Save Access

Note: Excellent analysis of what can go wrong in state franchising - the devil is in the details.

from: Trenton Times

Cable watchdog

Saturday, April 07, 2007
BY PHYLLIS SALOWE-KAYE

or many in New Jersey, the battle over state vs. municipal franchises to foster competition in the cable market ended with the governor's signature on the sweeping new law. The decision was made to allow Verizon to provide cable television service without a local franchise, in the belief that new competition will lower cable rates for consumers.

from: On Milwaukee

Video and cable debate heats up in Madison

By jfoust
Community Blogger

April 2, 2007

On March 27, 2007, a joint hearing took place at the Capitol to discuss a proposed "Video Competition" bill AB-207/SB-107. The hearing room overflowed with citizens deeply concerned about the threats posed by this bill. Most were associated with small-town "public access-governmental-educational" (PEG) channels. The proponents of the bill were associated with AT&T, their lobbyists, large business organizations like WMC, or the unions of workers who'd get the jobs associated with new video build-outs.

from: Hudson Star-Observer

Cable access channels threatened by proposed legislation, leaders say

Randy Hanson Hudson Star-Observer
Published Friday, April 06, 2007

Hudson/North Hudson Community Access Television has made great strides in the quality and quantity of its programming in recent years, its leaders say. But now all of that progress is threatened by proposed legislation that would reduce funding for local cable access channels and increase their costs.

from: the Telegraph Herald

Cable Franchising Bill Bad for Consumers

Dubuque, Iowa, April 6.

Legislators should question the promise of more competition

A bill moving through the Iowa Legislature offers a promise tempting to lawmakers: Lower cable TV bills and more competition among providers.

If the bill actually could make good on that promise, it would be worth considering. But it can't. Neither lawmakers nor citizens should be taken in.

from: Bytes from Lev

Statewide Coalition Formed To Fight SB 117

This arrived in my inbox and after reading the draft legislation, I think it is really important that folks inform themselves of this significant retrogressive Ohio Senate Bill. Smart communities around the country continue to leverage Franchising Authority to create and sustain community value. This development, if it were to pass, would be very significant nail in the coffin of community partnership networking efforts. If others have insights, please share them via comments.

from: Save the Internet

Groups Manipulated To Spread Telco Propaganda

And you thought Telco Astroturfing was bad enough.

Bruce Kushnick of Teletruth exposes the dirty ways that AT&T and Verizon manipulate public opinion by “co-opting” not-for-profit groups and aligning their leaders against Net Neutrality — even when it’s in the worst interests of their constituents.

from: Technology Daily

Bell Companies Ask FCC To Maintain Content Rules

By David Hatch

(Monday, April 2) Regional Bell companies seeking to compete directly with cable television systems asked the FCC not to eliminate rules designed to ensure the widespread availability of content.

from: Technology Daily

Cable Firms May Get Relief Despite Wave Of Lawsuits

By David Hatch

(Wednesday April 3) The FCC plans to grant regulatory relief to incumbent cable operators despite six new lawsuits challenging new rules providing similar relief to telecom giants entering the pay television business, FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell indicated.

from: Holmen Courier

Cable bill, hot wired for quick passage, leaves municipal leaders cold

By JO ANNE KILLEEN | Staff writer
.
To Assembly Speaker Mike Huebsch, a proposed cable television bill on the fast-track to passage will merely align state laws with technology and increase competition for cable services.

from: Broadband Reports

Bells Using Minority, Disabled Groups For Telecom Propaganda?

Bruce Kushnick pens a piece for Nieman Watchdog exploring how AT&T and Verizon are manipulating public opinion by "co-opting" (read: paying) legitimate minority, disability, elderly and low-income groups into supporting positions that are frequently not in their members' best interests. This, of course, is in addition to their use of consumer groups they've made up completely, or think tanks they've paid to produce public relations disguised as objective economic analysis. Collectively, it creates a very loud "sound wall" of consumer support that actually doesn't exist.