DC telecom day
In Pattern Recognition, an absorbing William Gibson novel, the protagonist believes that when she travels a long distance it takes a while for her soul to catch up. Jet lag, for her, is just a matter of the soul wandering above the Atlantic in the slipstream.
I spent the day (a long day) in DC watching seven panels of people (including one that had me on it) prognosticate about the future of communications. I'm back in NY, but my soul is somewhere in Philadelphia, confused.
Today focused on the same old deep conflict, but now I think I understand it better. There are at least two sides to it.
First, the people who are used to owning and controlling networks see the internet as just another network. They're used to networks competing, and they're looking forward to lumping “value propositions” and “user experiences” together for their subscribers. They're investing hugely in their proprietary networks. They're not used to “networks of networks.” There are only two actors in this category: Comcast/TW and SBC/Verizon. A duopoly. Through the good graces of this duopoly, Americans are able to get online.
Second, the people who are used to interactive computing as a way of life can't imagine that anyone will show up and constrain their access. Impossible to contemplate. So impossible, in fact, that many large companies whose business plans depend on access to the internet don't put a lot of energy into the policy game in Washington.
Both sides assume that their respective worldviews are indisputably accurate. The cable/telco world is squabbling over the applicability of cable franchise rules to telcos. The online world is squabbling over content issues and the liability of intermediaries. Both worlds are closed, acronym-ridden, clubby places.
It's time to get the access question straight, and it won't be easy — particularly given the lobbying muscle of the incumbents. I'll start to work when my soul gets in from Philadelphia. It's been quite a day.