Not only does AT&T oppose the blocking or throttling of access to websites or online content — just like net neutrality proponents — it is also, just like them, against the creation of internet fast lanes.

Well, with a few exceptions that is.

"Let me [be] clear about this — AT&T is not interested in creating fast lanes and slow lanes on anyone's internet," Bob Quinn, AT&T's senior executive vice president of external and legislative affairs, said in a blog post published on the company's site on Tuesday.

But, he added, the company does want the freedom to essentially do just that — give preferential treatment, or a speedier virtual lane, to certain classes of applications. Among the data AT&T would like to prioritize: that coming from self-driving cars, remote surgery applications, and virtual reality devices.

"I think we can all agree that the packets directing autonomous cars, robotic surgeries, or public safety communications must not drop. Ever," Quinn said in his post. "So, let's address concerns around paid prioritization without impacting those innovations."

Quinn's statement came amid an on- and offline protest by consumer advocates on Tuesday aimed at urging Congress to reinstate the Federal Communications Commission's net neutrality rules. The commission in December voted to rescind the Obama-era regulations that require internet service providers such as AT&T to essentially treat all data equally.

AT&T and other big telecommunications companies opposed the former net-neutrality rules and have argued against having them put back in place, charging that the rules were too onerous and thwarted their ability to innovate.

The question of paid prioritization — the creation of fast lanes — has never really been about whether internet providers could offer services that gave special treatment to data from applications such as self-driving cars. Even the Obama-era rules allowed internet providers to essentially prioritize certain data by creating so-called managed services. Although those services are carried over the same wire lines and wireless frequencies as internet traffic, their data is kept apart from the internet.

In his blog post, Quinn acknowledged that AT&T and other internet providers could offer such services, but charged that they were forced to seek permission from the government first under the old rules.

The conversation concerning paid prioritization needs to be about banning "fast lanes and slow lanes, while also ensuring that innovative, new real-time technologies like those described above continue to live in a world where permission-less innovation exists," Quinn said in his post.

But AT&T and other companies have been offering managed services over their broadband networks for years. It's not clear whether they've ever sought permission for them from the FCC.

For net neutrality advocates, the fight over internet fast lanes hasn't been about the ISPs' ability to ensure remote surgeries go smoothly, but about the concern that companies such as AT&T would use such practices to favor their own sites and services — and those of paid partners — over their competitors. Such companies have already been engaging in a related practice — dubbed zero rating — through which they offer discounted or free access to their own and partners' sites and services.

The FCC under the Obama administration began an investigation into whether the ISPs' zero rating practices were unfairly giving a leg up to their own related businesses, but Ajit Pai quashed that investigation soon after he took over as chairman of the FCC under President Trump.

Quinn's statement is only the latest example of AT&T or other ISPs trying to convince the public of their support for net neutrality. Activists have cautioned that such statements have been symbolic at best.

Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images

"The first opportunity we have to delight or to upset a client is when they walk through the door either physically or virtually."

Sounds like a tech executive, right? Jeff Bezos even? The Amazon boss often talks about delighting customers, after all, although until recently the ecommerce giant didn't really have doors to physically walk through.

But no, that's not a tech founder, or a retail CEO. It's Marianne Lake, the CFO of JPMorgan Chase.

In an investor day presentation Tuesday February 27, Lake went through the Wall Street giant's "Digital Everywhere" strategy. And later, JPMorgan chief Jamie Dimon, who's teamed up with Bezos and Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway on a healthcare initiative, discussed Amazon Prime.

Taken together, the comments hint at JPMorgan's vision of the future of banking.

A generational shift

There's a generational shift taking place, according to Lake. Customers are demanding digital capabilities in all their interactions with the firm. "Think streaming films versus DVDs," she said. "Banking is no exception."

JPMorgan

Now there are drawbacks to this shift, of course. The movie business used to make good money out of DVDs. Streaming films has been a more challenging business. For Wall Street, it means margins are likely to be compressed, meaning less money per trade.

"Jeff Bezos says 'Your margin is my opportunity,'" Dimon said in the Q&A portion of investor day. "You know, that's called competition. And so some of it gets passed on to the customer in terms of lower prices and lower spreads."

But there are clear benefits to these digital relationships.

"They create loyalty, they give us more shots on goal to deepen relationships," Lake said. "This drives higher volume for us, and leveraging our scale, that higher volume is much more profitable."

This shift is playing out across JPMorgan's business, according to Lake's presentation. For example:

"We are already deeply embedded in our customers lives at a scale and a frequency that we believe is unmatched," Lake said.

JPMorgan

Amazon Prime for banking

It also allows JPMorgan to take a different approach when rolling out new products. Dimon cited the example of Amazon Prime going into movies, likening it to how JPMorgan would roll out online investing.

"Who thought Jeff Bezos would go into movies?" Dimon asked the audience at the investor day. "And he just gives it away for free to Prime because Prime pays for itself and he's just trying to make you a happy Prime customer."

"Well we do a little bit of the same by giving a lot of things away for free as part a package. We look at the price of the whole package, not necessarily the products."

He said:

"That's why when we do online investing, we're going to be thinking about 'How are we going to add that to the product set in a simple way ... that the customer wants, so that they'll say 'I love this.'' Remember, if you're a great client, we can do it for free."

Now, JPMorgan's not the only bank thinking this way, of course. Goldman Sachs has said it wants to be to risk what Google is to search, for example. And McKinsey has highlighted the risks to traditional finance posed by so-called platform companies like Amazon, Alibaba, and Rakuten.

But JPMorgan's ability to implement these digital shifts across multiple business lines, many of which just happen to be market share leaders, has the potential to reshape the entire industry. JPMorgan might have the ability to "do it for free" for great clients, but many competitors won't.

"Digital capabilities will really differentiate players in our industry in the coming years. And in a digital world, we are always open for our customers, continuously, 24/7," Lake said.

"We do have a complete strategy, a plan for every customer type, for all of their needs, in each business and around the world," she added.

Sound familiar?

The Google Home app seems like a great idea.

In theory, it should show me what's currently playing through my Google Home Mini (whether it's a YouTube video, show on Netflix, playlist, podcast, or whathaveyou) and allow me to pause, control volume, rewind, and all the other functions that you usually find on a remote control. In addition, the app is intended to offer content that I might be interested in, and offer helpful tips and suggestions for using the Google Home.

In reality, the app is never synced with what's really happening in my device, rendering it pretty useless as a replacement for the remote control. The "Browse" section is entirely generic, and not catered to my search histories at all.

The suggested commands are helpful, and I'm often surprised at some of the cool things I can ask the device. One of my favorites right now is, "Ok, Google. Tell me a joke." Unfortunately, I have no reason to open the app and browse the suggested commands if it's otherwise of no use to me, so I rarely interact with it.

Snap CEO Evan Spiegel. Mike Blake/Reuters

Last year, Snap CEO Evan Spiegel got paid more than the heads of some of the world's biggest companies, including Apple chief executive Tim Cook and Google boss Sundar Pichai.

In fact, he was probably the best-paid CEO in America, according to data firm Equilar, which tracks executive pay in the US. Spiegel received a massive $638 million (£456 million) stock and compensation payout after Snap floated last year.

Speaking to The Financial Times, Equilar spokesman Dan Marcec said: "It is very rare for us to see an award that large. I would be surprised if we saw a larger one for 2017."

We already know how much Pichai and Cook were paid last year. Cook made $12.8 million (£9.2 million), while Pichai made almost $200 million (£143 million), according to filings.

It's astonishing that Spiegel was paid more given Apple and Google — both in the top five firms globally by market cap — were massively profitable in 2017. Apple and Google are nearing a $1 trillion (£715 billion) market cap, while Snap is currently lingering at around $22 billion.

Snap has yet to turn a profit, and in fact, lost $720 million (£515 million) last year. It's a much younger company, but it's had a rough first year as a public firm.

When it first went public, investors worried how much money Snap could make from advertising versus the competition. Snap's camera-enabled spectacles, Snap Spectacles, were also a failure. And users hate the Snapchat app's redesign — so much so that sceptical Wall Street analysts last week downgraded Snap's stock.

"The Angry Birds Movie." Columbia Pictures Good morning! Here is the tech news you need to start your Friday.

1. Apple is reportedly working on a new pair of AirPods. The new earbuds are said to support the "Hey Siri" command, have a new wireless chip, and be scheduled for this year, while a water-resistant version may be launched in 2019.

2. The FCC's Restoring Internet Freedom order will become active on April 23. The order will repeal the 2015 Net Neutrality rules.

3. Top artificial intelligence (AI) experts and policymakers from 14 institutions have published a report on the malicious uses of AI. The 100-page paper outlines digital, physical, and political dangers.

4. Intel reportedly failed to disclose Spectre and Meltdown flaws to US cybersecurity officials before the news leaked online. Both Apple and Alphabet, Google's parent company, as well as Intel, have said as much in letters sent to US congressmen.

5. Airbnb has debuted a new service called "Airbnb Plus." The premium offering, active in 13 cities globally, has been designed to compete with hotels, and includes amenity-filled places that are professionally inspected and photographed.

6. Snap's stock slid over 6% after an analyst warned of negative reactions to the recent update. Also, Kylie Jenner's tweets that suggested that she uses the app less after the update may have contributed to the stock's fall.

7. Amazon is reportedly planning to open up to six new Amazon Go cashier-less stores this year. There is no clear indication about their location, but rumours say that they will most likely be in Seattle and Los Angeles.

8. Apple Pay has an estimated 38 million active users in the US and 127 million globally, up from 62 million a year ago. That, in turn, means that only about 16% of iPhone users worldwide use Apple Pay.

9. "Angry Birds" maker Rovio's stock has fallen over 50% to about €5 (£4.4/$6.2), well below its original €11.50 (£10.20/$14.20) IPO price. The revenue guidance for 2018 has been weak, too, with a maximum of €300 million (£265/$370 million) in forecast opposed to the €336 million (£292/$414 million) predicted by analysts.

10. Intel is partnering with several companies to launch 5G-powered Windows 10 machines in 2019. Partner firms include Microsoft, Dell, Lenovo, and HP.

David Becker/Getty Images

While 2017 was a wash for tech M&A, we're barely a month into the new year and that narrative is already changing.

This is hardly a surprise. In a single year, tech executives' confidence in the global economy increased to more than 80%, from less than 20%, according to the 17th edition of the EY Global Capital Confidence Barometer - Technology. Pair this with optimism about corporate earnings, tax reform liquidity and confidence in credit availability, and you have an environment that is highly conducive to dealmaking. In fact, 57% of tech executives surveyed said they intend to pursue acquisitions in the next twelve months.

New entrants on the buy side of potential deals are likely to drive greater activity levels in the coming months. Because we continue to live in a sellers' market, buyers need to be agile and well-prepared to pit themselves against competitive, no-outs and preemptive bids from other parties.

New players at the table

Heightened competition comes, in large part, from increasing interest from nontraditional tech acquirers, sovereign wealth funds and private equity firms converging on the tech market. Private equity firms, in particular, have shown an increased interest in technology assets. In fact, private equity players have more than tripled their tech investments over the past seven years (see chart below, from 451 Research).

While unicorn tech companies are attracting traditional players looking for both the technology and talent upgrades, private equity firms are more likely to bid on companies that have matured past the hype phase to a steady growth — profitable businesses, with a stable management team.

Ernst and Young

Cash-rich tech incumbents also are looking to build or buy into new technologies through joint ventures or venture arms. Technologies such as artificial intelligence, blockchain and augmented reality — which, despite their growing hype are still very early in their innovation cycle and lack a defined business model — will serve as strategic investments for buyers looking to augment their existing product lines, or hit the next S curve growth cycle.

As with new technology, increased investments in security will likely spur deal activity in a similar way. Hacks and vulnerabilities are growing, and companies within the technology sphere and beyond are looking to build solutions that improve trust and reliability. There are over 1,000 security vendors, and many companies employ two to three vendors per security vertical. We can expect to see further consolidation and deals in this subsector.

How do buyers beat competition while ensuring a fair price?

Heightened competition from private equity firms and strategic buyers will likely incite a jump in hostile and competitive bids. Tech companies should prepare to compete against these market participants by leveraging advanced analytics, evaluating synergy opportunities and carefully crafting deal narratives and integration strategies.

Carve-outs, the sale of business units or segments from larger entities, are also on the rise. These assets may be very attractive, but they carry a lot of risk and uncertainty, in particular around stand-alone costs. The sellers typically look for a speedy transaction, which may leave potential buyers nervous. Companies looking for acquisitions should not shy away from these opportunities. Instead, they should implement the same rigorous evaluation process. The employment of predictive analytics, such as revenue optimization or customer analytics, for example, can provide a clear vision of the acquirer's own value proposition for the target assets.

In sum, companies looking to buy assets this year need to have their ducks in a row. This means understanding who's looking at the same assets and how those players measure valuations. Most companies need help in doing that - both from technology tools and a trained business advisor who understands the competitive landscape. Businesses that do not do their proper due diligence ahead of the transaction often lose out on attractive assets. This scenario is completely avoidable with a diligently compiled M&A playbook fit for the buyer's organization.

Keeping tabs on market and policy changes

Excluding the possibility of geopolitical deterrents, little stands in the way for tech acquisitions this year. While there is some concern that valuations are inflated, even if stock prices were to decline, M&A conditions would remain prime. In fact, decreased valuations would likely drive further activity, because it would spur buyers to chase an attractive purchase price.

As for tax reform, the combination of the different rules is unlikely to significantly change M&A appetite as a whole. Assuming tech giants repatriate foreign cash, many believe Trump's tax plan will provide slightly better liquidity for tech companies, although it remains unclear if easy access to offshore cash will be used for share buybacks or to fuel domestic deal activity.

VMware CEO Pat Gelsinger VMware

Analysts are starting to get cranky about the impact that Dell's uncertain future is having on VMware's value.

In a note published Thursday, Barclays analysts Raimo Lenschow, Mohit Gogia, and David Rainville said they have faith in the fundamentals of VMware's business, but fear that uncertainty over whether or not a merger with Dell is imminent is creating wild swings in the stock price.

"The news has created significant volatility in the stock which may have driven some long-term fundamental investors away from VMW. Hence, we believe that these recent dynamics, added to the unorthodox VMware ownership structure could overshadow the strong fundamental momentum the business is seeing," the analysts wrote.

VMware stock, which traded at an all-time high of $150 in late January, has already seen a negative impact in the last few weeks. Shares currently cost around $125, though Barclays maintained its price target of $145.

Dell is considering a so-called "reverse merger" with the publicly-traded VMware, as a means of taking itself public without going through the usual IPO process. Dell currently owns 82% of VMware stock, and 97% of its voting interest, thanks to the 2015 Dell/EMC merger. This structure means that Dell could theoretically perform such a merger at any time, should it choose to go that route.

However, the uncertainty is accelerated by reports that Dell is also considering a more traditional IPO for itself, or just remaining a privately-owned company. All of these options are still on the table.

Should a VMware/Dell "reverse merger" go through, Barclays said that it would be an "obvious negative" for VMware shares in the near term. And in the meanwhile, uncertainty around the issue could cause some continued price volatility, analysts said.

"VMware continues to be an attractive fundamental investment given its undemanding valuation, combined with its growth and margin profile," the note reads. "We also like the company's hybrid cloud positioning here with its partnership with [Amazon Web Services]. However, we accept that the recent news flow around Dell will create more volatility in the shares until we get more clarity."

Analysts at Morgan Stanley issued a similar warning last week, calling a Dell/VMware merger a "worst case scenario" for shareholders. Morgan Stanley analyst Keith Weiss also maintained a price target of $143 for VMware in a note published Thursday.

VMware is scheduled to report financial results for its fourth quarter and fiscal year 2018 on March 1.

Amazon founder and CEO Jeff Bezos laughs as he talks to the media while touring the new Amazon Spheres during the grand opening at Amazon's Seattle headquarters in Seattle, Washington, U.S., January 29, 2018. Reuters/Lindsey Wasson

It's still remains to be seen if Amazon will get into the prescription drug business, though there have been a lot of hints. That hasn't stopped people from speculating what kind of impact they could have on the space, or even mapping out what their potential entry could look like.

"We believe that disruption is coming for healthcare and Amazon will be an accelerant of this disruption," Bernstein analyst Lance Wilkes wrote in a note Thursday. "We believe this is unusual, in that healthcare usually moves slowly, and investors have been rewarded for not being ahead of actual changes in healthcare. This time is different, we believe, because cost is now the most important consideration for payers (government and employers)."

The idea is that Amazon could come in and sell prescription drugs directly through its site, delivering them via mail and impacting retail pharmacies.

There are three ways Amazon could approach the prescription drug industry, as Bernstein sees it:

In January, Amazon along with JPMorgan and Berkshire Hathaway, launched a new independent nonprofit venture aimed at lowering healthcare costs for their employees. There weren't many details right off the bat, so it's unclear the exact approach companies will opt for. They could team up to form a health insurance plan, or find other ways to negotiate for cut backs on healthcare spending.

By banding these three self-insured employers together, Amazon's roadmap into the prescription drug business might not have to rely on partners or acquisitions of pharmacy benefits managers. Instead, Amazon could have the leverage to convince employers, starting with these three organizations, to buy into Amazon's mail service.

That large employer strategy could put Express Scripts, one of the largest standalone PBMs in the US, at even more risk than previously anticipated, Wilkes told Business Insider. If employers decide to build their own transparent PBM, they might rely less on Express Scripts' services. National account employers make up about 21% of Express Scripts' gross margin, according to Bernstein.

PBMs tend to make about one-third of their gross margin from rebates paid out for prescriptions by drugmakers, one-third from transactions happening at retail pharmacies, and one-third from their mail and specialty pharmacy services.

Should online prescriptions — particularly for recurring prescriptions — pick up market share from retail pharmacies and mail-order services start to favor Amazon, Bernstein anticipates that this threatens about 55% of Express Scripts' gross margin.

Scroll wants to make people who surf the web happySebastiaan ter Burg/Flickr

Rather than fighting people who install ad blockers, a group of publishers are banding together to help people access their websites ad free, as long as they pay up.

The Atlantic, Slate, Gannett, MSNBC.com, Fusion Media Group and Business Insider have all signed on to participate in Scroll, a soon-to-launch digital subscription product that will allow people to surf multiple websites with no ads - for $5 a month.

Scroll is the brainchild of Tony Haile, the former CEO of Chartbeat. The startup's investors include Business Insider parent company Axel Springer, News Corp., The New York Times, and now Gannett, which is joining the venture as both a strategic investor and client.

Gannett 's vast list of publications includes USA Today as well as dozens of local newspapers such as the Indianapolis Star and the Detroit Free Press.

Haile been developing the product over the past year or so. Many in the digital ad industry speculated that he'd been working on some sort of universal payment tool for publishers. Instead, the idea behind Scroll is to find a way to cater to consumers who want to enjoy a faster, cleaner web, and are willing to pay for that experience.

Scroll founder Tony Haile Scroll

And the business side, the key for Scroll is to satisfy the needs of a wide range of media companies large and small, Haile said.

Scroll promises partners that it will pay them more money per consumer than they currently make from the average visitor to their website from advertising.

"We tried to focus on both user experience and a revenue model," he said. "The hope was, 'Can we find a business model we're proud of?' and 'Can we find something that doesn't make you want to stab your eyes out when you visit websites?'"

Scroll arrives at a time when the use of ad blocking software has been on the rise, particularly in Europe. The industry has been taking a number of measures to clean up the glut of ads on most websites and mobile apps, including the Interactive Advertising Bureau's LEAN initiative (Light, Encrypted, Ad choice supported, and Non-invasive ads) and the Coalition for Better Ads, which in conjunction with Google's recent Chrome browser update promises to rid the world of annoying ads.

It won't be easy for Scroll to gain traction, considering:

Plus, there's the fact that the world doesn't know what Scroll is. Some publishers have agreed to promote the products, while others have not.

Haile acknowledged these challenges, and said he expects to sign on more publishers as the company's reputation grows among consumers.

He's also realistic about Scroll's impact. This is not going to kill the banner ad overnight. And he doesn't need to sign up the majority of the web population to be successful.

"The majority of people will still want free content with ads," he said.

Brad Smallwood.YouTube/IAB

Facebook said it's willing to knock down some of the walls from its garden. But it won't go it alone.

The social networking giant, along with Google, gets hammered a ton in ad circles for hoarding its data behind "walled gardens." The complaint among ad buyers is, as much as each company possesses incredibly powerful data that can be used for ad targeting, that data is kept inside each company's walls to a degree.

So an advertiser that wants to figure out how many customers its signing up from ads on one platform can't easily match that data up with how their ads are performing on the other.

To date, neither company has budged much on this stance, as data is such a strategic advantage for each.

But at a press event on Thursday morning, Brad Smallwood, VP of measurement and insights at Facebook, said the company would be willing to deliver some of its ad data to a neutral third party. With the help of an independent player, advertisers could then theoretically reconcile which consumers are responding to which ads across Facebook, Google, and any other data rich platform - and be a lot more strategic about how they spend their ad budgets.

The operative word being: theoretically.

Smallwood told reporters that breaking the data silos is something Facebook is working on. "It's the biggest ask we get," he said. "The challenge is how to do it ... you need an independent third party."

So does that means a data-sharing plan is plan is in the works and a third party has been tapped to help? Not quite. When pressed by Business Insider, Smallwood said that while Facebook is willing to tackle this issue, nothing is imminent. And nobody, including Facebook, wants to take such a leap without assurances that others are on board.

"We can't do it alone," he said. "We think it would be better for the industry, including us ... I can't speak for Google."

​For its part, Google says it is indeed helping marketers use better use ad targeting data outside its own properties. "​We've given agencies and advertisers access to more data than ever before with the launch of Ads Data Hub last year," said Brad Bender, VP of Product Management, Google, "They can use it to manage data from a variety of sources​ -both Google and non-Google data."​

Beyond a potential data collaboration initiative, Facebook announced a number of measurement-related moves on Thursday. The company is paring down the number of metrics that are automatically available via Facebook's Ads Manager product.

The company is also adding more language to that tool to make it clear what metrics are absolute, which are based on estimates, and which are "in development" and subject to being changed over time. Facebook has gotten some rough press of late after uncovering some errors in its metrics dashboard, as well as an embarrassing report last September that showed how Facebook's ad planning tools was promising advertisers that the platform can reach more people than actually live in the US.

In response to these issues, Facebook put together a measurement council roughly a year ago that includes representatives from big ad agencies and marketers. Ed Gaffney, who heads up research for the ad buying firm GroupM, said that those gatherings have been illuminating, and Facebook has been more responsive to advertiser needs.

"Understanding what data you've got, and how it was calculated, is the key thing going forward," he said. Of course, when it come to data, "We always want more," he said.

Disney

"Black Panther" is shattering records at the box office, and it has one Wall Street analyst rosy about the entire movie-theater business.

In its opening weekend, "Black Panther" was expected to earn $165-170 million domestically. It ended up snagging a whopping $242 million— even beating the latest "Star Wars" movie.

That's good news for the movie-theater business, which has had to combat the narrative that it's in a slow, secular decline for quite some time. In fact, it's such good news that RBC analyst Leo Kulp has updated his box-office forecast upward, and wrote in a note Thursday that the outlook for the first quarter had "improved dramatically."

"We had been expecting a 12% decline but it looks like 1Q could end up closer to flat," Kulp wrote.

He cited two reasons:

"First, Black Panther substantially outperformed our expectations. We now expect a $500mm+ domestic gross, more than double our previous $220mm estimate. Second, the flow through from late 2017 releases was much stronger than we anticipated. While Star Wars: Last Jedi ended up being light, Jumanji and The Greatest Showman were particularly strong. Several Oscar contenders like The Shape of Water, Darkest Hour, Three Billboards, etc. also contributed."

And Kulp isn't the only one in the industry who has taken notice of what the success of "Black Panther" means for the business, and particularly how it might hint at strong first quarters to come.

"The industry is certainly moving towards a more balanced release calendar," Jeff Bock, a senior analyst for Exhibitor Relations, told Business Insider recently. "Old Hollywood adages are being thrown out the window because audiences, no matter what season, have an insatiable appetite for event films — provided they deliver the goods."

Kulp also said the second quarter was looking "even stronger" than it had been for the movie-theater business.

But Kulp's optimism doesn't extend to the second half of the year.

He wrote that much of the content in the second half of 2018 is "either untested content designed to appeal to younger audiences (like Peter Jackson's steam punk film Mortal Engines) or remakes of older IP that we aren't convinced resonates."

President Donald Trump. AP

At a moment when many are trying to figure out how to prevent another school shooting, President Trump believes we need to look at video games and movies that young people are consuming.

During a meeting in the White House about school safety on Thursday, President Trump said that today's video games and movies are "so violent," and that the rating systems for both need to be reexamined.

"The level of violence on video games is really shaping young people's thoughts, and then you go the further step, and that's the movies," Trump said. "You see these movies, they're so violent, and yet a kid is able to see the movie. If sex isn't involved, but killing is involved. And maybe they have to put a rating system for that, and you get into a whole very complicated, very big deal."

There are currently rating systems for both movies and video games. The Motion Picture Association of America has a rating system that's used at movie theaters nationwide. For video games, they are conducted by the Entertainment Software Rating Board.

This is hardly the first time both mediums have come under fire after a violent act. But it's the victims of this latest school shooting that are coming out to say it's not the content that's causing the violence.

"My friends and I have been playing video games our whole lives, and seen, of course, violent movies, but never have we ever felt driven or provoked by those action in those games to do something as horrible as this," Samuel Zeif, a Stoneman Douglas High School shooting survivor, said on CNN soon after Trump made the remarks. "It's a video game, something happens you restart, we know that's not how life is. I think it's a distraction, the president is trying to distract us."

Fellow survivor, Chris Grady, gave stronger words about Trump's comments.

"That's just a really pathetic excuse on behalf of the president," he told CNN. "I grew up playing video games — 'Call of Duty,' those first-person shooter games — and I would never, ever dream of taking the lives of any of my peers. So it's just pathetic."

Since the Florida shooting, students across the country have rallied for stricter gun-control measures. Protests have been held, and there's a planned national school walkout on March 14, and a "March for Our Lives" protest on March 24.

The National Association of Theatre Owners declined to comment for this story. The Motion Picture Association of America and Entertainment Software Rating Board did not respond to Business Insider's request for comment.

Here's President Trump's comments on there being too much violence in video games and movies:

Imran Khan, Snap's chief strategy officer Dave Kotinsky/Getty Images

Snap gave CEO Evan Spiegel a gargantuan stock award last year.

More quietly, it also handed out a jumbo-sized award to Imran Khan, its chief strategy officer.

In January 2017, mere days before Snap went public, the company handed out $100 million worth of restricted shares to Khan, the company disclosed in its annual report, made public Thursday. The shares — some 6.1 million of them — will vest over the next 10 years.

"This ... grant was a one-time performance award granted to Mr. Khan," the company said in its annual report.

The award was the second major stock grant given by Snap to Khan. The company also gave him a $145 million stock grant in 2015, according to the registration statement it filed before going public.

Khan was one of at least three Snap executives that received large stock awards last year. Most notable was that granted to Spiegel. At the time of its initial public offering, the mobile app maker gave Spiegel 34 million shares worth $637 million.

Snap had previously disclosed the relative size of the stock award it planned to give Spiegel in conjunction with its IPO, but not the value of that award. Unlike Khan's grant, Spiegel's vest over a three-year period.

Snap CEO Evan Spiegel. Michael Kovac/Getty Images for Vanity Fair The company also handed out a one-time grant of 2.2 million shares in May to Chris Handman, Snap's general counsel at the time. Those shares were worth $53.8 million when they were granted and will vest over the next 10 years. Handman, however, left the company in August and now serves as an outside advisor. If Snap cancels that contract, he could lose the bulk of his award.

Snap's disclosures about executive compensation come as the company's stock has taken a hit due to criticism about a recent redesign of its core Snapchat app. The company has struggled to impress Wall Street since going public, although it did top expectations with its most recent quarterly report.

The company's governance and compensation practices have long drawn the scrutiny of certain investors. Snap has a multiclass stock structure that allots no votes to common shareholders, and, instead, grants outsized control to Spiegel. He and fellow co-founder Robert Murphy together have nearly 96% of the voting power at Snap.

In addition to the massive stock award, Snap paid Spiegel $98,078 in salary last year and $1.08 million in "other compensation." That latter figure includes $561,892 in security-related costs, which was down from the $890,339 it paid for such expenses in 2016.

Khan, meanwhile, received $441,923 in salary last year and $69,728 in "other compensation," which included relocation expenses.

REUTERS/Mike Blake

Snap is making its most aggressive bid for digital ad dollars yet.

Following its strong fourth quarter, Snap is making its Marketing API available to any ad agency, brand or ad tech company that wants to access the platform.

The program, which was first launched in 2016, has been closed with limited access to a few companies until now. The move essentially allows any company — irrespective of its size, scope or the scale of the software it is building — to leverage the Snap API to automate its ad efforts or build and sell tools for advertisers to use.

"We've been listening closely to third-party developers as we transition Snapchat ad products onto our self-serve platform," James Borow, Snap's director of revenue programs, told Business Insider. "Today we're opening up our Marketing API to give every developer tools to build the Snapchat ad solutions that perform best for them and their customers."

The move is aimed at the so-called long tail, the thousands of developers and brands that want to customize the platform, build something new or even start a niche ad tech company.

Brands can, for instance, enhance their targeting, creative and measurement across all advertising efforts by easily layering on proprietary data sets through the API. They cal also automate processes like placing orders, or ingest ad metadata and performance metrics into their own data warehouses, ultimately better measuring the success of their ads.

Hootsuite, for example, has built a solution that allows its customers to manage their Snapchat Geofilter ads from within its tech platform, which has been helpful for customers that want to buy Geofilters for multiple locations at once and plan all of their ad spend collaboratively on one platform. It hopes to continue to build on the API.

"We're particularly excited to see how our customers leverage the new Snap Pixel," said Stefan Krepiakevich, VP of strategic alliances at Hootsuite. "And how it can help advertisers better manage their audience targeting and conversion tracking."

The move also comes on the heels of Snap's major push toward automating its ads and strengthening its programmatic business in recent quarters. Ad volume on the auction increased by more than 4x year-over-year, and over 90% of Snap Ads were bought programmatically during the fourth quarter.

Opening up its Marketing API will allow Snapchat to cater to an even broader base of marketers. While a majority of ads are now sold through automated auctions, there aren't enough advertisers bidding for these spots yet. So an open API will theoretically bring more brands on board. Revenue from small and medium-sized businesses is already rising: it more than doubled in the fourth versus the third quarter, Snap's CFO Imran Khan said.

It will also prompt a wider variety of ads than the ones that already exist on the platform, including ads with calls to action for consumers such as installing apps.

Snapchat has already indicated that it is bullish on such direct-response ads and smaller advertisers. After doubling its total revenue from app install campaigns since the beginning of the fourth quarter, Snap began offering free ad credits to advertisers running vertical video ads last week, primarily targeting advertisers who focus on direct-response.

"These releases are helping drive more spend on the platform, particularly from direct response marketers," said Lance Neuhauser, CEO of 4C, a marketing technology company and Snap Ads partner. "We're also seeing success with brand advertisers looking to complement their TV advertising and reach Snap's core demographic."

Ultimately, opening up the API will allow Snap to significantly boost its revenue by racking up ad spending from advertisers of all sizes using its platform without having to invest in hiring new developers, just as Facebook and Google were able to do.

Bill Hader. AP

Bill Hader is known for his characters while doing eight seasons of "Saturday Night Live," playing the lovable leading man in "Trainwreck," and his voice work on everything from "South Park" to "Inside Out."

But he also helped bring to life one of the most memorable characters of the current "Star Wars" trilogy: BB-8.

It's a highlight in his filmography Hader is shy to discuss because, he said, "Anybody could do what I did."

While making "The Force Awakens," director J.J. Abrams called on Hader to voice the droid (previously, Abrams had actor Ben Schwartz come in to do an English-language dub of the droid).

"That is J.J. Abrams being a really nice guy," Hader told Business Insider while promoting his upcoming series on HBO, "Barry" (airing March 25). "That's him saying, 'I know you like "Star Wars," do you want to come and do this?'"

Bill Hader helped bring to life the voice of BB-8, who is one of the most popular stars of the current "Star Wars" trilogy. Jordan Strauss/AP Hader said he tried to come up with a voice for BB-8, but it wasn't working. He left and felt he blew his chance at being a part of the saga. Then the actor said Abrams called him back again, "I mean, there were billboards already out for the movie," said Hader in describing how close it was to the movie opening when he got the second call.

This time, Hader spoke into a talk box while Abrams messed with an effects app on his iPhone and out of that came the basis for the BB-8 voice and it put Hader into "Star Wars" lore.

"I mean, I'm signing BB-8 pictures now," Hader said.

But is he getting residual checks from it?

Hader said that he did not take part in any of the work that went into BB-8 for "The Last Jedi," but he does have a credit on "The Force Awakens." Actors receive yearly payments when movies begin getting sold on Blu-ray, DVD, streaming, or begin to air on TV (actors in television series get residuals when the shows are sold to syndication).

Will Hader get that sweet Disney money for years to come?

"That's a good question, I should ask my business manager," Hader said with a laugh. "You're finding out how bad I am at this. If my dad reads this he would lose his sh--. 'You gotta know how much f---ing money you have, you moron!'"

Processing it all for a moment, all Hader could answer was, "I mean, I would hope so."