May 2011

[Commentary] Forty years ago this week, a former television news correspondent inaugurated a momentous era in American journalism by speaking the following words into a microphone: "From National Public Radio in Washington, I'm Robert Conley with 'All Things Considered.'"

Much has changed at NPR. From an understaffed outfit that attracted a weekly audience of just 3 million in 1976, it has grown into a worldwide news organization with 18 foreign bureaus, and in 2010, it drew a weekly audience of 27.2 million. Listeners now tune in to a full menu of programs that includes not only the drive-time staples of "All Things Considered" and "Morning Edition" but also such cultural fare as "Fresh Air" and "World Cafe." In an era when mainstream media are losing ground (network TV viewership was off 3.4% last year), NPR's audience is expanding — up 3% in 2010 and 58% since 2000. Nonetheless, as "All Things Considered" celebrates its 40th anniversary, NPR finds itself at a troubling pass. The network became, once again, the target of conservative members of Congress.

The current threat feels more ominous because NPR has a structural problem. The network has an uneasy relationship with its member stations. It is in competition with local outlets for the digital future. KCRW and hundreds of others like it don't want their broadcast audiences to bypass them and listen to NPR.org on the Internet. Yet as its brisk growth attests, NPR is one of the few "good news" stories in today's mass media. The explanation for NPR's increasing popularity is obvious: the high quality of its work. Although "All Things Considered" rarely airs 24-minute documentaries now, day in and day out it produces great journalism. Just in the last few weeks it broadcast a tough but fair story by Melissa Block about the fierce emotions released by the sesquicentennial of the Civil War, which highlighted that conflict's ongoing relevance; a moving piece by Wade Goodwyn about the suicide of an Iraq War veteran suffering post-traumatic stress disorder; a thorough report by Gloria Hillard about crystal meth addiction in Riverside County; and dozens of other stories you couldn't find elsewhere. As long as NPR does this kind of work, there should be many more happy birthdays for "All Things Considered."

While Congress has been off on a break over the last two weeks, the five men and women who make up the Federal Communications Commission have been able to breathe a little easier. Soon, that’s going to change.

The FCC commissioners will find themselves in the crosshairs of Rep. Greg Walden (R-OR), the powerful chairman of the House Commerce Committee’s Subcommittee on Communications and Technology, when he convenes a hearing about reforming the FCC on May 13. “Process reform at the FCC is critical,” Chairman Walden says. “Process affects policy outcome . . . When you look at the FCC and its track record, it often reaches its decision, builds its record, and loses in court. That is not the flow that similarly constructed agencies have.” The commissioners themselves have also suggested areas of reform. In a speech in March, Commissioner Meredith Attwell Baker, a Republican, slammed the commission over its process for reviewing mergers, which can drag on for what seems like an eternity. Chairman Walden, too, has gone after the merger review process, but for different reasons. In an interview with Adweek earlier this month, he sharply criticized the commission for its practice of forcing companies to accept restrictive conditions as a condition of approval.

[Commentary] The potential of wireless SmartMeters for both utilities and customers is clear: accuracy, timeliness and thriftier energy use. But in rolling out about 11 million of the devices in California, Pacific Gas & Electric has fumbled this message. It's played down buggy software, flawed installation and health worries by decided doubters. The result is a deep gulf between the utility and its customers.

[Commentary] As the lead analyst for mobile devices at PCMag.com, I have reviewed more than 500 cell phones and other gadgets over the past seven years, and I'm considered an expert on the wireless industry. I believe a merger between AT&T and T-Mobile would result in less competition, fewer choices, higher prices, and less innovation. This merger is not in the interest of American consumers. AT&T's purchase of T-Mobile, AT&T and Verizon would have approximately 80 percent of U.S. wireless subscribers. AT&T claims smaller competitors such as Cricket, MetroPCS and Cellular South are threatening AT&T's business. But MetroPCS, with 8 million subscribers, would be less than 1/16 of the new AT&T's size. The other companies are even smaller. This is an elephant professing a fear of mice.

Additional concerns:

• The merger will result in fewer handset choices for consumers.
• The merger will result in reduced customer care quality and higher plan prices.
• The merger will result in less innovation.
• The merger will result in a monopoly on GSM service.
• AT&T's argument about needing spectrum is disingenuous.
• Holding LTE deployment hostage to a merger is reprehensible.