You are here
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Thu, 2007-09-27 09:44
Senator Kerry's recent echoing of the call for a "National Broadband Strategy" by House Telecom Chairman Markey and FCC Commissioner Copps -- is really a slick coordinated bicameral campaign to reverse current national communications competition policy and replace it with a Government industrial policy.
Calling for a "National Broadband Strategy" implies we don't have one when we do -- and it is the law of the land -- the 1996 Telecom Act -- and it was supported by over 95% of Democrats and Republicans when it passed during the Clinton administration -- and by the way it is working.
What's wrong with that national broadband strategy?
What's wrong with the progress and achievement of that strategy to date?
Lets review the facts, not the spin that those promoting a new industrial policy cannot support with facts.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Fri, 2007-09-21 11:38
Reed Hundt's Frontline Wireless is proposing more changes to the FCC's 700 MHz auction rules upon reconsiderataion -- so watch your wallet!
Per today's Comm Daily:
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Thu, 2007-09-20 10:20
It seems the "pixie dust" of "free" municipal wifi isn't so "magical" after all.
To quote one of my conservative heroes, the late great Milton Friedman, "there is no free lunch."
Bottomline: What I hope cities take away from this painful lesson is what they were taught when they were young: "if it looks too good to be true, it is."
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Fri, 2007-09-14 18:15
I am on a Broadband Policy panel on Monday at 4:45 at the Future of Music Summit with a couple of the lead folks who champion net neutrality: Professor Tim Wu, who coined the term, and Ben Scott, of Free Press who has slickly popularized it in close coordination with Moveon.org.
Congress and the FCC are currently working a series of initiatives designed to revise the telecommunications regulatory framework, with everything from spectrum reform, to broadband deployment, to network neutrality on the table. How will proposed revisions impact musicians, citizens and technologists? How does broadband policy intersect with concerns about protecting intellectual property? What would a pro-musician Telecom Act look like?
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Tue, 2007-09-11 18:05
If you missed The Washington Post's Steve Pearlstein's incisive and on point critique of how the campaign for net neutrality has morphed, it surely deserves a read -- its short.
See the header "Whiny Techies II" ("Whiny Techies I" is funny too.)
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Fri, 2007-09-07 18:10
Some folks have no shame.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Fri, 2007-09-07 10:31
CNET's respected Declan McCullagh produced a sound and fair analysis of what ails net neutrality, which I recommend as a good read on the state of play on the issue. Below is the comment I posted on his piece.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Thu, 2007-09-06 19:05
Now both the US Department of Justice and The US Federal Trade Commission, the agencies legally responsible for investigating anti-competitive practices, officially have stated opposition to net neutrality regulation/legislation.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Thu, 2007-08-30 12:31
Kudos to the Wall Street Journal editorial page for the editorial "A Wireless Bounty" highlighting that US wireless competition is robust, better than the rest of the world, and does not need government intervention to fix non-existent problems.
It is essential for the truth to be trumpeted in the mainstream media, because those who favor more government regulation of communications markets will fabricate all sorts of false notions to justify the creation of a "bureaucrat-net."
Those advocating wireless net neutrality have systematically misrepresented the state of US wireless competition and the benefits US consumers enjoy from that world leading competitive market.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Wed, 2007-08-29 10:13
The Washington Post's editors should have been more forthright and put a "news analysis" label on their front page story today "Japan's warp-speed ride to Internet future." If the Post had put the "news analysis label on the story, I would not be writing this critical analysis on why the story was not news but a thinly-disguised advocacy piece for net neutrality masquerading as news or straightforward unbiased reporting.