[governance] Free Web Plan Being Pushed by FCC Head

Mon Dec 15 07:40:13 EST 2008

> And PLEASE note that this is a CENSORED internet, which is precisely what
some of us fear will be the price of government-provided "internet for all."
(Milton) 

There is no necessary connection between publicly provided net  and a
censored net. The analogy often applied earlier comparing a 'right to the
Internet' with the right to education is useful here. Public education has
mostly meant some kind of a public curriculum. States and communities have
dealt with the issue of inappropriate kinds of control over 'public
curriculum' in a nuanced and dynamic manner. No one has ever proposed
scrapping public education provisions to deal with the problems associated
with state's role in determining/ influencing curriculum. 

The comparison with right to education and state's role in
curriculum/content development however ends here. There perhaps was (is) a
structural and also a social requirement for state's involvement in
curriculum decisions in terms of public education. Internet however is
entirely different. Any amount of different content, of any number of
different types, *can* be accommodated *equally* on the Internet. However,
public support is still required to provide 'equalizing' conditions for
production of all, and different, kinds of content. (Canada recently has
announced some such provisions to ensure there is sufficient "Canadian"
content on the Internet, as the government used to do to ensure enough
Canadian content on TV and Film media.)

IT for Change just now concluded an international workshop on 'ICTs for
participatory local development' where the combination of - as well as
nuances and dynamics of - 'public provisioning' along with 'local community
decision making' was emphasized to deal with equity and social justice
aspects of the emerging information society. The two are not exclusive, in
fact they need to complement one another, and public provisioning has to be
done in a manner that strengthens rather than weakens 'local community
decision making'. The same extends to the issue of expanding individual's
freedoms through public action, something which underpins Sen's capability
rights approach and UNDP's Human Development approach to development policy
based on Sen's work. 

As for some members skepticism about public provisioning on the Internet;
who proposes what solution depends of where one is placed. Societies where
markets are in a good position to deal with the dynamics of an emerging
information (or Internet-based) society would have a different take on this
issue than societies where these dynamics are furthering inequalities, both
within the societies and vis a vis the Northern societies. To the extent
that we are speaking in terms that are sought to be applied across the
world, we need to be sensitive to social and political realities of the
whole world.  

Parminder 

  _____  

From: Milton L Mueller [mailto:mueller at syr.edu] 
Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2008 3:25 PM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Lee W McKnight
Subject: RE: [governance] Free Web Plan Being Pushed by FCC Head

And PLEASE note that this is a CENSORED internet, which is precisely what
some of us fear will be the price of government-provided "internet for all."

Outgoing Federal Communications Commission Chairman Kevin Martin is
pushing for action in December on a plan to offer free, pornography-free
wireless Internet service to all Americans, despite objections from the
wireless industry and some consumer groups.

The proposal to allow a no-smut, free wireless Internet service is part
of a proposal to auction off a chunk of airwaves. The winning bidder
would be required to set aside a quarter of the airwaves for a free
Internet service. The winner could establish a paid service that would
have a fast wireless Internet connection. The free service could be
slower and would be required to filter out pornography and other
material not suitable for children. The FCC's proposal mirrors a plan
offered by M2Z Networks Inc., a start-up backed by Kleiner Perkins
Caufield & Byers partner John Doerr.

Consumer advocates have objected to the FCC's proposed pornography
filter, while the wireless industry has objected to the entire free
Internet plan. To address concerns about the filter, the FCC is
proposing that adults could opt out and access all Internet sites.

T-Mobile USA, in particular, has raised concerns. The Deutsche Telekom
AG unit paid about $4 billion a few years ago for nearby airwaves and
has complained that the free wireless Internet plan will likely result
in interference for consumers of its new 3G wireless network. The FCC
dismissed the company's interference concerns this fall, although
T-Mobile disagreed with that finding.

--
Gurumurthy Kasinathan
IT for Change
www.ITforChange.net
Bridging Development Realities and Technological Possibilities
 <http://ITforChange.net> http://ITforChange.net
 <http://India.IS-Watch.net> http://India.IS-Watch.net
 <http://IS-Watch.net> http://IS-Watch.net
*IT for Change is an NGO in Special Consultative Status with United Nations'
Economic and Social Council*

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20081215/4ba719e7/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance