For upcoming media policy events, see http://www.benton.org/calendar.htm
BROADBAND
Voters say 'Yes' to Fiber
La. Referendum Gives Impetus to McCain Broadband Bill
Let Them Have Broadband
Government Net not Cheap
US Telecoms seen Beating Cable on Broadband
Fighting a Broadband Battle
TELEVISION
Tex. Video Franchising Bill May Fail in Education Fight
Industry Lobbyists Split Over Need For Telecom Act Rewrite
DTV Confusion Pervasive Among Lawmakers Who
Decry Consumer Confusion
Group Targets Indecency, Pushes For 'A La Carte' Cable
TV News Outlets Revamp Web Sites
PUBLIC BROADCASTING
Don't Get Fooled Again
Fairness in the Balance
QUICKLY -- Massive Rereg Bill Introduced; Media Kingpins Face the Music;
Diversity Said Good Business Strategy for Media; Meet the Bloggers; The
cellphone debate at 35,000 feet
BROADBAND
VOTERS SAY 'YES' TO FIBER
Lafayette voters turned out in surprising numbers Saturday for an election
with a single issue. With a 27 percent turnout, they voted 12,290 to 7,507,
or 62 percent to 38 percent, to proceed with the controversial
fiber-to-the-home project. The vote authorizes Lafayette Utilities System
to sell up to $125 million in bonds for a fiber to the home and business
project. It will involve extending fiber optics cable down every city
street, then offering residents and businesses the option of receiving
high-speed Internet, telephone and/or cable TV service through LUS. City
officials said they believe it can offer those services at lower prices
than incumbents such as BellSouth and Cox Communications. The next step for
LUS is to work with the Louisiana Public Service Commission on its rule
making, a move that can affect how much LUS can charge and could prevent
LUS from guaranteeing the fiber bonds with revenue from its electric, sewer
and water divisions. The matter may be taken up at a PSC meeting this week,
said Terry Huval, LUS director. Once LUS clears the PSC rulemaking, it will
begin the process to issue bonds. Without delays, Huval said, LUS could
have the bond money in hand in four to five months. Then the utility would
hire an engineering firm to prepare engineering on every pole and lot in
the city.
[SOURCE: The Daily Advertiser, AUTHOR: Claire
Taylor ctaylor( at )theadvertiser.com]
http://www.acadiananow.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050717/NEWS01/50...
* La. Parish Gets Broadband OK
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA626410.html?display=Breaking+News
LA REFERENDUM GIVES IMPETUS TO MCCAIN BROADBAND BILL
With Lafayette (LA) voters approving a referendum to let the city authorize
up to $125 million in bonds to build a fiber network, Washington was a-buzz
over municipal broadband networks and a bill introduced in June that would
prevent states from barring public providers from supplying advanced
telecom capability or services using it. The McCain-Lautenberg bill is
designed to help municipalities achieve their goal of deploying high-speed
Internet services to their citizens as quickly as possible. In Lafayette's
case, the network represents a service as much as an economic development
tool to attract more business development, said Jim Baller, an attorney for
municipal interests. While the La. city's effort may be a successful first
start, there are 14 states that have passed laws that put restrictions on
cities investing in their own advanced communications services -- one
reason Sen McCain introduced his bill.
[SOURCE: Communications Daily, AUTHOR: Anne Veigle]
(Not available online)
* La. City Votes Municipal Network Expansion
http://www.njtelecomupdate.com/lenya/telco/live/tb-OKGE1121718831744.html
* Intel Backs Municipal High-Speed Networks
http://www.njtelecomupdate.com/lenya/telco/live/tb-EUOL1121715022852.html
LET THEM HAVE BROADBAND
[Commentary] Only about 10%-20% of those living in rural areas have access
to speedy broadband connections through cable or telephone companies,
according to various estimates. Satellite connections, with delayed
responses and some uplink speeds nearly as slow as dial-up, aren't a
satisfying solution to many rural residents. At stake is far more than
downloading music or playing video games at full speed. Increasingly,
high-speed links are a lifeline to the new economy. The telecommunications
companies say they have little incentive to deliver costly broadband
connections to sparsely populated areas, and from a business perspective,
they're right. What's less understandable is why those companies fight to
prevent people in rural areas from wiring themselves. Telecommunications
companies make two arguments against such efforts: 1) Unfair competition.
No private company can compete against taxpayer-sponsored Internet systems,
they say. But for the most part, communities push ahead on their own only
after the private companies fail to meet their needs. No mayor would
survive spending local bond money to build an unnecessary network. 2) Most
of the country already has broadband access. New data from the Federal
Communications Commission show that 99% of Americans live in zip codes with
high speed connections, note the companies. That ignores millions in those
zip codes who have either no broadband or slow broadband.
[SOURCE: USAToday, AUTHOR: Editorial Staff]
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20050719/edit19.art.htm
GOVERNMENT NET NOT CHEAP
[Commentary] According to new FCC data, 99% of us live in zip codes where
high-speed Internet is available, and 83% of us have a choice of providers
as wireless, cable, landline, satellite and power companies join the
competitive fray. Despite this progress, many local communities are
entering the broadband business, investing millions of taxpayer dollars on
advanced communications networks of their own. The idea may sound
appealing, based largely on the false assumption that a government service
is cheaper. But broadband networks require significant ongoing investment
and technical expertise to stay on top of changes in technology and to
ensure a quality customer experience -- attributes not often associated
with government. Local governments play a crucial role in our daily lives,
but they are ill-equipped for the financial and technological challenges of
being a leading-edge broadband company. No one opposes a government role
encouraging the spread of high-speed Internet in underserved areas. We
differ on whether the government should do so in competition or in
partnership with the private sector.
[SOURCE: USAToday, AUTHOR: Walter B. McCormick, Jr, CEO of the United
States Telecom Association]
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20050719/oppose19.art.htm
US TELECOMS SEEN BEATING CABLE ON BROADBAND
Industry experts say the sales figures for broadband lines due to be
released with second-quarter earnings reports over the next couple of weeks
are likely to show telephone companies added roughly 1 million new digital
subscriber lines for the second quarter. While such a total would be down
about 20% from the first quarter's growth rate, analysts say it would still
be good for 55% of all new broadband subscribers.
[SOURCE: Reuters, AUTHOR: Justin Hyde]
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=technologyNews&story...
FIGHTING A BROADBAND BATTLE
FCC Chairman Kevin Martin is finding he needs Republican reinforcements to
implement an ambitious agenda. Currently, the five-seat Commission has one
vacancy creating a 2-2 split between Republicans and Democrats. In an
interview, Chairman Martin says his top goal is to increase Americans'
access to high-speed Internet. Late last week, he began circulating plans
to loosen rules so neither phone nor cable companies will be required to
share their Internet connections with competitors like America Online, a
change that essentially would create a duopoly in many local markets. His
view, though, isn't popular with Democrats and consumer advocates, who
argue more competitors would lead to lower prices. Chairman Martin also
embraces the idea that local governments should be allowed to offer
wireless Internet services, at least in rural areas where some phone and
cable companies balk at providing high-speed service. Besides pushing
broadband, Mr. Martin is under pressure to more strongly enforce the FCC's
indecency rules. As a FCC commissioner, Martin was a proponent of tougher
standards and higher fines, siding with Democrats and anti-indecency
groups. After assessing $7.9 million in indecency fines in 2004, the FCC
hasn't issued any this year. "We'd like to see some movement. It may very
well require a fifth commissioner," says Tim Winter, executive director of
the Parents Television Council, an indecency watchdog group. Mr. Martin
says he doesn't believe the FCC needs to enforce standards on premium
channels like HBO, since subscribers specifically pay extra for such
channels. He says one solution is to have cable companies provide a la
carte channel pricing for consumers, a notion unpopular with the cable
industry, which built its business model around selling packages of
channels. "I saw a quote recently where one person said 'I can call up and
order HBO, I don't understand why I can't call up and cancel any of my
cable...programming.' I think that there could be additional control over
that," he says.
[SOURCE: Wall Street Journal, AUTHOR: Amy Schatz Amy.Schatz( at )wsj.com]
http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB112173373313488959,00.html?mod=todays...
(requires subscription)
* Questions for Kevin J. Martin
http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB112173473180788984,00.html?mod=articl...
TELEVISION
TEXAS VIDEO FRANCHISING BILL MAY FAIL IN EDUCATION FIGHT
The video franchising bill before the Texas legislature has two days to
pass, but that's not a certainty now. The legislature is meeting in a
special session meant to address first and foremost education funding. And
now the Governor and Lt. Governor have vowed to pass no law until the
legislature addresses -- well, education. The Texas Senate must approve an
amended form of its own bill freeing telephone companies of municipal
franchise agreements as they roll out video services.
[SOURCE: Communications Daily, AUTHOR: Jonathan Make]
(Not available online)
* Texas House OKs Deregulatory Telecom Bill
http://www.njtelecomupdate.com/lenya/telco/live/tb-HUTU1121721709271.html
* The New Cable Guy
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/18/AR200507...
* Verizon Pursues Local Cable Franchises
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/18/AR200507...
INDUSTRY LOBBYISTS SPLIT OVER NEED FOR TELECOM ACT REWRITE
Lobbyists from the telephone and cable industries expressed sharp
disagreement Friday about whether telecommunications legislation is
necessary or politically practical during the current Congress -- and also
disagreed about what form such legislation should take. Verizon
Communications Senior Vice President Peter Davidson insisted that
legislation is necessary and doable. The two essential components for
reform, he said, are creating national video franchises -- a move that the
cable industry opposes -- and creating a new category of telecom law
governing high-speed Internet services, or broadband. Replied Kyle
McSlarrow, president of the National Cable and Telecommunications
Association, "Everything [the Bells] are arguing now is different" from
their posture during writing of the 1996 Telecommunications Act. Nine years
ago, the Bell companies "were not making the argument that franchises are a
barrier. Now, they want to change the rules," McSlarrow declared. The
differences over video franchises occurred in a broader discussion about
the consequences of the Supreme Court's decision last month in NCTA v.
Brand X Internet Services. But McSlarrow urged caution about changes to the
1996 Telecom Act. The Brand X decision underscored the cable industry's
slogan that "like services should be regulated alike," he said, noting that
efforts to rewrite the telecom law's treatment of broadband might "spill
over" into telephone or television services.
[SOURCE: Technology Daily, AUTHOR: Drew Clark]
http://www.njtelecomupdate.com/lenya/telco/live/tb-WMCS1121723570339.html
DTV CONFUSION PERVASIVE AMONG LAWMAKERS WHO DECRY CONSUMER CONFUSION
Representatives from various sectors of the television industry warned the
Senate Commerce Committee last week that a mismanaged digital TV transition
could be a "train wreck." Committee Chairman Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) asked
if November 15, 2005 is a reasonable date by which all TVs sold in the US
could include built in digital TV tuning. The Consumer Electronics
Association replied saying that would increase the price of televisions by
$100-200. Sen. Conrad Burns (R-Mont.) then suggested building a $50
digital-to-analog converter box into every TV, noting that's the estimate
of what a set-top would cost by 2009 to keep households from going dark.
Subsidizing digital-to-analog convertor boxes for households that rely on
over-the-air broadcasts may be the downfall of digital TV legislation. New
America Foundation's Michael Calabrese told the committee a "credible" hard
date that includes a comprehensive "compensation" package "can spin straw
into gold." He called for a "broad-based" DTV converter "rebate that
ensures all households still relying on analog over-the-air are held
harmless." "By earmarking a relatively small share of the expected auction
revenue for a consumer compensation fund, Congress can both protect
vulnerable consumers and ensure potential wireless business plans will not
be disrupted via voter backlash." According to Calabrese, giving a $50 box
or rebate to 16 million households -- the minimum he projected would depend
on over the air reception -- would cost about $800 million. Giving a rebate
to 44 million households that report relying on over-the-air for local
channels would cost $2.2 billion, he said. Either way, that's a small part
of the $18-$30 billion that would be raised in a spectrum auction,
Calabrese said. A "means-tested" subsidy program for low-income consumers
would cost less than one for all disenfranchised households, Calabrese
said, but "we believe it's neither administratively practical nor fair." If
a broader program were adopted, he said, "we believe that on balance, it
would be most cost-efficient to reimburse qualified retailers" for
requiring them to offer FCC-certified converters, keeping consumers' share
of the cost "to a small co-pay, and to provide a degree of technical support."
[SOURCE: Communications Daily, AUTHOR: Paul Gluckman]
(Not available online)
GROUP TARGETS INDECENCY, PUSHES FOR 'A LA CARTE' CABLE
A coalition of 24 conservative and faith-based organizations is decrying
indecency on cable television. The group has launched a campaign aimed at
convincing lawmakers to require cable operators to offer a la carte, or per
channel, programming. Concerned Women for America, the Family Research
Council, Focus on the Family, the Parents Television Council, and the
Salvation Army are pressing their case in Washington. The coalition
represents millions of voters and lobbied on the issue in the last
Congress. The new effort began Thursday with a letter to Senate Commerce
Chairman Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, and his House countepart, Energy and
Commerce Chairman. Joe Barton, R-Texas. It suggests a public movement for
more consumer choice in cable-channel selection.
[SOURCE: Technology Daily, AUTHOR: David Hatch]
http://www.njtelecomupdate.com/lenya/telco/live/tb-ZUEB1121724451131.html
TV NEWS OUTLETS REVAMP WEB SITES
Trying to reach younger viewers and others who are not at home to watch the
evening news, television news sites are rolling out revamped web sites
offering plentiful free video news stories on demand to surfers. "Our
audience on the Web is 10 to 15 years younger than our TV audience" for
news, says Larry Kramer, president of CBS's digital-media operations.
Visitors to ABC News's long-established Web site have a median age of 45,
nine years younger than ABC News's median TV audience, according to
Nielsen/NetRatings and research by the network, which is owned by Walt
Disney. With this in mind, "the advertisers we are going to are different,"
says CBS's Mr. Kramer, including electronics manufacturers and fast-food
chains. On the CBS Evening News TV broadcast, pharmaceutical companies
predominate, making up seven of the 10 biggest advertisers in the 11 months
to April. These included Novartis, Merck and Pfizer, whose drugs often
treat chronic conditions common in older people.
[SOURCE: Wall Street Journal, AUTHOR: Brian Steinberg
brian.steinberg( at )wsj.com and Christopher Lawton christopher.lawton( at )wsj.com]
http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB112173238523588921,00.html?mod=todays...
(requires subscription)
PUBLIC BROADCASTING
DON'T BE FOOLED AGAIN
A leading Republican donor named Cheryl F. Halpern is the top candidate to
replace CPB Chair Ken Tomlinson. Halpern and her husband Fred -- long major
financial supporters of Republican candidates -- have given more than
$324,000 to Republicans since 1989. During the last election, Mother Jones
magazine ranked them among the nation's top 100 "hard" money contributors.
Appointed to the CPB board three years ago by President Bush, Halpern is a
close ally of Tomlinson and part of the five-member Republican majority now
controlling the board. She and Tomlinson served together on the
Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG), which oversees the federal
government's international broadcasting services, such as Voice of America
(VOA) and Radio Free Europe. As the chair of CPB, the agency that
distributes federal funds to noncommercial radio and TV stations and
supposedly serves as a buffer between public broadcasting and politicians
seeking to influence its news reporting and programming, Halpern would be
far from impartial. At the Senate confirmation hearing on her nomination to
the CPB board in 2003, for example, she suggested that public broadcasting
journalists should be penalized for biased programs. She also agreed with
Senator Trent Lott, R-Miss., when he questioned the objectivity of the
award-winning PBS journalist and commentator Bill Moyers. Neither Halpern
nor Lott ever said what penalties they might propose. But Halpern did refer
to her previous powers at the BBG -- which included "physical removal" of
journalists -- as a model.
[SOURCE: AlterNet, AUTHOR: Rory O'Connor]
http://www.alternet.org/mediaculture/23602/
FAIRNESS IN THE BALANCE
What is it about National Public Radio, the Public Broadcasting Service et
al. that so irks conservatives? The answer seems to be twofold, reflecting
both a general ideological aversion (using taxpayer money to support radio
and TV shows) and a specific set of complaints about the alleged leftward
tilt of programs hosted by the likes of Bill Moyers and Tavis Smiley. At a
time of massive government budget deficits, amid tight spending on social
programs of all kinds, some Republicans assert that Washington's support of
public broadcasting is expendable. What's more, conservatives like to say,
those federal funds are subsidizing a system that disproportionately serves
the tastes and interests of relatively affluent audiences. But about 27
percent of PBS viewers graduated from college, compared with 27.6 percent
for the U.S. population. Among households that watch PBS, 32 percent earn
more than $60,000 a year, compared with 37 percent across the nation.
[SOURCE: Washington Post 7/17, AUTHOR: Paul Farhi]
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/15/AR200507...
(requires registration)
QUICKLY
MASSIVE DEREG BILL INTRODUCED
On July 14, Rep Maurice Hinchey (D-NY) introduced the Media Ownership
Reform Act of 2005 (H.R. 3302). The bill would: 1) invalidate all of the
FCC's 2003 media ownership rule rewrite (an appeals court only remanded the
rules for a re-do), and reinstate the newspaper-broadcast cross ownership
rule the local TV multiple ownership rule that the FCC scrapped in the 2003
rewrite; 2) restore the fairness doctrine; 3) lower the cap on TV station
ownership from the 39% (raised by Congress) back to 25%; 4) reduce the
number of radio and TV stations a company can own; 5) increase the number
of public interest obligations on all broadcasters; 6) get rid of the UHF
discount "loophole" that counts only half a UHF station's audience reach
toward ownership caps. The bill would change the FCC's biennial regulation
review to triennial, but would require any media ownership rule to be
published in the Federal Register and be the subject of at least five
public hearings across the country. (FCC Chairman Kevin Martin is said to
be agreeable to that number of hearings on the FCC's current attempted
rewrite of the 2003 rules.) The bill, co-sponsored by Diane Watson (D-CA),
would also take aim at vertical integration by mandating more
independently-produced programming on the TV networks.
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA626499?display=Breaking+News&...
(free access for Benton's Headlines subscribers)
MEDIA KINGPINS FACE THE MUSIC
Concerns about the Internet, new technologies and piracy continue to weigh
on the likes of Time Warner, News Corp., Viacom and Disney. Big media
companies have "missed opportunities" to attach to robust young industries,
from gaming to the Web. Investors once wooed by lofty consolidation
promises are now being told just short years later that the synergies
weren't quite what they seemed.
[SOURCE: The Street, AUTHOR: Sandy Brown]
http://www.thestreet.com/_tscs/stocks/sandybrown/10232215.html
DIVERSITY SAID TO BE A GOOD BUSINESS STRATEGY FOR MEDIA
Diversity is a good thing for media companies that strive to satisfy
consumers in a multi-ethnic market, said speakers at the Minority Media &
Telecommunications Council's "Access to Capital" Conference. Diversity is
among the FCC's top concerns, said FCC Media Bureau Chief Donna Gregg told
the conference. Promoting competition and localism are also "touchstones,"
she said, adding that "these are subject to agreement at the commission."
It's important that new minority firms enter the media industry to
stimulate "fresh, new ideas," Chief Gregg said. There will be ample
opportunities for input from stakeholders. One chance starts July 27, when
a filing window opens for applications for an upcoming auction of 172 new
FM station construction permits, she said. Gregg invited MMTC attendees to
a pre-auction seminar at the FCC July 27: "The time to get involved is
now." Auction No. 62, starting Nov. 1, offers a 35% credit to a winning
bidder who has no stake in another media or mass communications asset, an
FCC document said.Ms. Gregg's appearance was the first time an FCC media
bureau chief has spoken at the event.
[SOURCE: Communications Daily, AUTHOR: Anne Veigle, Jonathan Make]
(Not available online)
Oh... so consolidation is bad and diversity is good -- where have I heard
that before?
UNCLE SAM, MEET THE BLOGGERS
Is the future of blogs, those symbols of the Internet's democratic promise,
in jeopardy? A federal judge has ordered the Federal Election Commission to
extend campaign finance laws to the Internet. And the regulatory foray has
sparked debate about whether the anti-establishment, rant-prone but
politically relevant blogosphere is more akin to a world of activists or
journalists. Bloggers worry that bringing bloggers under the regulatory
scope of campaign finance laws will mean incurring debilitating legal fees
to defend against partisan lawsuits or FEC investigations. That is unless
the government classifies blogs as "press," which are exempted from
campaign finance laws. The whole affair has anti-establishment bloggers
taking some ever-so-establishment paths to Washington.
[SOURCE: AlterNet, AUTHOR: Kelly Hearn]
http://www.alternet.org/mediaculture/23532/
CAN WE TALK? THE CELLPHONE DEBATE AT 35,000 FEET
The possibility that airlines may soon be cleared for cellphone use has
raised alarms with security officials, flight attendants, and many of the
flying public. The Federal Communications Commission has already signaled
its willingness to lift the restrictions that it put in place in 1991
because new technology ensures that chatting at 35,000 feet won't interfere
with cellphone service on the ground. But the Federal Aviation
Administration is more reluctant. During congressional hearings last week,
FAA officials stated that while they'd keep their ban, they would also
consider requests to lift it on a case-by-case basis if the airlines can
prove that doing so won't interfere with navigational systems or avionics.
A study due out late next year will address that issue, but it's expected
to find no problems. Few groups are more opposed to allowing cellphone use
than the airlines' own front-line personnel. Flight attendants are
concerned not only about terrorists, but also about passengers' air rage if
they're forced to sit and listen to someone else chatter for three or four
hours.
[SOURCE: The Christian Science Monitor, AUTHOR: Alexandra Marks]
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0719/p01s02-ussc.html
--------------------------------------------------------------
Communications-related Headlines is a free online news summary service
provided by the Benton Foundation (www.benton.org). Posted Monday through
Friday, this service provides updates on important industry developments,
policy issues, and other related news events. While the summaries are
factually accurate, their often informal tone does not always represent the
tone of the original articles. Headlines are compiled by Kevin Taglang
(headlines( at )benton.org) -- we welcome your comments.
--------------------------------------------------------------