Inspired by Sikkdays’ post about Net Neutrality, I though I’d put my 2 cents in regarding another, related issue.
Net Neutrality
Net Neutrality is tiered service based not on the money you pay your ISP, but based on the money a service provider (like Google, Yahoo, Blogger) pays that ISP. Usually, as an ISP, you would do this if you had a competing service. For example, Comcast might want to put a speed limit on Skype, because Comcast has their own digital voice service. AT&T would do the same, in favor of selling you a phone.
The Internet was never designed that way. It was designed to be egalitarian. Bits are bits, and the Internet sends every bit just as fast as it can, regardless of protocol, port number, or packet size.
I want my bits to be equal. The ISP’s argue that these services are ‘Piggy-backed’ on “their” internet access. In reality, each of the aforementioned services pays a rather large fee to have their connection – they pay their ISP just like you do, and I guarantee they pay a heck of a lot more.
Clearly, nobody saw the Internet coming. We’re seeing disruption in all kinds of industries, especially information industries. Video, music, communications, they will all have to adapt to a world where units of information is bought at a flat fee.
Channel Neutrality
So here’s where I transition to the new topic: Channel Neutrality. Many people know that I used to work at a public access TV station. Cable companies are required by law to provide community access, if one exists in your community, on every plan – even basic cable.
Here’s where it gets interesting: AT&T “Advanced TV.” AT&T argues that it is not a “cable company” – they aren’t stringing coaxial cable into your house, just good old-fashioned copper wire. So, since they aren’t a cable company, they don’t have to provide PEG (Public Access, Education, and Government) access channels. So very likely, you simply won’t get them. (Take that, First Amendment!)
But it gets better! If your local PEG Channel decides that they want to pay AT&T to be sent to your TV, (which costs them well over $5,000, and likely upwards of $10,000, according to my old boss) they get siphoned into a separate “PEG Channel Area.” They’re no longer “Channel 25.” They’re “PEG Channel 2” in the “Channel 99 PEG Area.” It’s hard to describe this correctly, so here’s a video of what PEG access looks like on AT&T U-Verse:
There is one advantage of this setup that AT&T is quick to point out: you can see PEG channels not just from your community, but from your neighboring communities as well. This was always a problem when I worked at BCTV, because one of the school districts we covered was not in our viewership – they were in WKTV’s.
Still, the decision to “block off” PEG into it’s own section is a curious one. The video makes no mention of if it’s possible to DVR record the PEG either.
It gets better yet! Because AT&T has been so successful not carrying PEG, the cable companies are now getting into the act!
Huh?
I’m not going to say this has anything to do with our politicians, except that it is just plain ignorance. Most people care less about their public access than they do about Google loading fast. But to me, this is a clear erosion of our freedom of speech.
So write letters. I think Americans need a new Freedom of Information Act, one that ensures that content produced by the people, for the people, gets to the people.