November 20th, 2009

Internet: A threat to government or the other way around?

Posted by Doug Hanchard @ November 20, 2009 @ 6:58 AM

Categories: Blogs, Courts, Cyberwar, Elections, Government technology, Journalism, Multi-media, Net neutrality, Open government, Privacy, Regulations, Social networks, State & Local Govt, Telecom, Twitter, Web, Winter Olympic Games, politics

Tags: President, Internet, Government, Vertical Industries, Doug Hanchard

Could the Internet pose a threat to government as an institution and create significant problems that shape how governing in the future occurs around the globe?  Or are government a danger to users of the Internet — and vice versa?

The answer is maybe both.  The internet has plunged government institutions into a very steep learning curve; creating new frontiers that many bureaucrats believe help how they run the country. For many departments, it’s been a windfall in financial savings such as publishing news, services, and many other programs. But for the actual governors of a country, it’s become quicksand or worse: the death knell for an elected official. The power brokers have found that making deals that used to be done in secret are now just about impossible to do. Getting a deal done, negotiating give and take on a bill is now leaked before the ink has even dried, because a draft is already out on the internet on some blog or news forum - like this one.  Senators, Congressmen/women, parliamentarians around the world no longer worry about one single person; suddenly, anyone around them can be the next Deep Throat tell-all informer, straight from their BlackBerry to Twitter, and their career could be over.

It could be argued that the internet is the great equalizer to government and its institutions, preventing them from becoming too powerful. For other agencies, it’s an entirely new battlefront - one which they now must confront - and use.

• The Internet is the great creator and destroyer of current and next generation politicians.
• A journalist does his homework and steadfastly enshrines ethical methods.

These two statements are about to collide in a head-on crash of extraordinary proportions. When U.S. President Nixon resigned from office, it wasn’t a news story covering a week in the life of a President’s downfall. It started in June of 1971 and finally ended when he left office in August of 1974. Newspaper reporters had to maintain constant pressure on information leaking out of the White House and Defense Department for three years.  Watergate was covered by some of the most respected journalists in the world and ensured that the facts pertaining to the story followed strict guidelines before publication. Those standards were what ultimately brought down a President.

Standards 2009… I don’t have time for that!

Today, a single story with enough information that is both accurate AND false can wipe out a politician in the amount of time it takes to log into a BlackBerry, type out 140 characters onto Twitter.com and you’re done like tweet….

The amount of retractions and corrections that news organizations have published has skyrocketed over the past several years. I myself have had to correct a story’s accuracy of facts. The speed of the internet has also created a conundrum that existed already in newspapers: Deadlines, which have now accelerated from several hours to ‘hit the press’ to seconds to get it online before the person across the street on his cell phone blogs it. Competition isn’t what it used to be. A single event can have devastating effects that spread and collects unwitting victims that are also elected, thus ending that official’s colleague career.

Go to:
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4 in this series

November 19th, 2009

FCC releases broadband agenda

Posted by Doug Hanchard @ November 19, 2009 @ 11:10 AM

Categories: Congress, FCC, Net neutrality, Regulations, broadband

Tags: FCC, Broadband, Broadband Internet, Network Technology, Federal Government, Telecommunications, Networking, Government, Doug Hanchard

The FCC released its broadband agenda and supplied a presentation on areas to be reviewed which is due in 90 days. It covers a very broad (no pun intended) area of topics. The statistics embedded are worth reading about. Among them;

• Broadband adoption by adults: 63%
• Smart phone adoption: 31%
• No Broadband available: estimated at 3 to 6 million Housing units
• Cost Estimate that it costs 25 times LESS to have broadband urban areas compared to rural

The presentation is available on the FCC site.

 Loading ...

November 17th, 2009

Internet Governance Forum goes to Egypt and hits a few snags

Posted by Doug Hanchard @ November 17, 2009 @ 9:42 AM

Categories: Censorship, China, Copyright, E-government, Green Dam, International, Internet Governance Forum, Journalism, Justice, Net neutrality, State & Local Govt, United Nations, politics

Tags: Internet Governance, U.N., Egypt, Internet Governance Forum, Internet, Doug Hanchard

It seems that no matter where, when and why, somebody has to make sure a political statement is made. Now it seems that the United Nations is also getting into the Internet debate and dipping its toes into the Net Neutrality debate. The Internet Governance Forum is no different. Funded by the United Nations, its political firestorms are no different than those occurring daily at the World Headquarters in New York.

Sir Tim Berners-Lee delivered a keynote speech, launching the World Wide Web Foundation at the Internet Governance Forum sponsored by the United Nations being held in Egypt.  A most unique place in which to hold the event some suggest. That in turn raised some eyebrows of another group, Reporters without Borders suggesting that the Government of Egypt is ‘hostile’ to the very concept of the Internet.

Then not even a day into the conference, Egypt announces that it’s launching a Arabic domain .masr to abbreviate Egypt name. And then somebody lit the fuse.

The BBC reported that the United Nations requested that certain posters and flyers stop being handed out during the conference with respects to a film about ‘Free Tibet’. From there it has been all downhill. This is the headline story instead of one of the key topics of the event, Security Openness and Privacy.

And the conference isn’t even over yet.

November 9th, 2009

Wireless users may be shut off if sharing copyrighted files

Posted by Doug Hanchard @ November 9, 2009 @ 6:28 AM

Categories: Commerce, Copyright, Courts, International, Justice, Law enforcement, Mobile/wireless, Net neutrality, Patents, Privacy, Security, Telecom, UK, Web services, piracy

Tags: Service Provider, U.K., Wireless, Wireless Security Problem, Internet, Wi-Fi, Wireless LANs, Internet Service Providers (ISPs), Business Services, Wireless And Mobility

Internet services have created explosive growth in distribution of copyright materials. Some people are distributing it and don’t even know it, some argue. Reaction, regardless whether a consumer knows it or not, is to push for extensive reform and new enforcement capabilities to prevent further erosion and  protect their content. The U.K. government responded (Oct. 28) with proposed enforcement options for OFCom to use at its discretion. Among them is the ability to shut off a user’s wireless WiFi service if user is found to be transmitting internet traffic such as file transfer of copyright material. Singling out wireless access to the internet is just the start. Read the rest of this entry »

November 2nd, 2009

Net Neutrality: You own the Internet - make sure it becomes Law

Posted by Doug Hanchard @ November 2, 2009 @ 6:23 AM

Categories: Censorship, Congress, Copyright, Courts, Cybercrime, E-government, FCC, International, Journalism, Justice, Law enforcement, Net neutrality, Privacy, Regulations, Security, Social networks, Standards, State & Local Govt, Telecom, Web services

Tags: Regulation, Net Neutrality, Law, News Organization, Changes, Internet, Doug Hanchard

Last week I wrote about how Net Neutrality could be blown to pieces in satire and followed up with another piece suggesting that the Internet is not free from government monopolies and corporate service providers. An advocate of an open system that has choice and no boundaries barring access needs some ammunition to fight back with. It has plenty if used appropriately.

For the first time in the world, there’s a service that has a unique platform, allowing all free people to interact, demonstrate, express and bind together to resolve issues. The internet is the vehicle which has and will continue to drive change, innovation, and create an entirely new political landscape that does not have limitations. Could turn out to be a bad or good thing. But internet users will be decision makers on this point, not corporations. Read the rest of this entry »

October 27th, 2009

Banks and auto sector got bailed out, are telecom providers next?

Posted by Doug Hanchard @ October 27, 2009 @ 12:45 PM

Categories: Budget, Canada, Comcast, Commerce, Congress, E-government, FCC, Google, Government technology, IT Management, International, Microsoft, Net neutrality, Personnel Management, Regulations, Telecom, UK

Tags: Innovation, Bank, Debt, Internet, Telephony, Smb/Sme, Government, Telecom & Utilities, Telecommunications, Strategy

U.S. Senator John McCain came out with statements against government interference or the creation of regulations by the FCC. Instead he came out proposing a new law to prevent law. The Senator stated that Net Neutrality would stifle profitability, innovation, commerce and that jobs would not be  created with such regulation. Telecom and Internet Service providers are not hiring and with current debt levels some are barely profitable. But for how long? The FCC’s proposed Net Neutrality rulesare probably the least of the worries that are on the horizon for the Internet. Worldwide the industry has been turned upside down and none of the industry players got bailouts like the banks or auto sector did. Debt at many of the main telecom players are at unbelievable levels;

• France Telecom: 34.7 Billion Euros
• British Telecom: 16.1 Billion Euros
• Cable & Wireless: 922 million Pounds
• Italia Telecom: 35.8 Billion Euros
• Telstra : 16.1 Billion Au
• New Zealand Telecom: 2.8 Billion NZ
• NT&T : 639 Billion Yet
• Bell Canada: 14 Billion Cdn
• Telus: 7.5 Billion Cdn
• AT&T: 60.8 Billion US
• Sprint: 21.6 Billion US
• Comcast: 30.0 Billion US

These levels are sustainable for most, providing the economy doesn’t get any worse and credit facilities do not collapse any farther. Nortel collapsed under debt, Alcatel and Lucent merged and is heavily leveraged,  leaving Cisco as the only healthy one. Job creation and innovation will have to come from companies that have little or no debt burden. Most of ones listed above have made significant cuts in employment. Government regulates providers already, and does offer some incentives, grants and loans for internet innovations, and they are in debt in the trillions of dollars already. The private sector will be the innovator and career opportunities engine for internet services and applications that create healthy profit. Companies like RIM, Microsoft, Cisco and Google have significant advantages in growth capabilities. But it will be small and medium business (SMB) sized companies that will likely be responsible, and are rarely given credit for doing so around the world. Many wonder if they can bail out the industry before government has to.

October 22nd, 2009

Net Neutrality: Why the Internet will never be free. For anything. So get used to it

Posted by Doug Hanchard @ October 22, 2009 @ 10:10 AM

Categories: Antitrust, Canada, Censorship, Commerce, Congress, Copyright, Courts, E-government, FCC, FTC, Google, Government technology, Green Dam, ICANN, Intellectual Property, International, Journalism, Justice, Microsoft, Net neutrality, Open government, Privacy, Regulations, Social networks, Standards, State & Local Govt, Telecom, VoIP, Web browsers, Web services

Tags: Provider, Google Inc., Network, Law, Net Neutrality, Yorkton, Market Pie, Internet, Networking, Doug Hanchard

Call it Net Neutrality if you want, but it doesn’t exist, nor is it required when you already have antitrust, regulatory and other local and state, and international law in place. Choice, innovation and open access are the principles in a free enterprise competitive market, not the halls of government.

Before I start, I wish to make clear that ’Law’ is what makes our society what it is today. Without, we would have anarchy and society as we know it today would not exist. Also this is not your typical blog story, what follows is an medium depth look at the problems and challenges Net Neutrality would have on providers, users and government policy if implemented. It doesn’t ask all the questions or give solutions to every aspect in fine detail but does give the reader a general knowledge and sense of issues.

Overview - Net Neutrality - a philosophy or set of regulations?

Your government will ensure Net neutrality with whatever they believe it is. You may not like it, but it is coming. I just don’t know if the lawmakers know what they are getting themselves into. The world believes the Internet is open to everyone. Some are arguing and even demanding we need Law and the RIGHT to eliminate censorship and have choice in all its forms.  The Internet is the People’s network and everyone owns it. Thus Net Neutrality would enable and ensure innovation, freedom, choice and access. Read the rest of this entry »

October 21st, 2009

Net Neutrality: Hit satire coming to a theatre near you

Posted by Doug Hanchard @ October 21, 2009 @ 5:49 AM

Categories: Congress, Government technology, Journalism, Net neutrality, Open government, Telecom, White House

Tags: Net Neutrality, Actor, Doug Hanchard

The world is a simple place, until someone wants to tell you what to do.  The realization that not everyone believes in common ground that surrounds each of us seems to be a new discovery to some. The sanctity of individual requirements is wrapping around our lives with a plethora of effects that will have long term consequences. Hey - wake up!! Don’t go to sleep reading this post just yet! Allow me to entertain you. After all, one component of a Internet blog is to entertain, right?

Net Neutrality is a theatre stage play written in Washington D.C. and this is a glimpse of what’s happening behind the scenes. There’s a pile of actors dancing around ready to be heard by you in the audience. What you don’t know is that the audience is about to watch chaos in motion amongst the actors and not realize that many simply turn around and walk out before they even get to their seats. The show is the story about Net Neutrality that never settles down. Right off the bat, the writer has lost control of the script because of all the request for rewrites. The producer doesn’t even remember what the storyline is. I’m usually asleep by Act II if it’s Opera and if this play doesn’t figure out what it IS soon, I won’t even finish writing this blog! The story…right….about Net Neutrality, I think.

The players are the same ones we’ve become used to. Government, Corporations, and Consumers. Mixed in with those groups are the supporting actors; lobbyist, agents and the commentators. All the players described are going to make money, except one. You do know which group that is, right? Read the rest of this entry »

October 21st, 2009

Antitrust: Time to break apart the phone companies -- again?

Posted by Doug Hanchard @ October 21, 2009 @ 4:00 AM

Categories: Antitrust, Commerce, Congress, Courts, FCC, Government technology, International, Municipal broadband, Net neutrality, Open government, Regulations, Telecom, Web

Tags: U.S., Phone, Antitrust, Network, AT&T Corp., Corporate Law, Telephony, Telecom & Utilities, Telecommunications, Security

In the global meltdown of the economy, corporate earnings are the bellwether of survival. The old adage that the strong get stronger and the weak….  they just collapse. But some corporations now control significant market share that some believe borders on antitrust violations in the U.S. In Australia, Canada and Japan, corporate consolidation has risen significantly over the past several years. There’s no indications of policy direction or change at the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in the U.S, CRTC (Canada) or OFCom (U.K.). which would trigger antitrust or anti-competition hearings.

There are very few industries collecting guaranteed revenue. Utilities and financial institutions are the two biggest. Within utilities, telecommunications has had a unique blend of service ‘delivery’ since the beginning. Initially, a single entity that provided everyone the services, is what created instant monopolies. Fast forward 80 years, and antitrust had its second big challenge (after Standard Oil) with AT&T, which was broken up in the United States in 1984 and the Canadian “group” of telecommunications known as Stentor self-destructed in 1999 because regulator tariffs choked their ability to compete with new entrance into the market. Read the rest of this entry »

October 19th, 2009

FCC and court save the cable companies again

Posted by Doug Hanchard @ October 19, 2009 @ 12:57 PM

Categories: Antitrust, Commerce, Courts, FCC, Net neutrality, Regulations

Tags: FCC, Network, Cable Company, Internet Service Provider, Cable, Internet Service Providers (ISPs), Network Technology, Federal Government, Internet, Telecommunications

Access to infrastructure networks is neither free nor equal. Not everyone has the same privileges, quality or agreements in place. There are different products and services that are often bundled, sold as individual items, etc. And there are always capacity issues, so you’re not always guaranteed what you paid for. For the past several years, the same is true for companies that want access to the cable companies’ networks to broadcast their television station(s). Some are doing very well and have very good mutual agreements. But when a new player enters the field and wants in, there are a number of ways to complain if they hit a road block as Herring Broadcasting found out two years ago. They filed a lawsuit and began the process of blaming everyone else, except themselves.

In September of 2007, Herring Broadcasting, which operates Wealth TV, filed a complaint against Time Warner Cable and Cox Communications alleging discrimination that Herring were not allowed access to their cable networks to broadcast their television station. The cable companies denied the allegations and presented evidence that the primary reasons were for low demand for their type of programming and limited HD space on their networks — Wealth TV being supplied in HD signal only. In a decision released on Oct. 15 by Judge Richard L. Sippel, the complaint by Herring Broadcasting was denied.

Herring Broadcasting argued that both cable companies had infringed on their rights to equal access to their networks and because they already carried similar a programmed television station, MOJO that they partially either owned or had rights to, was also one of the reasons Time Warner discriminated against Herring Broadcasting’s station Wealth TV. Read the rest of this entry »