Benton RSS Feed
The Federal Communications Commission’s vote to suspend its deregulatory triggers for special access (broadband business service) prices continues to draw both fire and fans from industry.
"With this action, the FCC has done right by consumers, and it's taken a first step toward promoting competition in wired and wireless communications," said Public Knowledge senior staff attorney John Bergmayer. "While consumers don't pay high special access fees directly, they still bear their cost. When competitive carriers have to pay unreasonably high rates for connectivity they may have to pass the costs along to users, or slow down new deployment."
COMPTEL, whose independent telecom members have complained about price increases for access to major carriers' plant, were all for the moratorium, as well as for suspending the deregulation triggers before it has collected industry data on the competitiveness of the market, the latter which was roundly criticized by the major carriers, FCC and Hill Republicans and various industry groups.
Not so appreciative of that suspension was AT&T, among those whose petitions for deregulation are now in limbo. While the company said the mandatory data collection was necessary, to suspend the triggers before it determines the current state of competition for the services was putting the cart before the horse.
Walter McCormick Jr., president of USTelecom, which represents major telecom providers including AT&T, Verizon, and CenturyLink, shared those concerns. "We are disappointed that the Commission has chosen to take this action despite its recent repeated admissions that it does not have adequate information to evaluate the competitiveness of the high-capacity services marketplace." he said.
Ditto Verizon in its statement from Donna Epps, VP of federal regulator affairs. "While today's Order acknowledges that the current rules fail to capture the full extent of existing competition, the FCC, before taking any action, should have collected the data it repeatedly has said it needs to evaluate the marketplace. There are many providers - cable companies and CLECs - that compete vigorously with special access. Given this intense competition, any efforts to impose new pricing regulation are unjustified and will depress investment in these networks so critical to our economy."
House Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-MI) and Communications and Technology Subcommittee Chairman Greg Walden (R-OR) released a statement saying, “The FCC has once again handed down a decision without providing sufficient evidence that action is needed. The decision violates good process and is difficult to square with Chairman Genachowski's previous statements about how this issue would be addressed. The FCC told the D.C. Circuit Court in an October 2011 filing that the commission lacked ‘an evidentiary record that is sufficient to evaluate current conditions in the special access market,’ in part because of ‘the failure of some parties to produce information clearly documenting their claims that special access rates are unreasonable.’ Further, the FCC Wireline Bureau Chief said in April that the FCC was still faced with ‘an incredible dearth of data.’”
FCC Special Access Call Continues to Draw Crowd Statement (Public Knowledge) Statement (AT&T) Upton, Walden Statement on the FCC’s Special Access Decision (House Commerce)
Sprint and T-Mobile are rejoicing, as are many other rural telcos and other companies that are reliant on buying access back to the Internet from circuits that are primarily owned by AT&T and Verizon.
The Federal Communications Commission said that it would halt the deregulation of the special access business while it looked at the rates charged by the companies providing the circuits connecting rural telcos and many wireless towers back to the Internet. The FCC is halting the ability of circuit providers to raise their prices while the regulatory agency gathers data on how the prices are set and how those prices affect competitors and rural carriers. The FCC plans to issue a mandatory data request in the next month or two, but that in itself is a long process requiring approvals and comment periods that mean the FCC won’t even have a conclusion on whether or not it needs to reform special access until next year. The issue is esoteric, and is a long time coming given the FCC began its look at the problem in 2009, but it does indirectly affect consumers. Sprint and T-Mobile both pay AT&T and Verizon a lot of money to buy access to those backhaul circuits so they can keep their network running.
This means even when T-Mobile and Sprint are doing well, a portion of their proceeds ends up feeding Verizon and AT&T. FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski estimates that special access charges are roughly $12 billion a year industry, which isn’t chump change.
What’s up with special access: the $128 billion surcharge on Spring and T-Mobile?
With Congress looking unlikely to act anytime soon to fix vulnerabilities in the nation’s computer systems that leave them open to cyberattacks, President Barack Obama is weighing the pros and cons of using an executive order to do what Congress hasn’t. But President Obama needs to consider his options carefully, because any unilateral steps could invite accusations from his critics of overstepping his authority.
As the acrimonious debate over antipiracy legislation illustrated earlier this year, simmering Internet issues can easily explode. Backers of the White House’s proposals say an executive order could add clarity to the debate and prove to skeptics that the government can play a greater role in protecting American networks without violating privacy or burdening private businesses. “I think it’s hard to make things any messier than it was politically,” said James Lewis, an expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “If done right, an executive order could help critics reconsider their arguments.” That’s an analysis echoed by University of California (Berkeley) professor Steven Weber who said many people seem to be “sleepwalking” when it comes to the threat of cyberattacks. An executive order, he said, could reform cybersecurity policies before a catastrophic attack galvanizes public opinion. An executive order could give Obama the chance to take a strong stand on a rising national-security concern while portraying Republicans in Congress as ditherers.
Obama faces Delicate decisions as Cyberattack Fears Rise
As more newspapers roll out metered paywalls and subscription plans, trying to duplicate the success of the New York Times, some journalists hope that being funded by readers will help stop the ad-driven pageview race and save quality journalism. But this argument is fundamentally flawed.
The biggest flaw is the idea that having subscribers means newspapers won’t have to be driven by pageview-based tactics any more, and can just focus on high-quality journalism. This assumes that the readers who subscribe will be radically different creatures than the ones who read the content for free: in other words, they will only be interested in serious journalism and not celebrity news briefs or slideshows, whereas the free reader is driven only by their interest in those sleazy eyeball-grabbing tactics.
No, metered-content walls won’t save journalism
In its response to recent filings from Apple, publishers and booksellers on its proposed e-book settlement with three publishers, the Department of Justice addresses few specific complaints. Rather, citing the “unmistakable consumer harm that has resulted from the conspiracy in this case,” the DOJ calls on Judge Denise Cote to approve the settlement without a hearing.
The DOJ shoots down the argument that e-books are different from print books but doesn’t elaborate on why they are the same (and doesn’t respond to the criticism that it has failed to take interrelated markets, like those for e-readers, into account). Rather, it says, “Railroads, publishers, lawyers, construction engineers, health care providers, and oil companies are just some of the voices that have raised cries against ‘ruinous competition’ over the decades,” and publishers should not be granted special treatment.
DoJ compares Apple and publishers to big oil in e-books case
As a national public safety broadband network begins to take shape, many state and local governments are looking to the federal government for guidance. The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) has set aside $135 million in grant money to help municipalities get through the planning stages of the nationwide project. Born from the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 signed into law by President Obama in February, the NTIA has formed the First Responder Network Authority (FirstNet) as an independent body that will oversee the administration and development of a nationwide public safety broadband network (PSBN). State and local governments will give their input to FirstNet.
National Public Safety Network: $135 Million Set For Planning
TV stations' newscasts reach key voters better than national cable news networks -- at least according to one TV trade association. Local TV early and late TV news programs in the top 10 markets have 32% of its viewership coming from the core "voting" demographic, those 35-54, per the TVB, the TV and local media advertising trade group, with analysis from Nielsen. By contrast, that demographic is underrepresented by prime-time cable news networks -- just 22%. The TVB says the top 10 markets' prime-time TV newscasts generally mirrors the U.S. population as a whole. Those 35-54 are 39% of all voters.
Local TV News Best Cable Nets In Reaching Key Voters
The advocacy group Consumer Watchdog is asking a federal judge for permission to weigh in against Google's plan to pay a $22.5 million fine to settle privacy charges with the Federal Trade Commission.
Consumer Watchdog argues that the deal in this case isn't appropriate because Google is denying liability. The nonprofit filed papers this week asking U.S. District Court Judge Susan Illston to allow it to submit a friend-of-the-court brief in the case. Consumer Watchdog -- which has long criticized the search giant -- also is asking Judge Illston to order the FTC and Google to more fully flesh out why they believe the settlement should move forward.
Consumer Watchdog Seeks To Weigh In On Google's Privacy Settlement
On the eve of the conventions, the portrayal in the news media of the character and records of the two presidential contenders in 2012 has been as negative as any campaign in recent times, and neither candidate has enjoyed an advantage over the other, according to a new study of mainstream media coverage of the race for president.
More of what the public hears about candidates also now comes from the campaigns themselves and less from journalists acting as independent reporters or interpreters of who the candidates are. An examination of the dominant or master narratives in the press about the character and record of presidential contenders finds that 72% of this coverage has been negative for Barack Obama and 71% has been negative for Mitt Romney. The study, conducted by the Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism, examined the personal portrayal of the candidate in 50 major news outlets over a 10-week period. These numbers make this as negative a campaign as PEJ has seen since it began monitoring the master narratives about candidates in press coverage in presidential campaigns in 2000. Only one campaign has been comparable-2004 when coverage was filled with the controversy over the war in Iraq, the prison scandal at Abu Ghraib and the Swift Boat documentaries. That year, 70% of the personal narrative studied about Democrat John Kerry and 75% of that about incumbent George Bush was negative, numbers similar to now.
Press Coverage of the Character of the candidates is Highly Negative
August 23 marks three months since we released the Digital Government Strategy – as part of the President’s directive to build a 21st Century Government that delivers better services to the American people. Executing on this vision of government cannot happen alone. To provide the highest value of services, we must rethink from step one how government builds and provides services for the American people. We must unlock rich government data, information and services so that everyone from citizen developers and private sector entrepreneurs, to our very own Federal agencies can help provide the American people with the access to these services “anywhere, anytime, on any device.” Today agencies are making great strides towards putting a solid foundation for a 21st Century Digital Government in place.
Building-Blocks of a 21st Century Digital Government Digital Government (read the strategy) Census Digital Transformation (Census as example)