Tactical Media Minutes October 19, 2006
Notes: Steven
Facilitation: John

Housekeeping
Regarding Workshops
-Production and editing workshops will be presented ASAP
-reasoning is that they represent empowering skills that will allow us to take control of future study
-Reminder about Tactical Media Project
-we are in the process of doing 4 competencies in 2 semesters
-this is an important focus because it requires us to work
together outside of Thursday evening meetings
-if anyone has issue with this please see Fred
-Misc.
-everyone’s e-mail should be up on the blog so we can contact each other individually about projects, etc.
-Jay circulated a note taking/facilitation sign-up sheet. Please sign-up for future meetings so time is not wasted on deciding who is doing what.

Content
-Pam and Fred presented a discussion on public policy to recap last year’s national legislation
-be sure to get the Tactical Media Tool Kit handout from Pam
-the goal is to get this up on the blog and also to possibly develop it into a wiki project to enhance interaction
-Moyers on America was implemented as an audio-visual tool highlighting communication policy issues. Be sure to watch it!!
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/moyersonamerica/net/
-the evening was divided into three segments
-NET NUETRALITY
-KEY CONCEPTS (Pam provided a useful handout)
-OUTLINE ON COMMUNICATION POLICY (also a handout)

Net Neutrality
-Def: the free flow of information over the internet characterized by open access to all and free content for all.
-The struggle: telecom companies are trying, through national legislation, to create a two-tiered internet where larger content providers will pay more for access as compared to smaller content providers who cannot afford the fee. This will establish an environment of unequal access and a skewed internet based on market rather than democratic principles.
-Telecom agenda: there has been a concerted effort on behalf of the telecom industry to gain control of the internet.
-Duopoly: an important term that refers to the cornering of the Information Super Highway market by cable and phone giants
How We Have Arrived to the Current Situation
-Moyers documentary sheds light on this issue
-the basics
-in the early 90s the federal government created industrial policy to induce telecom companies to develop Information Super Highway infrastructure
-this was accomplished through tax breaks and subsidies
-the goal was to develop internet technology (speed!!) by replacing broadband copper wiring with much faster fiber optics
-the phone companies did not hold up their end of the bargain and basically pocketed the money
-this was largely due to regulatory capture
-this term refers to the unethical relationship between regulators and industry lobbyists
The Industry’s Reasons for Doing Away with Net Neutrality
-to set up a “toll road” that would serve to “unclog” internet traffic making it more efficient
-view Moyers on America series paying particular attention to segment with Mike McCrurry, co-chairman of Hands off the Internet, a coalition of telecommunication-related businesses
Skeptics’ Rebuttal
-phone companies’ true motive is monetary gain
-favoritsm and discriminatory practices in terms of accessibility
Net Neutrality Points to Ponder
-H.R. 5252 (net neutrality bill)
-http://www.benton.org/index.php?q=node/1882
-Stevens Bill (telecom reform bill)
-http://www.benton.org/index.php?q=node/2183
-National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA)
-http://www.ntia.doc.gov/
-net neutrality is a complex issue
-slow lane
-fast lane
-common carriage/common technology issues under attack
-Common Carriage: A network usage principle that guarantees that no customer seeking reasonable service — and able to pay a competitive price — would be denied lawful use of a transportation service or would otherwise be discriminated against. For centuries, common carriage has played an important role in the infrastructure services of transportation; in the US, it was broadly applied to railroads and later communications media. Today the concept is under threat by large cable and telephone companies who seek to get further into the business of using their “tracks” to sell their own packets of digital content to the end user. By wielding their network control to discriminate against other sellers they gain an unfair advantage in the content marketplace.(http://freepress.net/att/=glossary)

KEY CONCEPTS

-Net Neutrality
-Concentration of Ownership
-Digital Divide
-Access to Internet
-Assistive Technology
-Web Content Accessibility
-Public Interest
-Community Programming
-Copyright Law
-Intellectual Property Rights

OUTLINE
-Fred quickly elaborated upon an outline entitled Tactical Media Communication Policy Notes. Be sure to get one from Pam as it denotes many important issues about the current media and technology landscape.

Misc. Thoughts
-cable and phone companies=the internet!
-Comcast is the primary cable company in Boston
-bound to municipal contracts
-RCN is a smaller franchise
-agreements not as comprehensive at the local level
-not responsible to buildout
-costs less than Comcast
-not available everywhere
-United States is currently 16th internationally in terms of internet technological development
-largely due to the greed of the phone giants
-types of internet connections
-dial-up (extremely slow)
-broadband (10-30x faster than dial-up)
-fiber optics (40x faster than broadband)
-U.S. is still a broadband market
-downloading Library of Congress via dial-up=82 years
-downloading Library of Congress via fiber optics=45 seconds!!
-cost of service
-U.S. broadband=$40 per month
-South Korea and Japan fiber optic access=$40 per month
-in the United States the phone companies have not been held accountable for their actions.
-Fred posed the question, “Why is communications policy so important?”
-answer: because its implications and applications are at the core of the socio-cultural aspects of democratic interaction.