roundtable: Re: universal service and non profit amendments to cable-telco legislation

roundtable: Re: universal service and non profit amendments to cable/telco legislation

Re: universal service and non profit amendments to cable/telco legislation

James Love (love@Essential.ORG)
Fri, 25 Mar 1994 08:56:19 -0500 (EST) 

Date: Fri, 25 Mar 1994 08:56:19 -0500 (EST)
From: James Love <love@Essential.ORG>
Subject: Re: universal service and non profit amendments to cable/telco legislation 
To: roundtable@cni.org
In-Reply-To: <9403232053.AA21517@austen.rand.org>
Message-Id: <Pine.3.85.9403250819.C23649-0100000@essential>

On Thu, 24 Mar 1994, Warren Walker wrote:
> The system used in the Netherlands may sound good on paper, but may not
> produce the results you envision.  The following is some information 
> from a Dutchman that explains how the system has turned out in practice.

     There are, of course, several differences between the US and the 
Netherlands, which are important.  The most important point is that in 
the Netherlands these "movements" controlled all the tv and radio time, 
and commerical broadcasters were not given licenses.  The so called 
non-commercial broadcasters showed much of the commercial programming 
that was available in the Netherlands.  In recent years there has been a 
movement toward more privatization in the Netherlands (and elsewhere in 
Europe).  However, are principally interested in the Netherlands model as 
a way of allocating resources for non-commercial information services, 
rather than a model of how to allocate the entire bandwidth.  

    The current debate in Washington over the non-commerical allocation 
is bogging down precisely on the point of who will decide (if anyone), 
how the non-commerical resources are allocated.  There are not that many 
models (PBS, cable access, and this), and it will be important for people 
to come to grips with this difficult issue.

 - jamie

----------------------------------------------------------------------
James Love, Taxpayer Assets Project; internet:  love@essential.org
P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036; v. 202/387-8030; f. 202/234-5176
12 Church Road, Ardmore, PA 19003; v. 215/658-0880; f. 215/649-4066
----------------------------------------------------------------------

> -----------------------------------
> 
> 
> Your message provides an interesting- but only partly realistic -
> interpretation of our public broadcasting system. Actually, the 
> line of difference between the system and a commercial system 
> gets thinner and thinner: Our 'omroepen' have more or less grown 
> into semi-commercial organisations which attempt to maintain or 
> enlarge their share of time on the networks by programming 
> popular series and shows, selling fancy program guides coupled to 
> membership, etc. Of course, a few, notably the most Christian 
> one, keep using ample TV and radio time for preaching the 
> message, but most others compete on program styles rather than 
> idealistic ideas.
> 
> Wil Thissen <Thissen@sepa.tudelft.nl>

[CNI Home Page]