Dolly Parton Vs Google In Radio Space Showdown
Tuesday is the end of a clash that has been drawn out for two years, with the opponents foreseeing dire results should they lose. Not the historical November 4th bid for the White House, but the huge battle of Google vs Dolly Parton.
The king of Silicon Valley and the longstanding queen of country are two participants in a high-tech argument over valuable parts of the nation’s airwaves.
The topic comes to an end today on Election Day, when the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) decides the outcome of a proposal to make an undecided chunk of radio space accessible for the public.
Google, Microsoft, Hewlett-Packard and other companies insist that the space could be used by a new collection of Internet-connected wireless devices. They note that freeing the space could persuade further improvement and deals the way that the spread of Wi-Fi technology has in the past.
However, a partnership of media, from television networks to Broadway producers, objects to the proposal insisting that it requires a closer look. The challengers feel that signals sent over those frequencies may obstruct broadcasts and wireless microphones at live productions.
The measure looks like it will pass, even though its adversaries have accumulated a late in the game lobbying effort supported by Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, and others in Congress.
Also against the proposition are professional sports leagues, various Las Vegas casinos, a group of rock musicians and, recently, Parton, who is opening a new Broadway musical called “9 to 5: The Musical.”
If the space is set free to the public, Parton insists, pandemonium could descend on Broadway in the appearance of static and other intrusions.
“The potential direct negative impact on countless people may be immeasurable,” Parton said in a letter last month to the FCC, encouraging it not to make the space public.
Parton got caught up in the situation after she was notified by the Broadway League, a theater group that has fought the FCC on the topic and synchronized support from various performers. The group said Parton became more involved than others because she is also a live show producer.
In this age of all things digital, airwaves transporting television, cellphone and wireless Internet signals are very precious. The FCC controls the airwaves and auctions off licenses for them to private corporations.
In this specific case it is mulling over putting aside free or “unlicensed” sections for the public’s use.
Tech companies dispute that if the FCC does this, entrepreneurs and innovators could generate a new variety of devices that send signals further and more consistently than Wi-Fi, which depends on unlicensed air space.
“This could lead to Wi-Fi on steroids,” said Richard Whitt, a Washington lobbyist for Google. “It could become a ubiquitous nationwide broadband network.”
The conflict between the old media and new media companies is the result of an imminent shift in the way TV signals are sent. In February, TV stations must change from analog broadcasting to digital, which is less vulnerable to radio interference.
The premise behind the FCC proposal is that hand-held devices produce such small levels of power that their conduction can not extend beyond or obstruct the digital TV signals.
The FCC has been looking at the probability for obstruction and has discovered that many problems can be evaded through increased regulation, said Kevin J. Martin, chairman of the FCC, who proposed the measure.
“We’re being very cautious about protecting the broadcasters, but at the same time making sure the technology allows us to make greater use of this invaluable resource,” Martin said.
Martin added that he felt that several opponents are against the proposal because they are intimidated by the increase of interactive tools that creates a less submissive media experience. “The empowerment of consumers is threatening,” he added.
Behind the debate are changes in politics and culture. Increased Internet and computer use by consumers has allowed the technology lobby to have additional power and importance. Simultaneously, the broadcast industry has lost a lot of its lobbying power as consumer preferences have altered and advertising money has poured into the Internet.
However, the National Association of Broadcasters, which backs 8,300 local and national television stations, is leading the attempt to insist that the FCC postpones their decision on the measure.
Without further testing, “this could be a recipe for potentially massive interference into the television spectrum,” said Dennis Wharton, a spokesman for the broadcasting trade group.
Broadcasters insist that the signal could even interrupt channels received over cable.
The interests of TV providers are dissimilar from the needs of Broadway theaters, which have to use wireless microphones in order to broadcast sound to the audience and for necessary communication among crew members.
Gerald Schoenfeld, chairman of the Shubert Organization, stated that the new gadgets will interfere with the 450 wireless microphones used in New York’s theater district. This will create static or cause crew member communications to become stalled, leading to an accident like a set piece falling and injuring someone.
“There’s a danger element attached to this,” he said. “They are fooling with many aspects of American society under the pretext of helping get Internet access for parties that already have the greatest amount of Internet usage.”
Encouraging a postponement on the vote, Mr. Schoenfeld added: “Why this is being rushed through at this time is mystifying.”
In her letter to the FCC, Parton admitted that she did not comprehend all the complicated technicalities of the issue. However, based on further counsel, she decided that the probable problems are important to address and consider.
Parton called the proposal “a dangerous and shortsighted answer to a highly complicated question.”
Eric E. Schmidt, the chief executive of Google, also wrote a letter to the FCC as of late.
“We are eight days away from a vote that could transform the way we connect to the Internet,” he noted. “The time for study and talk is over. The time for action has arrived.”
—
On the Net: