September 2009

Stimulus funding just a down payment, DOE says

The $4.5 billion that the federal government has allocated in smart grid stimulus funding is just a utility's down payment on the grid, said Department of Energy senior advisor Matt Rogers, who oversees allocation of the funding. It is a down payment in customer choice, but the expected return on investment is what has nearly every utility and a range of players and new partners clamoring for a piece of the market. "We are trying to move this in quite a rapid fashion," Rogers said. "As part of making the down payment is the expectation that these are high payout projects...It'll take $150 to $180 million in investments, but the payout is four or five to one." The government's aid in the grid is also an investment in network reliability to create much more rapid response and a reliable grid network, as well as to create a grid that can handle the levels of renewable energy that the DOE is anticipating, he said. The DOE reports its progress every 100 days to encourage accountability and make sure the movement - being expedited by the Obama administration - stays on track. Today, at day 217, Rogers said the DOE has awarded $23 billion of the $36.7 billion it has available for America's energy and environmental future, of which the grid is a critical part.

Deployment proposals for the National Broadband Plan

The Federal Communications Commission has received 12 proposals on broadband deployment for the National Broadband Plan from the public via IdeaScale.

The most popular proposals are to 1) exclude low speed services (like satellite broadband) from the plan and 2) to ensure Network Neutrality.

Additional ideas include requiring broadband be available in all public housing, using "dark fiber," making broadband deployment and adoption an Obama Administration Cabinet-level priority, modernizing the Universal Service Fund, and initiating and expanding programs to extend broadband to persons with disabilities, seniors, minorities, Native Americans, and other populations that are too often on the wrong side of the digital divide.

The FCC awaits your proposals -- and your votes!

National Broadband Plan Again the Agenda for FCC Meeting Sept 29

The Federal Communications Commission will hold an Open Meeting on Tuesday, September 29, 2009, which is scheduled to commence at 1:00 pm in Room TW-C305, at 445 12th Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. The meeting will feature presentations on the status of the Commission's processes for development of a National Broadband Plan.

FCC Includes Blogband Postings as Part of the Record for the National Broadband Plan

To foster dialogue about the National Broadband Plan, the Federal Communications Commission launched a new blog called "Blogband." The FCC is now clarifying that views expressed on Blogband will be part of the official record in the National Broadband Plan proceeding (known to wonks as GN Docket No. 09-51). And, so, the FCC is advising people to track both its Electronic Comment Filing System and Blogband to ensure that they are aware of all relevant views expressed to the Commission concerning the National Broadband Plan. And, if you make a posting at Blogband, you do NOT have to make an ex parte filing.

US's Future Tied to Broadband, Media Policy, says FCC's Copps

Speaking to the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, Federal Communications Commission member Michael Copps spoke about the Commission's task of crafting a National Broadband Plan and media policy.

About the broadband plan he said, "If we succeed at our task of deploying this infrastructure across America, we will create millions of new jobs and businesses. We will bring more and better education to our children. We will advance medical care through the development and delivery of new health services. We will be able to tackle our debilitating energy dependence through smart grids and other smart energy initiatives. We will be able to slow the degradation of our environment. And enhance the delivery of government services. The list goes on, but my point is this: there are few if any challenges confronting our country today whose solution does not have a broadband component involved in it. Broadband to me is the Great Enabler, empowering us to tackle our problems and to overcome."

On media policy, he said, "The success of our media is so integral to the success of our country. If we have a media that reflects the genius and the diversity of America, that provides real news and information to citizens voting on the country's direction, that covers the communities where we actually live in all their splendid diversity, we will have a media that does justice to America. Lots of broadcasters do good things-no question about that-but at the end of the day our media environment is not measuring up to the challenges we face. Take the state of our news and, since I'm from the FCC, let's begin with broadcast news. We rely so heavily on our broadcast media for so much of the news we must have; for emergency and public safety information; for public affairs programming essential to our civic dialogue; and for programming reflecting the great cultural and ethnic diversity that comprises the great tapestry that is America. But news-gathering has been cut to the bone and in-depth investigative journalism will be an endangered species if we continue much longer down the road we're traveling. Broadband and the Internet open new opportunities, to be sure, but what we've gained there hasn't yet begun to match what we have already lost because of bad choices that have been made regarding traditional media. I'm talking about bad choices by the private sector through the heedless consolidation bazaar of the past decade that saddled companies with debt that became unmanageable when the economy went south and that sacrificed localism and diversity to uniformity and program homogenization. And I'm talking about bad choices by government, particularly the Commission of which I am a member, through mindless deregulation of public interest protections that undergirded the country's media landscape for decades. Together, I believe, these private and public choices exacted a heavy toll on consumers, on all our citizens and, in the end, even on the companies themselves. We've been asleep at the public interest switch. We'd better wake up before it's too late. We should be developing policies, for example, to use some of that new digital television multi-cast capacity for programs that focus on local culture and diversity groups, on local civic affairs and elections, on local music and arts and sports. Wouldn't that be a wonderful counterweight to all the nationalized, homogenized, stereotyped mono-programming that seems to be evermore the norm? With a few media dance-masters calling the tune, too few of the kind of stories I am advocating make it to our screens. Too little real hard-hitting journalism. Too little news about what's really going on in America. I think we're playing with fire letting this happen. I think we're taking huge risks with our democracy. And I think we need to change it now. For openers, maybe, just maybe, when your FCC looks at a station's license renewal, instead of stamping the post card that comes in, we should be asking how that station is serving the interests of its locality? And the answer should determine our action."

President Obama! Stiff-arm that "save the newspapers" legislation!

[Commentary] The government's attempt to prop up newspapers with rewrites of the tax code or direct subsidies of government advertising and free subscriptions for young people interferes with the already-in-progress transition from print to digital news delivery that's been accelerating for the past 15 years -- or longer. Propping up troubled papers has a cost. It weakens the enterprises that are rising from below to compete with them to deliver advertising and, yes, deliver news. I can think of no better way to hinder the rise of such Web sensations as Politico and Talking Points Memo than rewriting the rules to benefit newspapers. Remember, the decline of newspapers is multifactorial, and it didn't start yesterday. As early as 1992, Warren Buffett was counseling investors against newspapers, saying they had already lost their economic advantage. This was a full three or four years before the commercial World Wide Web took off. Even if the government were to create as level and competitive a playing field as possible—say, impose the same sales tax burden on Web retailers as bricks-and-mortar shops that are much more likely to advertise in newspapers—I doubt that the dying newspaper trend could be fully reversed. The best thing President Obama can do for the news business is nothing.

Health care remains Hot Topic

On the week when a key Senate Democrat unveiled a long-awaited bill, the battle over health care reform was the No. 1 story—the eighth time in nine weeks that issue has topped the news agenda. The health care debate, fueled by Senator Max Baucus' proposal, accounted for 17% of the newshole the week of September 14-20, according to the Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism. While that is a significant drop from the previous week (32%), when Barack Obama's prime-time speech drove the coverage, the subject was particularly dominant in the media sectors that feature talk shows, radio (31%) and cable (28%), according to PEJ's weekly News Coverage Index.

Universities Pilot Amazon's Kindle in the Classroom

To save paper and test electronic reading devices in the educational setting, seven universities are testing Amazon's Kindle DX this fall. As part of Amazon's pilot project, 40 to 60 students will be given the Kindle DX at each participating school, which include: the Darden Graduate School of Business at the University of Virginia, Arizona State University, Case Western Reserve University, Princeton University, Reed College, Pace University and University of Washington. To determine the devices' effectiveness, the participating schools have agreed to complete a survey. Arizona State University will ask the students additional questions outside of the standard survey and is also collecting anecdotal evidence, like feedback from students. Kari Barlow, ASU's assistant vice president of strategic alliances and special initiatives, will interview the students once a semester about their experiences with the Kindle DX, and the university also has a teacher's assistant tracking any problems, issues or recommendations from the students. Barlow said the university didn't experience any barriers to implementing the technology and the students have been very excited about using the Kindle DXs. Amazon and the universities split the cost of the Kindle DXs. The device retails for $489.

Chicago focuses IT on public health

The Chicago Department of Public Health's (CDPH) hospitals and clinics are using electronic health records. Back-office operations are run on a common set of recently deployed enterprise resource planning (ERP)-like applications. And it is entering the final phase of a project to modernize public health services. The next step: pull together data from CDPH's service-based organizations into a data warehouse. This will let the department mine operational data for health-related trends, bolstering the city's population health management efforts.In Chicago, population health encompasses a number of services, including emergency preparedness, disease surveillance and food protection. The department plans to harvest the information across these disparate service areas in order to obtain better business intelligence. "Today, most of our effort is geared toward getting the transaction done," said Carlo Govia, CDPH's Chief Financial Officer. "This new environment will now move us from the transactional world to the analytical world."

Search engines are about to drive dictionary sites out of business

Dictionary Web sites, as you may have surmised, are akin to the oxpeckers. The only way they can sustain themselves is by borrowing resources from far larger game—search engines, in this case. All sorts of traffic finds its way to an online dictionary through a search engine, which means that all sorts of advertising revenue depends on those clicks coming through. On the Internet, pageviews equal revenue, especially when you pack dozens of ads on a page, as the dictionary sites do. Without search engines feeding the dictionaries traffic, the reference sites probably couldn't survive. But search engines are smarter than giraffes. They've always had the ability to evolve and start providing definitions on their own. Thus, the dictionary sites have always been in a precarious spot; their hosts could grow the equivalent of a backscratcher at any moment and put the oxpecker out of a job. And now it finally appears that search engines have had enough. Without warning, the evolution has already begun; dictionary sites are more endangered than ever. But if search engines borrow too much content and leech too many page views they'll send the dictionary sites out of business. And then where will they get their definitions?