Benton RSS Feed

Coverage Type 

WHEN IT COMES TO BROADBAND, US PLAYS FOLLOW THE LEADER
[SOURCE: InformationWeek, AUTHOR: Richard Hoffman]
Broadband access in the United States continues to grow at an impressive rate, from 60 million users in March 2005 to 84 million in March 2006, according to the Pew Internet & American Life Project. As-yet unpublished survey data gathered by Pew in December 2006 shows that 45% of respondents now report broadband access at home. The United States may be a technology leader, but it isn't a broadband leader, in relative coverage and use of broadband, in speed and capability of the services that are widely available, or in price. Broadband infrastructure in the United States, while healthy by some measures, is marked with surprisingly little competition in some key critical areas, and in others, such as wireless communication and data services, a patchwork of incompatible technologies has led to inconsistent and often substandard regional service, duplication of effort, and waste of resources -- exactly the problems that telephone regulation in the 20th century was designed to address. It's clear that broadband access isn't just a faster and more convenient way to view Web pages and download songs or e-mail. Many applications in use now, such as videoconferencing, IP telephony, and video-on-demand, and many more which are still over the horizon, are dependent on broadband access. Many nations have recognized that widespread broadband access is a critical strategic asset, pumping billions of dollars into their economies and enabling entirely new kinds of business models and economic opportunities. Those nations able to craft genuinely forward-looking telecommunications policies that promote universal access as well as enhancing competition, and which can balance short-term market forces against long-term national priorities, will reap the current and future benefits of increased economic productivity. They will be the true trailblazers, and the first to see and make use of the rich possibilities which lie ahead. It remains to be seen whether the United States will regain the initiative, and be among those leaders.
http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=197006038


http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=197006038
Coverage Type 

RURAL BROADBAND V STATE-WIDE FRANCHISING LOBBYISTS
[SOURCE: Facing South, AUTHOR: R Neal]
[Commentary] Remember FDR's rural electrification? It transformed the South, or at least the Appalachian Tennessee Valley for every future generation. While broadband Internet access isn't quite on par with electricity as a basic human need in modern society, it's almost as important, especially in terms of U.S. global competitiveness. Local governments who control the infrastructure rights of way have a duty to make sure those resources benefit all their citizens and taxpayers. They also know best which areas are underserved (which are all too frequently rural, low-income, or predominately minority communities), and they are more likely to negotiate build-out requirements to ensure that every resident has access. It's unlikely that a bureaucrat in Nashville will know or even care about the needs of Bell Buckle or Ducktown TN, and even less likely that anyone at a communications giant's corporate headquarters has even heard of such places.
http://southernstudies.org/facingsouth/2007/02/rural-broadband-v-state-w...


Rural broadband v. state-wide franchising lobbyists
Coverage Type 

GOOGLE HOPES RULES AID NET NEUTRALITY EFFORT
[SOURCE: Bloomberg News 2/15, AUTHOR: Molly Peterson]
Google is using conditions regulators placed on AT&T Inc. as ammunition in its fight for rules that would bar Internet providers from charging new fees for priority access. The "network-neutrality" concessions that helped persuade the Federal Communications Commission to approve AT&T's $86 billion purchase of BellSouth Corp. on Dec. 29 could help the new Democrat-led Congress to write an industrywide law, said Alan Davidson, Google's chief Washington lobbyist. "Not all the questions were answered in the FCC approach, but it's a very good starting point," Davidson said Tuesday after speaking at a network-neutrality conference in Washington. The Federal Trade Commission is hosting the two-day event. Web companies have urged Congress not to let telephone and cable providers charge new fees for a "fast lane" that would let some companies send their content more quickly than others. They say allowing such fees could destroy the open nature of the Internet by giving broadband providers too much control over subscribers' access to content.
http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/cctimes/16703898.htm


Google hopes Rules aid Network Neutrality Effort
Coverage Type 

INTERNET 3.0: IDENTIFYING PROBLEMS AND SOLUTIONS TO THE NETWORK NEUTRALITY DEBATE
[SOURCE: Rob Frieden, Penn State Univ]
What Internet Service Providers (“ISPs”) can and cannot do to diversify services lies at the core of the debate over network neutrality. In prior generations ISPs had little incentive or technological capability to deviate from plain vanilla best efforts routing for content providers and from standard “all you can eat” subscription terms for consumer access to the World Wide Web. The next generation Internet has the technological capability and ISPs have the commercial motivation to offer “better than best efforts” routing and premium services for both content providers and consumers seeking higher quality of service and more reliable traffic delivery. However the potential exists for carriers operating the major networks used to switch and route bitstreams to go beyond satisfying diverse requirements of content provider and endusers. Network neutrality advocates worry that major ISPs have both the wherewithal and incentive to bifurcate the Internet into one medium increasingly prone to congestion and declining reliability and one offering superior performance and potential competitive advantages to users able and willing to pay, or affiliated with an ISP operating a major bitstream transmission network such as AT&T, Verizon and Comcast. Opponents refuse to see a current or prospective problem and worry that network neutrality requirements legitimizes common carrier regulation of the Internet, a regulatory regime heretofore limited to telecommunications services operating in a less than fully competitive environment. This paper examines the network neutrality debate with an eye toward refuting and dismissing the many false and misleading claims and concentrating on the real problems occasioned by the Internet's third evolution. The paper accepts as necessary and proper many types of price and quality of service discrimination. However the paper identifies other types of hidden and harmful discrimination. The paper concludes with an identification of best practices in “good” discrimination that should satisfy most network neutrality goals without creating disincentives that might dissuade ISPs from building the infrastructure needed for Internet 3.0 services.
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=962181


http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=962181
Coverage Type 

WIRELESS NET NEUTRALITY: CELLULAR CARTERFONE AND CONSUMER CHOICE IN MOBILE BROADBAND
[SOURCE: Tim Wu, Professor, Columbia University School of Law]
Over the next decade, regulators will spend increasing time on the conflicts between the private interests of the wireless industry and the public’s interest in the best uses of its spectrum. This report examines the practices of the wireless industry with an eye toward understanding their influence on innovation and consumer welfare. In many respects, the mobile wireless market is and remains a wonder. Thanks to both policy and technological innovations, devices that were science fiction thirty years ago are now widely available. Over the last decade, wireless mobile has been an “infant industry,” attempting to achieve economies of scale. That period is over: today, in the United States, there are over 200 million mobile subscribers, and mobile revenues are over $100 billion. As the industry and platform mature, the wireless industry warrants a new look. This report finds a mixed picture. The wireless industry, over the last decade, has succeeded in bringing wireless telephony at competitive prices to the American public. Yet at the same time, we also find the wireless carriers aggressively controlling product design and innovation in the equipment and application markets, to the detriment of consumers. In the wired world, their policies would, in some cases, be considered simply misguided, and in other cases be considered outrageous and perhaps illegal. Four areas warrant particular attention: 1) Network attachments, 2) Product design and feature clipping, 3) Discrimatory broadband services, and 4) Application stall.
http://www.newamerica.net/publications/policy/wireless_net_neutrality


Wireless Network Neutrality
Coverage Type 

OWNERSHIP OF MEDIA DEVALUES DEMOCRACY
[SOURCE: Ventura County Star, AUTHOR: Ernest A. Canning]
[Commentary] Actor Tim Robbins wrote, “The very structure of our conglomerated media system conspires against real journalism, and hence, the truth. And without access to the truth, democracy withers.” Nowhere is the problem more acute than the manner in which we operate elections. The corporate media, especially electronic media, have a vested interest not only in whom we elect but how we elect. By failing to provide in-depth, meaningful coverage of links between candidates and issues that truly matter to the vast majority of Americans, i.e., the middle and working classes; by focusing solely on those candidates whose electoral success will not threaten the media conglomerate bottom line; even then limiting coverage to poll numbers and abstract observations about “viability,” the media conglomerates have enhanced the existence of a corrupt electoral system in which candidate access to the public can only be secured by the expenditure of millions of dollars spent on expensive, 30-second spot ads, and where only those candidates who are backed by wealthy corporations need apply.
http://www.venturacountystar.com/vcs/opinion/article/0,1375,VCS_125_5352...


Ownership of Media Devalues Democracy
Coverage Type 

THE TUSSLE BETWEEN NEW AND OLD MEDIA OVER THE DIGITAL SPOILS
[SOURCE: Financial Times, AUTHOR: Joshua Chaffin and Richard Waters]
Leslie Moonves, chief executive of CBS, summed up the mood earlier this year. “There’s no such thing as old or new media any more,” he proclaimed. “There is just media.” But judging by events of the past two weeks, things no longer look so cosy. It started when Viacom demanded that YouTube remove from its wildly popular site more than 100,000 of Viacom’s video clips, putting an acrimonious end to months of negotiations. The parties apparently could not agree how much Viacom would be paid for its material and how they would divide any associated advertising revenues. Then, a few days later, Steve Jobs, the Apple chief executive, opened a rift with the traditional record companies. In a manifesto published on the Internet, Mr Jobs called for the removal of anti-piracy protection ­ known as “digital rights management” ­ that restricts which devices songs bought from online services can be played on. Together, the blow-ups surrounding YouTube and Apple’s iTunes service highlight some deep fault lines as traditional media companies face up to what could be a turning point in their industry: with online services like these taking off, are the media companies willing to risk embracing disruptive new ways of doing business online?
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/394c700e-bd34-11db-b5bd-0000779e2340.html
(requires subscription)


The tussle between new and old media over the digital spoils
Coverage Type 

NEWSROOM SPENDING RAISES US NEWSPAPER PROFITS -- STUDY
[SOURCE: Reuters, AUTHOR: Robert MacMillan]
U.S. newspapers that spend more money on their newsrooms will make more money, according to a study released on Wednesday, which questioned the wisdom of the media industry's trend of cutting jobs to save costs. The authors of the University of Missouri-Columbia study, which was based on 10 years of financial data, said news quality affects profit more than spending on circulation, advertising and other parts of the business. "If you invest in the newsroom, do you make more money? The answer is yes," Esther Thorson, an advertising professor and associate dean for graduate studies at the University of Missouri's School of Journalism, said in a statement. "If you lower the amount of money spent in the newsroom, then pretty soon the news product becomes so bad that you begin to lose money," she said. The researchers developed a mathematical model that showed how newspapers could rearrange their spending on distribution and circulation, advertising and newsrooms to achieve a higher profit, Thorson said. U.S. publishers have been eliminating jobs at many newspapers as part of larger efforts to trim expenses amid falling profit margins and, in the case of publicly traded chains, declining stock prices.
http://in.today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=entertainmentNews...



Coverage Type 

POLL: BLOGGERS, CITIZEN JOURNALISTS TO PLAY KEY ROLE IN JOURNALISM'S FUTURE
[SOURCE: Editor&Publisher]
A new We Media/Zogby Interactive poll has found that most Americans think blogging and "citizen journalism" will prove vital to journalism in the future. The national survey found that 55% thought blogging was an important aspect of American journalism in the future, while 74% said they believed amateur "citizen" reporters would play a key role. When asked about the impact of the Internet on journalism, 53% said that Web-based media provided the most opportunity for the future of journalism. 72% of respondents said they were "dissatisfied" with the quality of journalism in the U.S., but 76% thought that the Internet's overall effect on the quality of journalism has been positive. The poll also found that dissatisfaction with the media is greater among those respondents who characterize themselves as "conservative," with 88% saying they were unhappy with the state of journalism. A full 95% of those saying they were "very conservative" expressing negative sentiments about the current state of journalism. 51% of liberal respondents said they were dissatisfied with the quality of American journalism. The poll also surveyed 77 members of the media at the recent We Media conference in Miami, finding that 55% of these media insiders were "dissatisfied" with American journalism today, while 61% thought that the media is out of touch with what Americans want from their news. 86% of those media industry insiders polled said that bloggers would be key to the future of journalism.
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_con...


http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=…
Coverage Type 

PTC CONTINUES TO PUSH ON VIOLENCE
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
The Parents Television Council continues to push broadcasters on the issue of violent programming. On Wednesday, it asked Fox and other networks to either curtail the violence or put it on after 10 p.m.--the beginning of the safe harbor for indecent programming on broadcast TV. PTC was prompted in part by a special two-part episode of Fox's 24 that aired Feb. 11 and began at 8 p.m. (eastern) during the so-called family hour. The PTC request was telegraphed by research on 24 it released Feb. 11 saying the 24 had shown 67 torture scenes in its five seasons on the air.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6416682?title=Article&spacede...

Also see --

* Report Urges FCC to Limit TV Violence
A new draft report from the Federal Communications Commission suggests the government may be able to limit violence on TV in a way that does not violate the Constitution.
http://www.newsvine.com/_news/2007/02/15/570660-report-urges-fcc-to-limi...

* FCC report suggests violence on TV could be regulated
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/money/20070216/fcc16.art.htm

* FCC Report suggests TV Violence Limits
http://www.latimes.com/business/printedition/la-fi-violence16feb16,1,222...

* FCC wants to regulate TV violence
http://today.reuters.com/news/NewsArticle.aspx?type=televisionNews&story...\


http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6416682?title=Article&spacedesc=news