Where is our National Digital Strategy?

Among industry observers and policy wonks, the question is seen as a running joke. How long has this been missing in action? Fifteen months ago, Michael Geist called it the government’s Penske File. Not that it is overdue by 15 months. It was already so late that we have been joking about it for that long.

It is a dark humour, because it really isn’t a joke. More like a national embarrassment.

In the meantime, the global digital economy pushes forward while Canada’s digital economic activity drifts rudderless.

To be sure, there is activity on the digital economy file, but there is no coherent strategy that sets objectives, goals or direction.

As a result, we have regulations being developed for anti-spam legislation that are among the world’s most onerous, without any assessment of the impact on the development of electronic commerce or the creation of additional red-tape. We have seen Canada’s spectrum policy lag way behind our trading partners despite traditionally being characterized as “fast-followers” of US spectrum allocations. The US completed its auction of 700 MHz 5 years ago.

Today, the FCC is hosting a Broadband Summit, “to identify and discuss best practices learned from broadband adoption programs and academic studies/surveys, and how implementation of these best practices can close the broadband adoption gap among Americans – particularly low-income households, racial and ethnic minorities, seniors, rural residents, residents of Tribal lands and people with disabilities.” As I looked at the agenda, I had difficulty thinking of which agency in Canada would convene such a session, or take action on its conclusions.

Three years ago, the FCC set goals for broadband service availability that would be easily attainable in the Canadian context (affordable availability of 100 Million connections over 100 Mbps by 2020). Its Broadband Plan [Exec Summary, pdf] also set spectrum release goals, a goal to lead the world in mobile innovation, with the fastest and most extensive wireless networks of any nation; public safety network goals; clean energy goals for real time tracking and management of energy consumption.

In Canada, we continue to fall further behind. We have had activity related to each of these lines, but without a goal in mind. Tactics do not equal strategy. Canada’s current approach is a recipe for dabbling, not leading in the digital economy.

The theme of The 2013 Canadian Telecom Summit is “Defining our place in a digital world.” We are going to look at issues including broadband wireless spectrum, next generation business models, consumers, business transformation and network evolution. We will be sure to search for ways to move forward in the absence of a national strategy.

The program is coming together for The 2013 Canadian Telecom Summit in June. We’re especially pleased to welcome a number of new faces as keynote speakers and panelists

For 3 days, the leadership of the telecom, broadcast & IT industries will converge at the Toronto Congress Centre to discuss the key issues and trends that will impact this critical sector of the economy. Join your peers, suppliers, policy makers, regulators, customers and competitors in attending the industry’s most important gathering.

For 12 years The Canadian Telecom Summit has been the place for Canada’s ICT leaders to meet, interact and do business. As in past years, this year’s Summit will feature high-octane interaction, top-level keynote speakers and thought-provoking panel discussions.

Defining our place in a digital world: As connectivity expands to include billions of devices and machines in our homes and businesses, how does Canada stake out a leading position in an increasingly digital world? How do our networks and our industry need to change? The 2013 Canadian Telecom Summit’s keynote speakers and panelists will address these points, giving you a chance to hear about service deployment, what is in store for next generation business models, and underlying all of this, the technologies that continue to drive the! industry forward.

As always, The Canadian Telecom Summit features cutting-edge topics. This year, in addition to our always popular Regulatory Blockbuster, we are featuring sessions devoted to Business Transformation & Strategic Sourcing; Devices, Screens & Apps; Network Transformation; Business Models in a Converged World; Consumer Issues; The Revolution of TV: Content Anywhere & Anyhow; Building an Innovation Economy; CIO Roundtable; and, The Next Generation of Wireless.

The Canadian Telecom Summit has something for everyone! It leaves no stone unturned in bringing you the most substantive and comprehensive line-up of speakers and topics. Hear from senior executives from across the industry. Meet with your suppliers, customers and peers for 3 full days of thought provoking interaction.

Early bird pricing is in effect through the end of February. Register now to save more than $200.

I had an interesting engagement on Twitter earlier today. I replied and retweeted a question from Rogers that asked if I would use social media from my TV:

Not if I want to keep my followers RT @rogersbuzz: Would you tweet from your TV? @torontostartech looks at Smart TVs bit.ly/11pFkVE

— Mark Goldberg (@Mark_Goldberg) February 6, 2013

My answer has presumed an automatic twitter feed that would let me followers know about each channel selection or program change. For the record, I un-follow people who have Foursquare connect to their Twitter feed. To me, that is noise, not information. I don’t care if you are now the mayor of Burger King.

The Toronto Star video shows them testing the voice recognition capability that allows you to input a Twitter or Facebook update via the TV remote.

I don’t get it.

This strikes me as engineers building a capability because they can, not necessarily based on common sense. My social media activity is from me. It is personal. A big screen TV belongs to the household, and it is a shared viewing experience. It strikes me as selfish to interrupt a group viewing experience for a personal indulgence.

Think of security issues as well. The idea of having to log in and log-out of a TV in order to protect the integrity of my social media feed is more than I could take.

We have seen the transition from household based telephones to personal based mobile devices. We know that many people watch TV with mobile devices and tablets in hand, precisely so that they can add personal commentary on social media, from their personal appliances.

Social media on a big screen TV strikes me as an idea with appeal limited to people who have no family or friends who ever come to visit.

I doubt that would be much of a selling feature.

In a blog post, Sandvine announced that for the second year in a row, the Super Bowl was seen as an event that led to a 15% reduction in overall internet traffic, despite being available as a streaming video feed for United States viewers.

The blog says “Sandvine’s traffic statistics have showed continued growth in adoption of live streamed sports events, but for the time being it is no threat to replace viewing via traditional broadcast methods.”

As Sandvine observed, for the Super Bowl, it makes sense that most people would prefer to watch the game on large screen HDTVs.

After this is live event TV – an unofficial holiday when so many of us gather with friends, eating massive quantities of foods that we swore off a month ago in our New Year’s Resolutions. Broadcasting is the right technology for such content distribution.

But how many of us had narrow band sidebar checks at different parts of the game, trying to look up different statistics in order to provide our own colour commentary? Perhaps you checked your mobile device after the second half kick-off return for a record breaking touchdown run.

What role did the internet play in your Super Bowl viewing experience?

Sandvine CEO Dave Caputo will be speaking at The 2013 Canadian Telecom Summit on a panel looking at Business Models in a Converged World.

Many observers of the Canadian telecommunications regulatory world have characterized the new CRTC chair, JP Blais, as sending strong pro-consumer signals – is that to say that previous chairs were anti-consumer? In an article called “Make no mistake, this is a new CRTC“, we are told “In four months, Blais has transformed the CRTC into a pro-consumer advocate, creating the kind of regulatory agency that few thought imaginable.”

Two decisions issued today signal a balance that helps to signal a greater level of predictability and stability that should give comfort to, if not encourage the investment community.

The first decision was the CRTC’s rejection of an application by Primus to delay the effective date of relaxation of regulation on certain wholesale services that were defined in the Essential Services decision of 2008.

The other decision was the CRTC’s rejection of applications by Iristel and Ice Wireless to order Northwestel to stop competing. Yes, that is really what they asked for. The CRTC’s summery states:

In this decision, the Commission denies Ice Wireless’s and Iristel’s request that it direct Northwestel to cease and desist launching new competitive services and reducing rates for existing services until the Commission has completed all proceedings related to the establishment of the competitive environment in Northwestel’s serving territory.

In the Northwestel case, it could be argued that the CRTC is just showing its “pro-consumer” bent. Of course consumers would want access now to new services and lower prices. But, I would like to think that the CRTC looks at the longer term impact, beyond the immediate gratification.

As such, what are the messages that emerge from today’s decisions? These are outcomes that are predictable, which is a characteristic that all stakeholders should be looking for. Competitors need to be prepared to compete; incumbents should be expected to get returns from their investments  and respond in a competitive marketplace.

And that is what delivers long term benefits to consumers.