There’s a larger problem here, too, though—one that Hiltzik gets at in an aside about how the deal is “concentrating economic power in fewer hands.” That doesn’t ever seem to be a consideration for antitrust officials. Why isn’t it?
Further Reading:
A Scalpel We Can Believe In. Obama’s antitrust regime and the proposed Comcast/NBC merger
‘See you on the other side’ - Meet Jessica Lum, a terminally ill 25-year-old who chose to spend what little time she had practicing journalism
#Realtalk: This is the best moment to be in journalism - The old stuff isn’t coming back, but that’s okay
Streams of consciousness - Millennials expect a steady diet of quick-hit, social-media-mediated bits and bytes. What does that mean for journalism?
Sticking with the truth - How ‘balanced’ coverage helped sustain the bogus claim that childhood vaccines can cause autism
An ink-stained stretch - Can Aaron Kushner save the Orange County Register—and the newspaper industry?
This is the best moment to be in journalism (25)
The WSJ editorial page hits rock bottom (19)
The New York Times told me to take this down
“If you wouldn’t mind using another publication to advertise your infringement tool, we’d appreciate it”
In AP, Rosen investigations, government makes criminals of reporters
“[A]s flagrant an assault on civil liberties as anything done by George W. Bush’s administration”
Jay Carney press briefing blues
“Reporters are increasingly skeptical about Carney’s demeanor and the veracity of some answers”
Jaron Lanier wants to build a new middle class on micropayments
A future where writers can gain wealth through a “freelance economy”
CJR's Guide to Online News Startups
Uptown Messenger – Hyperlocal news for a neighborhood in New Orleans
Who Owns What
The Business of Digital Journalism
A report from the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism
Questions and exercises for journalism students.
Comcast isn't charging Netflix it is charging a new CDN service provider (Level 3) which is sending heavily imbalanced traffic to it's network. Level 3 charges CDNs, AT&T charges CDNs, etc. CDNs, Hosters and any traffic source pays an ISP to deliver bits. If they didn't only us consumers would be paying.
Level 3 is moving to the CDN business and wants to get anti-competitive free access to send unlimited bits. Something it's CDN competitors don't have
This has nothing to do with Netflix as Level 3 wants you to believe. Level 3 charges other companies to send Netflix traffic to it's customers... What is the difference????
#1 Posted by GetUrFactsStraight, CJR on Sat 8 Jan 2011 at 12:01 AM
Actually, "the derelict condition of government regulation" has been an issue since, at least, the republic's founding: the historical tendency of govts toward self-aggrandizement, inefficiency, ineffectiveness and corruption was a case-in-point, when arguing for few and limited fed-govt roles in trade and economy. (BTW: “[C]oncentrating economic power in fewer hands” is the direct and predictable effect of anti-trust [sic: anti-competition] legislation.) Under any organization of society, regulations, deregulations, and wedge issues provide battlegrounds for individuals and groups to fight each other over equality, fairness, "The Pie," etc. Meanwhile, the central state and cronies (including regulators) invariably keep getting richer and more powerful off everyone else. As the footprint and power of the central state expand, so increase the effects of the force and fraud on the people who ostensibly are to be protected by the central govt. Here is a tepid and very thoughtful observation by Ross Douthat, on both interventionist and non-interventionist approaches to reform.
#2 Posted by Dan A., CJR on Sat 8 Jan 2011 at 03:39 AM