Tales of the Sausage Factory

An insider’s view of the media hegemony

White House Makes Intelligent Case For Incentive Auctions.

,

Yesterday I attended the White House event on incentive auctions. It was probably the most sensible public event on the pro-incentive auction side I’ve attended to date. I have had several discussions with Federal Communications Commission (FCC) staff that persuade me that, if Congress gave the FCC generic authority to do voluntary incentive auctions (subject to limitations to protect broadcasters – including low-power broadcasters – that want to stay in the broadcasting business), they could design a pretty good auction that would get more spectrum out for both licensed and unlicensed broadband access. Unfortunately, just about every public discussion on incentive auctions tends to focus on either a few simplistic talking points (more spectrum=good!) or, worse, has been about trying to persuade members of Congress that spectrum auctions are magical money trees that let you solve the deficit problem without raising taxes (just look at how the 2008 700 MHz auction completely eliminated the federal deficit).

So a pro-incentive auction event that does not make me grit my teeth or put me to sleep is worth celebrating.

Continue reading

Here In Boston for National Conference on Media Reform

,

Once again, I am out at Free Press’ amazing and movement changing National Conference on Media Reform (hashtag #NCMR11). You can check out the program here. For those interested, I am on a panel on spectrum (what else) on Friday at 9 a.m., and a panel on Phone Justice (where I will talk about USF, among other things) on Saturday at 9 a.m. (how did I get tagged as a ‘morning person’?) In addition, check out the Public Knowledge table for info on what my employer is doing and our projects (in the intellectual property area as well as in the media/telecom area).

For those who can’t make it, I will try to blog from time to time. I’ll also be tweeting from harold.feld.

But hopefully, I’ll see a lot of you there.
Stay tuned . . . .

Why Chairman Genachowski Should Appoint Commissioner Baker To Chair The Spectrum Task Force

, , , , , , ,

Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Julius Genachowski has a spectrum politics problem problem. On the one hand, he learned from last year’s D Block battle that he needs to stay aggressively on message to sell his spectrum reforms.  His every speech on spectrum therefore reads like a campaign speech for incentive auctions. ‘We have a looming spectrum crisis, we need bold action, Congress must act now to pass incentive auctions.’ But, as Genachowski has discovered, this approach can have unintended consequences. Recently, Commissioner Robert McDowell reported that this focus on incentive auctions created uncertainty in Silicon Valley over the FCC’s commitment to the TV white spaces (TVWS). This follows earlier concerns from Senator Snowe (R-ME) and others that the Chairman’s exclusive public focus on incentive auctions invariably means giving short shrift to other, equally important spectrum reforms identified in the National Broadband Plan.

 

Genachowski moved quickly to reaffirm that support for TVWS remains strong and that TVWS is a big part of the FCC’s  spectrum for broadband initiative. Further, the inclusion of several spectrum items for the next open FCC meeting shows that Genachowski remains committed to broad spectrum reform. But these incidents underscore Genachowski’s difficult dilemma. How can he campaign to push through incentive auctions on the one hand, while making sure that other aspects of the spectrum reform agenda receive the prominence and attention they need to move forward? The fact that anyone could doubt the FCC’s continuing commitment to developing the TVWS despite its broad bipartisan support and support from the Obama Administration spectrum team underscores how little it takes to undermine confidence even in reforms already accomplished.

Commissioner Meredith Baker may hold the solution to Chairman Genachowski’s spectrum politics dilemma.  Genachowski should appoint Commissioner Baker chair of the reconstituted Spectrum Task Force. At the moment, the Spectrum Task Force is co-chaired by Julie Knapp (Chief of the Office of Engineering and Technology) and Ruth Milkman  (Chief of the Wireless Bureau). In an ideal world, having two such extraordinarily qualified experts and Bureau Chiefs heading the Spectrum Task Force would be enough to show that Genachowski is not neglecting spectrum reform outside incentive auctions. But in status-conscious Washington DC, the sad truth is that only a Commissioner can give the Spectrum Task Force the “star power” it needs to reassure everyone that serious work continues along multiple fronts.

More below . . . .

Continue reading

The Community Broadband Fight In North Carolina

, ,

The problem with fighting extremely bad corporate-sponsored legislation is that it has a distressing tendency to re-emerge time and again long after a human being would have gotten a clue and gone away. So it is with the fight by corporate carriers against local governments providing any sort of broadband. Most of us thought this fight over about 5 years ago, when the majority of carriers realized that municipal networks not only were not a threat, but were potential customers. Since then, excluding the occasional flair up around projects like Lafayette’s fiber build, things have generally been quiet on this front. As a result, we have a number of useful munibroadband networks (see this map) and, surprise surprise, big carriers continue to make money hand over fist.

Alas, some big carriers never give up their big dreams of squashing all who oppose them and crushing the life out of anyone who might show them up. So it is with Time Warner Cable in North Carolina. TWC’s allies in the NC state legislature tried year after year to get legislation banning local governments from providing broadband in communities where private companies haven’t bothered or do a dreadful job. Every year, a coalition of the tech community and local governments would refight the same fight and manage to kill the bill again.

But to TWC’s great delight, Novemeber 2010 ushered in a new generation of Tea Party Republicans who intend to show their respect for localism and small town virtues by kicking the crap out local governments that try to bring broadband to the people. As a result, the North Carolina House has now passed this job-killing piece of corporate welfare designed to protect helpless providers like TWC from small towns and rural areas they don’t want to serve. An equally awful version now seems ready to pass in the North Carolina Senate.

A bit more detail, and how we can do our part to save municipal broadband below . . . .

Continue reading

Upcoming Speaking Events (Both on Net Neutrality)

, ,

Network neutrality remains the issue that will not die, despite the pending court challenge and the actually timely filed court challenge sure to come once the final order is published in federal register (you can read the story behind why this is taking so long here). So my next two speaking engagements focus on the FCC’s Open Internet Rule.

This Tuesday, March 1, I will be at an event called Decoding the FCC’s Net Neutrality Order sponsored by TechFreedom.Org, a relative newcomer to Policyland as an org but run by many familiar faces. After opening remarks by Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), we’ll discuss Larry Downes testimony and expanded paper on why he thinks the FCC’s Open Internet Order was bad bad bad with a side order of not needed and a side of death-to-freedom fries. But while the anti-NN Order folks certainly have the home team advantage, I and Open Internet Coalition representative Markham Ericson will give them a run for the money.

On Monday March 7, I’ll be speaking on a panel at the American Bar Association Regulated Utility section meeting called “Market Power Analysis in the FCC’s Open Internet Order” where I will reiterate a lot of the ideas from here, here, here, here, and here.

Hope folks will attend. Should be fun, even if we are revisiting old ground.

Stay tuned . . . .

How NCTA Protects Us From An Army of Lazy, Easily Frustrated Terrorists Inspired By “Family Guy.”

, , , , , , , ,

All of these years, I wondered why you find folks in the cable industry who are such a pain in the neck about maintaining and getting stuff from their “public file.” Now I understand that this was really a last line of defense against an army of terrorists and saboteurs bent on destroying our way of life. Unfortunately, according to the National Cable & Telecommunications Association (NCTA), the FCC’s recent action approving the technology for the broadcast white spaces may undermine this defense of our vital public infrastructure. How? Read below. And pray, PRAY, that the FCC heeds this warning and helps NCTA protect us from the army of lazy, easily frustrated terrorists inspired by Family Guy to destroy cable head ends that apparently surrounds us.

Continue reading

How Dynamic Is The Mobile Internet Marketplace? Good Question. No, It Really Is A Good Question.

, ,

I’m torn between whether or not to respond to Adam Thierer’s post on this subject at Techliberation. Part of the problem is that I’m not exactly sure what the post is trying to say other than that those of us who doubt that we have what I have previously referred to as GMPBIITGBCGHEGMOTFOTE (“God’s Most Perfect Broadband Infrastructure in The Greatest Best Country God Has Ever Given Man On The Face of the Earth”).  As far as I can tell, the argument goes:

1. This post here shows that lots of cool things happen in wireless.

2. The fact that cool things happen proves we have GMPBIITGBCGHEGMOTFOTE. Since regulation is only warranted if we don’t have GMPBIITGBCGHEGMOTFOTE, and since we obviously have GMPBIITGBCGHEGMOTFOTE, anyone who calls for regulation of anything is a moron.

3. Neener neener.

This is a pretty common mode of analysis here in D.C., give or take a few neeners. It proceeds from what I refer to as the “binary” fallacy, which holds that a market is either “competitive” or “not competitive.” A few more nuanced folks might go so far as to say there is a third category called “not competitive enough.” But as far as I know, I’m the last die hard who thinks this is probably not a terribly relevant question.

More below . . . .

Continue reading

Join Me For Lunch and Spectrum Policy At Senate 2-23-11

,

Tomorrow, from Noon-1:30 p.m., I will be at the Senate Russell Office Building, Room 253,  as part of this exciting event on spectrum policy. The big draws will be Phil Weiser, Senior Adviser to the National Economic Council, Larry Atlas, Senior Adviser to the NTIA Administrator,  and Ruth Milkman, Chief of the FCC’s Wireless Bureau. Expect them to explain why Obama is so pumped up about wireless. Singing back up will be yr hmbl obdn’t blogger, Michael Calabrese from New America, Paula Boyd from Microsoft, and Rick Whitt from Google.

OK, you have to be totally into spectrum policy — or told by your boss you need to understand spectrum policy — to get as excited about this as I am. But there will be sandwiches.

to RSVP, so you can be sure to get your sandwich, click here.

Stay tuned . . . .

I Apologize To CTIA/CEA For Needless and Counterproductive Snark

,

As occasionally happens from time to time (indeed, as some might say, more than occasionally), I get worked up about an issue or — even worse — fall in love with my own cleverness and snark and say things that I regret on reflection and need to publicly apologize. Ideally, of course, I would avoid saying such things in the first place and I do not pretend that an after the fact apology somehow makes everything all better. When it does happen, however, the honorable thing to do is make the apology and correction and take my public drubbing.

Which brings me to yesterday’s post about the CTIA/CEA Report projecting $33 bn in revenue from incentive auctions. I stand by my criticism of the report. They do not address how many stations in the top markets need to participate to reclaim the 120 MHz of broadcast spectrum on which they base their estimate and their projected payout to broadcasters is, in my opinion at least, far too low to induce any broadcasters to participate. However, it was needlessly snarky and counterproductive to refer to this as an “infomercial” or otherwise imply deceptive tactics. As I’ve said myself on a number of occasions, we have better and more productive policy debates when we stay focused on the merits and avoid gratuitous insult. That doesn’t mean being all sweetness and light or unduly dry (Lord knows this stuff is dry enough already). But it does mean exercising some restraint and remaining within the bounds of reasonable debate.

As readers know, I dance pretty close to those bounds on a regular basis. That imposes a responsibility to publicly apologize when I cross over it. My apologies to CTIA and CEA, and I have edited the offending post to reflect this.

Stay tuned . . . .

Why The White House and CTIA Don’t Agree On Incentive Auction Revenue, And Why I Think Both May Be Wrong.

, , , , , , , , ,

The White House budget proposed last week contains an estimate of about $28 billion from auctioning federal spectrum and giving the FCC authority to conduct incentive auctions.  By contrast, the CTIA – The Wireless industry Association — and the Consumer Electronic Association (CEA) have published a study showing that the FCC could raise $33 bn from an incentive auction of the broadcast bands alone. So what gives?

The short answer is that spectrum auctions are extremely hard to predict, and incentive auctions are even harder to predict because we’ve never done one before. The longer answer is that because the White House is banking on the revenue as part of the budget process with real world consequences, they have therefore hedged against uncertainty by including an easier to estimate spectrum auction. CTIA/CEA, have written an advocacy piece. As with all such pieces, it tends to accent the positive. Unfortunately, the Report fails to address some rather pivotal issues, a factor that renders it of rather limited utility for resolving what I consider the most critical question no one has answered: will enough broadcasters participate in a voluntary auction to make it happen at all. It is on this point in particular that I remain profoundly skeptical.

Fair warning, as with all spectrum policy posts, this one tends to run pretty long. Still, I’m hoping the prospect of all that money  will rivet folks as I unpack the “known unknowns,” the “unknown unknowns,” and why I raise a skeptical eyebrow over the CTIA/CEA estimate below .  .  .  .

UPDATE: As I’ve explained here, I’ve edited this article considerably to take out some unwarranted snark on my part against CTIA/CEA.

Continue reading