FCC Says Competition a Critical Part of National Broadband Plan
The FCC’s two leading figures on the National Broadband Plan made several positive comments yesterday in support of goals which foster competition and praised the telecommunications industry for the work they have already done building the nation’s broadband infrastructure.
Blair Levin, the main author of the FCC’s forthcoming National Broadband Plan, told the Industry Standard that increasing competition is an important part of his recommendations that sometimes get overlooked, "Most of the publicity about the plan has focused on getting more spectrum but a major concern of ours is using mobile applications for public safety, healthcare ... and general innovation in the economy," he said.
In addition, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski spoke with Wired magazine yesterday on all things broadband. When asked how expanding broadband access and adoption might actually lower overall consumer costs, he said, “Healthy competition places discipline on the market and should focus providers on providing the best service at a lower cost. As part of a competition strategy, increasing the transparency to consumers empowers consumers to make the market work.”
Genachowski also praised the telecommunications industry for taking the lead in installing broadband infrastructure to most parts of the nation:
“It’s important to acknowledge the billions and billions of dollars of investment in fiber. But we need more. We need lots of companies to say, ‘Look, this is an important competitiveness goal for the United States, and we need to do this.’”



So True - Fair, Free and Open Competition is a Good Thing
If fair, free and open competition is the goal, and the Chairman's comment are stressing the intent of "fair and open competition," then it's undoubtedly a very good thing.
If however this reference means to undermine the current internet governance rules by lobbying for a change which would allow a two-tier or multi-tier rate structure which may be employed arbitrarily by those same telco/cable companies who have profited handsomely (billions+) from the billion of dollars they invested on that simple last mile of the internet infrastructure originally developed by the US taxpayer, then the virtues of competition are the least of what is being extolled here. And the only thing "critical" in this context is how quickly and unconscionably the the lobbying incumbent telco/cable companies are going to adversely and influence the process to an extremely contorted advantage by taking a new controlled advantage of both added tiers of charges they can make to customers and the content of the traffic those customers transmit which are mandated as open until this least fair/open change they want is delivered by the FCC.
Like I said, "IF" fair and free competition would have been the goal...
Post new comment