TV regulation will become telecom regulation
By Eli M. Noam
Published: October 24 2006
Financial Times

What will the regulation of television look like in the future? That
question is on the minds of policymakers and media companies around the
world. In the past, television was tightly controlled through
restrictive licenses and other rules that do not exist for print media.
Yet when these print media originally emerged centuries ago, they, too,
were censored and licensed. This history raises expectations that
television would follow a similar path. It would be set free when
television would migrate from the limited over-the-air broadcasting to a
delivery over the wide-open open internet.

Yet it is worth taking a look at what is actually happening on the
internet. Things have certainly changed. Just over a decade ago in 1994,
the internet’s pioneers declared in their Charter for Internet
Liberties: “Government, leave us alone, we did not call you, we don’t
need you.” But today, the internet community is seeking, under the
heading of “net neutrality”, regulations that protect them from
telephone companies’ control over access, price discrimination, gate
keeping, and self-dealing. They have encountered the market power of the
infrastructure networks, and they do not like it.

Thus, for all practical purposes, different hands are on the libertarian
flag: today, the incumbent telecom infrastructure networks wave it to
keep restrictions from being enacted, while the internet community seeks
an increased role for government. “Common carrier“regulation is back.
We must jettison the conventional view that such regulation is backward
or primitive. Existing telecom regulation is quite a sophisticated tool
in comparison with the regulation of other industries. Neither aviation,
pharma drugs, environmental controls, rail transportation, electric
utilities, nor even securities has anything that comes close in terms of
economic analysis and institutional intricacy.

It has been easy to belittle the resultant complexity as old-fashioned,
pre-net, out-of-touch, and analog. And of course any accumulated set of
rules will have its share of inconsistencies and holy cows. But on the
whole, telecom regulation is complicated because it is trying to balance
multiple policy goals and their constituencies. None of these goals or
constituencies disappears just because information gets delivered and
encoded differently.And in the meantime, the new participants encounter
the old problems: market power based on economies of scale, the need to
access “essential facilities”, and the vertical leveraging of a firm’s
market power in one segment into others.

The significance of this lies in the fact that most next-generation
media - television, music, film, games, online news - will run over the
internet and its fixed-line and wireless pathways. Therefore, as the
internet becomes the main platform for most media uses, the regulatory
rules that underlie the internet become the rules for much of the media
system as a whole. And with the regulatory rules for the internet moving
toward those of telecom, it follows that the telecom-style rules become
the rules affecting all media.
This does not apply just for the interaction of content companies versus
the infrastructure networks. A variety of societal goals inevitably
enter as well: ownership diversity, privacy, morality, trade,
competition, innovation, national culture, protection from defamation
and hateful speech, consumer protection, revenue generation, truthful
advertising, public health, technological innovation, connectivity
across geography and income classes, security – the list gets longer, if
anything. 

To carry out such policies, legislation and regulation tend to lean on
the most limited and reachable segment of a communications chain, and
try to manage through the policing of its bottlenecks a set of broader
goals.That limited segment is generally the last-mile transmission.For
traditional broadcasting, that element was the over-the-air
electromagnetic spectrum, and access to it was therefore made subject to
many conditions. For cable and satellite TV, the scarce elements were
construction franchises and orbital slots that provided the pivot. And
now, for internet-based video media, the internet’s delivery path
becomes the nexus of regulation.

Thus, the regulation of the television system will not fade away. Nor
will it become a new-style “converged” regulation that amalgamates
various media. Instead, It will simply shift to the newer underlying
delivery pathway, the telecom (and cable) infrastructure on which the
broadband internet is riding.Television regulation will therefore end up
resembling in many important respects old-fashioned telecom-style
regulation, and the present debate over net-neutrality is a harbinger of
more to come.

(A fuller version of this article will be presented in November at the
international conference of Ofcom, the UK’s telecom and television
regulatory agency, and in its forthcoming volume, “Communications - The
Next Decade.”)

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2006


Jayson Funke

Graduate School of Geography
Clark University
950 Main Street
Worcester, MA 01610
 

Reply via email to