« F2C Video Spotlight: Michael Powell, Former FCC Chairman | Main | Update from House Telecom Subcommittee: Today's VoIP Amendment Results »
April 05, 2006
We – the Internet Communications Community -- Need a Crash Course in Lobbying 101
Freedom-to-Connect, by almost every account, was big success. Lots of interesting people, lots of great ideas, lots of energy. We had about 250 attendees at F2C, and I thought we had inspired at least a few to take the trek down to Capitol Hill for the Mark-up of the COPE Bill. Heck, F2C could not have occurred at a more opportune moment. F2C ended at 4:45 pm last night, and Opening Statement began in the House on the COPE Bill at 5 pm. The Mark-up, itself, began in earnest, at 10 am this morning. We are already in DC talking about these very issues, and lamenting the lack of understanding and the absurd policy paths down which Congress might lead us.
We have to make sure that Congress knows that we care and that will be a force with which to be reckoned in the debate.
So, where are the Internet innovators, entrepreneurs and enthusiasts? As the COPE Bill and/or other bills that will affect the future of the Internet and communications move through Congress, I hope we become more vocal, that we harness our collective passion, creativity and expertise to work with Congress to advance communications and the Internet, for users and innovators, and not just for the traditional entrenched interests. Perhaps a first step would be to join the VON Coalition, which has clearly emerged as the leading voice in Washington for the Internet communications industry.
Jonathan Askin is sitting in the House today witnessing the spectacle of the House Mark-up on the COPE. Most of this is a rehash of the existing battle between Bells and cables, but, I warn you, they are dragging us into the political and regulatory quagmire (under the guise that they speak for the Internet communications revolution). Most of the debate is revolving around the tired debate over the nature and regulatory structure for IP-TV. Ho-hum. This, to me, is a silly battle between cable delivered video and Bell-delivered video without any recognition of the digital revolution occurring around these dinosaurs. The Bells want quick relief to replicate the lame cable broadcast delivery model. The debaters are largely oblivious to the fact that cable and Bell are dinosaurs and that Congress should, rather, be enabling disruptive, internet-delivered applications, be it voice, video, what have you.
Having said that, much of what is going on in the House today WILL affect the future of Internet communications, both indirectly and directly. There are net neutrality amendments, emergency response amendments affecting VoIP, and at least one amendment intended to impose legacy access charges and universal service obligations on VoIP. Please check out the House Energy and Commerce Committee Website so that you can stay engaged.
Amendments are flying fast and loose today in the House, and many of these amendments could do grave harm or great benefit to the future of Internet communications. We have to be seen and heard, and let Congress know that we are participating in the debate.
On another note, we need to learn from the Bells and cablecos and other entrenched interests within the Beltway how to play politics. I know many of us are great innovators, perhaps geniuses, but we are largely ignorant in the ways of Washington.
I found it kind of charming and refreshing that our community does not pull punches. At F2C, we had a community chat board running in real time on a large screen behind the speakers. Quite often, biting comments appeared on screen. At other times, audience members could not contain themselves and shouted comments at the speakers. Now, we made great efforts to invite strong allies and guides from Congress and the policy arena to teach us how to work better to affect positive change in government policy. It is not easy to get not one, but two, former FCC Chairmen to address an audience at a single event. It is not easy to get a current Comm’r bound for the airport to take a detour to give us guidance on how to advocate on behalf of the Internet communications community. It was not easy to get a Congressman, leading the discussion within the House on Internet and communications policy reform, and four Hill staffers to take time away from their Hill duties (particularly during this most pivotal week in the history of Internet and communications policy reform). My gratitude to these noble public servants cannot be overstated. For this reason, I was a bit surprised to hear that we did not hold back on these allies from the ranks of government. I understand that our guests from government took it all in stride and even admired our passion, but I would not want to discourage them from engaging us and championing our cause and advancing the best interests of the Internet and its users and innovators. I go to a lot of conferences, and everyone is always reverential to the government officials (perhaps overly reverential). I do not, in any way want to censor our community, but we might want to figure out a more positive way to engage government, particularly our allies and champions within government.
I know we did not ask to be legislated or regulated, but others have decided to drag our businesses and hobbies into their political fight. Like it or not, we have to participate, and we have to participate on their turf. As such, we have to learn the rules of engagement as written by our analog precursors.
We also need to figure out how to hone our message. While cable and Bell are not very innovative in the delivery of compelling technologies, services and applications, they are geniuses in marketing. Their messages are clear, simple and resonate. We are too clever and varied for our own good. No one knows what our message is. I ask any marketing geniuses out there to help us hone our message – a clear message that lets Congress and the public see what could be if we are allowed to innovate under the right policy framework.
Finally, I have to think that with our collective genius and ability to harness the Internet, we should be able to bring new ideas and processes to the debate.
I was tempted not to let anyone leave the F2C meeting room until we came up with a game plan that would allow us to send a contagious, brilliant, but clear message to Congress and policymakers about how and why and what they must do to enable us to fulfill the promise of the Internet communications revolution.
I welcome any creative ideas you might have. We have hundreds of thousands of innovators and entrepreneurs and hundreds of millions of Internet users and enthusiasts. Between us, we should be able to transform the debate.
Again, I welcome your thoughts.
Tags: Net Neutrality, F2C, voip
(c) 2006 Jeff Pulver. All Rights Reserved.
(This blog posting is copyright protected by Jeff Pulver. Portions of this blog posting may be quoted or abstracted if attributed.)
Share this post:
Digg |
del.icio.us |
Reddit |
Newsvine |
Google Bookmark |
Yahoo MyWeb |
StumbleUpon
Posted by jeff on April 5, 2006 12:56 PM | Permalink
Additional resources: Watch PrimeTime TV Shows | Watch the Jeff Pulver Show | Jeff's Qik Videos
Comments
Here's a new twist on this question. Pretty funny
http://colonial-america.suite101.com/article.cfm/the_invention_of_the_internet
Posted by: Alex at November 7, 2007 05:53 PM
I have commented on this on my blog (in agreeance), noting some of my thoughts on what appear to me as possible hurdles:
http://bluntperspectives.com
or
http://scottstevens.net/nucleus/index.php?itemid=13
Posted by: Scott Stevens at April 11, 2006 11:25 AM
I was listening to f2c remotely and came away with the same feeling you express. I was particularly upset with Chairman Powell's warning.
A few thoughts..
- some of the non-cable/telcos involved have serious lobbying power. Perhaps they can focus it better
- A very simple message needs to be constructed (as you point out) . This is the area for marketing and branding. Perhaps it makes sense to spend $100k at a few agencies to get something that will actually resonate with the public and with congress. This is NOT an area for techies like us. We can probably raise the money.
- Once there is a message, public awareness seems in order. Susan Crawford's OneWebDay may be a good vehicle, but it also suffers from lack of message that the public can understand.
- The President has provided us with a rare opportunity. A few months ago most pundits thought 10-15 seats in congress might be closely contested and perhaps 2 in the senate. Now people talk about 60 and 8 to 10. The control of the legislative branch is up in the air and elections can and will turn on a few thousand votes. If we have a clear message and can move it to the political arena we might have some leverage.
- A crazy thought. What is Al Gore doing these days (other than his global warming message) ... despite all of the laughter about the "invention of the Internet" (a meme that he never said), he *was* extremely important for getting NSFnet to take off - probably the key event in the growth of the Internet. It would be wonderful to spend a day with him for advice...
Posted by: steve at April 5, 2006 09:19 PM