Skip to main content

tv   The Communicators  CSPAN  May 28, 2016 6:30pm-7:01pm EDT

6:30 pm
chamber proceedings, we represent wise policy. the recent right and need of the citizens of our nation to know the business of the government. >> c-span marks the 30th anniversary of our lives gavel-to-gavel senate coverage on c-span two. >> i would show to you the body of evidence from this question. something witnessed that has never before happened in all of senate history. during ae of power session of congress. when the american people still do not understand is that there are three areas that will be government in charge of everybody's health care. made a number of mistakes in my political career,
6:31 pm
c-span wasagainst one of them. to see more of our 30 years of coverage on the u.s. senate, go to c-span.org. this week the communicators comes to the i in tx show in, the internet and television expo sponsored by the vacation association. we interviewed for fcc commissioners. as a regulator and a consumer,
6:32 pm
what is your view of the cable industry? : first ofsenworcel all, thank you for having me here. joy to come back to boston. supply somedustry of our most important infrastructure. it is not traditional video but rock band. it is clear to me that the broadband they provide is a market leader, and it is now going from luxury to necessity in all of our households because it is an essential part of what we do every day. ajit pai: thank you for having us. thank you for giving us the opportunity. to me the cable industry has helped to drive the digital revolution. cities big and small
6:33 pm
that have taken the risk for next-generation networks those investments did not have to be made, that infrastructure did not have to be deployed. is due inhat it is part to your members efforts. michael o'rielly: i look at the cable industry as a very dynamic one. we need to meet consumer need and demand. story in what serve thee to do to communities throughout america. michael o'rielly: it has to only change the landscape when it comes to content. one of the things that i note is
6:34 pm
i do not have to watch he high 7 p.m. at 7:00 p.m.. there are options and opportunities for programming that peak my background and interest. for theabout contract sky is limited in terms of options and opportunities. , as a consumer of entertainment, is taking it to the next level. >> d.c. it is a technologically advanced industry? >> absolutely. they are leaving in so many ways . is when we talk about the internet of things and the internet of everything, in to wherever you
6:35 pm
are. device that cable is helping to provide, that will meet we where i am. let's take that question around the horn. michael o'rielly: that is what you really want from industry. my conversation in what they are trying to do, it is no longer about video. wi-fi,lso about different unlicensed devices.
6:36 pm
they are trying to meet the different spectrum of ideas and needs. it starts with a very advanced platform. think anyone who uses the phrase downpipe has to theunt for the fact that future is really setting the standard for high-speed collectivity. you have to account for the fact that cable has been leading the charge. you have to account for the fact that they have been delivering affordable access to low income communities across this country. cable has been leading these efforts to liver benefits to the american people in the digital economy. i will rosenworcel: point out that communications it is changing at a rapid clip in the cable industry. what used to be the place that
6:37 pm
we went to watch video content when it was on on a single screen has now morphed into a broadband industry, and i think the mobile industry as well. the cable industry's contributions to wi-fi have been flat-out amazing and changed content wherever we are. mignon clyburn: it has redefined the word bundle. it has been a driver. verye meant something constricted before. , ande have the options people want a one stop shop efficiency when it comes to their services. i have to cable has been a driver, talking about triple play" triple play in some instances. service delivery of utilities. there are some relationships that have been forged.
6:38 pm
whatever you define as a utility, and i know there is going to be, when i say it that way, whatever you think is a necessity in your home, in some markets there is one check and you have the capacity to get all of your services into the home. that is what is being enabled by this industry. we seem to have crested a wave in cable consolidation and now some are predicting that industries going to look toward content and bundling their content with their conduit. for inll you be looking new service offerings in terms get a some might try to
6:39 pm
foothold? >> cable providers are trying to figure out as our programmers of others, with the business model is that allows people to supply the content that everybody wants to see over the networks that everybody wants to flourish. that the fcc should take a more restrained approach, let this experimentation happen. not rule any business model in or out preemptively. but try to figure out what is ultimately going to be in consumer's welfare. the current digital fermentation we see among cable providers and others. visited a standalone offering,? ? consumers have been the beneficiaries of the expert imitation, but that will only continue as the fcc sticks within the letter of the law and adheres to the e-cig principle.
6:40 pm
the letter to me is evolving and changing. so the consumers have an expectation that their regulatory agencies are going to be a backstop when markets are less efficient. we have to keep all of that in mind. competition is a part of our middle name. we want to be regulators that are partners in terms of options and opportunities in stimulators of growth. it is very important, but it is important that the consumers are if thingsn their own are less-than-perfect. we have to keep in mind we are there for them if the markets are less-than-perfect trade michael o'rielly: we should not start with the idea that the market is less-than-perfect. i do not want to predetermine
6:41 pm
what may be something beneficial to the consumers, but working with the best price for content in different spheres. what i think you see his overall cable is trying to not rest on its laurels and find out what is the next step in the future. how do we constantly trained? -- constantly change? jessica rosenworcel: i think the answer starts and ends with consumers. we want to make sure they get the content they want, when they wanted and where they want it. that is the wonder of the internet age. i think the public officials, that is something we want to make sure our market actually accomplish. speecherday at his michael powell said that the sec is conducting a relentless government assault on cable.
6:42 pm
mignon clyburn: we all have our rules to play. to make sure that what comes over my desk is beneficial to consumers. i want competition, i want all of these things. consumers want them as well. my fellow citizens want them as well. i do not come from a posture of regulation and being in a vacuum , that is not what i am saying. what i am saying is affirming what my role is here is to be that person who watches, listens, and who is there if you need us. michael o'rielly: when i look at
6:43 pm
dartmouth, cross my desk, his comments are not far off the mark. you can look at other sectors of the communications via that are andng similar burdens similar obligations that are coming from the federal government. that is problematic going forward. it cost consumers in one form or another. lydia beyoud: speaking of some issues,onsumer the set-top box proposal has been one of the most recent one of those. the sechere a way for to thread the needle and achieve the benefits bonuses are possible while also protecting the copyright and the piracy problems that cable and content providers are concerned about? colleen andrn:
6:44 pm
internal optimist, i believe that nirvana exists. i think we can get there. what we are having is an exciting conversation. we are talking about content and opportunities. we are talking about a robust ecosystem. i really think, especially when milestones, when we get to certain places in a revolution that mean to have a conversation about which direction to go. while i know there is a lot of of and people are on various sides of the fence when it comes to this particular issue, the fact that we are having this conversation and not immediately passing down a edict really for what this interactive process is. i've proposed rulemaking that we are putting forward to where everybody has an opportunity to weigh in. i think it is healthy at this
6:45 pm
point to have these conversations. i'm looking forward to what i will be a very interesting and dynamic exchange. peter slen: do you agree with what you're probably just said? a good exampleis of the crossroads we have found ourselves in. on one hand, you can take a forward-looking view where the market is is going from trying to encourage technological innovation that is in the benefit of consumers. or you can look at the sap snapshot as increasingly yellowing with age. the set-top box proceeding is a classic example of that. you can take the word of literally over 100 members of the united states house of representatives republicans and democrats who say there are a variety of different issues with copyright protections that the
6:46 pm
fcc's proposal is a solution that will work. the problem is working itself out in the market ways. why they would choose, with all the other issues on their weight to go across rural america, to focus on something that is fading into the background is something that is beyond me, but nonetheless we are going to be spending which next couple of months debating this very issue despite the fact that the private sector and congress have told us it is a misplaced priority. [applause] do you think they have a duty to listen to congress? with your own ties to capitol hill, doesn't have a duty to those studies that lawmakers have called for, others saying they are delaying tactics and the proceedings need to push forward. what is your spans a little response to these calls you are hearing from lawmakers?
6:47 pm
jessica rosenworcel: i had the great privilege some years ago of working for the united states senate. so i know deep in my moans we have to respect the laws that congress has placed the forests and asked us to implement. we have a section of the statute that speaks to the competitive availability of navigation legallywhich is rulemaking. we also have to be mindful of the contributions of congress in our conversations back and forth. we are wrestling with all that information right now in the proceedings we have before us. we are a data: during the agency. and i really think this exercise, which i also referred us i think it is healthy for to pause and look and weigh in. these are important, serious, complex issues we are talking about.
6:48 pm
we are talking about the consumption habits of our citizens. i think it is an important thing for us to look at the entire ecosystem, how they get information, the platforms that are used. i do not think it is an unhealthy exercise for us to look. talk about when we significant issues and challenges that we have been to have a conversation of gathering data and make the decision if we e a determination that it is necessary to improve and encourage and push these dynamic ecosystems that we have. if that is they: structure, we should have a notice of inquiry. to answer your previous question, is there something we can do, i would take the current proposal and throw it in the garbage. that is where it longs. we had an opportunity to embrace
6:49 pm
with the cable industry has offered. to get rid of the set-top box, th eliminate from the consumer home. embrace what is happening in the marketplace. embrace applications of what consumers are doing today. you do not need to threat a needle when they have put out this platform for us to look at. ajit pai: what is happening is not a conversation, it is a dictation. wonderlandlice in paradigm of sentence and then verdict afterward. it goes through the formality of having this process in which it receives public input, but the decision has already been made. they are not open to different points of view. that is one of races of people have been speaking out. and the writing was on the wall
6:50 pm
when our downloadable security advisory meeting said there are distinct approaches here. the other proposal that the commission ultimately adopted. if these were genuine conversations, they would say here are proposals, the american public wants to tell us what they think. so they said this is our proposal, and here are a couple of paragraphs. it will be terrible for america, but let us know what you think anyway. that is not an open and fair debate. mignon clyburn: it allows the opportunity for people to weigh in. isuess what i am saying here you have, if you do not agree with the original premise, you have an opportunity to weigh in. i think it is a healthy way.
6:51 pm
if you go around the world and see the regulatory dynamics, new, even when it is less-than-perfect here, you will find out or get affirmed that and allows consumers interested stakeholders, including all of you in this audience the opportunity to weigh in. we have an opportunity to use that. i think that allows that type of process, and that type of interaction. it is healthy. we all need to bring our best cased forward, i believe, including regulators in order to make the consumer experience more robust. i think it is a healthy way of doing this. jessica rosenworcel: first of all, my mind is open. i do not want my colleagues to suggest that it is not. we have thousands of pages of information before us, and i cannot claim to have read
6:52 pm
original one, but we will try because we want to make sure we understand the consequences of our proposal. this is a market that could use competition but it is also a proposal that is very complicated. there are issues of copyright, privacy, diversity that all need to be addressed. we are looking for the input to make sure that we address them as we move forward. a 394 page opinion was sent in on section 629 on the set-top boxes. is that something that you will have time to read, or will your staff rated? jessica rosenworcel: we will make sure that my office takes a good look at every one of those pages. i will not claim that i will read every single one of them, but i guarantee that i will spend time with that filing. might it be easier
6:53 pm
to somehow break it apart into multiple proceedings and try to can achieve it that way? jessica rosenworcel: i don't know if i have an answer at that time. we are still waiting for the comments to come in, and i want to assess those before we decide precisely how to proceed. mignon clyburn: when things are proposed, it does not necessarily mean that every word is adopt it. that is why we have this interactive process. commission,he hopefully, to put forth if it is necessary in any case really solid regulatory path that will enable all of the things we see, and more. i do believelly: with my colleagues say, but that
6:54 pm
is not with the chairman is going for, and that is not where the commission is going. this item is already being written. and that is what is going to be voted on in a matter of months. i predict this is an october thing. i think it is already pretty much done. i do not see it changing. i appreciate colleagues looking at commons and looking at material, but at the end of the day this proposal was put forward by the chairman, and it will be the one we vote on. anybody ine how it the building claimant will be different. peter slen: is this an official meeting? mignon clyburn: there was enough advertising, we are in good standing. all inquiries will be directed to peter slen. [laughter] this aten: could you do the fcc building, sit and have a
6:55 pm
chat, without notice? jessica rosenworcel: isn't that crazy? it seems to me that the record together and hashing south, and members of congress can get together, have discussions. they can talk with solutions for the companies and institutions. it will be better off if we had the ability to visit with one andher and spake more often more candidly about how to manage the issues before us. mignon clyburn: we are on the cusp of a final decision. share, thatoners
6:56 pm
this is not a final say so when decisions. our it is cumbersome, it makes for disjointed conversations. we have been talking about it for years. it is something we to look at, because it promotes this kind of exchange and interactions that we have. peter slen: let's see if the republicans agree. this is something that is not in our power to remedy. it is up to congress to change the law. many moreare so important process reforms that we could and should adopt. we talked about the radical notion that they would publish ,hat they're proposing to do
6:57 pm
and allow a vote on it. there are very basic process reforms that would go a long way towards money openness and transparency. ultimately, accountability. but ultimately we have been denied these proposals at every turn. michael o'rielly: this is something for congress to decide. on a limitinglem the burdens in the sunshine ban. getting together and deciding where things are go, i'm not as worried about that. i am happy to have circumstances that then occur that are not in violation of law. i am fine if that is the case. i am happy to have all my colleagues sit around. i think we can have a very wholesome conversation. but to my colleagues second
6:58 pm
point, we have put forward a number of process reform ideas. somewhere between 24 and 25, to improve the operations without undermining the chairman's authority or the majority's authority. approve a process for the american people without harming the process of getting to an outcome. that is something we should spend more time on. unfortunately the chairman has set up a process review test horse -- task force that has not succeeded yet. .herefore it stays out as it is it cooks the books. you have mentioned the internet of things. with the growth of connected devices that is right over the horizon and a lot of industries
6:59 pm
looking at this as the new vertical for them, what role do in see the fcc playing regard to privacy and the order of magnitude of consumer data that will be collected? what should you be doing, what policies should you be putting into place now to help the to flourish? foremost,first and the reason that they are injected into the space is a result of free classic nation of all broadband providers as content carriers. that led to determinations about privacy restrictions. , with whaterence those regulation should be, to the maximum extent possible we should harmonize our privacy rules those of the federal trade commission. the worst thing our government can do in this space and any other is to happen on level
7:00 pm
playing field where one set of regulars of why to one group of companies, and another set of regulations apply to another group, even now they are competing in the same space. important for the agency to not pursue ideological ends, but to make sure consumers are protected. have a baseline level of privacy lessction, and a level -- stringent protection for some of the information consumers would share, based on the ftc's deceptive practices authority. lydia, you asked about the internet of things, which is one of the exciting developments in communication policy. sensors would start relying an almost infinite amount of information that would make us much more efficient and effective with everything we do.

7 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on