Yesterday, the FCC finally (it's been in limbo for months) gave approval to Comcast and NBC to merge. This merger creates an absolute powerhouse in the entertainment and news industry. Not only will this single entity create media, but they will also be the most powerful distributor of it.
Anyone who has taken a college-level critical thinking course knows about philosophical fallacies. One of the more emphasized ones in my college philosophy class was the "slippery slope" fallacy. This is the fallacy in which if (A) happens, then it will lead to (B). And if (B) happens, then it could lead to (C), (D), (E), or (F).
This is a philosophy that's often associated with conservatives. Historically, conservatives are against change because new laws, guidelines, and oversight could lead to more new laws, guidelines, and oversights. It's a very typical argument that you may hear right-wingers argue. And most of the time, they're probably right! Unfortunately, according to my philosophy professor, it's not a sound way to make an argument for or against something.
The reason I bring that up is because this merger is the beginning of a redefinition of the internet. The internet itself isn't owned by anyone (as far as I know), but the buried lines, servers, and bandwidths which distribute the ability to use the internet, are. Comcast (according to this article from the Associated Press) boasts an internet subscriber base of 17 million. That goes by subscriber. So in many cases, you have three, four, or five people using the same service in a single household. That means that the number of people who use Comcast in the US could be upwards of 100 million, which is by far the largest ISP provider in the country.
So why does this merger matter?
It's really difficult for me to even begin why this matters.
To start, Comcast and NBC knows that Netflix needs to die. Hulu (which is owned by NBC) is a direct competitor of Netflix. As a Netflix user, I know how convenient their service and prices are. For under $10 a month, it's nearly eliminated the need to ever purchase a tangible piece of film/TV media ever again. Not only is NBC getting killed because of this, but Comcast isn't reaping any benefits by providing bandwidth to it's subscribers who stream media on a daily basis. Comcast will control transfer rates when it comes to certain sites. Legally, they can't do this, but how can the FCC regulate this? The FCC can input regulations and oversights on NBC/Comcast, but Comcast is a company that has come under fire in the past for discriminating against internet traffic, so what makes the FCC think that's going to change now that they have an even larger motive to do so?
If NBC owns Hulu, and rakes in revenue from advertisers through it, is Comcast going give fair treatment to Hulu users and Netflix users if Comcast owns NBC?
What it all comes down to is money (there's a shocker). NBC wants to kill Netflix and take a stranglehold of the streaming media market; and they have the infrastructure to do so with Hulu. Meanwhile, Comcast wants to ultimately charge different rates to consumers for their services (hence the reason why the FCC is requiring Comcast to offer a $49.99 internet service for three years - really, three years? BFD). Netflix and Hulu aren't the only sources of downloadable TV/Film on the internet. Through illegal torrent sites, Apple's iTunes, and Amazon, consumers can get similar services. Comcast knows that if they begin to charge for tiered internet (much like AT&T changed to tiered data plans for iPhone users), they can off-set their declining cable subscriber revenues with increased rates for those that are switching from cable television to streaming media use over their internet service. If Comcast can charge for tiered data plans, anyone who streams/downloads media (music, movies, etc) or plays online video games (another multi-billion dollar industry) are going to need to upgrade their data plans. The question is, in a free-trade-capitalistic market, shouldn't Comcast be allowed to do that?
Yes, but what are our other options? If Comcast sets the precedent at a [hypothetical] rate of $120/month for their basic internet service that covers all these consumers, are their competitors going to charge the same old rates they're charging now? Absolutely not. They'll charge $5, $10, or $15 less. I'd hate to put it in the same vein as gasoline, but it is. This isn't the shoe industry where if you don't want to pay $200 for a pair of Camper brand, you can settle for a $15 pair of Cherokee brand. As the industry is now, if you don't want to pay $49.99 for Comcast internet, then you're only alternative is paying $42.99 for their competitor's service; that's not a significant difference.
I could go on for a long time about how this merger is bad for the future relationship between consumers and internet rates. I could go into how offering preferential treatment to certain media companies (NBC Universal) could potentially kill any independent media companies attempting to distribute their content online. There are many reasons why this is bad. And there are many reasons this could become a "slippery slope."
The bottom line is that the internet is not something that should be monopolized to access. It wasn't created for profit, it was created for communication. Allowing NBC and Comcast to merge with such frivolous oversight is feckless. Most of us require the internet to do our professions and big business knows that. Comcast knows the internet is no longer a luxury, but a need. If you don't think the board of directors and executive officers of NBC and Comcast didn't have a party on the night of Tuesday, January 18, 2011, you're wrong.
As a parting shot, here's what you CAN do:
Write Michael.Copps@fcc.gov and thank him for being the only member of the FCC (out of five) who voted against this approval.
and/or
Write Julius.Genachowski@fcc.gov and tell him how much of a sham it is he put corporate profits over our best interests.
and/or
Contact Al Franken (US Senator from Minnesota) for being diligent about protecting the free flow of information. And ask him not to quit his fight.
and/or
Contact Barack Obama and let him know how incredibly irresponsible it is to appoint an FCC chairman who doesn't care.
No comments:
Post a Comment