Over the last few weeks, dozens of House members from both sides of the aisle have signed on to a lobbyist-driven letter advocating to give control of the Internet to Comcast and AT&T by preventing the FCC from protecting the Internet, broadband expansion efforts, and net neut
A CTIA spokesman said, in a recent discussion, the Federal Communications Commission’s messaging around so-called “bill shock,” or unexpectedly high wireless bills, was not “fair” to the wireless industry. This is simply not the case.
Congress just sold you out to Comcast, Verizon and AT&T.
Big phone and cable companies are so determined to dismantle consumer protections on the open Internet that they've spent millions to flip Congress against you. Earlier this week, many in Congress delivered.
It appears that many of the nation’s leading Internet service providers aren’t actually worried about the Federal Communications Commission’s “Third Way” approach to broadband oversight and its impact on broadband build-out and investment – despite what they’re telling lawmakers in Washington.
Phone and cable lobbyists are making the rounds on Capitol Hill, urging elected officials to sign on to letters disparaging the Federal Communications Commission’s plans to protect the Internet and bridge the digital divide.
The release of the FCC’s National Broadband Plan has brought the issue of universal and affordable broadband Internet access to the attention of policy makers in Washington, D.C. But one of the best tools for achieving this goal is not found inside the Beltway, but rather in a variety of communities across the nation.
On the last day of the Journalism Innovations conference earlier this month, a group of journalists gathered around a table at the University of San Francisco to talk about struggles and opportunities related to new kinds of media collaboration. The group was a diverse mix of new and old media including Salon, Mother Jones, San Francisco Public Press, Spot.Us, The San Francisco Chronicle, California Watch and others. The conversation was part storytelling, part Q&A, and part troubleshooting.
At first, people were most interested in sharing their experiences with collaboration and describing the projects they were working on currently. However, before long the conversation took on a much more critical tone and the results were a fairly frank assessment of new news collaborations and some initial lessons from those on the front lines of this work.
We talk a lot about the digital divide, the lack of local news coverage in communities across the country, and how this absence of information affects civic participation, quality of life and ultimately our democracy. We are facing a growing information divide that is leaving more and more people with less and less access to the basic information that helps them make choices about their jobs, families and communities. We have to have a national approach to the challenge of meeting these information needs.
But first we have to answer a few core questions: How do we define the information needs of communities, and how do we measure them? What metrics should we use and what tools do we need? Are communities receiving quality news and information? A panel at the Free Press Summit delved into these questions because understanding our communities information needs is essential in shaping the policies and solutions we fight for in our quest for a better media system.