Introduction
Spectrum as Ocean
Current spectrum
policy is predicated on the technical limitations of traditional analog
broadcast signals, argues Mark Cooper, director
of research for the Consumer Federation
of America . Signal interference through primitive
analog technologies created the need to grant exclusive licenses
for airwaves and enforced the idea that there was a scarcity of spectrum.
This in turn has driven up the market value of the spectrum, something
Cooper believes has had a devastating effect on the constitutional rights
inherent in the public airwaves. “The airwaves are not an asset, and
speech is not a commodity,” he says.
You have to get
that 20th century concept out of your heads and adopt a 21st century
concept, or maybe an 18th century concept, which is where our Constitution
was born.
With digital technology,
the space of spectrum expands tremendously, if not infinitely as some
technologists believe. Cooper likens spectrum to the ocean because it
creates an image of a vast commons
that is limited much more by the technologies we use to navigate it
than by the water itself. Spectrum is like an ocean, only it's
a lot bigger than the ocean. And actually technology can make it bigger
and bigger and bigger, says Cooper. This is one of the reasons
Cooper believes exclusive licenses are unfair, if not unconstitutional.
The policy of granting exclusive licenses has led to the notion of spectrum
as property, a kind of de facto ownership of licensed space. Cooper
finds this idea antithetical to what spectrum actually is:
"Think
about it. NBC never invested in spectrum, they simply got the opportunity
to use it, and they invested in a series of transmitters and supported
the purchase of receivers. They never did anything to add value to the
spectrum itself. They made their own private investments. So that is
absolutely critical to remember."
One
of the more controversial aspects of spectrum policy is how to protect
public interest
obligations, a vague set of
FCC mandates that require broadcasters to air programming that serves
the public. Advocates straddle the fence on whether public interest obligations
should be strengthened or whether they have become obsolete. Cooper believes
that once the potential of spectrum is better utilized by digital technologies,
exclusive licenses will be unconstitutional and public interest airwaves
will be abundantly available. In the meantime, the broadcasters owe the
public more than they have offered. Going back to the ocean analogy, Cooper
puts it like this:
"Over
the past 75 years, the fact that they had these huge exclusive lanes
enabled them to build aircraft carriers with immense amounts of firepower
with which to assault public opinion."
The
important thing to remember is that we are in a media transition that
will have powerful impact on the public. Cooper draws a comparison to
radio and television, which each took about 30 years to gain dominance
in the media. With the Internet only 10 years old, its explosive growth
is only the beginning. But policies are falling into place and need
to be confronted now. Cooper believes the broadcasters are faltering
on how to monetize all the digital channels that have become available.
They want to keep [the channels], and they don't know how to make
money. And they keep begging for different ways to do it.
But even more important than the failures of the broadcasters is the
potential of Wi-Fi, which makes use of what was called the junk bands
that nobody wanted.
"Here
is an unlicensed
space, a pure commons,
that has proven exactly the fact that we don't need centralized investment
or control to exploit the ocean. We simply need to liberate people to
actually use it by making the investment that they want and need to
speak. And that scares the heck out of the people who want to propertize
it. They simply can't deal with the fact that the best example of a
commons is right under their nose."
Community Wireless & Community Building
Broadband Access & Urban Redevelopment
Randal Pinkett is president and CEO of BCT Partners,
a New Jersey-based development consulting firm that specializes in the
use of technology in low-income and underserved communities. Exciting
opportunities have developed in recent years through policies in 29 states
and the District of Columbia that either require broadband infrastructure
as a part of low-income housing development or provide public incentives
for developers to include broadband infrastructure in publicly funded
housing. The convergence of economics and policy, Pinkett says, “opens
up an entirely new realm of opportunity when we think about affordable
housing.”
Camfield
Estates, a 102-unit low-income housing development in Roxbury, Massachusetts,that
enhance community resources. Providing Camfield residents with computers,
computer training, and wireless
netwoork broadband, Pinkett's organization has had a positive impact
on numerous fronts. Wireless infrastructures have become inexpensive alternatives
to the costly infrastructure of cable and telephone wiring. For low-income
communities, wireless often allows residents online access for free. In
Camfield Estates, one project involved mapping community resources and
helping residents to connect to and share resources. Computer training
provides practical skills that translate into job skills, and now Camfield
has a Cisco Network Academy.
For Pinkett, it's essential to connect the benefits of technology to literacy,
employment, and social programs of all kinds:
"Good community
wireless projects, or maybe even good community technology projects
nowadays, unlike the nineties, do not define themselves that way.
They define themselves as health programs, as workforce development
programs, etc., and the technology is a tool to lead to those outcomes.
That wasn't the case 10 years ago."
Tribal Digital Village
Reconnecting Tribes in Southern California
For over a century, the three original Native American tribes of San
Diego County have been splintered among 18 reservations, dividing family
lines, friendships, and cultures. Since 2001, the county's tribal communities
have been reconnecting through the Southern California Tribal Digital Village
a high-speed wireless
Internet network. It is an ambitious project, says Matthew
Rantanen, the Tribal Digital Village's director of technology and
Web services:
"We
support 65 community buildings on 18 different reservations, and 14
tribal administration buildings are included in that. What that
does for the tribal administrations is it allows them to reconnect the
three original tribes that were in San Diego County as they were prior
to the reservation movement."
Built under the aegis of the Southern
California Tribal Chairmen's Association, a nonprofit consortium
of reservation leaders, the Tribal Digital Village was launched with
a $5 million grant from Hewlett-Packard
with technology support from the University
of California, San Diego. Designed, owned, and operated by the sovereign
nations, the Tribal Digital Village is equal parts community organizing
and technology infrastructure. Relay towers and backbone nodes shoot
wireless signals from point to point within and among the reservations.
And because the network was built on tribal land, Rantanen explains,
the cost is low. There are no city or county building codes to contend
with, and no one has to pay rent for placing a node on a relay tower.
When the
project was starting up, the tribes' young people conducted the site
surveys, heading out into the mountains with global positioning units
and topographical maps to find the best places to site relay towers.
Later, they learned to program and manage Web sites. We're taking
the youth into this because we know that the youth is our future,
says Rantanen.
There's a technology
gap. So when the Indian kid goes home to do his report and he comes
back to school and it's handwritten and there's a picture taped to it,
versus high technology, access to Internet, all the resources you can
get, all the photos you can get, and printed out on nice color printers.
We had to fix that. We had to bring those two things together. Where
everybody else had this benefit, these kids need this benefit.
Residents have discovered
numerous resources, using the Internet to apply for federal grants,
to petition the Environmental Protection Agency against the long history
of pollution from the outside, and to learn fading tribal languages
have found new life as the language preservation movement has gone online.
Network training and educational resources are preparing residents for
high-paying jobs. Even more essential, the network provides basic phone
service where utilities have failed to provide it. “For the tribal communities,
it allows them to take control of their futures and not be dependent
on what does or does not exist for rural underserved communities.” It's
a model that is having worldwide impact, says Rantanen:
"The U.S.
FCC took the example
of Tribal Digital Village to the Geneva
Wireless Summit a few years ago and used that to say, 'Keep unlicensed
spectrum in the world because this is what you can do with it.'
And the African vote swung the world decision, and they changed their
vote because it was very similar situations, tribal situations, where
people had been separated, where they wanted to reopen lines of communication.
And there was unlicensed spectrum at the world level using a local
example from little southern California.
Taking Back the Airwaves
From
Community Radio to Community Wireless
Prometheus Radio Project has
made a name for itself over the past decade as an FCC gadfly and a leading
advocate of low power FM
(LPFM) community radio. In the late 1990s, Prometheus Radio emerged from
the pirate radio
movement - spectrum activists setting up LPFM stations without a broadcast
license. These acts of civil disobedience, combined with vigorous grassroots
activism, persuaded the FCC to extend broadcast
licenses to over 400 low power FM stations around the country - although
not in urban areas. Since the FCC policy victory in 2000, Prometheus Radio
has focused on radio barnraisings - organizing communities,
training volunteers, and setting up stations in just three days.
Prometheus is now applying its barnraising model to community broadband
projects. We've learned over the years that barnraisings work,
explains Hannah Sassaman , Prometheus Radio's program director. They are
able to develop long-term successful support locally for a station,
and they create a hotbed of policy organizers.
Prometheus Radio
recently began working with residents in North Lawndale, a poor, largely
African-American community in Chicago. The Center
for Neighborhood Technology (CNT), a local nonprofit, had established
a pilot network that provided 20 families with high-speed Internet.
In June 2004, a barnraising put up 50 repeater nodes, creating a mesh
network and bringing access to the entire community. Sassaman
points out the obstacles communities like North Lawndale face, and the
desire to overcome them:
"Over 55%
of the community's residents have interacted in some way with the
criminal justice system. There's high unemployment, and 45% of the
households are below the poverty line. And SBC, the local incumbent
broadband community provider for things like DSL, is charging incredibly
high prices to families and businesses that want to get online. And
so members of this community in conversations with the Center for
Neighborhood Technology determined that they wanted to build a community
Internet network that they could control, that would benefit them."
The network is helping
to solve community problems, create opportunity, and bring residents
together. For instance, when the City of Chicago shut down bus lines
that served North Lawndale, college and high school students were left
without reliable transportation. Lacking broadband connections, they
faced arduous commutes to get online. Now they have instant access.
And through the Crib
Collective and Street Level
Youth Media - both local nonprofits - young people are creating
music, local news, and other creative content, which is distributed
over the Internet. Though a partnership with the North Lawndale Employment
Network, a nonprofit that provides job training and placement for ex-offenders,
residents are trained to build and troubleshoot the network. Another
nonprofit will use the Internet to support childcare and GED classes.
North Lawndale's
community wireless network also has important policy implications. CNT
and the folks in North Lawndale have already been incredibly successful
in using their community model to influence the City of Chicago as it
chooses and plans to pursue wireless, Sassaman emphasizes. Residents
have been active in meeting with officials, and the city has agreed
to a task force to explore the issue more fully. It is this bottom-up
approach to wireless policy and community development that can impact
national policy. If you have a big outpouring of energy with a
lot of community members coming in, and a big press push, and a lot
of policy folks coming down, it can really raise the momentum level,
Sassaman says.
"Because
digital broadcasting
is the future, we want to work with communities who want to get onto
this spectrum now, so when corporations try to claim it there's someone
already there. We want to squat this spectrum, and when government
tries to regulate it, there will be incredibly just cause in regulating
in favor of us, in favor of our communities."
Municipal Broadband
San Francisco's
Wireless Future
When San
Francisco's Public Utilities Commission held open hearings on a
proposal for municipal
broadband service, Commissioner Adam Werbach
received an e-mail leak from a local business group
with the headline, Socialists Seize San Francisco. But Werbach,
the former executive director of the Sierra
Club and Common
Assets Defense Fund, worried about embarrassing the mayor, soon
realized the commission was on the right track. As soon as people
start over-dramatizing what we're doing here - talking about building
a municipal broadband network, getting the public sector to expand rather
than contract - they'll begin to lose.
The hearing proved
the point. When a representative from the Chamber of Commerce tried
to convince the commission that a city-run wireless system was bad for
business, a member of the commission asked how many of those businesses
actually provide high-speed Internet services. Well, two,
came the answer. And how many of them would benefit from free
or low-cost wireless? the commissioner asked. Well, we have
18,000 members, she replied. The commissioner continued, Then
maybe its time to ask them what they think. The plan for municipal
wireless broadband was approved, a project that ensures equal access,
which is currently a problem, says Werbach.
"In San Francisco
you cannot get a high-speed wireless connection in Bay Shore or Hunters
Point, the largely African-American neighborhoods in the city.
This will make that happen first."
Werbach expects
the incumbent Internet
providers to launch a vigorous campaign to undercut the plan and
points to lessons learned in the environmental movement. First,
the dire rhetoric of economic ruin reveals the fundamental weakness
of the commercial Internet providers.
"If it's
true that they are overreaching, it is time now to think big and start
small. Think globally; act locally. It's these individual projects
all over the place that are actually just going to take the market."
Second, municipal
wireless service needs to be equal to or better than that provided by
the private sector. Can the public sector do as well or better
as the private sector? We cannot be an inferior choice. And third,
incumbent providers have already convinced 14 states to pass laws limiting
municipal broadband and will push similar laws elsewhere.
"If we win,
and if we continue moving forward, it will be extraordinary. If we
slow or falter right now, the opportunities that present themselves
today will be forever foreclosed."
Creating Spectrum Policy
The Moment
Is Now
Harold Feld is associate director of the public interest law firm
Media Access
Project.
His mantra for this seemingly complex issue is simple: Don't get bogged
down in the details. This is how the incumbents win, because they
make this look like it's so complicated and it's such a tough problem,
and we get divided and we start looking at different solutions.
For Feld, the first
challenge is to get people to care about this issue. Freeing up spectrum
would unleash a new wave of technology innovation in consumer electronics
and software. The Intel guys go in and make this case. Microsoft
makes this case, Feld says. For me, it comes down to good
jobs at good wages. That's what I always say when people [in corporate
circles] ask me what this is about. Feld argues that legislators
and potential corporate allies need an economic angle, though he believes
social justice and First Amendment empowerment is at the core of spectrum
policy:
"Where people
can directly speak through the airwaves, they should be allowed to
do so. The fact that it has spin-offs for economic development, the
fact that it has spin-offs for civic engagement and other things are
also part and parcel of the promise of free speech."
One hotly contested
area is spectrum
auctions, where airwave licenses are sold by the federal government
with the idea that the revenue generated will go back to the public.
Feld adamantly opposes them. Spectrum auctions are the crack cocaine
of public policy, he says. Do not take a hit on that pipe.
You get one hit of those revenues and you sell your future for a bunch
of magic beans. Putting 5% of auction revenues into a public interest
media trust fund is poor compensation for the loss of access. This
is not a fairy tale and the bean pod doesn't grow up to a golden goose
in the sky, he continued. You're left with a bunch of pea
plants and the rest of these guys are living off the rest of the farm.
On a strategic level,
Feld argues that advocates need facts and stories from local communities:
"Policy is
made by human beings, another one of my big aphorisms. People respond
to these stories. They respond to the facts on the ground.
Congress responds to their constituents. And no matter how big
your war chest is, every congressman knows [that] at the end of the
day he needs votes."
There is also a
tremendous need for studies and intellectual support - engineers to
address technical issues, lawyers to file policy briefs, sociologists
to track the impact of community wireless. When we're right, we
should say it, and we should say it in the most effective way possible,
Feld says. He
believes this is an urgent battle. He stresses that the United States
is influencing policies throughout the world.
"The major
battles are going to be fought in the next five years. Everything
after that is quibbling about the details. If we lose, our descendants
will not forgive us and they will be right."
Shaping the Wireless Future
Managing the Transition to Digital Television
The Telecommunications
Act of 1996 gave television broadcasters 10 years to convert to
digital television with the promise that 18 prime analog channels would
be offered to the public. Ensuring that these new public channels are
well utilized is an enormous challenge. The risk is that they,
too, could become privatized. Michael Calabrese,
vice president of the progressive think tank the New America Foundation
and director of their
Spectrum Policy Program, says this is a major battle:
The essential and
still ongoing struggle has been to stop the effort by the current FCC
to effectively strip the word public from airwaves, to convert
temporary licenses into permanent private property, ownership of spectrum.
The New America Foundation has been a leading force in the Digital
Future Initiative, an effort to capture some of the revenues from
spectrum auctions - a step many advocates abhor, but which Calabrese
sees as inevitable - and use them to support noncommercial media. Congress
is currently considering a bill that would earmark at least $1 billion
in spectrum revenue for a consumer assistance fund to pay for digital-to-analog
converter boxes for the 15 million households that still rely on analog
broadcasts. We want to expand this consumer converter fund
to create a trust to help finance the multicast future of public broadcasting
and noncommercial content more generally, Calabrese says.
Another goal is
to roll back exclusive licensing so spectrum can be reallocated to community
wireless and affordable broadband. The New America Foundation would
like to see a dedicated band for unlicensed access once channels 52
to 69 are returned. (Former FCC Chairman Michael Powell already agreed
to a proposal that would open empty channels below 52 to unlicensed
access.) Calabrese sees phenomenal potential with the new capacity and
interactivity of pubic digital channels, far beyond television broadcast:
"Free and
open access to wireless
networks will create platforms for individual expression, creativity,
and political discourse, every bit as much as the unregulated printing
presses did in the era of Tom Paine and Ben Franklin. It will
be that radical a change. And open access community wireless
networks will be the essential check and balance that prevents the
owners of the fiber pipes from controlling the distribution of content
and turning potentially creative netizens into consumers of one-way
advotainment."
New Platforms for Independent Media
Supporting Public Interest Content
Jeff Chester , executive director of
the Center for
Digital Democracy, sees an unprecedented opportunity to reinvent
public interest media through the numerous digital systems - cable,
fiber optic networks, and wireless broadband -- that are emerging. Chester
believes emerging digital platforms have the potential to bring new
revenues to public interest content providers. Not only can they
make a living, which is a good thing, but more importantly we'll be
able to create more content. But there are challenges.
Corporations have invested billions of dollars to deliver individually
tailored interactive content to consumers, such as software that analyzes
consumer purchases on Amazon.com and uses the data to recommend other
products. Interactive capability allows for one-to-one marketing. Now
what's going to fill up most of this capacity, from a [commercial] basis,
is what I call digital drek, he says. Digital
television is designed to facilitate the needs of advertisers
and marketers to more effectively target individuals and discreet demographic
groups, not only for the sell, but for what they call lifelong branding.
Chester pointed to Rupert
Murdoch's NDS, a company that helps content providers integrate
video, advertising, and interactive media, allowing them to engage in
what Murdoch calls monetizing interactivity.
Chester argues that
noncommercial providers can use the same systems to create what he calls
the one-to-one marketing of democracy.
"I want people
looking back 10 years from now to see [that] public interest content,
broadly defined, was part of these systems, whether it was [a] cable
or telephone company or Internet or wireless, from the very beginning."
Good models are
already out there for realizing an alternative digital future. Chester
points to the British Broadcasting
Company's charter review, underway since 2003, for digital media
platforms. What the British have done well is to articulate a
broad public service media vision for civil society, for education,
for inclusion, that takes advantage of the expanded landscape.
Chester also believes
there is great potential for public interest media to generate sustainable
revenue. He looks to On Demand television, a pay-as-you-go system
for delivering content over cable and satellite networks. Profits could
underwrite free distribution over public broadcasting systems and other
venues for those who cannot afford to pay for content.
Chester urges activists
and advocates to make a business case for public interest media and
opportunities for pipelines that can support independently produced
content. We have to bring the content providers together. We have
to work with the technologists who are working with innovative approaches
to video distribution to program this new network, he says.
"We
need to be there, and indeed I intend to be part of an initiative that's
going to do that. Because unless we create this public interest infrastructure
we
won't be making the kind of contribution our country needs."
Building Constituencies
Framing the Issues for Public Engagement
Josh Silver is executive director of Free Press, a media policy organization
he founded in 2002 with media scholar Robert
McChesney and journalist John
Nichols. Silver is focused on building large constituencies for
media democracy.
"How do you
get, not thousands, but millions of people to care? How do you
get them to care enough to hold a house party at their house, or call
their legislator, or send an e-mail, or write an op-ed piece?
How do you get them to do the very same things that other successful
movements, like the environmental movement, have managed to get tens
of millions of people to do?"
According to Silver,
Free Press has managed to persuade roughly 150,000 people to take action
on media policy issues. But those numbers, from our group and
from others, need to expand into the millions, and it needs to happen
soon. Silver believes that the public responds deeply to large
media scandals - commentator Armstrong Williams taking nearly $250,000
from the Department of Education to shill for the Bush administration's
education policies; the Republican owners of Sinclair
Broadcasting airing Stolen Honor, the anti-Kerry propaganda
film, as news; a faux news correspondent from Talon News lobbing softball
questions to President Bush at White House press conferences. Silver
says these high-profile cases are the kinds of hooks that can draw the
public into media policy issues.
The only way we're going to win is if we get the public highly
engaged locally throughout the country, in addition to doing good policy
work in Washington, Silver says. People have to take up
their own initiatives in their own communities. One strategy is
to respond to government and industry initiatives that threaten public
interest media. For instance, recently a Verizon lobbyist sent trade
journalists a memorandum knocking the success of community wireless.
It was patently untrue, yet these guys are doing this stuff all
the time, Silver says. We need to respond quickly.
However, Silver
believes that, in the long run, public interest media advocates need
strong, convincing positions that can drive policy and not just react
to big media.
"How do we
create ways of framing the debate so that we cannot just respond to
the opposition's rhetoric but actually preempt it and frame the debate
in our terms rather than their terms? If we do that, we can win."
Broadband Policy in Indian Country
Sovereign Nations Going Digital
For the 4 million
Native Americans living on and off reservations today, telecommunications
reform is a matter of life and death. Just 67% of homes have telephone
access, compared with a national average of 95%. Only 15% of reservation
households have Internet access, and basic services such as 911 are
lacking for many in the 562 federally recognized tribes. What
that means is that people are literally dying waiting for an ambulance
to get to them, says Marcia Warren Edelman , president of the Native Networking Policy Center
and an enrolled member
of the Santa Clara Pueblo of New Mexico. Edelman says the issue
for Indian country is access.
"We weren't
at the table for the re-write of the 1996
Telecommunications Act, but we have an opportunity to really be
involved as policy is being formed, and we are taking that opportunity
and running with it."
Bureau of Indian
Affairs schools and Indian Health
Service clinics have Internet access, but they are only open during
business hours. We need to be part of this digital economy,
Edelman stresses. We need to be part of our digital democracy.
Because sovereign Indian nations enjoy unique access to government regulators
and policymakers, the Native Networking Policy Center is in a good position
to affect policy. Working with the National
Congress of American Indians, the oldest and largest tribal representative
group in the United States, Edelman's group formed the Native Networking
Coalition to ensure Native American concerns are addressed in the upcoming
re-write of the 1996 Telecommunications Act.
"We have
the federal government-to-government relationship, which tribes as
sovereign nations are guaranteed through the Constitution of the United
States. So we've always dealt with the federal government on a peer-to-peer
basis. We go to D.C. We meet with Congress. We meet with the federal
agencies. And that's what we are accustomed to, and that's what we
demand."
One challenge is
to mobilize Native American constituents to demand better telecommunications
policies for Indian country. So we're dealing on an educational
level all the way from local to national, says Edelman. We
don't propose to tell them how to use the technology or even suggest
technology to use. It's up to them as sovereign nations to do that.
What we want to do is provide information. We want to be a hub of information.
Another challenge
is the lack of studies on telecommunications, information technology,
and media in Indian country. In 1998, the Benton Foundation commissioned
Edelman to write a report about the use of technology in Indian country,
Native
Networking: Telecommunications and Information in Indian Country.
"When I started
that research I was sure that I would find information out there on
the state of telecommunications access in Indian country. I
did not. I found one report from the Office
of Technology Assessment, which no longer exists, and maybe two
or three other examples of at least some telephone penetration rates,
but not much. There was nothing out there."
Little has changed.
Census figures regarding technology need to be updated so policy has
a sound empirical foundation. Edelman believes this is crucial. We
need to build the public record.
"What we
envision is that tribes will have access. We have no other alternative.
We must. We can't be left behind. Our individuals are at stake, our
communities at stake, our cultures are at stake. That's why we care,
and that's how we're going to make it happen."
Conclusion
Expanding the Public Airwaves
Wireless
networks on unlicensed spectrum are transforming community development
and civic participation in urban communities, in Indian country, and
in places throughout the world. And that has been on so-called junk
bands - slices of spectrum with limited capacity. Imagine the
innovation that could be unleashed if prime spectrum - the stronger
frequencies now used for radio and television broadcasting - were freed
up.
The
future of broadcasting is one in which media and communications technologies
converge, creating a dynamic exchange of programs, information, and
services. Urgent policy issues that could have dramatic impact on the
future of public interest media are imminent. With support and dedication,
advocates believe the media future can be one that serves the public
interest, protects free speech rights, and gives people equal access
to information and technology resources that can enhance lives and communities
and foster economic, educational, and cultural development.
Bios of Participants
Michael Calabrese (Washington, D.C.)
is vice president of the New America Foundation, a nonpartisan policy
institute in Washington, D.C. As director of the Spectrum Policy Program
(http://www.newamerica.net/index.cfm?pg=sec_home&secID=3),
Calabrese oversees the Foundation's efforts to improve our nation's
management of publicly owned assets, particularly the radio frequency
spectrum. Calabrese is the co-author of three previous books on policy
and politics and has published opinion articles in the nation's leading
outlets, including the Atlantic Monthly, Washington Post,
Wall Street Journal, and New York Times.
Jeff
Chester (Washington, D.C.) is executive director of the Center for
Digital Democracy, or CDD, (http://www.democraticmedia.org), a Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit ensuring that digital
media serve the public interest. In the 1980s, Chester led the national
campaign that prompted the creation by Congress of the Independent Television
Service (ITVS) for PBS. In 1990, he co-founded the National Campaign
for Freedom of Expression, which focused on protecting artists' rights.
The following year he created Ralph Nader's Teledemocracy Project on
cable TV reform. In 1992, Chester co-founded and served as executive
director (until 2000) of the Center for Media Education, a leading force
on such issues as Internet privacy, media ownership, and children's
TV. At CDD Chester has co-led the two-year campaign against proposals
by the media industries and FCC Chairman Powell to eliminate critical
ownership safeguards. His work helped generate unprecedented public
support opposing the Big Media lobby. Chester has also campaigned to
maintain the Internet's open and nondiscriminatory architecture, through
work in the press, Congress, and in the courts.
Mark
Cooper (Washington, D.C.) is director of research at the Consumer
Federation of America (http://www.consumerfed.org/) and a fellow
at the Stanford Law School Center for Internet and Society (http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/), the Columbia
Institute on Tele-information (http://www.citi.columbia.edu/home/),
and the Donald McGannon Communications Research Center at Fordham University
(http://www.fordham.edu/Academics/Office_of_Research/
. Cooper has written extensively on digital society and telecommunications
issues, as well as provided expert testimony on telecommunications and
energy policy in over 250 cases for public-interest clients including
Attorneys General, People's Counsels, and citizen interveners before
state and federal agencies, courts and legislators, in almost four dozen
jurisdictions in the U.S. and Canada.
Marcia
Warren Edelman (Reston, VA) is an enrolled member of the Santa Clara
Pueblo of New Mexico and serves as president for the Native Networking
Policy Center (http://www.nativenetworking.org/).
She is a co-founder of the organization. Most recently, she served
as the president of her own consulting firm, Sweet Moose Enterprises
LLC, providing consulting services in the areas of Native American policy,
economic development, and telecommunications and information technology
to Native organizations and the federal government.
Harold
Feld (Washington, D.C.) is associate director of the Media
Access Project (http://www.mediaaccess.org/),
a nonprofit public-interest law firm working to ensure a public voice
in telecommunications policy. He is the primary author of many of the
current public-interest filings on spectrum proceedings at the FCC.
He joined MAP in August 1999 after practicing communications, Internet,
and energy law at Covington & Burling. From 2002 to 2003, he served
on the ICANN Names Council as representative of the Noncommercial Constituency,
and he currently serves as the Noncommercial Constituency representative
to the Advisory Committee of the Public Interest Registry.
David
Haas (Philadelphia, PA) is chair of the steering committee of Grantmakers
in Film and Electronic Media (www.gfem.org),
an association of grantmakers committed to advancing the field of media
arts and public-interest funding, which serves as home to the Working
Group on Electronic Media Policy. In addition, Haas serves on the board
of the William Penn Foundation (http://www.williampennfoundation.org/),
a regional grantmaker focusing on the greater Philadelphia area, and
as a Trustee of the Phoebe Haas Charitable Trust "B," which
supports a range of 501(c)3 charitable organizations, including media
projects. From 1989 to 1997, Haas worked as coordinator of the Philadelphia
Independent Film/Video Association (PIFVA), a service organization for
independent film-, video, and audio makers based in the greater Philadelphia
area.
Becky
Lentz (New York, NY) is program officer for Electronic Media Policy
at the Ford Foundation (http://www.fordfound.org/program/media.cfm).In
that capacity, Lentz directs a three-year initiative called "Reclaiming
the Public Interest in Electronic Media Policy in the U.S.," which
focuses on seeding the development of a field of sustainable
institutions, organizations, coalitions, and networks that can advance
the public interest over the long term. As a practitioner, advocate,
and academic, Lentz brings to Ford more than 20 years of combined experience
in the information services industry, state and local government, the
nonprofit sector, and most recently in academia.
Alyce
Myatt (New York, NY) is a multimedia consultant providing analysis
and strategic planning services for independent media organizations
and the philanthropic community. Chief among her clients are the Center
for Digital Democracy (http://www.democraticmedia.org/),
a media policy organization; MediaWorks, a media funder network; and
Free Speech TV (http://www.freespeech.org/fscm2/genx.php?name=home),
a 24-hour progressive television network. Other recent clients include
OneWorld TV (http://tv.oneworld.net/),
Emerson College, TVE Brazil (http://www.redebrasil.tv.br/),
the Heinz Endowments (http://www.heinz.org/),
Roundtable Media (http://www.roundtablemedia.com/),
and the Annie E. Casey (http://www.aecf.org/)
and Skillman foundations (http://www.skillman.org/).
Prior to her return to consulting, Myatt served as vice president of
programming for PBS. She also was program officer for media at the John
D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation (http://www.macfound.org/),
where she administered grantmaking for documentary film and television,
community outreach related to media, community-based media arts centers,
and public radio. Preceding her work at the Foundation, Myatt was president
of her own consulting firm, providing program development services,
strategic planning, and brand management to a variety of clients in
television, radio, and multimedia.
Randal
Pinkett (Newark, NJ) is the president and CEO of BCT Partners (http://www.bctpartners.com/), a management,
technology, and policy consulting firm that works with nonprofit organizations,
including community development corporations, foundations, and government
agencies, to improve organizational effectiveness and support strategies
for change. BCT specializes in the following industries/sectors:
housing and community development, community and nonprofit technology,
health, education, and e-government. BCT is a minority-owned
and operated company and one of the leading firms in the country with
expertise in the use of technology in low-income and underserved communities.
A nationally recognized expert in the strategic use of technology, Pinkett
has corporate experience as a member of the technical staff at General
Electric, AT&T Bell Laboratories, and Lucent Technologies
Matthew
Rantanen (San Diego, CA) is director of technology and Web services
for the Southern California Tribal Chairmen's Association (http://www.sctca.net/)
and the Tribal Digital Village (http://www.sctdv.net/).
He is also launching Southern California Tribal Technologies,
a for-profit venture to support broadband wireless Internet connectivity
to the individual home on the Indian reservations of southern California.
Previously, Rantanen was a Web designer and artist for Blue Mountain
Arts, Bluemountain.com, and Excite@Home. He is a descendant of the Cree
Indian Nation, with ancestors from Finland and Scandinavia.
Hannah
Sassaman (Philadelphia, PA)is program director at Prometheus
Radio Project (http://www.prometheusradio.org/), where
she builds partnerships, coordinates outreach, and manages volunteers.
Most recently, Sassaman has been coordinating public participation in
the FCC Localism Task Force (http://www.fcc.gov/localism/)
hearings. In San Antonio, TX, she helped to get almost 500 individuals
from all over Texas to testify on how to make the media more local.
Sassaman works to build coalitions between existing media justice and
media democracy groups and a wide range of allies for a more diverse
global media system; she has built partnerships on media issues with
groups as diverse as Latino environmental arts groups and Christian
community ministries and broadcasters. Sassaman has published articles
in Clamor magazine and is interviewed regularly for local, national,
and international publications.
Josh Silver (Northampton, MA) is executive
director of Free Press (http://www.freepress.net/), which he co-founded
with Robert McChesney and John Nichols in 2002 to engage broad public participation in
media policy debates. Prior to that, he was the campaign manager of
the successful ballot initiative for Clean Elections in Arizona, director
of development for the cultural arm of the Smithsonian Institution in
Washington, D.C., and director of an international youth exchange program.
Silver has published extensively on media policy, campaign finance,
and other public policy issues.
Emy Tseng (San Francisco, CA) is senior policy advisor at the Community
Technology Foundation of California (CTFC) (http://zerodivide.org/)
and managing director of the Innovation Funders Network (IFN) (http://www.innovationfunders.org/),
a group of funders who support technology for social change. She
previously worked at the Ford Foundation on issues of information and
communications policy. Tseng has consulted on technology policy
and strategy for a number of public interest and community networking
groups including Consumers Union (http://www.consumersunion.org/),
NYCwireless (http://www.nycwireless.net),
and LINCOS (Little Intelligent Communities) (http://www.lincos.net/).
Her previous employment included 12 years in the software industry as
an engineer, project manager, and software architect.
Adam Werbach (San Francisco, CA) is the
founder of Act Now Productions in San Francisco (http://www.actnowproductions.com/),
a multimedia production and outreach company dedicated to helping nonprofits
get their message out through video, music, and the Web. Prior to founding
Act Now, he served as executive director of the Common Assets Defense
Fund (http://www.commonassets.org/) and as the 46th president of the Sierra
Club (http://www.sierraclub.org/), a position he was elected to
at the ripe old age of 23. Werbach is the author of Act Now, Apologize
Later (HarperCollins).