Benton RSS Feed

COMMUNICATIONS PROBLEMS REMAIN BEFORE NEXT HURRICANE SEASON, FCC PANEL TOLD
[SOURCE: Associated Press]
Federal emergency officials told regulators Tuesday they were working hard to improve flawed communications systems that hindered the Katrina disaster response, but they acknowledged many problems remain. Thomas Wetherald, deputy operations director for the National Communications System, which oversees emergency telecommunications preparedness, said his group has beefed up training, set up task forces to identify problems and improved the communications infrastructure. "There has to be better coordination between state and local groups,'' Wetherald told members of an independent panel gathering information to be presented to the Federal Communications Commission in June. "The feds have to understand how the states work. This is not largely a technology problem; this is largely a procedural, human problem,'' he said. "I can tell you we are working on it.'' At the hearing Tuesday, panel members watched a demonstration of the Digital Emergency Alert System, a pilot project by the Association of Public Television Stations with the Homeland Security Department. The system seeks to improve the public alert system by datacasting text, voice and video alerts over public television stations to cell phones, computers, pagers and other devices, which may be incorporated for future disasters.
http://www.wlox.com/global/story.asp?s=4785820

* John Lawson Testifies at FCC Hearing
http://www.apts.org/

* For more info on the FCC panel, see http://www.fcc.gov/eb/hkip/

NET NEUTRALITY MEANS DON'T TREAD ON THE INTERNET!
[SOURCE: Jeff Pulver Blog, AUTHOR: Daniel Berninger, Tier1 Research]
[Commentary] Companies selling Internet access argue for property rights as the basis for unwinding long standing net neutrality. However, the companies deriving revenues from Internet access do not own the Internet any more than a company making money from a port owns the ocean. No one entity public or private can own the Internet as in the case of an ocean. An Internet access provider does not assume ownership of the content of communication transiting its network any more than a port assumes ownership of packages loaded onto ships. The Internet access provider like a shipper can assess risks in the sense of whether a package contains liquids, perishables, or hazardous material, but customers reserve the right make decisions about the nature of transport. The telephone network implementation of network neutrality known as common carrier rules prevent AT&T from discriminating against particular users. They prevent Verizon from asking about the purpose of a call before connecting it. Opposition to net neutrality arises to preserve market power in the $300 billion voice market not the pursuit of "investment incentives" necessary to improve US broadband penetration rates. AT&T and Verizon claim to need new sources of revenue to fund the "billions and billions" it costs to expand their access networks, but the poor performance of the US broadband ranking traces to the expense of broadband offers not availability. Broadband penetration rankings reflect the cost of broadband around the world. AT&T et al already extract more revenue per bit than carriers in other countries. The proposal of a new revenue stream from advertisers or Google et al will decrease not increase penetration rates. Pew Internet & American Life polls show annual growth in percentage of people with access to the Internet (broadband and dial-up) in the US has already nearly stopped. Ending net neutrality will only reduce the number of people interested in access to the Internet. The track record of communication policy apparatus in serving corporate interests over the public interest underlies a sadly compelling argument against making net neutrality rules enforceable. Ironically, government facilitated the accumulation of Bell company market power by granting risk free funding of infrastructure through exclusive monopoly, priceless unconstrained access to public rights-of-way, as well as, no cost spectrum to launch wireless divisions in the 80's. Consider the speed of Congressional action when Verizon and AT&T say they need national video franchise rights. Consider the fact that Verizon quickly turns to FCC when it finds cable companies pursue non-neutral advertising policies. The Bells point to the failure of communication policy as rationale for yet more concessions rather than admitting a connection to twenty years of incremental regulatory relief. The alignment of government with the monopoly Bells drives up the cost of broadband in the US and slows economic growth no less than the much discussed high cost of energy. The survival of net neutrality depends on the undemonstrated ability of citizens to get engaged in communication policy developments. The long legal history of common carriage provisions in communications provides a framework to push back in the courts. Entrepreneurs will do their part by creating businesses that probe every weakness in the Bellco defenses. The relative expense of broadband continues to throttle growth of the info tech industry, but info tech appears divided between defending the Internet and reluctance to challenge powerful anti-Internet forces. A letter pushing for strong enforcement of net neutrality sent to Commerce Committee Chairman Barton by the CEO's of Amazon, Yahoo, Google, Microsoft, and eBay keeps hope alive. Its seems at least possible average citizens will mobilize like they have in the past when essential freedoms come under threat and rally around a flag that reads "Don't tread on the Internet!"
http://pulverblog.pulver.com/archives/004396.html

NEW PROGRESS FOR PROGRESSIVE MEDIA
[SOURCE: AlterNet, AUTHOR: Don Hazen]
[Commentary] Progressives are beginning to flex some media muscle, finding ways to counterbalance the right wing's powerful spin machine. But there's still much to be done.
http://www.alternet.org/mediaculture/35074/

See also --
Taking Media Progress Even Further
[SOURCE: AlterNet, AUTHOR: Rich Gell]
[Commentary] Unless progressives wake up and face hard truths about media -- and the money, strategy and tactics it will take -- we will continue to win battles and lose the war. Progressives have essentially given up on center stage -- broadcast and cable news -- and stayed in the comfortable terrain of alternative media, given up on leveraging our "buying power" and mostly come to believe that the non-profit road is the only road to editorial integrity. This allows corporations to have their cake and eat it too; as if progressives are still the back-to-the-country, anti-automation, communal-living hippies of the sixties and not the Starbucks-drinking, iPod carrying, SUV-driving people many of us really are. So we run off to the alternative media hills preparing to wait the ten years till web-video reaches parity with broadcast. We live in the rarified world of non-profit funding, and leave billions of ad dollars and venture capital money on the table. We run "media reform" conferences steeped in policy, but void of creativity and absent of people who could greenlight any media projects.
http://www.alternet.org/mediaculture/35089/

BARTON SHIELDING TELECOM BILL FROM HOUSE JUDICIARY PANEL
[SOURCE: Technology Daily, AUTHOR: Drew Clark]
House Commerce Chairman Joe Barton (R-TX) is doing everything possible to avoid having his panel's telecommunications legislation referred to the Judiciary Committee. Last week Rep Barton and Telecommunications and the Internet Subcommittee Chairman Fred Upton (R-MI) were cautious about accepting amendments that might give Judiciary jurisdiction over their bill. Bell telephone companies could enter the market for cable television on a national scale under the measure. Their bill also addresses equal treatment for Internet content and network telecom interconnections. It is unclear whether Judiciary will seek to obtain a referral of the measure. Amendments scrutinized closely for possibly opening the door to Judiciary jurisdiction included those dealing with consumer protection rules for national video-franchise holders, child pornography over high-speed Internet networks and access to cable programming. The bill also does not include what some regard as a crucial component on Internet telephony. That issue concerns liability for emergency 911 dispatchers, and it lies within Judiciary jurisdiction, experts said.
http://www.njtelecomupdate.com/lenya/telco/live/tb-LLUW1145304458011.html