You are here
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Fri, 2008-08-01 15:20
What did we learn from today's FCC action on the FreePress-Comcast dispute?
First, there remains no need for passage of net neutrality legislation, as an FCC majority showed that there is an oversight process in place and readily available to address anyone's concerns about maintaining consumers' right to "access the lawful Internet content of their choice."
Second, the absence of any fine against Comcast, the lack of any finding of anti-competitive intent by Comcast, and the FCC acceptance of Comcast's self-imposed deadline to address the FCC's concerns --speaks volumes.
Third, an enforcement process is the appropriate mechanism for determining what is "reasonable network management," not a regulatory rule or legislation.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Fri, 2008-08-01 16:54
Precursorblog will be on hiatus for vacation.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Mon, 2008-08-11 13:34
Miguel Helft/The New York Times has figured out that Google is indeed a media competitor, but apparently doesn't think other media have connected the dots -- given how they framed their lead business article today: "Is Google a Media Company?"
While its obvious that Helft/NYT get the joke that Google is most certainly a media company by the prominence, graphic, and headline of the story, they also did their journalistic duty in presenting both sides of the question, including allowing Google a lot of space to continue its charade that Google is not a media company.
Let's have some fun with Google's "who? little old us? a media company? you must be kidding..." --defense in the New York Times article.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Tue, 2008-08-12 16:13
Harvard Business School Professor Benjamin Edelman posted his earlier House antitrust testimony on why the "Google Yahoo ad deal is bad for online advertising."
In short, it is a useful and concise read, for those closely following the Google Yahoo deal and those trying to determine whether or not the DOJ will have problems with the proposed online advertising partnership.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Wed, 2008-08-13 18:57
FCC Commissioner McDowell recently warned bloggers at the Heritage Foundation to look out for the Net neutrality issue to become intertwined with a possible push for the return of the Fairness Doctrine. He's right to lay down that marker.
The Fairness Doctrine was an FCC regulation that required broadcasters to "fairly" present both sides of controversial topics -- or be subject to FCC investigations and fines.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Thu, 2008-08-14 16:14
Does Google anti-competitively leverage its dominance in search to disadvantage its competitors, including Google's media competitors? New evidence suggests yes.
The evidence shows Google is not a neutral search engine or a neutral wholesaler of search services.
As I will show below:
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Fri, 2008-08-15 13:54
CNET's disclosure policy/judgement appears inadequate again in its latest net neutrality piece by Declan McCullagh: "Wanted: writers for DC tech lobby group, secrecy mandatory" which assails the financial motives/conflicts of other writers in excruciating detail without applying the same tough standard to themselves at CNET.
My point here is that CNET should have either had another writer who was not so conflicted write this piece or CNET should have increased the amount of disclosure on this piece to be congruent with the true thrust of the piece.
Additional evidence of Google's bias for its own content -- not a neutral search advertising platformSubmitted by Scott Cleland on Fri, 2008-08-15 18:00
GoogleBlogoscoped has flagged additional evidence that Google anti-competitively favors its own content over competitors in a good post: "Google allows itself a special ad."
The case builds...
Bottom line: How the DOJ ultimately rules on the Google-Yahoo ad partnership will tell us a lot about how much of the future online content economy Google will be allowed to de facto control.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Mon, 2008-08-18 15:05
Does Google inherently favor its Google-owned applications over competitors in search results? The more one looks, the more it looks that way.
Saturday's New York Times article: "Some Media companies choose to profit from pirated YouTube clips" -- got me thinking about the anti-competitive nature of Google's increasing dominance of the process of locating copyrighted content online.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Tue, 2008-08-19 11:32
Kudos to David Smith of the Gaurdian Observer for his outstanding piece on Google as it turns ten years old.
Some of my favorite insights from the piece are highlighted below: