January 2010

Iranian Filmmakers Keep Focus on the Turmoil

Iran's government cannot silence the filmmakers. It keeps trying. Films are censored. Directors are prohibited to leave the country and prohibited to return home, forced to cancel projects and threatened with punishment if their films are too probing or too critical of life in the Islamic Republic. But the films keep coming, and so do the filmmakers. Iran's government has been busy fighting on many fronts, struggling to enforce order in the streets, restore unity within the ranks of the political and religious elite, and maintain some degree of legitimacy at home and abroad. Increasingly, that effort has failed as the government has used force, including lethal repression, to try to beat down protests and frighten the opposition into silence. Some of the most radical government supporters have begun calling for executing those who challenge and defy the will of the leadership. But the government is also moving against the opposition in less public ways, working to sanitize the school curriculum from what it deems subversive ideas, like the study of humanities, and to empower a new force of cyber-police to patrol the Internet. And there has been a special emphasis on trying to tame the movie industry, which even before the Islamic government came to power had a long history as a medium for expressing — and exploring — ideas considered taboo by authoritarian governments and a conservative society. For decades, filmmakers relied on allegory and symbolism to get around censors and provoke audiences to think.

AT&T Tells FCC It's Time to Cut the Cord

In response to a Notice of Inquiry released by the Federal Communications Commission to explore how to transition to a purely IP-based communications network, AT&T has declared that it's time to cut the cord. AT&T told the FCC that the death of landlines is a matter of when, not if, and asked that a firm deadline be set for pulling the plug. AT&T said in its response to the FCC that "with each passing day, more and more communications services migrate to broadband and IP-based services, leaving the public switched telephone network ("PSTN") and plain-old telephone service ("POTS") as relics of a by-gone era." It also stated "It makes no sense to require service providers to operate and maintain two distinct networks when technology and consumer preferences have made one of them increasingly obsolete." Stacey Higginbotham notes that one in five Americans rely exclusively on plain old telephone service and AT&T in its filing doesn't offer a way to bridge the gap for that 20 percent of Americans relying only on landlines, nor does it address what an all-IP future means for the 33 percent of Americans who have access to broadband but do not subscribe. (12/31)

Broadband Blockage

[Commentary] Late last month, AT&T, which sells the iPhone, began blocking orders through its Web site. Sales resumed without an official explanation from AT&T of what happened, but an underlying problem still needs to be addressed. Unless policies for allocating spectrum become more conducive to new technologies, turning away potential customers could become more frequent. The reality is that the demand for mobile broadband is exploding, thanks to the popularity of the iPhone and rivals like the Palm Pre, the Blackberry and Verizon's Droid. According to the Federal Communications Commission, the use of smart phones has grown by nearly 700% the past four years, and mobile data are increasing at a projected rate of 130% annually as more people use their phones to send photos and watch videos. Spectrum is finite, but it doesn't need to be as scarce as it is. The problem is how the frequencies are being managed. Less than 10% of the spectrum coveted by wireless carriers has been allocated for commercial use. Much of the rest is controlled by the government. Television broadcasters and satellite companies also possess excess spectrum that could be made available to wireless carriers. Competitive bidding is the best way to allocate spectrum, but the government auctions are much too infrequent—only two in the past four years—and the licenses often come with cumbersome restrictions. The result is congested networks, frustrated customers and slower innovation. An an inventory of available spectrum would be a good place to start addressing this problem. (12/30)

Wireless phone companies pushing to use federal, defense frequencies

Wireless devices such as Apple's iPhone are transforming the way we go online, making it possible to look up driving directions, find the nearest coffee shop and update Facebook on the go. All this has a price -- in airwaves. As mobile phones become more sophisticated, they transmit and receive more data over the airwaves. But the spectrum of wireless frequencies is finite -- and devices like the iPhone are allowed to use only so much of it. TV and radio broadcasts, Wi-Fi networks and other communications services also use the airwaves. Each transmits on certain frequencies to avoid interference with others. Now wireless phone companies fear they're in danger of running out of room, leaving congested networks that frustrate users and slow innovation. So the wireless companies want the government to give them bigger slices of airwaves -- even if other users have to give up rights to theirs. "Spectrum is the equivalent of our highways," says Christopher Guttman-McCabe, vice president of regulatory affairs for CTIA-The Wireless Association, an industry trade group. "That's how we move our traffic. And the volume of that traffic is increasing so dramatically that we need more lanes. We need more highways." That won't happen without a fight. (12/28)

5 More Win Broadband Mapping Grants

On December 31, 2009, the Department of Commerce's National Telecommunications and Information Administration announced that it has awarded grants to fund broadband mapping and planning activities in Iowa, Montana, New Hampshire, Utah, and the U.S. Virgin Islands under NTIA's State Broadband Data and Development Grant Program. The program, funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, will increase broadband access and adoption through better data collection and broadband planning. The data will be displayed in NTIA's national broadband map, a tool that will inform policymakers' efforts and provide consumers with improved information on the broadband Internet services available to them.

Iowa: NTIA has awarded Connected Nation approximately $1.7 million for broadband data collection and mapping activities over a two-year period and nearly $500,000 for broadband planning activities over a five-year period in Iowa, bringing the total grant award to approximately $2.2 million. Connected Nation is the designated entity for the state of Iowa.

Montana: NTIA has awarded the Montana Department of Commerce nearly $1.6 million for broadband data collection and mapping activities over a two-year period and nearly $500,000 for broadband planning activities over a five-year period in Montana, bringing the total grant award to more than $2 million. The Montana Department of Commerce is the designated entity for the state of Montana.

New Hampshire: NTIA has awarded the University of New Hampshire (UNH) approximately $1.2 million for broadband data collection and mapping activities over a two-year period and nearly $500,000 for broadband planning activities over a five-year period in New Hampshire, bringing the total grant award to approximately $1.7 million. UNH is the designated entity for the state of New Hampshire.

Utah: NTIA has awarded the Utah Public Service Commission (PSC) approximately $1.5 million for broadband data collection and mapping activities over a two-year period and nearly $500,000 for broadband planning activities over a four-year period in Utah, bringing the total grant award to approximately $2 million. The Utah PSC is the designated entity for the state of Utah.

U.S. Virgin Islands: NTIA has awarded the Virgin Islands Public Finance Authority - Office of Economic Opportunity (OEO) approximately $830,000 for broadband data collection and mapping activities over a two-year period and approximately $460,000 for broadband planning activities over a two-year period in the U.S. Virgin Islands, bringing the total grant award to nearly $1.3 million. The OEO is the designated entity for the U.S. Virgin Islands.

ALA Wants Increase In Computer Center Funding

The American Library Association, along with other supporters of broadband build-out, has asked the National Telecommunications and Information Administration to allocate more money for public computer centers. The groups said the funding boost is needed to help public libraries and community colleges expand their Internet access capabilities and to encourage the purchase of computers and other technology hardware. (12/29)

Bills take aim at the University of Maine's role in broadband expansion

Two bills have been introduced in the Maine Legislature aimed at limiting the University of Maine System's ability to participate in efforts to expand broadband access in the state, but UMS officials say the bills are not needed. Sen. Lisa Marrache (D-Waterville), the assistant Senate majority leader, has introduced a bill that would ban the system from using any tuition money to help pay for efforts to expand broadband access. "People are paying money in to go to college," she said, "I don't think any of that money should be used to subsidize the broadband effort that really is competing with the private sector." State Sen Marrache said constituents raised the issue with her after charges were leveled this summer that UMS is competing with private companies in the broadband business. Severin Beliveau, an Augusta attorney representing FairPoint, blasted UMS at a meeting of the State Broadband Advisory Council, arguing their participation in a group seeking federal funds was improper competition with the private sector. Jeff Letourneau, associate director of information technology at UMS, said the university is part of a private-public partnership created to provide broadband capacity at a "wholesale" level and the university's role is minor. "The grant from the federal government went to GWI [Great Works Internet] and two private investors," he said. "As for tuition subsidizing our broadband efforts, that does not happen and will not happen." (12/30)

Broadcasters' woes could spell trouble for free TV

For more than 60 years, TV stations have broadcast news, sports and entertainment for free and made their money by showing commercials. That might not work much longer. The business model is unraveling at ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox and the local stations that carry the networks' programming. Cable TV and the Web have fractured the audience for free TV and siphoned its ad dollars. The recession has squeezed advertising further, forcing broadcasters to accelerate their push for new revenue to pay for programming. That will play out in living rooms across the country. The changes could mean higher cable or satellite TV bills, as the networks and local stations squeeze more fees from pay-TV providers such as Comcast and DirecTV for the right to show broadcast TV channels in their lineups. The networks might even ditch free broadcast signals in the next few years. Instead, they could operate as cable channels -- a move that could spell the end of free TV as Americans have known it since the 1940s. The future of free TV also could be altered as the biggest pay-TV provider, Comcast Corp., prepares to take control of NBC. Comcast has not signaled plans to end NBC's free broadcasts. But Jeff Zucker, who runs NBC and its sister cable channels such as CNBC and Bravo, told investors this month that "the cable model is just superior to the broadcast model."

Fox-TWC Fight Could Weaken Broadcasters' Hold on Spectrum

[Commentary] Could one of the big four television broadcasters (ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox) become a cable channel and dump its local affiliates within the next two years? If one of the big broadcasters suddenly sees more value in becoming a cable provider, where it can make money from selling advertising as well as selling access to its channel to cable providers, then its spectrum, and likely that of its affiliates, suddenly becomes vulnerable. After all, the broadcasters don't pay for their 6 MHz of spectrum in markets — it's given to them because they provide a public service. Meanwhile, the cellular industry says it needs 800 MHz of spectrum (and would love to pay for it via a revenue-generating auction), while the FCC has floated some trial balloons to take some of that spectrum from broadcasters. If broadcasters can't offer "The Simpsons" and the news for free over the air or are unwilling to, then why should the government provide broadcasters with the now-valuable spectrum? (12/29)

Low-Power Solution To Spectrum Issue

The CTIA, the trade group for wireless service providers, and the Consumer Electronics Association have come up with what they believe is a win-win solution to the tug of war now being waged over broadcast spectrum. The trade groups proposed a new "architecture" for broadcasting in which stations with high-power transmitters and tall towers would be replaced by stations with networks of low-power "distributed transmitters" — otherwise known as distributed transmission systems (DTS) or single frequency networks (SFN). "The goal ... would be to free up spectrum by grouping full-power TV licensees into a smaller portion of the existing television broadcast band and reducing the spectrum separations between licensees," the group said. The approach would free up 100-180 MHz of spectrum for wireless broadband use with a value of between $35 billion and $70 billion, they claimed, and the move — and the spectrum savings — could be made with minimal disruption to broadcasting or over-the-air viewers, they said. Each station would still have full use of 6 MHz of spectrum and the associated 19.4 Mbps data stream so it could continue to offer HD, mobile DTV and other ancillary digital services. And by moving to DTS, a station may improve its coverage and quality of service, they added. The cost of transitioning to the new architecture — as much as $1.85 billion by their reckoning — would be borne not by the broadcasters, but by the buyers of the freed-up spectrum, presumably wireless broadband users. Consumers, meanwhile, would continue to enjoy the same over-the-air service that they now do without having to purchase new TV sets or converter boxes. (12/24)

Benton

Search