Jake Paris's Weblog

Well here I am. The end of the semester… the final paper is pretty much settled, but I figured I would attempt to “Connect the Dots” that have been my often sparse and almost always wide-sweeping blog posts together. Let’s see what we can do here.

I’ve mentioned the Global Voices Project a number of times thus far. Less-often mentioned (if at all, it’s hard to remember after all this blogging) is the Global Learning Portal (GLP), being developed by the Academy for Educational Development (AED) with USAID funding.

My final paper for this class will argue for policies which will continue to fund projects like the GLP as a means of bringing education and democratic values to underdeveloped countries around the world. This is directly in line with the goals of organizations such as USAID and even the U.N.. Furthermore, I will argue that projects such as Global Voices should recieve increased funding for the same basic reasons:

1. Communications through such “global blogs” bring a greater level of transparency and understanding between peoples around the world.
2. Greater levels of transparency and understanding created at this grassroots level are FAR more effective at encouraging open and honest discourse on a variety of subjects ranging from politics to the environment to the development of science and technology than the traditional “top down” methods of going directly through foriegn governments.
3. Democracy and even Democratic Republics like our country are inherently grassroots afairs. You will NOT achieve stable democratic regimes through force… the recent debacle in Iraq has taught us this lesson.
4. Thus, my newly termed Global Blogs should be encouraged through a variety of policy measures in both the public and private sectors (as will be discussed in detail within my final paper) to promote these lines of communication, open discourse, the spread of ICTs, and eventually: the spread of democratic values.

Finally, it will be argued that thus far, Western / Modernized democratic regimes have only seen Internet-based technologies such as Blogs as enablers of increased control (check out any NeoCon political Blog, or for that matter, the Howard Dean campaign in 2004 to see examples of this), or in some cases, disruptive forces that break down control (hacking being the most obvious).

Why can these technologies not instead be pursued as agents of grassroots change to advance American ideals and in fact our basic stated foreign policy agenda of Democritization? They can be. They should be. I will show you the way :)

Haha. Sorry, last blog entry… had to wax cheesy at the end, can’t help myself.

Posted by Jake Paris at 10:15 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Well, it’s more of a Triangle really.

Let’s see, we have 3 major players:

1. Cable Companies: They can offer Internet, Video, and Voice services at a slightly reduced package deal to customers, but in turn making them millions in new subscriber fees. I personally see these folks as being the strongest player in the telecom market.
2. Phone Companies: They can offer Voice services, and substantially inferior (in most areas) Internet services in package deals, but so far have been given no FCC go-ahead to offer high-speed Video. More on this in a sec. I personally see this group as being the fastest-shrinking group in the telecom market.
3. VoIP Companies: They can offer both Voice and Video over the Internet… however, they do rely on one of the former players for their connection to your household. This would seem to be the most unpredictable of players, especially since most VoIP companies are still privately held.

Why my vague assertions in regards to market power between these 3 players you might ask? Well, take a look at this recent article in the Washington Post: Here.

As you’ll see, there is a pretty fierce debate brewing in regards to the future of “legacy” telecom. Companies such as AT&T and Verizon (the two remaining “big boys” in traditional telecom) are actively lobbying for a bill in Congress which would allow them to offer video and higher-speed Internet over their current lines.

Why such a hubub? Well, they are losing money… hemorrhaging it in fact. Check out their stock prices for the past 5 years, and you’ll see losses of almost 40% for both companies. That’s harsh, even for telecom “post bubble”. Of course our old friend Universal Service comes into play once again and is acting as a spoiler for the telecom companies. Whereas competitors like Skype (a major VoIP company) and Comcast do not have to deal with Universal Service restrictions currently, AT&T and Verizon still do.

So I pose the question to you the reader: is it fair to have a public policy in place which allows an industry’s major competitors almost complete freedom of access limitation rights, while still imposing the notion of Universal Service on the more traditional companies such as AT&T and Verizon? Far be it for me to stick up for big telecom… but in the face of stifled competition, I could easily see Comcast developing a virtual monopoly if policies are not put in place to hold their power in check. These policies could take the place of reducing restrictions on traditional telecom, legitimizing the fledgling VoIP business, or placing the same Universal Service burdens on Broadband Cable providers.

I’d personally love to see what their net profits would be like if they had to wire all of North Dakota with fiber-optic cable for broadband.

Posted by Jake Paris at 08:41 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)