[Random-bits] Washington Post and Cable Internet issues

[James Love]

Jeff Chester points out that the Washington Post wrote an editorial
urging regulatory restrain on cable Internet access, without disclosing
their own interests in the cable/Internet industry.  Jamie

http://washpostco.com/cable.htm
http://www.cableone.net/
http://www.cableone.net/Internet/cablemodemfaq.asp


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A52591-2000Aug7.html

Open Cable 

Tuesday, August 8, 2000, page A24

LAST WINTER, when AOL and Time Warner announced plans to merge, the two
companies laid out the case against regulatory opposition to their
union. True, the marriage would concentrate power in the brave new
multimedia world: Time Warner cables would offer high-speed access to
AOL's Internet service, which would in turn offer Time Warner TV,
magazines and music. But the companies explained that this concentration
would be redeemed by the principle of "open access." Time Warner cable
would give consumers a choice of Internet services, not just AOL. And
AOL would point customers to content from all manner of sources, not
just from Time Warner.  

The firms now are trying to show that open access is more than a slogan.
Time Warner has announced a deal with Juno, a company that provides
dial-up access to the Internet in fierce competition with AOL. People
living in areas served by Time Warner's cable network will be able to
choose Juno as their high-speed Internet provider rather than being
obliged to use a Time Warner affiliate. The competition should help keep
Internet subscription rates down while increasing AOL's incentive to
offer the widest possible variety of content, lest it lose customers.
Open access in the Internet service market thus promotes open access to
the Net for rival media companies.
  
The question for regulators is whether the firms' voluntary actions need
to be bolstered by government intervention. Critics argue that AOL-Time
Warner is not to be trusted: The firm may abandon openness once the
merger is done; it is already a jealous guardian of its dominance in
instant messaging. But the danger must be weighed against the cost and
difficulty of regulating a fast-evolving industry. So long as the firms
prove serious about open access, regulatory restraint is wisest.
 

=======================================================
James Love, Director           | http://www.cptech.org
Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org 
P.O. Box 19367                 | voice: 1.202.387.8030
Washington, DC 20036           | fax:   1.202.234.5176
=======================================================