December 2012

[Commentary] On December 3, representatives from 193 countries are convening in Dubai in the United Arab Emirates, to renegotiate a treaty that could give an arm of the United Nations new powers over the Internet. Despite increased scrutiny of these talks, many countries seem more determined than ever to turn the supremely bad idea of establishing international regulation of the Net into reality.

American diplomats will have to navigate a torrent of formal proposals that would curtail Internet freedom, limit consumers’ choices and increase costs for all Net users. How the negotiations end will shape the future of the Net, as well as the prospects for global freedom and prosperity. The purpose of the Dubai talks, known as the World Conference on International Telecommunications, is to re-examine a 1988 treaty that loosened rules covering telephone and computer communications. The regulatory framework adopted in 1988 took a “hands off” approach to emerging technologies, such as what later became the Internet. As a result, the Internet is now the greatest deregulatory success story of all time. For instance, in 1995, shortly after it was privatized, only 16 million people used the Net. That number has spiked to more than 2.5 billion today with upward of a half million people becoming first-time Internet users each day. If, however, some key regimes have their way, such soaring positive trend lines will flatten. A successful WCIT would produce a treaty that not only eschews expanded regulation of any aspect of the Internet but also commits to free markets, freedom of speech, competition and deregulation. The people of every nation, but especially tomorrow’s first-time Net users in the developing world, deserve no less. After the December WCIT, new talks commence in May. Defenders of Internet freedom should never let their guard down, for freedom’s foes are patient and persistent incrementalists. To be continued …

You may have heard that at a summit next week, the International Telecommunications Union, a U.N. agency, will attempt to wrest control of the Internet. At a Future Tense event on Internet governance, held at the New America Foundation in Washington, the rumor was soundly spanked by a host of experts.

In reality, they said, the upcoming World Conference on International Communications in Dubai will likely just lead to … more conversation. But maybe there’s a silver lining to all of this bipartisan fear-mongering (or, as Open Technology Institute Director Sascha Meinrath termed it, “the uber-geek [equivalent of] Red Dawn”): “Suddenly everybody’s interested in global governance of the Internet,” said Syracuse University professor Milton Mueller. “If it was necessary to lie to people and tell them the ITU was going to take over the Internet, maybe it’s a good thing.” Indeed, Temple University law professor David Post, author of the amazingly titled book In Search of Jefferson's Moose: Notes on the State of Cyberspace, observed that right now, it feels a bit like six months before the SOPA protests blew up: We are on the verge of Internet governance issues crossing over into mainstream discussion.

[Commentary] The Federal Communications Commission is about to make a little-watched decision that could have a tremendous impact on the way people in the United States get news.

After over a decade of Congressional obstruction, the FCC will finally vote to create thousands of new local radio stations across the United States. As a result of a bill I sponsored, the Local Community Radio Act, the FCC is issuing rules that will allow community groups and organizations to apply for licenses to operate noncommercial low-power FM (LPFM) radio stations on certain unoccupied parts of the dial. This means that if you've ever dreamed of starting a radio station, you just might have your chance soon. It also means that millions of Americans will have more choices on the FM radio dial and more access to local news and entertainment. This year's election cycle illustrated just how important it is for us to have more access to information about our own communities. Although we heard non-stop reporting on the presidential race for months, local and state political campaigns received a lot less coverage. Many people went to the polls on November 6 with little knowledge about their candidates for state attorney general, state representative, or school board. Yet those voters will be greatly impacted by the decisions their local and state representatives will make once in office. In places where noncommercial radio is already available, listeners really know the difference. This FCC action has the potential to dramatically expand the range of voices on FM radio and provide better coverage of community issues at a time of substantial media consolidation. It will give many radio listeners a real choice of content and perspective, and will empower local radio in many communities across the country.

[Commentary] According to a story in the Washington Post, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski is an overly cautious and plodding regulator who has accomplished little in his tenure that everybody in Washington believes is coming to an end. That's not the way I see it.

For better or worse (and most broadcasters would say worse), Chairman Genachowski has had an extraordinary, if not revolutionary, impact on at least a couple of the key industries he oversees. He set in motion a policy that, if allowed to play out over the next several years, could transform the mediascape and broadcasting's place in it. It was bold, it was radical and it came out of nowhere in the early days of his administration. I am speaking, of course, of what's come to be called the incentive auction, by which the FCC hopes to recapture a huge swath of TV spectrum and turn around and auctions it off to wireless broadband carriers that will, in Genachowski's way of thinking, put it to much better use.