My Account | Free Trial | Sign In
Submit site feedback
National Journal.com

nationaljournal.com > Tech Daily Dose

NationalJournal.com Home Under the Influence Experts Experts Home Under the Influence Experts Home

National Journal's Tech Daily Dose

Broadband

Tuesday, November 17, 2009

The latest comments to be filed on a study conducted for the FCC by Harvard University's Berkman Center for Internet and Society panned the study and urged the commission to give it little consideration. The comment period closed Monday for those wishing to provide input on the study by Berkman, which was charged with providing an expert review of existing literature and studies about broadband deployment policies pursued by other countries. The study is part of the FCC's efforts to craft a national broadband plan by early next year, as required by the economic stimulus plan. The Berkman study concluded that open-access policies, which require existing carriers to lease access to their broadband networks to competitors, have helped foster competition and innovation in broadband markets in other countries.

The National Cable and Telecommunications Association argued in its comments Monday that the commission should reject the Berkman report, saying it is biased in favor of the author's personal views. "A comprehensive, objective study of the existing literature regarding broadband deployment and adoption in other countries is something that could be valuable to the commission as it develops the National Broadband Plan requested by Congress," NCTA said. "Unfortunately, the report prepared by the Berkman Center is neither comprehensive nor objective."

In comments filed late last week, George S. Ford, the chief economist for the Phoenix Center think tank, said the economic analysis does not support the Berkman study's chief findings and is "embarrassingly bad." He added, that the study "claims that 'open access' stimulates broadband consumption, but the correct interpretation of its own evidence is that unbundling reduces broadband consumption."

1 Response

Tuesday, November 17, 2009

Don Bertman

Juliana,

Perhaps your reporting would be helped by not just blindly quoting organizations like Phoenix Center.  The fact is, George Ford's own previous work supported open access policies.  Ford, while working for MCI, then the CLEC Z-Tel, and his work for the pre-2006 Phoenix Center, produced numerous studies supporting open access policy.  This was because Phoenix Center, the old AT&T (who was a major funder of Phoenix), MCI and Z-Tel were CLECs who benefited from open access policy.

It wasn't until the merger of SBC with the old AT&T, and the merger of Verizon with MCI that Ford and Phoenix Center changed its tune.  All of a sudden they started producing "studies" that concluded the exact opposite of all their old work.

This is all made plain on Phoenix's web site.  Ford's salary went from $32,000 in 2005 to $246,000 in 2006, all because Phoenix Center sold its credibility to the new AT&T and Verizon.

Reporters who cite Phoenix give them credibility they don't deserve.  Your readers should know the motivations behind those who are quoted.

Leave a response



Get Print-friendly version of this page E-mail this page to a friend Subscribe to comments for Broadband Study Panned Follow us on Twitter

Blogroll

New Media

Online Politics

Tech Policy

Categories


Add Tech Daily Dose To Your Site

Advertisement
About    Contact    Employment    Reprints & Back Issues    Privacy Policy    Advertising
Copyright 2010 by National Journal Group Inc.
The Watergate · 600 New Hampshire Ave., NW Washington, DC 20037
202-739-8400· fax 202-833-8069 · NationalJournal.com is an Atlantic Media publication.