December 2010

FCC's New Net Neutrality Plan: Has Anything Changed?

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski unveiled an updated network neutrality plan, but how is this different from the proposal the commission introduced in October 2009?

For all intents and purposes, the main thrust of Wednesday's plan doesn't differ too greatly from the October 2009 proposal. move was really more of a legal argument. Genachowski's plan outlines the FCC's legal authority for addressing broadband, though it ditches plans to reclassify broadband as a telecom service.

What did this week's presentation raise?

  • More Usage-Based Pricing Coming Soon?
  • Network Management OK, But No Specific Blocking
  • Wireless still part of the plan, but treated differently
  • No reclassification

Waxman Still Mulling FCC's Open Internet Order

House Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) said that while he is supportive of the Federal Communications Commission's efforts to protect the open Internet, he needs to take a closer look at the commission's proposed net neutrality order before he signs off on it.

"You would think that making sure the Internet isn't censored in any way would be an idea that's popular among Democrats and Republicans," Chairman Waxman said. So far reaction on Capitol Hill shows lawmakers splitting down party lines with Democrats supporting the FCC's proposal and Republicans opposing it.

Fashioning FCC Auction Rules to Favor Diversity

On October 14, 2010, the Advisory Committee on Diversity for Communications in the Digital Age formally recommended that the Federal Communications Commission undertake a notice of proposed rulemaking to consider how the Commission could design, adopt, and implement an additional new preference program in its competitive bidding process. Under the proposed preference, persons or entities who have overcome substantial disadvantage would be eligible for a bidding credit. The Advisory Committee explains that the new preference "would expand the pool of designated entities to include those qualified applicants who have overcome substantial disadvantage," noting that the proposed program is analogous in some respects to programs used by educational institutions in their admissions processes.

The Advisory Committee's Recommendation acknowledges that a number of issues concerning the design and implementation of its proposal would need to be refined and resolved by the Commission in a future rulemaking proceeding. Accordingly, the Media and Wireless Telecommunications Bureaus seek information that will assist the Commission in considering whether to launch a proceeding to further examine the components of the recommended preference. The Bureaus seek comment on the proposal and are especially interested in comments on the following questions. Interested parties need not address all the questions presented, but are encouraged to respond to those about which they have particular knowledge or information.

Telecom giants and campaign cash

Top telecom companies are hoping their early investments in the freshman congressional class of 2011 will pay much-sought dividends in the form of new Washington allies. Political action committees for big players like AT&T and Verizon each wrote a number of campaign checks this election season to neophyte political candidates — sometimes, even to opponents in the same race — as they sought to strengthen their political hands as hot debates over issues like network neutrality begin to intensify.

Roughly one-third of newcomers this year can boast a contribution from either or both telecom giants. By contrast, other industry players spent far less on political newcomers this year. Google, for example, supported new, victorious 2010 candidates, but each already boasted some political experience. Many others, including Comcast, instead focused their attention on key veterans and big-ticket Senate candidates.

Facebook: The Media Company That Could Have Been

In mid-April, Facebook launched a Facebook + Media initiative focused on helping news, television and music partners "drive referral traffic, increase engagement, and deepen user insights on your site," presumably with the intent of closely integrating Facebook with existing media properties and extending the reach of the already monstrous social network. But is Facebook just an accessory for media companies, or a media company in itself?

At Business Insider's IGNITION conference, David Kirkpatrick -- author of The Facebook Effect -- talked with Wendy Harris Millard of MediaLink LLC and Mike Lazerow of Buddy Media about Facebook's odd evolution. The real question at hand is whether Facebook really is a media company -- that is, a company that produces and distributes attention-grabbing nuggets of content and makes money on them. By this definition, the answer is yes. At the same time, Facebook doesn't necessarily produce its own content. Perhaps that's because Facebook is a media company that's not trying to be a media company. It's more of a media infrastructure company; Facebook builds roads, pit stops, forums and other spaces on the Web that have become essential for virtually every business on the planet to reach its desired audience. But with the social network's ubiquity, it's as permanent a destination for content as CNN, Amazon or the iTunes store.

Bloggers Debate New Security Measures

Anger and frustration over the new TSA airport security measures boiled over in the social media last week. And while much of the mainstream press reported or commented on that rage, those in the online community embodied those sentiments.

And, in a rare case of news agenda unity, heavy interest in the new measures cut across all three social media platforms studied in the New Media Index from the Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism. For the week of November 22-26, more than half (54%) the news links on blogs were about the security measures, making it the No. 1 subject. They were also the fourth largest topic on Twitter with 9% of the links. And on YouTube, the new procedures were the subject of the second most popular news video as viewers gravitated to an element of comedic relief produced by a Taiwanese company.

HHS calls for online apps competition to help meet 10-year health goals

As part of its new roadmap to improve healthcare quality, the Health & Human Services Department has challenged developers to create applications for professionals who are working on national health objectives and with state and community data. HHS detailed the “myHealthyPeople” challenge as a part of its Healthy People 2020, the nation’s next set of 10-year goals and objectives for health promotion and disease prevention, which it unveiled Dec. 2.

Electronic Health Record Certification Final Rule Up for Review

The Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONC) has sent a final rule to establish a permanent certification program for electronic health records technology to the Office for Management and Budget (OMB). Review by the OMB is a required step in the process to publish a final rule. While there is no legislative deadline for the release of the rule, at the time the temporary certification program was finalized in June, ONC indicated it expected to publish the final rule for the permanent program this fall.

Forum

Federal Communications Commission
Tuesday, December 14, 2010, 10:30 a.m. - 1:30 p.m. EST
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-303192A1.doc
Additional info:
http://www.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2010/db1213/DOC-303566A...

A forum bringing together teens, parents, educators and experts to discuss the opportunities and challenges around mobile technology use by adolescents. Recent surveys show cell phone ownership among children has increased 68 percent in the past five years and typical teens send a text message every 10 minutes during waking hours.

will feature remarks by FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski and a presentation of findings from a Pew Internet and American Life study on kids’ mobile phone usage. The forum will include a panel of teens, parents and educators sharing their thoughts on mobile technology. A second panel will focus on educating and empowering parents through an “Ask the Mobile Experts” session. The experts will also recommend tools and resources to parents and kids for the safe and responsible use of mobile phones.

is free and open to the public. Due to limited seating, those attending are asked to pre-register by submitting their name, organizational affiliation and phone number to generationmobile@fcc.gov. The forum will be webcast live at http://reboot.fcc.gov/live/ and questions during the forum can be sent to livequestions@fcc.gov or using the hashtag #GenMobile on Twitter.

Agenda

10:00 a.m. Welcome, Opening Remarks, Live Chat with Jane Lynch
Speakers:
• Welcome by David Pinder, Principal, McKinley Technology High School
• Remarks by Julius Genachowski, Chairman, FCC
• Live Video Chat with Actress Jane Lynch, LG Text Ed Council
• Presentation by Amanda Lenhart, Senior Researcher, Pew Internet Project

10:40 a.m. Panel I: Speaks
Moderators:
• Rosalind Wiseman, Author and Teen Expert, Member LG Text Ed Council
• Julius Genachowski, Chairman, FCC

Panelists:
• Tori Dugger, Senior, McKinley Technology High School
• Jonathan Harris II, Senior, Dr. Henry A. Wise High School, Upper Marlboro, Md.
• Erin Maines, Sophomore, Falls Church High School, Falls Church, Va.
• Frank Preston, Junior, Howard High School, Ellicott City, Md.
• Lanita Preston, Author and Mother of Frank Preston
• Stacey A. Kopnitsky, Assistant Principal, Cabin John Middle School, Rockville, Md.
• Parry Aftab, Executive Director, WiredSafety.org
• Dwan Jordon, Principal, Sousa Middle School, Washington, D.C.

11:40 a.m. Panel II: Ask the Experts About
Moderator:
• Josh Gottheimer, Senior Counselor to the Chairman, FCC

Panelists:
• Marsali Hancock, President, Internet Keep Safe Coalition
• Dr. Michael Levine, Executive Director, Joan Ganz Cooney Center
• Maureen Cooney, Privacy Officer, Sprint
• Michael Clark, Co-Founder, SafetyWeb
• Dane Snowden, Vice President, External & State Affairs, CTIA
• Tim Sparapani, Director of Public Policy, Facebook
• Alan Simpson, Vice President for Policy, Common Sense Media
• Stephen Balkam, CEO, Family Online Safety Institute

1:00 p.m. Program Concludes



FCC Basing Network Neutrality Authority, In Part, on Broadband Deployment Argument

The Federal Communications Commission has better arguments to shore up its authority to enforce network management rules than Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Really. Trust us.

Section 706 requires the agency to make an annual report to Congress on whether broadband is being deployed to all Americans in a reasonable and timely manner. In instances when the agency concludes "no," the act also empowers the FCC to move toward fixing that. But the notion that network neutrality rules would help spur deployment is overwhelmingly rejected by rules opponents, who say such regulations would actually hinder investment. Even the most ardent network neutrality proponents rarely cite deployment as a reason to enact such rules, preferring to wage arguments about promoting free expression and forestalling potential Internet fees. The argument that net-neutrality rules would promote deployment goes like this: the rules ensure that Internet companies can get their content to users and continue producing more content, increasing the bandwidth demands on broadband providers and spurring them to build out their networks.

But when FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski used that logic, network neutrality-opponents balked. “It is possible that the FCC has new economic research to unveil, but the vast majority of economists, analysts and investors agree that new Internet regulations and policy uncertainty will deter investment, slow job creation and undermine broadband deployment,” Internet Innovation Alliance Co-Chairman Bruce Mehlman told The Hill at the time.

It's not just industry that questions the use of Section 706. The public interest community, which wants the agency to use the most solid argument possible to underpin the rules, recoiled at the notion that Section 706 can be used to justify the commission's net-work neutrality actions. "This argument has procedural problems, legal problems, and no basis in the record. It would apply only to the 14-24 million Americans the FCC found lacked adequate access to broadband," said Harold Feld, legal director at Public Knowledge.