Month: November 2018

The new registration system is now up and running for The 2019 Canadian Telecom Summit, taking place June 3-5, 2019 in Toronto.

Now in its 18th year, The Canadian Telecom Summit is Canada’s leading ICT event, attracting the most influential people who shape the future direction of communications and information technology in Canada.

For 3 full days, The Canadian Telecom Summit delivers thought-provoking presentations from the thought leaders of the industry. If your interests are in the Telecommunications, IT or Broadcasting sectors, you need to attend The 2019 Canadian Telecom Summit.

The Canadian Telecom Summit is pleased to announce that we have entered into a partnership with Macgregor Communications to program the 2019 and 2020 events. Macgregor Communications produces world class conferences, tradeshows, and digital media. Michael Sone and I will be working closely working with Richard Jirka of Macgregor Communications to produce The 2019 Canadian Telecom Summit.

Early bird rates are now in effect through the end of February. Save more than $200 by reserving your place now. For more information, contact Richard or me.

Join us June 3-5, 2019 for The 2019 Canadian Telecom Summit.

Last week, the Auditor General of Canada released a report on “Connectivity in Rural and Remote Areas” that concluded, among other things, that the government “did not implement its Connect to Innovate program for broadband improvement in a way that ensured the maximum broadband expansion for the public money spent.”

So I found it interesting that in the same week, we learned the CRTC will be adding 60 people, at an annual cost of $10M, just to manage its new $150M per year broadband fund.

Recall, when the CRTC release its Decision 2018-377: Development of the Commission’s Broadband Fund, the CRTC concluded “The Commission acknowledges that the use of its own expertise, staff, and institutional capability for the implementation and operation of the selection process, as well as the monitoring and enforcement of the conditions of funding, would be efficient, cost-effective, and timely.”

Before reaching its conclusion, the CRTC acknowledged “Many parties… suggested either assigning ISED as the project manager or leveraging ISED’s expertise through collaboration between ISED and the Commission. These parties argued that leveraging the Commission’s and/or ISED’s resources would be efficient, avoid duplication and unnecessary delays, and result in more money being available to fund broadband projects.”

Sixty new people, at a cost of $10M per year, to implement the Broadband Fund. Remember, this is what the CRTC says is the “efficient, cost-effective” approach.

Yet another regulatory cost that ultimately drives higher consumer prices.

Homes don’t subscribe to fibre. People subscribe to high speed internet, which is sometimes delivered over fibre. It can also be delivered over a host of hybrid technology solutions.

I have made this point before when I wrote:

Most people define problems in terms of solutions. Many people say that they need nails when what they really need is to hold two pieces of wood together. The difference between defining problems in terms of requirements versus preordaining a solution.

This principle came to mind again this morning, when I read about the challenges being faced by Southwest Airlines in delivering reliable on-board WiFi service to its passengers. There are generally two ways to connect an aircraft to the internet (neither involves a 3,000 mile long spool of fibre): from above via satellite; or, from below using air-to-ground (ATG) mobile wireless. Each has its own advantages and disadvantages. Satellite provides coverage over oceans, but has higher latency because of the tens of thousands of miles covered on each leg of the connection. ATG uses towers on the ground and somewhat conventional cellular technology with antennas pointed up, so that a dozen and a half or so towers covers virtually all of the air routes within Canada. But ATG doesn’t work on overseas flights.

Airlines need to make technology choices for each of their aircraft. The on-board equipment requires Transport Canada and FAA approvals with separate certification for every model type of aircraft, and the equipment cost is non-trivial. Most airlines have separate fleets of aircraft for their North American and overseas routes, enabling more flexibility in choosing the best solution, depending on the requirements.

The key: define requirements on terms of what is needed for the particular application, not in terms of comfortable solutions.

I have written before that many people say that they need to buy some nails when they go into a hardware store, but what they really need is to hold two pieces of wood together. There are a lot more possibilities that can be considered when you define the problem in terms of requirements, not solutions.

Now in its 18th year, The Canadian Telecom Summit is Canada’s leading ICT event, attracting the most influential people who shape the future direction of communications and information technology in Canada.

For 3 full days, The Canadian Telecom Summit delivers thought-provoking presentations from the thought leaders of the industry. This is your chance to hear from and talk with them in both a structured atmosphere of frank discussion and high-octane idea exchange and networking in a more relaxed social setting of genial conversation.

The theme this year is “Converging networks: a foundation for innovation leadership.” In-depth panels will examine:

• Regulatory Blockbuster
• Artificial Intelligence
• Technology Innovation
• Cyber Security & Privacy
• Network Innovation: 5G and more
• Innovation Economy
• Customer Experience Management

If your interests are in the Telecommunications, IT or Broadcasting sectors, you need to attend The 2019 Canadian Telecom Summit.

Mark the dates on your calendar: June 3-5, 2019 at the International Centre, near Toronto’s Pearson International Airport. I hope to see you there.

Charles Spurgeon (in a quote often mis-attributed to Mark Twain) was somewhat prescient in saying “A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.”

More than a few years ago, when I did my graduate work in Ottawa, I would frequently have lunch on Parliament Hill. My room mate did part time work for a Member of Parliament and the cafeteria on the Hill was heavily subsidized back then, making it one of the best places for a student to have a more balanced meal (for less than $2, including dessert!) than you could get from a box of mac and cheese.

Afterwards, I liked to catch Question Period and then watch the media scrum before heading back to the National Archives to do some of my research. At night, it was always entertaining to see how a seemingly innocuous statement by a Cabinet member would become the lead story, ignoring the context in which it was said.

That was before social media amplified polarities in opinion.

A recent study produced by the Colorado Media Project found that nearly 60% only read the headlines or brief summaries of stories, while 34% say they prefer full-length articles. Only 5% reported they regularly dig into long-form journalism. The study matches other reports that indicate the vast majority of online users only read headlines before commenting on or sharing articles.

That is why I found it disturbing to read a post by a University of Ottawa professor entitled “CRTC Chair Opens the Door to Weakening Canadian Net Neutrality Rules.” In his post, Michael Geist claims “CRTC Chair Ian Scott used a keynote speech last week to open the door to watering down Canadian net neutrality rules, noting his desire for ‘flexibility’ with the legislation.”

But in reality, his speech didn’t call for “watering down Canadian net neutrality rules.” As Professor Geist wrote later in the article, what the CRTC Chair actually said [November 1 at the IIC] was:

The Telecommunications Act provides the CRTC with the tools and flexibility to establish and enforce a net neutrality framework. The framework we have built over the past 10 years will likely be tested as needs and technology continue to evolve. There may indeed be situations relating to public safety or security, telemedicine or self-driving cars where a certain flexibility will be required and should therefore be maintained in the legislation.

Parse that carefully and you will see that it is simply not accurate to say that the CRTC Chair called for any kind of loosening or “watering down” of net neutrality. “The Act provides flexibility” and “flexibility will be required and should therefore be maintained”.

Yet the professor writes in terms of “watering down Canadian net neutrality rules” and refers to a non-existent “call for greater net neutrality flexibility.” Let’s be clear: calling for maintaining flexibility is not calling for greater flexibility.

But as a result of the misleading headline, many disciples are tweeting links to the professor’s article and spreading allusions about the Chair and ‘incumbent talking points’, having never read the actual speech or even seeing the contradictions in the blog post itself.

Science Post recently had an article saying “Study: 70% of Facebook users only read the headline of science stories before commenting.” Be sure to read the full article.

There is an important lesson to be learned. Don’t trust headlines. Other than my headlines, of course.