This week, the Federal Communications Commission will vote on an item that could either open the door to a dream of vast economic growth, innovation and consumer benefits, or bury the dream out of excessive caution and concern for incumbent interests.
Exactly a year ago, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski made a major promise to deliver on Net Neutrality. "If we wait too long to preserve a free and open Internet, it will be too late," he told an influential audience in Washington.
This week Charter Communications, the fourth largest cable operator in the U.S., notified customers that a “broadcast TV surcharge” was being added to their bills (in St. Louis, one of the largest cities they operate in, the charge is 94 cents).
Oops. AT&T is publishing advertisements that in no way reflect the company’s true feelings and actions about Net Neutrality. The ads are published at the exact same moment the company’s lawyers and lobbyists are pushing the Federal Communications Commission to allow “paid prioritization" – the antithesis of the free-flowing Internet.
A year ago today – Sept. 16, 2009 –Denver was the epicenter of the debate over the future of news in America.
Some 200 people packed the Colorado History Museum downtown that night, in the middle of a workweek, and spent three hours passionately talking about how to save the news.
Some were community leaders or journalists. Most were concerned citizens. Many who attended the event sponsored by Free Press were still reeling from the shocking closure six months earlier of one of the nation’s great newspapers, Denver’s Rocky Mountain News.
Last week, after much of the mainstream media worked itself into frenzy covering every angle of the Quran-burning story and the controversy over the proposed New York City Islamic community center, there was a moment of reflection in the press.
Journalists began investigating their own roles in fanning the fires of the controversies they were trying to cover. Memos swirled through newsrooms at the New York Times, Fox, and the AP discussing how to handle the story.
My last post, “No More Bleeding Ledes, Please”, has provoked a strong response from journalists, news producers and news consumers alike. I’m excited to have jumpstarted this discussion and want to respond to some of the themes that have emerged from readers’ comments.
Sensationalism is rampant in our consolidated news system, where scandal, celebrity gossip and violence (or the threat of looming violence) lead the headlines. Ever wonder why this is all we see and read and hear?
It isn’t simply that scandal and violence are all that’s happening in our communities; in fact, it’s the only news that companies want to cover. And they make it expressly clear to their reporters.