Mel Karmazin, former president and CEO of CBS and then Sirius Radio, pushed the media to consolidate in much more meaningful ways to compete with the merging advertisers and agencies it works alongside. Accepting his Giants of Broadcasting award in New York, Karmazin spoke at length on the need to partner up in order to keep this golden age of content moving forward.
[Commentary] A barrage of consolidation proposals flooding the FCC and the Department of Justice since April proves that “consolidation mania” is alive and well—and actually accelerating. What we are witnessing is a game of steady monopolization of broadband markets across the land and a tit-for-tat consolidation in cable and broadcast for control over programming. Wall Street is profiting from all the jousting for position, the media follows it as a spectator sport among industry behemoths, and the public interest—things like consumer prices, a truly Open Internet, diversity of content, and real competition—well, it just plain hemorrhages. Let’s briefly look at just two of the merger transactions currently being discussed.
The American government needs to embrace the IP transition. Consumers and private enterprise already have done so, recognizing that next-generation technologies such as optical fiber and wireless broadband offer higher quality, more efficient services than the old twisted copper pairs of yesteryear. Over the past two days, I have had the opportunity to visit two companies that are working to deploy these technologies to all Americans. And I learned there just how important the IP Transition is for every citizen, and how regulatory policy can promote or impede broadband deployment.
Amid concerns in some markets that big telecoms and cable companies are providing service that is too slow and too expensive, some cities are starting their own Internet services, spending millions of dollars to bring super-high-speed, or gigabit, Internet service to their communities through a new fiber-optic infrastructure.
Proponents call it the single most important piece of infrastructure of the 21st century, attracting businesses, bolstering education and raising property values. But it’s a layer of competition the telecom giants don’t support. The industry says it shouldn’t have to compete against a government entity and are pulling out all the stops to prevent these cities from going gig — suing them and even influencing restrictive laws in 19 states. One place this battle has materialized is Chattanooga, Tennessee.
Across the US, cities are deciding to compete with cable and telecom giants and invest in the latest technology for superfast Internet: fiber optics. It’s called gigabit Internet. Almost 90 cities have it — provided through the local electric utility or in partnership with a private company. It’s changing the landscape. Competition is thriving. Incumbent providers are lowering their prices and increasing speeds in cities with the service. But the giants are striking back — through litigation or by working with lawmakers — on the grounds that it is unfair to have to compete with a city-owned business, funded by taxpayer dollars.
There are 19 states that have laws on the books that restrict or prohibit city-led broadband. One of those states with restrictive laws is Tennessee, where utilities that provide high-speed Internet service may not expand past their service areas. This poses a problem for rural areas like Tennessee’s Bradley County, just 30 miles east of Chattanooga. Country roads lead to a picturesque landscape of grazing cattle and cornfields. But its Internet landscape — that’s a different story.
Verizon told the New York City Council during a hearing that it has met its obligations of homes passed with FTTH and that property owner disputes have hampered its ability to reach a number of potential customers. Verizon told city councilors that one of the key challenges it has faced in delivering service to more customers is getting permission from property owners and landlords to extend its fiber network infrastructure into their facilities.
Unlike the cable operators, which were able to enjoy a monopoly on the city's video services markets, Verizon has faced a number of uncooperative building owners. "The incumbents likely faced far less opposition from apartment building owner/managers than Verizon now faces," Verizon said. "This is because a building that denied access to the incumbents would not receive any cable television service at that time, whereas residents in buildings that deny access to Verizon today will in most cases simply not have the benefit of a second provider in the building." Verizon said that requests for FiOS service were delayed or turned down because it could not get access to the property.
Update from ars technica:
Verizon reps Leecia Eve and Kevin Service stated at the hearing that Verizon has unquestionably met its promise to "pass" all households in the five-borough area, which essentially means extending the fiber so that a building could theoretically then be connected to the network.
As one council member pointed out, that's like installing water pipes but not hooking them up to individual apartments: the water's flowing on by, but no one can actually drink it.
"We consider it to be passed if we're within the realm of substantial fiber placement," Service said when pressed on how the term is actually defined. "I'm not a lawyer, but here's what I would say: we're passed if, when we get the request for service and have the necessary rights of way, what we have left to do does not create a delay in bringing service to that customer. Under that Kevin Service Definition, we've passed every household."
Nearly 200 school district superintendents urged the Federal Communications Commission to modernize the Lifeline program in an attempt to help close the “homework gap,” through a letter organized by the Alliance for Excellent Education and the Leading Education by Advancing Digital (LEAD) Commission. The district leaders asked that Lifeline—which served more than 12 million households last year with discounted monthly telephone service—provide affordable, high-quality broadband service for low-income families so that students are able to access the internet at home.
© 1994-2025 Benton Institute for Broadband & Society. All Rights Reserved.
