The questions

5. In the coming years Cable TV will face very real competition from the telephone companies for customers. Give the competitive advantages of each industry and the efforts both have made in Congress and at the FCC to deal with perceived inequities in the competitive landscape.

Comprehensive Examination Question #5
Andrea P. Fuller

I. Cable Industry

A. Competitive Advantages

1. Due to the competition from satellite companies and more recent the telephone companies (mainly AT&T and Verizon Communications), cable companies (Comcast and Time Warner Cable-the two dominant companies) have to increase their services offered to their customers.
a. According to statistics, 90% of US cable systems currently offer HD video services as of January 2008 (Anonymous, In-Stat: Increased Competition Pushes US Cable Operators to Continue Investing, Business Wire, Jan 2, 2008)

2. Cable companies have limited competitive advantages due to their competing companies offering the same services. As a result, many cable companies are exploring offering improved services to keep customers.
a. Conversion of analog to digital (If customers have cable, on analog television, they don’t have to worry about the conversion from analog to digital on February 2009).
b. Increasing spectrum that increases the capacity of the networks
c. Capacity sharing through switched digital video
d. Node splitting, which improves
e. MPEG-4 provides capacity sharing (Anonymous, US Cable-New Strategies for a Competitive World, Business Wire, April 10, 2008)

3. Cable companies are now offering bundles to customers which includes cable, internet, and land-line phones

4. Cable is targeting small and medium business in offering commercial phone services (voice and data services)
a. Comcast is investing $3 billion over the next five years
b. Time Warner Cable is investing $6-7.5 billion for commercial phone

5. Time Warner plans to cut prices of telephone services 10-15% (Jon Hemingway, New Front in Cable-Teleco War: B2B, Broadcasting and Cable, October 1, 2007)

B. FCC/Congress vs. Cable Companies.

1. 70/70 rule
a. Under the Communications Act of 1984-which gives the FCC power to regulate cable companies when they feel they are too big.
b. FCC must use the 70/70 Test: cable must pass through 70% of households, and 70% of those households must be subscribed to a cable services.
c. State Representatives including Marsh Blackburn (R-Tenn.), Edolphus Towns (D-NY) and Joe Barton (R-Texas) a bill to challenge the 70/70 Test.
a. Bill call for stripping FCC powers to reregulate the cable industry
b. Bill getting support from NCTA, Rainbow/PUSH Coalition ad America for Tax Reform (John Eggerton, Blackburn’s 70/70 Bill a Reality, Broadcasting and Cable, December 6, 2007).

2. November 2007: FCC Chairman Kevin Martin introduced a 30% percent cap on cable companies prevent large companies such as Comcast and Time Warner from growing or making acquisitions after its conclusion that cable
a. States that no company can own no more than 30% in a market
b. FCC goal of rule is to promote “diversity of information sources”
c. Cap opens cable market to independent programmers and telephone companies (Stephen Labaton, FCC Planning Rules to Open Cable Market, New York Times, November 10, 2007)
d. In 2001, the FCC tried to establish a cap for cable companies, but it was struck down by the US Court of Appeal on First Amendment grounds. (John Eggerton, FCC Releases 30% Cable-Subscriber Cap Order, Broadcasting and Cable, February 11, 2008).
e. In March 2008, Comcast sued the FCC over the 30% cap
i. Company is at 27% of 30% cap
ii. Claims that the FCC has no evidence for a horizontal cap especially with numerous competitions among other cable companies, independent programmers, phone and satellite companies.
iii. Comcast also accuses the FCC of playing favorites with telephone companies (John Eggerton, Comcast Sues FCC over 30% Cap, Broadcasting and Cable, March 13, 2008).

3. FCC End Cable Deals for Apartments
a. October 2008: FCC ban cable deals/contracts giving cable companies the right to provide services to apartments
b. AT&T and Verizon benefit the most after lobbying for the new rules.
c. Can lower cable prices
a. Keven Martin, chair of FCC: cable prices risen 93% within the last decade.
b. New competition = lower prices (Stephen Labaton, FCC Set to End Sole Cable Deals for Apartments, The New York Times, October 29, 2007).

4. States creating laws creating franchises for telephone companies
a. Cable companies filing lawsuits claiming that cable will lose revenue, damage of reputation, and unfair competition (John Eggerton, Telecos Celebrate Franchise Wins, Broadcasting and Cable, September 29, 2006).

II. Telephone Companies

A. Competitive Advantages
1. 2006: FCC passed a reform video franchised legislative reform that made it easier for telephone companies to get into video through national franchising (John Eggerton, House Passes Video Franchise Reform, Broadcasting and Cable, June 8, 2006).

2. AT&T and Verizon offer new technology that has advantage over cable
a. Both companies have IPTV services
a. Unlimited number of channels
b. 2-way interactive services (Anonymous, US Cable-New Strategies for a Competitive World, Business Wire, April 10, 2008)
c. AT&T offers U-Verse in limited areas
i. Features includes 300+ channels, high-speed internet, phone services, DVR specialties, streaming live video from cell phone to tv, and games
ii. Criticism: U-Verse only targets affluent and avoid minority, low-income (Rick Barrett, AT&T U-Verse access debated: City’s low-income areas often lack cable alternative, McClatchy-Tribune Business News, December 11, 2007).
d. Verizon offers FiOS TV

3. Incentives
a. Verizon conducts Retention-Marketing
a. Provide incentives for their current customers for not switching to another cable company.
i. FCC refuse to intervene after cable companies pressured them to stop stating Verizon is violating law (John Eggerton, FCC Won’t Stop Verizon Communications’ Retention-Marketing Effort, Broadcasting and Cable, April 1, 2008 )
ii. Also offer incentives for new customers
1. Offered 19-inch HD TVs, camcorders and camcorders in December 2007
a. Cable companies only relied, promotional prices and good services (Toni Whitt, Cable war could be proving ground; Analysts watch Verizon’s use of incentives in effort to entice local consumers, Sarasota Herald Tribune, December 20, 2007)
b. Offering bundles (phone, cable, internet)

4. States are recognizing phone companies as video providers, and granting them licenses to compete with cable companies

B. FCC/Congress vs. Telephone Companies
1. One problem that telephone companies may endure is still being recognized by states as video service providers such as in November 2007 it was reported that AT&T spent $11.2 million lobbying for a franchise bill in TN.
a. Most money spent on public persuasion, and advertising between October 1, 2006 to September 2007.
b. Cable companies are claiming AT&T is trying to get an unfair advantage and cable will continue to fight (Andy Sher, AT&T, cable fight nears $11 million, McClatchy-Tribune Business News, November 20, 2008).

2. FCC bans phone deals for apartments
a. Unfair competitive advantage
b. Hurts consumers
a. Prevents residents from purchasing bundled services

Questions

#7

I.                   Obesity

a.       What contributes to childhood obesity

                                                              i.      Media influence on eating habits

1.      Product Placement

2.      Commercials (Preoperational Stage- not being able to tell the difference between a commercial and the program; don’t understand the advertiser’s intent)

3.      Endorsements (e.g. Spongebob cereal)

                                                            ii.      Eating between meals, convenience meals

                                                          iii.      Sedentary lifestyle (being lazy)

                                                          iv.      Genetics

                                                            v.      Parenting methods

II.                Findings Based On Existing Legislation

a.       Bumpers- “After these messages…”

b.      Limits on commercial times- 10.5 min/hr (wknd) and 12 min/hr (wkdy)

c.       A character from a program cannot advertise their product (e.g. Spongebob cereal) during their program(i.e. in-program host selling).

d.      Cannot advertise websites if they encourage children to buy products.

III.             Solutions to Parents

a.       After educating yourself, educate children about healthy foods.

b.      Practice healthy eating habits as a family at a dining table, and buy healthy foods

c.       Set time limits on television viewing.

d.      Discourage eating while watching television.

e.       Encourage physical activities.

IV.             Assurances to Policymakers

a.       Keeping advertisers in mind, regulate “junk food” advertising on children’s television; regulations based on time of day- less in the afternoon when pre-school aged children are home.

b.      Balance out good/bad food advertisements. Have more outside activity advertisements.

c.       We can’t actually regulate the amount of television a person watches – that’s up to the parents to do

V.                Violence

a.       Definitions

                                                              i.      Cartoon- unrealistic- no consequences

                                                            ii.      Realistic- real consequences

b. Cartoon violence has less consequences so it’s more effective

VI.             Causes of Aggressive Behavior

a.       Media violence (all inclusive- video games, television, comics, etc.)

b.      Genetics

c.       Parental guidance/upbringing

d.      Education

e.       Socioeconomic status

f.       Religion

VII.          Regulations

a.       There are currently no regulations that focus specifically on violence.

b.      The V-Chip and the ratings systems (e.g. Y7, MA) collectively include violence in something they monitor; however, it is a bi-product of monitoring sex on television.

VIII.       Parental Solutions

a.       Educate children about violence and its effects

b.      Regulate viewing of violence w/o relying solely on the V-Chip and ratings system.

c.       Discourage violence in the home and elsewhere.

IX.             Assuring Policymakers

a.       V-Chip in all televisions (it was not implemented in televisions that were smaller than 13in)

b.      Internet television must be regulated

c.       Air PSA’s for non-violence by cartoon characters to increase effectiveness

d.      Television on other platforms should include ratings

e.       Have the FCC request the production companies of every television show submit a list of what types of violence is typical on their shows.

                                                              i.      The lists will go on a website that is regularly updated.

                                                            ii.      PSA’s and listings on “parental discretion advised” screens will promote the list and its website, informing parents of its existence

X.                Sound Bite for the next news cycle:

“With the joint efforts of our nation’s parents, advertisers, broadcasters, and cable companies, we will increase awareness of obesity and aggression caused by television through education and cooperative regulation.”

-Contributed by Brian, Kelly, Alex C., and Hakan-

looks like the marshmallow man had kids

Well this is it, the all important, all-consuming election of the century. Just everybody vote in your own best interest and we should be fine

This argument comes from the conflicting claims to authority in the city.

The politician’s job is to create the regime that will best promote the good life within the city.

In order to do this he must give the authority of the city to the ruler or rulers that would best promote virtue within the citizens.

However all of the competing claims to authority over the city are incomplete in the truth of their claim. 

As a result the politician must use distributive justice and divide the city between the groups based on each individual’s contribution to the good life of the city.  Those who contribute the most to the good life should get authority over the city in proportion to their contribution.  Thus equality and justice are achieved.

The politician must use the idea of distributive justice when deciding who is to have authority over the city.   

1. The city comes into existence for the sake of the good life this is why none of them are right in their claims about justice.

Aristotle contends that the promotion of virtue in the citizens of a city is the nature of political life and that distributive justice within the city is the only way to attain this end.    

1. Human nature is inherently connected to the political association and this connection makes the promotion of virtue the end of politics.

1. It is the concern of the politician to create a regime that best promotes virtue in its citizens, for this reason distributive justice is necessary to combine the conflicting claims of the citizens.

Hardness

The characteristics of a Totalitarian system that make it possible for large groups of people to be first dehumanized and consequently slaughtered are the ones that replace a persons individual morality with the state’s. The first thing to note is how much the state could influence the individual’s personal ideas and beliefs. Belief in Stalin and the ideal communist society gave one the excuse that all these atrocities were for the greater good. This, and the fact that going against the grain was likely to get someone killed are the more superficial influences on the average person. Rational self-interest and belief in the communist system may explain why people asked to commit horrible acts did so, but does not explain why so many of the people committing these acts were almost unaffected by them. “This man who was responsible for one of the most devastating evils in the history of humanity stood before the court a profoundly mediocre, indeed common, human being” (Todorov p.124). Such is the case of Stalin’s close advisor whose wife was killed by Stalin while he said nothing and did nothing. Faith in the party and in its leaders does not by itself lead to the kind of mass abandonment of morality that ended in genocide during the Nazi and Soviet regimes.

The large-scale dehumanization under these regimes was made possible largely from the average person’s own morality being replaced by the morality of the state. The individual’s ideas about murder, betrayal, and sympathy are replaced by the values of the ruling party through fear of the enemy of the state and most importantly, a war mentality. The totalitarian view is obsessed with defending itself against the enemy, be it an internal or external one. The idea that “The obligation to destroy an internal enemy of the state, Eicke said, is in no way different from the obligation to kill your adversary on the battlefield” (Todorov p.127) makes the people of the state into soldiers and thus promotes the betrayal of anyone not totally on board with the system. This also erases any sympathy for the enemy, even if the enemy is in this case, a neighbor.

These “enemies” were further dehumanized by their confinement and treatment by the state, making it even easier for the individual to kill them or just turn a blind eye. One prominent moral idea that the state tried to eradicate from public consciousness was sympathy for the victims. This was done by promoting hardness and indifference through jokes about murder and cold pragmatic language about death, “Addressee relocated to the cemetery” (Glover p.259). The victims or what the state would probably call traitors were not just made into animals, but extremely dangerous ones. They were dangerous to the cause of attaining of the perfect communist society and they were most dangerous to anyone who helped them or even knew about them. Rational self-interest was what let people pretend not to see but it was the strongly imposed values of the state and the idea that the state was infallible that allowed people to turn a blind eye to the nature of their own actions.

I don’t advocate the dissolving of our government.  The government should, however, remember that the people have the option.

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. –That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

                                Limited Protection       

Months after Hurricane Katrina hit the gulf coast of the United States, almost every aspect of Federal aid and assistance is still being debated on both the local and federal level.  There is, however, a sense of priority with respect to aid in that the victims are considered first, the levees second, and the reconstruction of the city third.  Residents of New Orleans certainly want the city to be restored to its former state but unfortunately the budget for aid and reconstruction may not allow for such an optimistic task.  The urban planners in charge of restoring the city have found it prudent to strengthen the parts of the city least likely to be damaged in the event of another storm (Allen et. al).  The people of New Orleans might find that reconstruction will be benificial with regards to long term protection and stability if the low lying areas of the city are not rebuilt and efforts are concentrated towards protection for the parts of the city that can be protected.     The first thing to try and understand is the categories of hurricanes and also their frequency.  This is important because while it is unlikely for another Hurricane like Katrina to hit New Orleans in the near future, it is inevitable another will hit that area again.  Since the frequency, path, and intensity of a hurricane cannot be predicted, we have to rely on global trends in past years. Category 5 hurricanes like Katrina are defined as systems featuring winds of 156 mph or more and category 3 hurricanes with winds of 100 mph or less.  Studies have also shown that not only has the total number of hurricane worldwide increased by nearly one hundred percent in the last thirty five years, the number of category 4 and 5 hurricanes has increased as a percentage of the total number of hurricanes (Ascribe 2).  The current plan for restoration of the levees will enable them to withstand a category 3 hurricane or smaller by the start of next hurricane season. Donald Powell, Director of gulf coast rebuilding stated that “once this work is done, the city will still have some flooding but that it will be manageable”. (qtd in Kafanov).  While allowing for budget considerations, many politicians took issue with this plan for category three protections. Rep. Al Green (D-Texas) responded that “studies have already been done to indicate that we need to rebuild these levees to a stronger standard that category three. Category three is asking for trouble.” (qtd in Kafanov).  The strength of the levees is not, however, the only impediment to sufficient long term protection.     The disappearance of natural hurricane protection such as wetlands and barrier islands is not just a concern for environmentalists anymore. An illustrative example of this is a stretch of marshland the size of Rhode Island off the coast of Louisiana that has receded into the ocean within the last fifty years (Tidwell 2).  These wetlands around the mouth of the Mississippi were once created and maintained by the sediment coming out of the river. As New Orleans and other cities along the river grew, the sediment was drastically reduced and the marshes eroded.  The idea is that the wetland and the levees work to supplement each other. Professor van Heerden of LSU and director of the University’s hurricane center found an important piece of evidence in that “Where you had wetland, the levees were not eroded and where you did not have wetlands, the levees were annihilated.” (qtd. in Schwartz).  This shows a clear correlation between the man made protection and the disappearing natural barriers, further decreasing the possible stability of the city.     New Orleans is an important city not only for its residents who created and embrace the unique culture.  The city is also economically important as a major port at the end of the Mississippi.  Grain, oil, and natural gas are just a few of the key exports from the port and are necessary not only for the economy of the city, but for the country as a whole.  The official position of The American Planning Association, therefore is that New Orleans should be rebuilt to insure its position as an economic trade power (Tidwell 4).  In order to be restored as a trade center, there has to be a population to support it, as well as a stable place for residents to live.     A commission headed by the mayor of New Orleans has proposed a compromise “between those who had argued for rebuilding to be allowed anywhere in the city and those who wanted the most flood prone areas abandoned.” (Ward 2).  The proposal is that for the communities where there is very little repopulation, an appointed redevelopment agency will buy condemned properties.  This is a reasonable idea because it will indirectly prevent people from moving back into the low-lying areas. It is hard to imagine that any private real estate companies will invest in the ninth ward.  Despite this projected outcome of incentive based population redistribution, many urban planners still consider it irresponsible to allow people to rebuild anywhere they have the population to support it (Ward 3). With evidence showing that the city can not be adequately protected, there is just cause for this accusation of irresponsibility.     One of the largest problems with restoring the city is how to present the environmental and engineering evidence to the residents without prompting defensive and counterproductive responses.  Without considering the costs, most residents feel that “strong protection is the linchpin that everything else depends on”, said Joe Veninata, the owner of a shopping center and rental homes in the Gentilly neighborhood, “for people to come to the city and invest, for the people to feel secure.” (Schwartz 1).  The cost of upgrading the protection system to a category 5 is by no means a agreed upon figure, but one that is certainly out of reach in the near future.     Unfortunately, due to the botched response to the disaster by the Federal Government, the private sector has clashed with beaurocracy continuously, wasting time and resources debating various conflicting approaches to reconstruction. These debates serve to confuse the local population because of the constant emotional appeals.  The environmental evidence that suggests low lying areas should not be reconstructed is often refuted by the emotional attachment of the victims.     There is no question that however much New Orleans repopulates, the number of residents will be far smaller and the city demographic completely different.  The city has been steadily losing residents for 45 years and because the city had an inordinate amount of people living at or below the poverty line, a significant part of the population  will not be able to return, even if they wanted to (Moran 1). There is an almost universal consensus that the post Katrina population will depend on the level of protection for the city as well as the perceived long term stability of the region. Palazzo Simmons, a survivor and former resident of the ninth ward lamented, “I was lucky to get out this time and they can’t even tell me they gonna make things better…my family has been here for generations but it’s the next generation I’m worried about.”(Pround).     It is easy to emphasize and understand the desire to fully restore New Orleans because at the end of the day most of us just want to return home and it’s hard to imagine your home was gone.  My family has lived in Boston since the founding of the city and if a large hurricane hit Boston, we would be mostly under water east of Kenmore Square.  It is also very important that people are optimistic about rebuilding the city due to its unique and important cultural heritage (Mandel 1).  Being rational, particularly with a limited budget, is also necessary for a successful restoration.  The people of New Orleans will eventually make the major decisions concerning which parts of the city are to be rebuilt and will err on the side of caution if the practical evidence with regards to reconstruction and regional stability is properly presented.                                                                                         Works Cited  Allen, Greg; Reporter. Anchors Siegel, Robert & Norris, Michael. “All Things Considered: Plan Allows Controversial Rebuilding in New Orleans.” National Public Radio. Jan 10, 2006 8 am EST. Lexis-Nexis Academic. Boston College, O’Neill Lib. 21 March 2006 <Http://web.Lexis-Nexis.com> Ascribe Inc. “Hurricanes are getting stronger, study says.” Ascribe Newswire. Sept 12, 2005.  Lexis-Nexis Academic. Boston College, O’Neill Lib. 19 March 2006 <Http://web.Lexis-Nexis.com>   Donze, Frank & Schleifstein, Mark. “Added Protection.” Times-Picayune (New Orleans). Dec 7, 2005. National; Pg.1. Lexis-Nexis Academic. Boston College, O’Neill Lib. 19 March 2006 <Http://web.Lexis-Nexis.com> Kafanov, Lucy. “GULF RECOVERY: House panel calls for stronger levee protections.” Environment and Energy Daily. March 10, 2006. Spotlight Vol. 10 No. 9. Lexis-Nexis Academic. Boston College, O’Neill Lib. 19 March 2006 <Http://web.Lexis-Nexis.com> Mandel, Charles. “Rebuilding New Orleans: Economy and heritage favour city’s renewal; some say it’s too risky.” Times Colonist. Sept 24, 2005. Pg. E12. Lexis-Nexis Academic. Boston College, O’Neill Lib. 20 March 2006 <Http://web.Lexis-Nexis.com> Moran, Kate. “Shrinking City; No one disputes that Katrina will reduce the population of New Orleans area, but just how much is unclear.” Times-Picayune (New Orleans). Oct 23, 2005. Headline. Lexis-Nexis Academic. Boston College, O’Neill Lib. 19 March 2006 <Http://web.Lexis-Nexis.com> Pround, Geoffry; Executive Producer. “Modern Marvels: Engineering disasters: New Orleans.” Modern Marvels. The History Channel. General Electric. Org. air date Feb 28, 2006.  Schwartz, John. “Category 5: Levees are piece of 32 billion pie.” The New York Times Late Edition. Nov 29, 2005. Sec. A; Column 3; National Desk; Pg. 1. Lexis-Nexis Academic. Boston College, O’Neill Lib. 15 March 2006 <Http://web.Lexis-Nexis.com> Schwartz, John & Revkin, Andrew. “Levee construction will restore, but not improve, defenses in New Orleans.” The New York Times. Sept 30, 2005. Sec A; Column 1; National Desk; Pg.22. Lexis-Nexis Academic. Boston College, O’Neill Lib. 15 March 2006 <Http://web.Lexis-Nexis.com> Tidwell, Mike. “It’s time to abandon New Orleans; If the Bush administration continues to ignore the major fixes that are needed, it would be homicidal to rebuild the city.” Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (Pennsylvania). Dec 14, 2005. Editorial; Pg. B-7. Lexis-Nexis Academic. Boston College, O’Neill Lib. 19 March 2006 <Http://web.Lexis-Nexis.com> Tidwell, Mike. “Indifference to marsh is kiss of death.” Times-Picayune (New Orleans). Dec 9, 2005. Metro-Editorial; Pg. 7. Lexis-Nexis Academic. Boston College, O’Neill Lib. 16 March 2006 <Http://web.Lexis-Nexis.com> Ward, Andrew. “New Orleans panel suggests demolition for no-hope areas.” Financial Times (London, England). Jan 12, 2006. The Americas; Pg. 11.