More Net Neutrality

    

    Last week the Chairman of the FCC proposed the role that he sees the FCC taking in regards to the Internet and “Net Neutrality”. He has proposed giving broadband providers the ability to strike special deals with Internet companies like Netflix for preferential treatment in the “last mile” to consumers’ homes, as long as they act in a “commercially reasonable manner subject to review on a case-by-case basis.”  In effect, not only would this result in the potential to create “Fast Lanes” and “Slow Lanes” of internet traffic that will cost consumers more and make it harder for new innovation on an equal footing, but it makes the FCC a regulatory body that can only react after the fact.  This is not a clear solution to the Net Neutrality issue, but rather it creates a bad policy of ineffective oversight. 

    What Chairman Wheeler and the FCC must do is reclassify broadband as a telecommunications service under the common carrier provisions of Title II of the Communications Act.  This is clearly what the court ruling that defeated net neutrality in the beginning of the year says.  The FCC will only have the power to enforce net equality if it reclassifies, otherwise the courts will continue to rule against it.  Chairman Wheeler’s reluctance to act is clear, and while he continues to say that reclassification remains an option, he continues to propose actions that simply will not keep the Internet open and free. 

    Michael Copps, an FCC commissioner from 2001 to 2011, wrote in his reaction to the court’s ruling “The time is now for the FCC to classify broadband as Title II. Without this step, we are playing fast-and-loose with the most opportunity-creating technology in all of communications history. Without this step, we are guaranteeing an Internet future of toll-booths, gatekeepers, and preferential carriage. Without this step, we stifle innovation, put consumers under the thumb of special interests, and pull the props from under the kind of rich civic dialogue that only open and non-discriminatory communications can provide.”  

    I urge everyone who wants to see a free and open Internet to contact their representatives and urge them to pressure the FCC to reclassify.

Democracy in Action - Net Neutrality

Yesterday I participated in a meeting with Scott Wilson in Vermont Senator  Patrick Leahy's Burlington office.  There were 7 of us there in the meeting, which was coordinated by Mary Alice Crim, a very helpful person from the Free Press organization. The topic was Net Neutrality, which took a hit this year when the U.S. Court of Appeals ruled that the FCC does not have the power to enforce the Open Internet Order (Verizon v. FCC). At the risk of over simplifying, what this ruling did was kill the principal of Net Neutrality.  Before I discuss what this means to "We, the People",  I think we need to take a step back for a quick history lesson.

The Bush era FCC classified broadband Internet access service as an "information service" and NOT a "telecommunications service".  Information services (according to the court ruling) are exempt from the rules that prevent an ISP from "blocking" or "discriminating" under  FCC Rule 10-201.  These rules are intended by the FCC to prevent or discourage broadband Internet service providers from acting unfairly as "gatekeepers to the Internet" by blocking or discriminating against third-party providers of content, applications or devices.

"Specifically, the Commission has mandated that broadband Internet access service providers (1) follow transparency rules that require them to make available public information regarding their network management practices; (2) not block access to lawful websites; and (3) not favor third party services and applications in which the service provider has a financial interest. In the case of fixed (non-mobile) broadband Internet access service providers (e.g., cable companies, landline telephone companies), the Commission also prohibits unreasonable discrimination against any third party services, and blocking of non-harmful devices, applications or content. All of the requirements are subject to the right of the broadband Internet access service provider to adopt reasonable network management practices."    ( read the Article here )

This created the problem that either broadband is a "common carrier" network that is subject to FCC rules, or it is an "information service", which means the FCC does not have the power to enforce the Open Internet Order, or, the end of Net Neutrality.

In order to protect a free and open Internet, there seems to be 2 possible courses of action. Current FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler seems to favor a case-by-case examination under FCC Section 706, which was created to promote broadband development.  In a Washington Post article on February 19 of this year, reporter Brian Fung wrote "Wheeler seems to have seized what he's called the court's "invitation" to act boldly under Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act, which gives the FCC authority to regulate broadband infrastructure deployment. Under the FCC's reading of that statute, the agency can make rules on Web traffic discrimination because of the relationship between the free flow of information and the expansion of new technologies and services." (Read the article here) Fung quotes Wheeler in a statement he made after the court ruling "Innovators cannot be judged on their own merits if they are unfairly prevented from harnessing the full power of the Internet."

The second way to bring back enforceable Net Neutrality rules is to correct the classification problem, and to reclassify broadband as a "telecommunications service" or "common carrier"under Title II. This would seem to fix the problem, and would give the FCC the legal power to enforce it's Open Internet rules.  As a teacher and consumer of media, I am concerned that we get most of our news and entertainment from just a handful of consolidated media conglomerates.  The Internet provides an alternative to that.  Maintaining and enforcing Net Neutrality provides a free and open Internet that allows me to access information online that the 6 big mainstream media companies don't offer. I can access news and information online that I can't get elsewhere, and Net Neutrality is an important protection that allows access to sites and information of my choosing without interference and censorship.  In my opinion, this is the fix that ensures the free exchange of information and ideas, the very thing that is the bedrock of our Democracy.

Still with me?  This brings us back to now, and the meeting with Scott Wilson.  We let Mr. Wilson know that we are urging Senator Leahy to tell the FCC to reclassify broadband as a telecommunications service under Title II so that the FCC can craft and enforce strong Net Neutrality protections.  We also thanked the Senator for his continuing support of a free and open Internet.  Mr. Wilson told us that they will be watching the FCC and deciding the next move based on what course of action it takes.  He told us that we have a champion in Senator Leahy who cares about strong Net Neutrality rules that protects consumers and innovators. He added that it isn't Netflix (and it's leaked secret agreement with Comcast) that we need to worry about, but the next "netflix", the small service innovators that could be shut out of the competition.  "Let's see what the FCC is doing" Wilson told us, and hope that popular backlash will create the pressure to keep Net Neutrality rules in effect.  If not, then congress may have to step in with laws to enforce a free Internet and protect consumers and innovators. In a written response to the courts ruling, Senator Leahy said "“I am disappointed by today’s ruling that struck down core elements of the FCC’s Open Internet rules.  Network neutrality is a bedrock principle of the Internet, one that has allowed it to grow and flourish into the ultimate marketplace of ideas.  I will be closely monitoring this issue to ensure these principles are preserved.  It is crucial that the Internet remain a place where a better idea, product, or service can succeed on its merits, not based on a financial relationship with a broadband provider.”  I just hope that a "wait and see" position doesn't jeopardize the need to act now before we see the freedom we take as our right lost.  To prevent censorship, descrimination, and website blocking, the FCC must reclassify broadband as a telecommunications service under Title II.

Final OSCAR 2014 post

The Oscars 2014 are over...the winners announced...the controversies now old news (John Travolta).

The ratings for the program were good... USA Today reported:

Sunday's Academy Awards drew 43.7 million viewers, marking the top awards show's biggest total in 14 years, according to final Nielsen figures.

The 3½-hour event, hosted by Ellen DeGeneres, continued an upward trend for awards shows and other live events, with audiences stoked by social media. Nielsen's SocialGuide estimates 13.9 million saw Oscar-related tweets Sunday night.

The Oscars, which awarded the best picture to 12 Years a Slave, gave seven awards to Gravity and spread the rest among several films, were up 8% from last year's telecast, hosted by Seth MacFarlane, and up 11% from 2012, when Billy Crystal returned as host.

                                                                     Gary Levin, USA TODAY   March 4, 2014

So how did I do?  A record setting 20 out of 24!  And all the top categories!
I missed Best Production Design (The Great Gatsby), Best Film Editing (Gravity), Best Short Film (Mr. Hublot), and Best Short Film (Helium).  I picked "Captain Phillips" for film editing knowing that Gravity would probably win, but I thought it deserved it for the way it told the story.

So ends the discussion of films from 2013... and onto 2014... will "The Lego Movie" win Best Animated Feature Film?  Stay tuned!  :)

Visual Storytelling

Visual Storytelling



A great article on how production is all about storytelling.

Bill Nye the Science Guy and Climate Change

Bill Nye was on Real Time on HBO last week talking about his debate with creationist Ken Ham and climate change.  I like what he said about climate change:

“What he and his people have done is used the word science in this new way; it’s very much like the people who deny that smoking causes cancer and that there’s climate change,” Nye said.
He added they “take scientific uncertainty … and turn it into doubt about the whole thing.”
“The idea that we don’t know, it scares some people and every time you said it, Ken Ham would say, ‘Well, you know Bill, there’s a book,’” Maher said, referring to the Bible and slapping his forehead.
Maher also raised the point that in addition to religion, many still deny climate change. He specifically criticized Republican Sen. Ted Cruz.
“His big joke now is whenever it snows, you know, ‘Al Gore told me this wouldn’t happen,’” Maher said of the Texas senator.
Nye said that “climate is the big picture. Weather is day to day.”
Citing the recent polar vortex in the U.S. and heat wave in Australia, Nye said that extreme heat events can now be tied to climate change through statistical analysis.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/02/bill-maher-bill-nye-climate-change-education-103563.html#ixzz2thcUgAn1

See Also: Neil deGrasse Tyson on an earlier Bill Maher:

Comcast is B I G

To paraphrase Douglas Adams in "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy",  Comcast  "is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to Comcast." With the announcement last week of Comcast's proposed  merger with Time Warner Cable,  Comcast becomes even more "mind-bogglingly big".  How did we get here?

In 1983, 90% of American media was owned by 50 companies.  By 2011, that number shrunk to 6. ( The Big 6 ), Comcast, Walt Disney, Viacom, CBS, News Corp and Time Warner Inc.  6 companies that control at least 90% of our media.   Comcast's merger with NBC last year means it controls 1 of every 5 hours of television ( Article ).  In 2010, the combined income of the Big 6 was estimated to be $275 BILLION, or $36 billion more than Finland's GDP.  Last year Comcast reported $6.8 billion in profit on $64.7 billion in revenue. ( NY Times History of Comcast )  If that isn't scary enough, the new Comcast/Time Warner Cable merger  "would put more than a third of all cable-TV subscribers in Comcast’s hands and give it control over more than half of the “triple-play” services that combine TV, phone and Internet service."( freepress.net)

Is this consolidation of power good for us, the consumer?  Many say "NO".  There have already been arguments between cable systems and content providers, the largest one so far between CBS and Time Warner Cable. CBS won the battle because subscribers didn't want to lose CBS from their channel list.  Comcast has pledged to divest 3 of the 11 million subscribers it gains from Time Warner, keeping it at the 30 million subscriber level.  According to some estimates, that gives Comcast at least 1/3 of all cable subscribers, and with the decline in cable subscribers, that number may be closer to 50%.  Even with the subscriber decline, cable providers have still seen a 5% income growth thanks to the continuing increase of fees.  With a bigger Comcast, do you think there will be a reduction of fees anytime soon? Repeat after me "the rich get rich while..."  Forbes reported in an article at the end of 2013 that "Nationwide, the average pay TV bill (excluding internet and phone service) was $86 in 2011 and is expected to reach $123 by 2015, based on estimates by the NPD Group. With consumer income and spending remaining relatively flat, industry analysts agree that the current business model is not sustainable in the long term. Yet despite widespread customer complaints over price hikes and channel bundling, the cable industry still manages to hold on to a nationwide customer base of about 56 million video subscribers, more than their satellite (34 million subscribers) and telco (10 million subscribers) rivals combined, according to a recent report from SNL Kagan."  The FCC reports that customer rates have been increasing by about 6% annually – the current inflation rate, by comparison is 1.5%  And speaking of those "customer complaints",  Comcast and Time Warner are on the bottom  of the American Consumer Satisfaction Index.

Finally, how much influence does the consumer have?  The media information graphic I referenced earlier  points out that  232 media executives control the "information diet of 277 million Americans". That's 1 media executive to 850,000 subscribers.  That's a lot of power.  Is there anyone else looking out for us?  How about the FCC?  The new head of the FCC is Thomas Wheeler, a former top lobbyist for the wireless and cable industries. From 1979 to 1984, he served as president of the National Cable Television Association and before that he was CEO of the Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association.  Given those credentials, where would you guess his loyalties are? The only thing we consumers can do is make our voices heard.  It worked for CBS against Time Warner Cable, but not for the Weather Channel in it's fight with Direct TV. Freepress.net has an online petition to the FCC and the Justice Department. You can also contact your Congress member and let them know how you feel about the merger.  In the meantime, enjoy your cable and Netflix programming before the prices go up...again.

http://act.freepress.net/sign/consol_comcast_twc/?source=website_node_feature

OSCAR DOCUMENTARY SHORT NOMINEES

DOCUMENTARY SHORT NOMINEES

I watched these short docs at the Roxy this weekend.  Here are the Documentary Shorts for 2014 and my "winner" prediction:

“Cavedigger” (Director Jeffrey Karoff). Synopsis: New Mexico environmental sculptor Ra Paulette carves elaborately designed and painstakingly executed sandstone caves, driven by an artistic vision that often brings him into conflict with his patrons.

“Facing Fear” (Director: Jason Cohen). Synopsis: As a gay 13-year-old, Matthew Boger endured a savage beating at the hands of a group of neo-Nazis. Twenty-five years later, he meets one of them again by chance.

“Karama Has No Walls” (Director: Sara Ishaq). Synopsis: When protesters in Yemen added their voices to those of other nations during the Arab Spring, the government responded with an attack that left 53 people dead and inspired widespread sympathy throughout the country.

“The Lady in Number 6: Music Saved My Life” (Directors:  Malcolm Clarke and Nicholas Reed). Synopsis: At 109, Alice Herz Sommer is the world’s oldest pianist…and its oldest Holocaust survivor. At the heart of her remarkable story of courage and endurance is her passion for music.

“Prison Terminal: The Last Days of Private Jack Hall” (Director: Edgar Barens).  Synopsis: In a maximum security prison, the terminally ill Jack Hall faces his final days with the assistance of hospice care provided by workers drawn from the prison population.



While all 5 offer compelling stories on the human condition, my 2 top films were "The Lady in #6" and "Prison Terminal".  The weakest of the group for me was "Facing Fear", which felt more like a long advertisement for The Museum of Tolerance.  While the story of these two men is an interesting portrait of the clash of two teenagers on very different paths, it felt like there was more to the story than was included in the documentary.  I thought "Karama Has No Walls" was an intense journalistic report of the government attack on demonstrators in Yemen, and the first hand video footage is difficult to watch, but the style of the film made it hard to feel it ever was more than an on-scene report. "Cavedigger" is a very interesting portrait of a sculptor who is doggedly pursuing his art, carving amazingly sculpted caves out of soft rock.  Of the 5 films, this offers the lightest topic, but I was left feeling like there was more to tell about the artist than we learned in the film.  It did have a finished polish to it that set it apart from the rougher cut "Karama", and it may be a fan favorite, but I could not connect to the story.

That leaves the final 2 films that I think are the top two Oscar contenders.  "Prison Terminal" is a  hard to watch story about hospice care in prison.  With an increasingly elderly prison population, this end-of-life dying with dignity story is a captivating and difficult experience.  I was left with questions about the inmate's story that we never were told, but that really wasn't the focus of the film.  The access the filmmakers had to the death in prison of this World War 2 veteran sentenced to life in prison for the murder of a drug dealer is amazing as we witness his final days in a special hospice program run by other prisoners.  I couldn't help feel that his story highlights the struggles of older veterans that returned from World War 2 without the mental health support that they needed to receive to be integrated back into society. The big question is have we learned from our past mistakes?

"And the Oscar goes home with:"

"The Lady in Number 6" I predict will be the Oscar winner. It is an intimate and touching documentary on the life of the oldest Holocaust survivor.  This documentary seems to have the most current film-making techniques, taking the famous "Ken Burn's Effect" to the next level by animating the still images that tell the remarkable story of this 109 year old survivor and her encounters with history.  I think this will be the voter's favorite of the five.

I do find myself thinking about one of the films final shot that was amazing and left me with that question of "how did they do that?"  In "Cavedigger", we have a medium shot of the artist as he begins what probably will be his final cave, a 10 year project. The camera begins a long, smooth, pull out from the artist, and continues to move away until he is lost on the side of the mountain he is digging in.  It was a beautiful shot, and the one production technique from all 5 films that I am still thinking about today.

Please comment if you have seen these films.  Do you agree with my pick?

UPDATE MARCH 2014

"The Lady in Number Six" did win best documentary short.  It also became a tribute to it's star who unfortuately passed away on February 23, 2014 at the age of 110.

You can read more about her here.