Dan Gillmor: Telecom strategy is take it or leave it

[Dave Farber <dave () farber net>]

Sometimes you have to settle for what's available, not what's best, because
otherwise you won't get anything at all.

That's the basic argument in favor of giving vast deregulatory freedom to
some of America's telecommunications giants. Unless they can control who has
access to their lines and at what price, say the cable and regional phone
companies, they won't deploy the high-speed data access that the nation
wants and needs.

In a move as craven as any we've seen lately, the technology industry seems
to have signed onto this corporate extortion. Since broadband deployment is
so crucial to the future of the tech companies, they're willing to jump into
bed with anyone who'll make it happen sooner than later -- and the heck with
the public interest.

And despite opposition from telecom competitors who fear being frozen out
and do-gooders who understand the consequences, official Washington is
leaning toward decisions that could make today's media concentration seem
modest.

I say we should hold out for what's best, not what's expedient.

What's best? We could embark on a crash program, funded by taxpayers, to
bring broadband to every home and business in America. Maybe it should be a
build-out of networks using fiber and wireless technologies. Maybe it should
be subsidies that allow end users to buy what they want, spurring industry
innovation along the way.

This is a national security issue, if we understand it correctly. Broadband
everywhere isn't just about vast new economic opportunities. By
decentralizing the workforce, we are increasing our collective safety, too.

<snip>

-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as interesting-people () lists elistx com
To unsubscribe or update your address, click
  http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=125275&user_secret=1aa8f2d6

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/