by WendyBlom in Media, Politics
Posted on April 21, 2010 at 10:45 am
Last Modified on April 23, 2010 at 2:13 pm
loading…
Representative Capuano has agreed to be a sponsor of the Community Access Preservation (CAP) Act in Congress that would protect access television stations across the country. Many states have passed statewide franchising laws that have undermined established funding allocations from cable television companies, channel quality, and channel accessibility. Many stations have disappeared altogether. The CAP Act would require cable TV and phone companies to support access stations at pre-statewide franchising levels. This bill is gathering steam because transparent government, free speech, and media technology education are valued in communities across the country. Tell Rep. Capuano you appreciate his sponsorship! For more on the bill, go to http://www.alliancecm.org/cap.
loading…
Given that the Verizon franchise strategy is financed by the federal tax write off the FCC awarded Verizon in the 1990′s, it might be said that the lord giveth and the lord taketh away, long praise the FCC (or Verizon) lord!
Until we target Verizon to actually modernize their copper cable to FIOS, as their two billion dollar bonus in 1996 required, any other franchising reform is just a palliative. And as long as we let them use those funds to lobby legislatures rather than actually wire those to whom they advertise, for free – incidentally – since it’s a tax supported wire, we’re being fools and fooled.
loading...
I’ll be thanking Mike in person. But until then, a public thank you to Congressman Capuano for his support of this bill and his committment to public access television in Somerville.
This Somerville Community Access Television producer(“Greater Somerville”) thanks you!
loading...
Good idea here. But when will the city allow Verizon to come in and offer FIOS to neighborhoods that can afford it? How much is Comcast and RCN kicking back to keep Verizon out?
loading...
The city’s not prohibiting Verizon, they’re holding back themselves. They’ve redlined Boston, Cambridge and Somerville, and have ceased expanding FIOS having met their enrollment goal. And this is after the feds actually gave them a $2billion tax write off when they complained it would cost too much to convert to the very same fiber optic that is FIOS. Rather than spend that write off where they said they would, they shifted to DSL, about half the speed of cable and 20% that of FIOS, and 5% of the proposed Google gigabyte line. Neither Comcast nor RCN is kicking in anything – it is all Verizon, and that after they were publicly funded to upgrade more than a decade ago.
Oh, Xumi, you don’t know what a pleasure it gives me to know so much more about something you think you know! Thanks.
loading...
uhhhhh…. Joe, Verizon didn’t “redline” Somerville until the city stupidly said that they had to offer the same service in all areas. Which meant FIOS in those areas.
Why the heck would Verizon dig trenches and run fiber in East Somerville? Those people don’t even speak english and they certainly don’t have a pot to piss in or a window to throw it out. Verizon knows that’s a money loser, so why bother.
Let Verizon come in and offer FIOS to the areas of the city where the residents can afford it. Like Davis sq and West Somerville – and then you’ll see that 2b come into play. They’d love to do that and we should allow it.
loading...
Xumi, if you think its because of Somerville that Verizon has decided to pause in their $23billion FIOS expansion, you’re smokin better stuff than I’ve seen ever. The fact of that “pause” and that it redlined both Somerville and Boston – and several other key markets like Baltimore – has been the subject of a batch of columns in the Washington Post and DSL reports:
http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Dont-Actually-Demand-Anything-Of-Verizon-Or-You-Wont-Get-FiOS-107751
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fasterforward/2010/04/news_flash_verizon_thinks_its.html
Furthermore, it ‘taint because of Somerville’s franchise restrictions, but, rather, because the simple fact that it’s a Somerville franchise option that has caused that red line to be so bright. Verizon wants a state franchise and is holding back on wiring Boston and Somerville and Cambridge until they can get it. If there were any SMART lawyers in Somerville they’d use this as a remarkably clear opportunity to provoke an anti-trust case based on monopolistic practices. But I guess they’re all already on the Verizon payroll.
Also on that payroll was the FCC, about 15 years ago, when they supported Verizon’s claim for accelerated depreciation on their copper wire so they could afford FIOS in the first place. They took the depreciation, pocketed the $2 billion or so, and then delivered DSL. Fraud might be a reasonably inferred associated charge, along with that non-filed monopoly case.
Finally, who ever said anybody was digging trenches? They only do that on Highland Ave and around Tufts. All the rest of the city – if you haven’t noticed it – uses light poles, and usually, at least in my neighborhood, double poles. Verizon’s fighting the city over taxes, hotshot, and not just about where FIOS will go, because Verizon pretends they’re not doing anything that has any community impact, and so should not pay any taxes. Pfui. When you learn about the industry, write with some intelligence. Until then stop embarrassing yourself.
loading...
tsk..tsk…tsk… again, Joe, you’re missing the point. The issue is if a city/state decides they’re going to play hardball with corportaions then they won’t come What’s that old saying… “If you tax ‘em and bust their balls – they’ll leave”. Or in this case; won’t even bother coming.
Oh, and just to set the record straight, I am no fan of Verizon as a corporation. A very dificult company service-wise to deal with – no argument there from me. But they own a lot of that “last mile” in the streets (or on the poles) and they’re the largest telco player in the state, so it’s better to play nice with them as at least the residents can get expanded services and from those services the city/state can get some additional revenues.
Who is winning by the city/state digging in their heels? We’re not. What got accomplished by taking an antagonzing attitude with them and demanding excessive taxes and other provisions? Nothing. Now no FIOS – ever (from your articles) – and no more taxes for the state off those services. How’s that working out for us?
Does the mayor still sit/chair the task force charged with overseeing cable franchising? If so, then all I can say is “Good work, Joe, good work. Now we have no chance of ever getting FIOS.”
I wonder how many other corporations have been chased away by this mindset of chasing pennies and leaving thousands on the table? No wonder we have such a small business tax base – no businesses want to come here.
And, Joe, because I am a scholar and a gentleman I will refrain from going into the gutter and slinging insults. It’s just how I roll now.
loading...