The government is once again expanding wireless spectrum so we citizens can have “more”, “better”, or “consistent” access to wireless networks. The government is going to auction off the 500 MHZ spectrum that was “freed” up when old fashion broadcast stations, both FM radio and TV, became digital broadcast stations and “gave up” the spectrum. According to the FCC -
“The FCC’s National Broadband Plan laid out a strategy for unleashing 500 Mhz of spectrum for wireless broadband; enabling incentive auctions and market-based solutions for driving spectrum to its highest, best and most efficient use; promoting flexible and unlicensed spectrum use; and generating revenue to fund a world-class mobile broadband network for our nation’s emergency responders.”
It appears that the government is moving spectrum that had been used for generations for public access with a relatively minimal cost to “market-based solutions” for access and use. These “market-based solutions” do not appear to be held to the same standards that local, broadcast providers had been held for generations. Where is the public welfare being protected by this action?
I have no objection to companies making money. I have no objection to changing technologies when better technologies are available. I am no Luddite. I am, however, concerned about the public access to information which has driven citizen participation in the United States since its foundation when pamphlets were printed and circulated informing all as to the arguments during founding the country. It is a widely accepted principle that when information flow is not widely available by all engaged in speech, the ability to weigh information and make informed decisions is inhibited.
I advocate that the new owners of the spectrum, Wireless Providers, be subjected to the same public service requirements to which the prior owners of the spectrum were subject. To extend this logic, the owners of the other networks, commonly referred to as CableCos, which are subject to a patch work of local regulations to provide local content access to their networks, are not subject to constraints that Wireless porviders. Network owners are as vital today to public access as printers were in colonial times. The difference is that only individuals that have paid for access can get the information today. In colonial times, once a pamphlet was purchased it could be passed around. Today, depending on whether or not the signal is encrypted and the subscriber has the proper equipment, only those that pay to be connected will be able to have access to the information.
It appears to me that the FCC is trying to manage 21st century technology with 20th century tools. Today networks are everywhere and yet not everyone has access to these networks. I ranted in prior posts that Network Neutrality is false argument. I believe that the users have to pay for what they use, but I also contend that those that control the networks must provide access to baseline content as a public service.
The FCC needs to change their paradigm to account for the change in technology. All information will soon be IP based. All networks, including local access, will soon be IP based. As I type this, I am listening to Supreme Court Nomination Hearings on my computer but I could also do it on my iPhone. I can just as easily watch any movie, listen to music, or video conference with anyone throughout the world because all these applications rest on IP. They are all just another IP stream. Yet the FCC is concerned with antiquated concepts wired, wireless, broadcast, and cable. It is time to recognize that all networks are IP. Content will find the least cost path to end users and needs to be managed in open environments, not closed systems.
The only difference between wired networks (I would include wired cable and telephone networks) and wireless networks is mobility. Content will flow based on cost and access modality. The FCC needs to manage the networks in the context of 21st realities, not 20th century realities. The free market principles will provide for economic rewards. People need to pay for what they use. But those that cannot pay should be able to have information to make informed decisions. It is a fundamental to our form of government that information flows. The FCC needs to figure out how to maintain information flow within the context of the reality of new technology.
