A few stories about web domain names caught my attention yesterday.

• Canadian band The Tea Party could sell its domain name to the US political movement for $1M or more
• Animal rights activists PETA will launch a .XXX porn site to raise awareness of veganism

Earlier this summer, we read of the scramble to protect corporate brands from the risk of parodies hijacked under the .XXX domain. Further, virtually infinite expansion of internet names agreed by ICANN this past June will present a further challenge to protecting their image.

Canada’s Internet Registry, CIRA, concludes its candidates forum today with voting in its election opening tomorrow. There are real differences between the candidates; if you are a member, be sure to exercise your vote.

The New York Times section in yesterday’s Toronto Star carried an article that first appeared on September 2 “A Digital Plan to Help India’s Poor.”  India is in the midst of creating a biometric database of its 1.2 billion citizens.

But even more radical than its size is the scale of its ambition: to reduce the inequality corroding India’s economic rise by digitally linking every one of India’s people to the country’s growth juggernaut.

The system is intended to be used to verify identities anywhere in the country within eight seconds, using inexpensive hand-held devices linked to mobile phone networks. Of course, the story notes that privacy watchdogs worry about abuse of the identity numbers by state agencies that pay little attention to civil liberties.

The approach, to implement the massive system using veterans from India’s private technology sector is intriguing. The project is intentionally avoiding being captive to the massive bureaucracy that characterizes India’s civil service.

How can digital technology be used to improve conditions for Canada’s lower income households? In the past, I have written about the need to increase the number of homes with computers in the lowest income quintile. Currently only half of these households have a computer. How can we improve the ability of all Canadians to participate in a digital economy?

The major phone and cable companies are suggesting that Open Media is trying to collect twice for one set of bills.

On September 1, CIPPIC filed a costs application on behalf of Open Media, seeking compensation for its participation in the usage based billing proceeding. But, as Bell pointed out in its reply to the costs application, Open Media had raised funds specifically for this regulatory proceeding. Not only did Open Media have a very visible fundraising campaign, but they received substantial matching financial support from independent ISPs Acanac and Teksavvy.

The CRTC guidelines are pretty clear on this point [see para. 44 of TRP 2010-963]:

In the event that an applicant has received or will receive financial assistance in connection with its participation, then the amount of allowable costs shall be reduced by that amount

Cost awards end up raising prices for all consumers. How would you judge this application?

While feeding at the public trough, Canada’s association of campus radio stations apparently want to censor other media voices.

At its annual general meeting in Halifax this year, the National Campus Radio Association passed a resolution (Resolution 2011-F7) calling for “a comprehensive boycott of Israeli media institutions at the national and international levels”, including a call to “Refrain from participation in any form of cooperation, collaboration or joint projects with Israeli media institutions”.

I won’t get into the politics other than to point out that Israel is the only country whose media have been selected for censorship by NCRA, despite its institutions being independent, operating within the only democracy in the region.

What I will look at are the regulatory and communications policy issues raised by this. For example, presentation of diverse viewpoints is a key policy under the Broadcasting Act:

3. (1) It is hereby declared as the broadcasting policy for Canada that

…
(d) the Canadian broadcasting system should

…
(iii) through its programming and the employment opportunities arising out of its operations, serve the needs and interests, and reflect the circumstances and aspirations, of Canadian men, women and children, including equal rights, the linguistic duality and multicultural and multiracial nature of Canadian society and the special place of aboriginal peoples within that society, …

The CAB Code of Ethics requires

Clause 6 – Full, Fair and Proper Presentation

It is recognized that the full, fair and proper presentation of news, opinion, comment and editorial is the prime and fundamental responsibility of each broadcaster. This principle shall apply to all radio and television programming, whether it relates to news, public affairs, magazine, talk, call-in, interview or other broadcasting formats in which news, opinion, comment or editorial may be expressed by broadcaster employees, their invited guests or callers.

Clause 7 – Controversial Public Issues

Recognizing in a democracy the necessity of presenting all sides of a public issue, it shall be the responsibility of broadcasters to treat fairly all subjects of a controversial nature. Time shall be allotted with due regard to all the other elements of balanced program schedules, and the degree of public interest in the questions presented. Recognizing that healthy controversy is essential to the maintenance of democratic institutions, broadcasters will endeavour to encourage the presentation of news and opinion on any controversy which contains an element of the public interest.

The campus radio association resolution is troubling in that it flies in the face of balance required under the Act and under the industry codes. How can a “fair, full and proper presentation” of controversial issues be provided if the democratic free press of a Canadian ally are being silenced by this boycott?

In July, a month after the NCRA meeting, the CRTC handed millions of dollars to campus radio stations [Broadcasting Regulatory Policy CRTC 2011-431]. That decision approved the Operational Plan [pdf] of the Community Radio Fund of Canada (CRFC), which affirms its continued accountability to the CRTC in Section C of the plan. “The CRFC also welcomes questions from the Commission throughout the year.”

It seems to me that the CRTC may wish to file a question with the CRFC to determine if the CRFC will establish, as a condition of funding an individual station, an assurance that the station will not silence diverse perspectives and will distance itself from media censorship.

The imagery of high school pep rallies is appropriate in the first week of school. Very few schools are chanting “We’re number 12.” But that is Canada’s place in the latest ranking from the World Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness Index.

There are a number of areas that bring Canada down, such as the Macroeconomic Environment scores, which examines factors such as Government budget balance (as a percentage of GDP), national savings, inflation, general government debt and the country’s credit rating. Given the state of so many other countries, it is unclear why Canada’s relative ranking is so poor on government debt factors. I found the most interesting data points were the responses to naming the most problematic factors for doing business. Seventeen percent of responses cited “Inefficient government bureaucracy”.

I was exposed to this yesterday as I discovered that Canada’s passport office felt it needed to give two year’s notice to make changes enabling a 10 year passport. Keep in mind that most places require a passport to have 6 months remaining on a passport when entering a country, so a 5 year passport really needs renewal after 54 months. So, every four and a half years, you have the pleasure of being grounded while Canada Post and Passport Canada delay your application by mail. Alternatively, you can throw away your personal productivity by visiting a passport office in person. Does it not seem bizarre that the improvement to this bureaucratic mess requires a consultation and two years advance notice, with no firm readiness date other than “some time in 2012”? It is a little annoyance, symptomatic of government red-tape that doesn’t consider the detrimental impact on international business and lost productivity.

With Parliament returning to session at the end of this month, let’s hope that a majority government can motivate its all of its departments to operate with a greater sense of urgency. Canada’s national digital economic strategy consultation was launched in May of 2010. The Industry Minister, together with colleagues from Heritage and Human Resources, should soon provide leadership to drive Canada towards regaining a top-10 ranking in Global Competitiveness.