The internet is a value access to our communities, we no longer have the time to seek out information at the library we need a reliable source to get at the truth, the media now a days is so full of uncertainties that we need to seek info some where else. This is some of the events taking place now, Network neutrality advocates have argued that legislation is necessary to ensure that network operators do not use their market power to block or discriminate among application or content providers on the Internet. The Internet should remain a neutral platform where consumers can continue to access and share any application or content online. Network
operators and their defenders have responded that regulation is unnecessary because, first, there
have been no substantial network neutrality violations and, second, because the FCC’s ex post
enforcement can address any violations. The moment of truth has come. A network operator,
Comcast, is engaging in substantial network neutrality violations. Specifically, Comcast is
secretly degrading innovative protocols used for transporting and sharing large files, like highquality
television programming and movies. This complaint asks the FCC to address this
violation. (fp_pk_comcast_complaint ) (openinternetcoalition.com/index.cfm?objectid=00D19298-F1F6-6035-B53)

Internet Issue and Debate

The internet issue and debate is a very controversial issue. In one of these debates Mr. Michael Krieger a Los Angeles based attorney whose practice is devoted to high technology business issues, especially for software, multimedia, and internet-related development, acquisition, licensing, distribution and services. He also has served as a special private adviser to Dr. Jon Postel, the late Internet Pioneer/”czar” implemented the U.S. Government’s mandate to transfer internet policy making and control to a private corporation.
He was asked during an interview, what type of impact democratization of information in the internet would cause? Mr. Krieger replied with this “ Hopefully it will level the playing field so that those with fewer resources will be at least somewhat more equal to those with great resources. Let’s say, for instance, the citizen who wants to be informed previously had to go to a depository library for many kinds of information, if we’re talking about the United States. Now many, many things are available over the web. The burden of gaining information is substantially lower. That runs the risk of people assuming that everything they want is on the internet so they pursue nothing elsewhere” what you all think?

should Internet be Free or privetized

The issue I am interested in is in keeping the Internet free to all citizens.


New state laws and FCC regulations have been detrimental to PEG access centers and programming across the country. Congress held a hearing to assess the damage. And guest commentator Megan Tady wants our new president to address the digital divide and work to make high-speed broadband accessible to everyone.
more» link http://www.freepress.net

Media Ownership History

FRIDAY, OCTOBER 10, 2008

media ownership history

Fifty years ago there were some 50 or so media companies around the world. Today there are only 6 large media companies in the world, these companies are : Time, Disney, Bertelsmann, Viacom, News Corporation, and Vivendi Universal. How could or should I say how did this happen? It was when I started to investigate, I learned that the rule the Federal Communication Commission adopted in 1975 called the "newspaper/broadcast cross-ownership ban which prohibited a newspaper and broadcast or radio station from being co-owned changed. As of 2003 the commission adopted new media ownership rules and the ban was relaxed.