Color of Internet Neutrality

An FCC commissioner has challenged minority groups to think differently about how a non-neutral Internet might impact their communication strategies.

“The reality is that minority content is almost impossible to get distributed through traditional channels,” Clyburn noted. But with an initial investment of $526, Moore put his video network online. “Had the costs of access been much greater, however—say if he had to buy his way into priority status on one or more networks—Rowdy Orbit may never have seen the light of day,” Clyburn added.

Then she lobbed this concern into the crowd. “To my surprise, most of the filings submitted and public statements issued by some of the leading groups representing people of color on this matter have been silent on this make-or-break issue,” Clyburn confided. “There has been almost no discussion of how important—how essential—it is for traditionally underrepresented groups to maintain the low barriers to entry that our current open Internet provides.”

I think this point of network access costs for less well-to-do media outlets (and individuals) has been occasionally lost in the fray.  I’m particularly glad to see it come up in this exact context.

Also of interest, the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication is formally supporting Net Neutrality. As a member, I’m glad to see them going out on a limb like this.

Citizens United vs FEC

Important media law decision out today… I’m looking forward to reading this and hopefully posting a few comments. If anyone else is experiencing a broken link on the SCOTUS website, try Scribd:

We live online

The Times is reporting a recent Pew study that has some revealing findings about the amount of time kids spend online.

Those ages 8 to 18 spend more than seven and a half hours a day with such devices, compared with less than six and a half hours five years ago, when the study was last conducted. And that does not count the hour and a half that youths spend texting, or the half-hour they talk on their cellphones.

Even academics in communication are shocked:

“This is a stunner,” said Donald F. Roberts, a Stanford communications professor emeritus who is one of the authors of the study. “In the second report, I remember writing a paragraph saying we’ve hit a ceiling on media use, since there just aren’t enough hours in the day to increase the time children spend on media. But now it’s up an hour.”

What I find interesting about this report is how integrated the Internet has become in the daily lives of youth. It almost seems silly to call internet use “being online,” because there’s really not much of an “on” anymore–it’s as though we’re always there.

My feeling is that this may also have implications on how much we will be able to regulate internet use (ie: laws on downloading, etc). At a minimum, these laws may meet some resistance, and attempts to regulate structurally (packet inspection) won’t go unnoticed.

via If Your Kids Are Awake, They’re Probably Online – NYTimes.com.

FCC jurisdiction over the Internet

Ars gives an excellent rundown of recent proceedings which may hold grave implications for FCC jurisdiction over the Internet. Essentially Comcast is arguing that the FCC took charge of the Net through a policy statement. If you’re interested in the issues, I would recommend reading the article in full (note there are 2 pages), but here are a few highlights:

For the next ten minutes the judges and Comcast talked cases and precedents. Then [Justice] Randolph cut to the chase. “In looking this over I found a good many situations in which Congress has instructed the FCC to study the Internet,” he opined, “and taxation of transit sales transactions on the Internet, and this, and that, and the other thing. But what I don’t find is any congressional directive to the FCC to regulate the Internet.” It wasn’t hard for [Comcast attorney] Walker to summon a response to this observation. “That’s right,” she declared.

[After arguing that a Congressional order to the FCC to bear the responsibility for rolling out broadband access…] By the end of the discussion [FCC attorney] Schlick was bargaining with the judges. “If I’m going to lose I would like to lose more narrowly,” he confided. “But above all, we want guidance from this Court so that when we do this rule-making, if we decide rules are appropriate we’d like to know what we need to do to establish jurisdiction.”

What’s next if DC Court says FCC has no power over ISPs (Ars Technica)