What’s the Broadband Plan Implementation Vision? Affirming Competition Policy? or The “Retro-genda?”

-By Scott Cleland

At core, Congress has asked the FCC to recommend to Congress HOW “to ensure that all people of the United States have access to broadband capability.” Arguably, the FCC’s main “fork-in-the-road” decision in developing its National Broadband Plan is whether to recommend to Congress to Re-affirm the current competition vision/law/precedent for broadband policy and build upon the strong foundation and momentum of facilities-based competition in the marketplace? or Design the more Government-centered broadband ecosystem policy recommended most prominently by FreePress /Open Internet Coalition members and rebuild the common carrier regulation regime of the twentieth century?

What engine of choice will the FCC recommend to Congress: Competitive forces and private investment? or Government forces and taxpayer money?  

In other words, will the FCC: Affirm a competitive broadband ecosystem where consumers vote with their wallets about which innovations, technologies and companies succeed or fail on the merits? or Endorse a regulatory broadband ecosystem where regulators largely pre-determine which innovations, technologies and companies will be favored and, hence, win or lose?
Continue reading


What’s the Broadband Plan Implementation Vision? Affirming Competition Policy? or The “Retro-genda?””


Where Have I Been? In Computer Purgatory, That’s Where!

-By Warner Todd Huston

Frequent visitors to Pubius’ Forum will have noticed that not a whole lot new has been posted here for the last several days. Well, the reason is contained in the photo above… and it’s good and bad news.

First the bad. The bad is over — which is also the good news — but the reason we have had few new posts is because I just purchased a brand new 24″ imac computer and I just spent the last two days transferring files and programs from my old, old, old G4 Mac to the new one, updating programs, and downloading replacement third party apps to get back up and rolling again. I have done this twice before and t is always an ordeal. It’s an ordeal because I always wait until my old Mac is so hopelessly out of date that it no longer works at all.

My original Mac was a 6200 and I used that old clunker all the way until the year 1998. I went from the 6200 straight to a G3. The two were in few ways compatible. So, I had to transfer everything one at a time and painstakingly. This was a big jump, too, because every single program I was so used to using on the 6200 had been radically upgraded by the time of the G3 or even discontinued. So that the change over was a major disorientation causing me to completely overhaul my working habits.

The next Mac, the G3, I used until 2003. It was a dream compared to the 6200… once I got used to it. The speed was amazing to me with the big jump. After all, from the 6200 running system 7.5.5 Mac had gone all the way to system 10 by the time of the first G3s. Night and day, for sure.

Then I bought a used G4 and have been using that ever since 2003. Of course, the jump between the G3 and G4 was not a big deal user-wise. But, I still had to transfer everything by hand and it was a two day ordeal. It took at least two days that time, too. The G4 has gotten to the point where I cannot even run Firefox effectively any more. I can’t even upgrade Internet applications because the G4 is just too far out of date. Even YouTube wasn’t running right any more. Oh, my applications were running great, but if I couldn’t use the web effectively enough to post stuff… what good was it?

Well, Saturday I finally broke down and got the 24″ imac… and broke it’s made me. I had to get a loan against my stinkin’ 401K to even do it! Naturally it’s another two day ordeal. It just takes so much stinking time to arrange things to a familiar work space, downloading programs, registering everything, etc., etc. It has so consumed me that all day Saturday I forgot to eat!! I was all so centered on arranging my work space, playing around organizing cables under the desk, going out buying firewire cables so I could network the G4 and imac, etc., etc. It just took a ton of time.

So, the upshot is that I missed everything in the news for the last two days trying to get this all arranged and set so I could get back in business. And I still have to load Photoshop, Adobe Acrobat, and a few other apps. But, I’ve already been perusing the net and whatnot with the imac and it is screamin’ fast. I am quite happy with it. Oh, and, yes, I use a dual screen set up, so the second screen to the right of the imac is connected to the imac as well. You can see my set up in the main picture above. Not only that, but I’ve succeeded in setting up a Mac to Mac network over firewire and the third screen to the left is my old G4 hooked up to a flat screen TV set via a VGA connection. So, that means I don’t have to buy Photoshop all over again for the new imac! That’ll save a ton of cash. Now if only I could figure out how to get the Internet on the G4 through the firewire. I swear it should be possible, but I am missing SOME setting or another.

Now to fill out all the paperwork to get the various rebates… sigh.

And NEXT I have to update my PC laptop from XP to Vista. Arrrrgh.

So. Does anyone want to buy a Zip drive and a bunch of discs? How about Disc Warrior? Want it? I have a Diablo game that I don’t have anything to play it anymore. So much junk computer stuff laying around I can’t believe it.


What Do Broadband Stimulus Decisions Signal about Future Broadband & Net Neutrality Policy?

-By Scott Cleland

What do the Administration’s new “NOFA” guidelines, which implement the $7.2b broadband stimulus package, tell us about the trajectory for broadband and net neutrality policy going forward?

If one listened to just the public comments of net neutrality proponents one would miss a lot of important substance and clues about where broadband and net neutrality policy may be going, given that these new grant guidelines/conditions are the first major official broadband guidance stemming from the new Congress and the new Administration.

What do we know now that we didn’t know before the release of the NOFA guidelines?
Continue reading


What Do Broadband Stimulus Decisions Signal about Future Broadband & Net Neutrality Policy?”


Handset Exclusives Drive Growth & Broadband Adoption

-By Scott Cleland

Why regulate tech/computer sales?

Handset marketing exclusives are a pro-competitive wellspring of wireless growth and broadband adoption. Marketing exclusives are also a legitimate, proven and widespread marketing practice that marshals maximum marketing resources for selected, potentially-hot-new-products in order to drive maximum sales and adoption.

Pro-regulation proposals calling for the FCC to ban smartphone/netbook marketing exclusives are unnecessary, and would also be highly counter-productive as they would undermine the Government’s important goals of stimulating the economy and promoting broadband adoption.
Continue reading


Handset Exclusives Drive Growth & Broadband Adoption”


What Passes for ‘Journalism’ At HuffPo Isn’t

-By Warner Todd Huston

If you listen to the blabbers and gossipers, the Huffington Post is the talk of the town. It is claimed that Arianna Huffington’s “success” is the “new journalism,” the future of the news. TechNewsWorld proclaimed it “appropriate” that Huffington appeared in the YouTube series on journalism apparently because she personifies it. The New York Times celebrated HuffPo as “hybrid journalism” for its Iran coverage. Jeff Jarvis of The Guardian claims that Arianna is “saving journalism.” She was even just awarded the Fred Dressler Lifetime Achievement Award in journalism from Syracuse University. She even testified before a Congressional committee on journalism. And the list of accolades goes on.

But, what sort of “journalism” does Huffington Post represent? Is it the well researched sort with multiple links, named sources, or other such common journalistic practices? Most often no. In fact, those that write for Huffington Post rarely even bother with the normal journalistic practices of research, attribution, or the habit of having more than one source. Sadly, the largest bulk of what Huffington writers do is merely opine whether they have sourced information or not. And more often than not they do so from the extreme left-wing perspective.

Huffington Post is not “journalism.” It’s really just that simple.

Continue reading


What Passes for ‘Journalism’ At HuffPo Isn’t”


YouTube’s ‘How To’ on Citizen Journalism Filled With Lefty Media Types, No Conservatives

-By Warner Todd Huston

Apparently, YouTube doesn’t think that a conservative journalist has anything to say to help all you budding citizen journalists out there. A glance at the denizens of the Old Media offered up as journalism experts on the Internet video giant will show a long list of well known lefties with not a single center or center right professional in the mix.

On April 30, YouTube set up a channel dedicated to a sort of how-to instruction manual or an online media 101 class that folks interested in becoming citizen journalists can watch to help them learn some of the tricks of the Media trade. Ostensibly, this will help the average, every day blogger present his work in a more professional way. This is a great idea, by the way. Many blogs could use some tips on better writing and presentation, interview skills, and video presentation if not an occasional editor — and I should know on that last one!

But it seems that no one that represents the center-right in the world of journalism seems to qualify as an expert as far as Google’s YouTube is concerned. Going to the main page will reveal a whole bunch of lefty jurnos offering you their help. Not only do we get the advice from the heavily left-slanted Chris Cillizza, NPR or Katie Couric, but YouTube even offers “advice” from AlJazeera’s Riz Kahn, for Pete’s sake!

Imagine, AlJeazeera on journalistic professionalism!

Continue reading


YouTube’s ‘How To’ on Citizen Journalism Filled With Lefty Media Types, No Conservatives”


What If Columbo Investigated Special Access?

-By Scott Cleland

A new coalition of some struggling broadband competitors, NoChokePoints.org, is making claims that the “special access” market is being “choked” by lack of competition and is urging the FCC to reverse course and regulate lower prices for these competitors.

“Special access” is basically the business-to-business leasing market of the copper wire connections that link many buildings and cell towers to the Internet backbone at DS1 (1.5 Mbs) and DS3 (44.7 Mbs) speeds.

Continue reading


What If Columbo Investigated Special Access?”


My House Internet Privacy Testimony — ‘a consumer-driven, technology/competition neutral privacy framework’

-By Scott Cleland

Today I testified before a Joint House Subcommittee hearing of the Energy & Commerce Committee on “The Potential Privacy Implications of Behavioral Advertising.”

A one-page summary is below and the full testimony is here.

Summary Testimony of Scott Cleland, President, Precursor LLC

“Why A Consumer-Driven, Technology/Competition-Neutral, Privacy Framework Is Superior to a Default ‘Finders Keepers Losers Weepers’ Privacy Framework”

Before the Joint House Energy & Commerce Hearing on Behavioral Advertising, June 18, 2009
Continue reading


My House Internet Privacy Testimony — ‘a consumer-driven, technology/competition neutral privacy framework’”


Indexing into the Ditch — Financial Crisis Root Causes — Part I

-By Scott Cleland

Despite the widely held view that indexing is the safest way to invest, indexing helped recklessly drive our financial system and economy into the ditch last fall.

While there’s consensus the financial crisis warrants “new rules of the road” and better policing to protect against systemic risk, all the rules and oversight in the world can’t keep us out of the ditch in the future if index vehicles continue to drive the wrong way against oncoming traffic.

And “stress testing” whether bank vehicles can survive head-on crashes, completely misses the point that indexers should not be driving the wrong way on the freeway.

Continue reading


Indexing into the Ditch — Financial Crisis Root Causes — Part I”


The National Broadband Plan “Fork-in-the-Road”

-By Scott Cleland

A scan of the major comments just delivered to the FCC on the National Broadband Plan (which is due to Congress February 2010), spotlighted the big broadband policy “fork-in-the-road” decision that the FCC now has before it.

One road of the fork-in-the-road continues down the road of: Promoting facilities-based competition;Encouraging private investment in a wide diversity of technologies; and Facilitating a cooperative public-private partnership to address unserved broadband areas and lagging adoption of widely available broadband.
Continue reading


The National Broadband Plan “Fork-in-the-Road””


Why New WH Cybersecurity Focus is a Game-Changer — for the Internet and Net Neutrality

-By Scott Cleland

President Obama’s new approach to cybersecurity likely is more of an Internet game-changer than many appreciate. Initial reporting and commentary has been superficial and has not connected dots or analyzed the broader logical implications of this new policy emphasis and trajectory.

Why is it a game-changer for the Internet?

  • First, it formalizes a new leading priority for the Internet.
  • Second, it formalizes the lack of cybersecurity as the Internet’s leading problem.
  • Third, it practically redefines what “open Internet” means.
  • Fourth, it practically takes any extreme form of net neutrality off the table.

Moreover, the new cybersecurity focus will likely have a practical effect on the trajectory of Internet 3.0, which embodies cloud computing (where security has not been a primary priority by many); the Mobile web (where security has always been a very high priority); and the Internet of Things (where security will be imperative to prevent theft, intrusion, and sabotage).

Continue reading


Why New WH Cybersecurity Focus is a Game-Changer — for the Internet and Net Neutrality”


EC declares “no need for State intervention” in broadband duopoly

…because there’s no market failure

-By Scott Cleland

In a significant blow to U.S. advocates of Government-mandated open access networks — over facilities-based broadband network competition — the European Commission (EC) just declared “no need for State intervention” in geographic zones where there are at least two facilities-based broadband network competitors, because that means “there is no market failure.”

The EC made the declaration in its just-released report: “Community Guidelines for the application of State aid rules in relation to rapid deployment of broadband networks.” This is the EC guidance for spending economic stimulus funds for promoting broadband.

Continue reading


EC declares “no need for State intervention” in broadband duopoly”


Latest Data: US No Longer Falling Behind on Broadband

-By Scott Cleland

The latest data from the OECD and other sources indicate that the U.S. is no longer falling behind the rest of the world in broadband.

These latest data are relevant to assumptions underlying the FCC’s National Broadband Strategy due to Congress next February and also to broadband policymakers’ interest in more data-driven policymaking.

In particular, the OECD broadband rankings have been prominently cited by some as important evidence to justify a reversal of current facilities-based broadband competition policy, in favor of a more government-centered broadband policy.
Continue reading


Latest Data: US No Longer Falling Behind on Broadband”


Why the Australian “Fiber Mae” Broadband Model Doesn’t Work for the U.S.

-By Scott Cleland

As the FCC lays the groundwork for its submission of a National Broadband Strategy to Congress next February, some suggest the U.S. follow the lead of Australia’s new broadband policy model. While it may have superficial and nostalgic appeal to some, upon close scrutiny and analysis it is not an applicable, practical nor sound broadband policy option for the United States for a variety of reasons. The Australian “Fiber Mae” broadband policy model is:

  • Not applicable to the U.S. because the ownership and competitive baselines in Australia and the U.S. are not analogous;
  • Not practical for the U.S. because it is a hugely expensive proposal in an exceedingly tight budget/financial environment that would generate very little incremental additional benefit over the current competitive trajectory; and
  • Not sound policy for the U.S. because it pursues the wrong policy emphasis and structure, which could have the perverse result of the U.S. falling behind in broadband leadership — the exact opposite of the intended result.

By way of background, the Australian government announced last month that it would establish “a new company to build and operate a new super-fast National Broadband Network.” The proposal would deploy fiber to the home to 90% of users with 100 Mbs, and deploy 12 Mbs wireless technology to the remaining 10% of the country, at an estimated total cost of ~$31b or ~$4,100 per home passed. This government-sponsored enterprise would be majority-owned by the Australian government. It would create “Australia’s first national wholesale only, open access broadband network.”
Continue reading


Why the Australian “Fiber Mae” Broadband Model Doesn’t Work for the U.S.”


The Broader Implications of DOJ’s Book Settlement Investigation

-By Scott Cleland

The DOJ investigation of the Google Book Settlement suggests that a broader antitrust spotlight may be returning to Google.

Apparently the DOJ is investigating whether the Book Settlement sets a competitive or anti-competitive trajectory for the search of digitized books, and of “orphan” works in particular.

Google argues the settlement is pro-competitive and increases access to books.

The DOJ’s antitrust investigative scrutiny suggests otherwise.
Continue reading


The Broader Implications of DOJ’s Book Settlement Investigation”


Implications of Skype’s IPO for eBay-Skype & Wireless Net Neutrality

-By Scott Cleland

Given that eBay’s announced spin-off/IPO of Skype in 2010 is a material market event, this high-profile IPO represents a potentially tectonic development in eBay-Skype’s (and FreePress‘) push for wireless net neutrality/Carterfone regulations and applying the FCC’s broadband principles to wireless providers for the first time. There are much broader implications of this market development than many appreciate.

Some brief background information is helpful to understand the broader implications:

Reports suggest that eBay’s plans for a public IPO in 2010 are a result of eBay not being able to get a high enough private market price ($1.7b) for Skype and the fact that current market conditions are not ripe for initial public offerings. (eBay originally paid $2.6b for Skype and added an additional $500m later, then subsequently wrote down $1.4b of Skype’s value.)
Continue reading


Implications of Skype’s IPO for eBay-Skype & Wireless Net Neutrality”


Skype’s Anti-competitive Uneconomics

-By Scott Cleland

There are two primary problems with eBay-Skype’s attempt to get the Government to force competitive wireless providers to carry Skype’s free communications app under the guise of wireless net neutrality and Internet openness: first, it is wildly uneconomic, and second, it is anti-competitive.

The issue has surfaced in the news (USAToday, WSJ) as Apple enabled a Skype app on the iPhone for use on free public WiFi networks, but not on the iphone’s commercial network provided by AT&T; and again when Google’s Android banned a tethering app because it violated T-Mobile’s terms of service as reported by CNET.
Continue reading


Skype’s Anti-competitive Uneconomics”


Building upon a Strong Broadband Foundation — Part I in America’s Broadband Strengths Series

-By Scott Cleland

The combination of the severe recession and Congress’ requirement for the FCC to devise a National Broadband Strategy provides an excellent opportunity to inventory not only weaknesses, but also the many strengths, of the broadband sector and economy. Comprehensive analysis shows much that is going well that mustn’t be taken for granted in any new broadband plans. Unlike many other sectors of the economy, the American broadband sector is:

  • An exceptionally strong foundation to build upon;
  • On the right track with much positive momentum; and
  • Partnering to solve many of society’s most pressing problems.

I. Strong Foundation to Build Upon

America’s competitive broadband market has an exceptionally strong foundation of positives on which to build upon, enhance, expand and supplement.
Continue reading


Building upon a Strong Broadband Foundation — Part I in America’s Broadband Strengths Series”


The Flawed Economics of Broadband Open Access in the U.S.

-By Scott Cleland

A post by a Google policy analyst yesterday attempted to make the economic case for open access in the U.S. and suggested reasons why American infrastructure providers should embrace a mandated open network model. This proposed theory warrants a strong practical rebuttal. The proposed case for the economics of open access does not hold up to close scrutiny because it has fatal flaws in both logic and economics.

I. The fatal flaw in logic in the case for the economics of open access:

Since the post assumes broadband markets everywhere are basically the same, it concludes that the open access experience in some European countries is relevant and applicable to the U.S. situation. The fatal flaw in logic here is the core assumption that European and U.S. markets are factually analogous. They are not. They are substantially different factually and structurally as I will explain in detail.
Continue reading


The Flawed Economics of Broadband Open Access in the U.S.”


U.S. Leads World in Broadband Affordability per New ITU Data — Competition Works!

-By Scott Cleland

America’s longstanding bipartisan policy commitment to promote broadband competition has succeeded in making broadband more affordable in the U.S. than in any other country in the world according to the ITU.

Data in a broad new study by the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) of 150 countries, show the U.S. leads the world by a substantial margin with the lowest broadband prices as a percentage of per capita GNI. (See the tables on pages 56 and 66.)

Continue reading


U.S. Leads World in Broadband Affordability per New ITU Data — Competition Works!”


Conservatives Should Embrace the Triumph of Disruptive Innovation Over Old Media

-By Patrick Ruffini

In this space yesterday, Scott Cleland laid out an argument for why business should launch a “counter-movement” against the ongoing revolution in media and the distribution of digital content, writing:

The recession has created new urgency for multiple content industries to find a better way to protect and monetize their property/content in the digital world. The dot-com bubble ethos that “information wants to be free” is like a gross mold destroying the incentives to create valuable content and distribute it digitally.

Cleland defends the business models of traditional media concerns like the New York Times, CBS, and MSNBC who generate $40-60 in revenue per user as exemplars of the “real economy” as contrasted to the pennies on the dollar per user generated by many Internet companies (the “ecommony” or digital commons). It’s easy to laud old media for how well they monetize their audience — until you run headlong into a profit-and-loss statement.

Conservatives and free-market advocates should want no part of a rearguard defense of old business models built around pre-digital media. (Indeed, many on the right will feel a certain sense of schadenfreude at old media’s decline, given traditional newsrooms’ bias against conservatives.) Above all, the free market is about enabling disruptive innovation — and like legacy industries before it, traditional media will once again be forced to adapt or die. This isn’t a socialistic commons. It’s the free market deciding that it wants to easily access any piece of content from a multitude of online sources, as opposed to in print or on TV or in online walled gardens, where distribution is closely circumscribed by geography or an elite group of editors deciding what you should read or watch.
Continue reading


Conservatives Should Embrace the Triumph of Disruptive Innovation Over Old Media”


An Internet Economy or “Ecommony?” Growing pushback against ‘Information wants to be free’

-By Scott Cleland

The recession has created new urgency for multiple content industries to find a better way to protect and monetize their property/content in the digital world. The dot-com bubble ethos that “information wants to be free” is like a gross mold destroying the incentives to create valuable content and distribute it digitally. (Be sure not to miss the shocking analysis at the end of this e-mail comparing revenue generation per user in the digital “ecommony” versus the real economy.)

The first point of this e-mail is to connect-the-dots about why several content industries are currently in the news, actively pushing back against the “ecommony” anti-business model, where content owners are expected to essentially give away their valuable content to the open Internet/digital commons without the requirement of permission or payment.
Continue reading


An Internet Economy or “Ecommony?” Growing pushback against ‘Information wants to be free’”


Neutralism: Identifying the ideology behind net neutrality —

-By Scott Cleland

Where did the net neutrality issue come from? And why is it such a persistent issue? In researching answers to these important questions, I came across a key quote by Yale Professor Yochai Benkler in his 2006 book “Wealth of Networks”:

“There was a moment…in 2001, when a range of people who were doing similar things … seemed to cohere into a single intellectual movement, centered on the importance of the commons to information production and creativity in general, and to the digitally networked environment in particular.”
Continue reading


Neutralism: Identifying the ideology behind net neutrality —”


Stimulus: Congress rejected mandated open access/net neutrality; affirmed reasonable network management

-By Scott Cleland

In promoting the important goals of extending broadband to all Americans and stimulating the economy, Congress has rejected attempts by net neutrality regulation proponents to broadly impose open access or net neutrality requirements on the marketplace at large via the economic stimulus bill. The Congress obviously understood that would not be an economic stimulus, but a wrong-headed, counter-productive depressant to necessary private broadband investment (see the stimulus bill).

Importantly, Congress implicitly affirmed the necessity for “reasonable network management” and also implicitly rejected the core end-to-end network principle of the net neutrality movement — where they define/accuse any smart network management/innovation as anti-competitive discrimination or infringement of free speech.
Continue reading


Stimulus: Congress rejected mandated open access/net neutrality; affirmed reasonable network management”


Congress: Don’t Kill the Internet’s Golden Goose — Welcoming Private Investment Capital

-By Scott Cleland

It is more important what Congress does not do — than what it does do — concerning the final language on broadband in the pending economic stimulus bill.

It is critical for economic growth and job creation for Congress not to derail the market competition and private investment dynamic, which is currently very successful for 90+% of the country, in trying to achieve broadband open access for the <10% of the country that does not have it, or enough of it.

Economically-depressing, open access/net neutrality restrictions on broadband investment are counter-productive in an economic stimulus package.
Continue reading


Congress: Don’t Kill the Internet’s Golden Goose — Welcoming Private Investment Capital”

The Growing Privacy-Publicacy Fault-line — The Tension Underneath World Data Privacy Day

-By Scott Cleland

Given that January 28 was World Data Privacy Day, its instructive to examine why there is such increasing tension underneath the surface of the Internet over the issue of privacy. I believe there is a growing “fault line” between two opposing tectonic forces — one that believes in online privacy and the other which believes in the opposite — online publicacy.

I coined the term “publicacy” in my July 2008 House testimony on online privacy because Internet technology has created the need for an antonym to describe the opposite of privacy. Many in the Web 2.0 community believe in the “publicacy ethos” where if technology innovation can make information public, it should be public and that there should be no permission or payment required to access, use or remix this new “public”‘ information.
Continue reading “The Growing Privacy-Publicacy Fault-line — The Tension Underneath World Data Privacy Day”

WaPo: Attempting to Make Bush Look Like Tech Moron

-By Warner Todd Huston

Our old friend Anne E. Kornblut, Washington Post Staff writer, is at it again with her latest outbreak of Bush Derangement Syndrome. This time she and the Washington Post have teamed up to try to paint the Bush White House as technological Neanderthals in theirs headlined “Staff Finds White House in the Technological Dark Ages.”

The headline alone tells readers that those poor, poor Obama staffers have come in expecting to get right to work only to find it a mess thanks to Bush’s failure to update the tech capacity of the White House. Only, that impression would be simply incorrect. Bush was restricted by certain laws and rules that prevented him from bringing White House operations into the I-Phone age.

Continue reading “WaPo: Attempting to Make Bush Look Like Tech Moron”

Why net neutrality regulation would undercut Universal Broadband progress

-By Scott Cleland

The start of robust broadband deployment in the U.S. was delayed for several years in the late 1990’s because of regulatory uncertainty over whether broadband investment could earn a competitive return.

Today’s release of the proposed economic stimulus package is extremely relevant to the question of investment in Universal Broadband; it says: “For every dollar invested in broadband, the economy sees a ten-fold return on that investment.”

Recent guidance from the Obama transition team spearheading the Universal Broadband effort is also encouraging. At the State of the Net Conference, Blair Levin said: “You don’t want to do anything that makes a competitive market more difficult.”
Continue reading “Why net neutrality regulation would undercut Universal Broadband progress”

Rush Limbaugh and Warner Todd Huston

-By Warner Todd Huston

Last year, Rush Limbaugh read one of my Op Eds and reacted to it. I’ve had Rush read about 5 or so of my pieces, but here is one that I have the audio on.

Feel free to visit the Publius Forum TalkShoe page to see my past podcasts. New podcasts appear approximately monthly, or whenever the mood strikes me to do one.

The Net Neutrality debate has narrowed — Why the recession may narrow it further

-By Scott Cleland

The reality is that the net neutrality debate has narrowed greatly over the last three years, and could narrow further as the recession puts a public policy premium on growing the economy, creating jobs and promoting investment.

That was my general conclusion in preparing to participate in the CES Open Internet panel yesterday as I stepped back and took stock of the state of the Net Neutrality/Open Internet debate and issue. The panel was moderated by Rob Pegaroro of the Washington Post and had panelists from Free Press, Amazon, Google and AT&T — in addition to me.

I believe you will find the two main points I made thought-provoking — and that you will find the reaction they elicited from my fellow panelists interesting as well.
Continue reading “The Net Neutrality debate has narrowed — Why the recession may narrow it further”