1. Monthly archive
  2. September 2016

September 2016

FCC’s Wheeler to Intensify Push to Break Cable’s Grip on Set-Top Boxes

The nation’s top television regulator is preparing a major push to win support for a compromise version of his proposal to open up the market for television set-top boxes, apparently. Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler has made a priority in 2016 of breaking the cable industry’s longtime grip on the lucrative market for those boxes. The devices have long been used to translate cable signals into TV programs, but several companies see a market for devices or services that offer integrated access to both cable TV and independent video-streaming services like Netflix Inc. or Hulu LLC. Chairman Wheeler’s plan would require cable companies to make their feeds available to other device makers through apps. Regulators hope the increased competition will help drive down prices. Proponents also say it would give a major boost to internet-based media. By some estimates, the set-top-box business brings in $21 billion a year in rental fees for cable and other pay-TV providers, which dominate the market. Consumer advocates estimate that customers overall pay $6 billion to $14 billion more for the boxes than they would if there were greater competition. But Chairman Wheeler remains at risk of being blocked by objections from cable and media companies, say several people familiar with the matter, despite extensive concessions to the cable industry and others that condemned the original plan.

Big media companies worry that the new generation of devices that Chairman Wheeler’s plan would foster might pose a long-term threat to their business model, such as by offering unlicensed internet versions of their content. They are expected to file detailed comments with the agency early this week. Some cable companies, meanwhile, worry about the potential for what they view as unaccustomed FCC meddling in their complex deals with their program suppliers.

Former wireless group lobbyist sets up shop with AT&T, Verizon as clients

The former top lobbyist for the wireless industry’s major trade association in Washington will continue his work for the group, and some of its members, as a consultant. Lobbying forms filed recently show that Jot Carpenter will lobby for CTIA, the trade group, as well as AT&T and Verizon, the nation’s top two wireless providers. His advocacy is focusing on spectrum provisions in the appropriations process as well as a bill meant to combat spoofing, or the practice of falsifying a caller ID.

Carpenter departed from the trade association in July with the intention of starting his own consulting business. At the time, he said he wanted to continue working on wireless issues. “I’m proud of CTIA’s talented team and the many things we have accomplished together during my time at the Association,” he said in a statement at the time. “From spectrum to tax policy to cybersecurity, the things we have achieved together have benefited the industry and consumers and I have been lucky to be involved in all of those efforts.” “I hope that my new venture will include remaining a part of the wireless industry for many years.” He worked at AT&T as well as other jobs in the private and public sectors before coming to the trade group. When he left, CTIA President Meredith Attwell Baker said the organization was “excited to support his new venture and hope to partner with Jot for years to come.”

FCC Announces Anticipated Renewal of Its Disability Advisory Committee and Solicits Applications for Membership

By this Public Notice, the Federal Communications Commission announces the anticipated renewal of its Disability Advisory Committee and solicits applications for membership on the Committee, subject to renewal of the Committee’s charter. It is expected that the two-year membership term on the Committee, if renewed, would commence on December 30, 2016. Applications for membership are due by 11:59 P.M. on October 20, 2016. The Committee, which was created under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, provides a vehicle for consumers and other stakeholders to provide feedback and recommendations to the Commission on a wide array of disability issues within the FCC’s jurisdiction.

The Internet May Be as Segregated as a City

In a city or town, a quick look around will tell you the racial makeup of the community you're in. But on a webpage, there’s no easy way of telling who else is visiting. Some sites make it clear that they’re geared toward members of a certain race: The Root, for example, describes itself as a destination for “black news, opinions, politics, and culture.” Elsewhere, visitors have to guess a site’s target audience based on its content—or they may conclude that race doesn’t matter on most of the Internet. But that latter idea is one that a group of academic researchers who study race and the Internet have been pushing back against for decades. With training in different backgrounds—sociology, media studies, Unternet culture—they contend that the Internet is far from raceless; in fact, they say, most of the Internet is targeted at one demographic in particular.

Because of its history as a product of technology companies that are staffed overwhelmingly by white employees, the Internet is largely made by, and for, white people, the researchers argue. “Those with the most access and capital are more likely to control the culture of the Internet and reproduce it in their interests,” said Safiya Noble, a professor of information studies at UCLA who has published research about examining the role of race in social media and search engines. “The web is a white space and its sensibility otherizes non-whites.” Internet scholars have been kicking around this idea since the early days of the World Wide Web, but it’s a particularly difficult one to test experimentally. Unlike studies that catalog how discrimination leads to generations of segregation in physical spaces—redlining in major American cities, for example—it’s not as easy to detect similar patterns on the web.

CenturyLink broadband availability is uneven, with rural markets suffering, report shows

CenturyLink revealed in its semi-annual broadband deployment report to the Federal Communications Commission that 51 percent of the living units in its more populated legacy Qwest territory can get 40 Mbps or higher. But rural areas overwhelmingly get much slower speeds, showing the disparity between different markets.

In the rural sections of CenturyLink’s legacy Qwest footprint, only 21.9 percent of households can get access to a 40 Mbps copper-based service. The disparity is due to the challenge of deploying copper-based broadband. Despite advances like VDSL2 and vectoring, CenturyLink is stymied by the physical limitations of copper plant that require electronics to be placed closer to each customer. The service provider saw similar variations between rural and non-rural markets for its 12 Mbps and 5 Mbps service. CenturyLink’s 12 Mbps service availability non-rural markets was 71 percent, a figure that drops to 47.6 percent in rural markets. Likewise, the 5 Mbps tier was available to nearly 80 percent of living units in non-rural Qwest markets, while only 61.3 percent could get the same service. Finally, the 1.5 Mbps service fared a bit better with service noted to be available in 95.6 percent of non-rural markets and 83 percent in rural markets. Regardless of the differences in the availability of copper-based broadband service speeds, CenturyLink is making progress across all of its markets to make higher speeds available to more customers.

Federal Communications Commission
September 23, 2016
1:00 p.m. – 4:00 p.m.
http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2016/db0906/DA-1...

At this meeting, the Task Force will hear updates on 2016 tasks from the Task Force's three working groups: Working Group 1—Cybersecurity: Optimal Approach for PSAPs; Working Group 2—Optimal 911 Service Architecture; and Working Group 3—Optimal Resource Allocation.


Clinton vs. Trump: Comparing the Candidates' Positions on Technology and Innovation

[Commentary] Republicans all too often focus on limiting or denying government’s contributions to bolstering US innovation and competitiveness, while Democrats often seem more interested in shackling rather than harnessing the power of American enterprise. Each side argues that if the country would just pursue the menu items in their respective agendas, then US competitiveness and innovation will be restored and all will be well. But there are two major problems with these perspectives.

First, because neither side wants the other to receive credit for their items, little gets done. Second, even if one side would acquiesce to the other to get some things done, it would not be enough. We need a wide array of policy reforms. Each side ultimately must bend if we are to restore or maintain US economic greatness. In general, the left needs to accept the fact that successful companies that innovate and compete globally are not the enemy, and that public policy should help companies succeed in creating new products, services, and jobs domestically. For its part, the right should abandon its opposition to government’s role in promoting competitiveness. All the tax cuts and regulatory relief in the world will not enable the United States and its enterprises to succeed in global competition if the country lacks a robust national innovation policy that includes partnerships with the private sector.

© 1994-2024 Benton Institute for Broadband & Society. All Rights Reserved.