You are here
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Wed, 2007-10-31 13:48
I guess the World Economic Forum folks did not "get the memo" from net neutality proponents that the U.S. is supposed to be falling behind competitively because of broadband.
The Wall Street Journal reported today that: "U.S. tops Report on Competitiveness By World Economic Forum."
The OECD's questionable methodology ranks the U.S. 15th in the world on broadband; however, FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell gave a great speech that systematically debunked the OECD's agenda-driven methodology and rankings.
However, both the World Economic Forum and the Economist Intelligence Unit rank the US at or near the top of the world in competitiveness.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Wed, 2007-10-31 10:56
The unanimous passage of a new seven-year Internet Tax Moratorium, is powerful evidence of how far out of the political mainstream the net neutrality movement is.
Sound mainstream policies can attract near unanimity in Congress -- despite rampant partisanship.
If net neutrality was truly a long-standing "principle" of the Internet, like its proponents have claimed, it would attract strong political consensus.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Thu, 2007-10-25 18:03
With all due respect to all the folks I read often at Business Week, I have to challenge the thinking behind Stephen Wildstrom's column in Business Week where he shares that he switched his year-long position opposing new net regulation, largely because of Verizon's admitted mistake in delaying by one-day a text messaging approval code to NARAL.
After Verizon and the rest of the industry have handled literally billions upon billions of communications for years without significant similar incidents, one company makes an admitted mistake, takes full responsibility, immediately fixes it, changes its procedures so it won't happen again, -- and Mr Wildstrom's answer is to now throw the common-carrier regulatory book at Verizon and the whole industry?
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Tue, 2007-10-23 14:28
The recent AP story "Comcast blocks some Internet traffic" has refocused many on the real question at the core of the net neutrality debate -- "should broadband networks be managed?"
The pro-net neutrality point of view, which the AP reporter ably represented in his article, is essentially making the standard net neutrality movement case that:
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Mon, 2007-10-22 12:21
I normally consider myself a big fan of Walter Mossberg's technology reviews in the Wall Street Journal, but for today I am a big critic of Mr. Mossberg's woefully uniformed and one-sided opinion piece on public policy "Free my Phone."
Obviously frustrated at the technical reality that the bandwidth availability of telecommunications devices has not kept pace with the faster growth in computer processing, Mr. Mossberg lashes out at public policy as the cause in an emotional diatribe that illogically concludes that "if the government...breaks the crippling power that the wireless carriers exert today, the free market will deliver a... happy ending."
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Thu, 2007-10-18 10:56
It's important to highlight yet another official/legal repudiation of the net neutrality movement's common carrier regulation agenda.
Why is this important?
The significance of this appeals court affirmation of the legitimacy of the FCC's highly-market-successful broadband deregulation policy is that the legal precedents for maintaining broadband as an unregulated competitive service are piling up and becoming extremely difficult to reverse in the future.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Mon, 2007-10-15 18:24
While I doubt I'll ever be accused of being a supporter of Senator Hillary Clinton, I must commend her and her campaign for sound political judgement when it's due.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Tue, 2007-10-09 10:59
Google's long rumored Google phone
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Thu, 2007-10-04 12:05
The Google blog continues to essentially argue: what's good for Google is good for America and consumers. We have all heard that self-serving hubris and bunk before...
Let's unpack the hubris and deception behind these assertions.
Given Google's assault on the supposed failures of the current system, it is important to review the facts of what the existing competitive model actually has produced for American consumers.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Wed, 2007-10-03 13:10
Someone needs to call the SaveTheInternet/FreePress/net neutrality crowd on their outrageous hypocrisy in politically claiming that being for "net neutrality" is being for more "free speech" protections.
When the SaveTheInternet organization and their net neutrality allies were offered very specific legislative language that would explicitly protect "free speech'' on the Internet -- they actively blocked it from passage in the Senate Commerce Committee in August of 2006 and from it passing into law last Congress.