Search Results for: literacy

Next Tuesday, the CRTC’s New Media hearings open in Gatineau. The Commission has scheduled time for oral presentations through the middle of March.

As we described last October, the proceeding is looking at how Canada’s broadcasting system is affected by new mechanisms, such as the internet and mobile devices, as contrasted with traditional over-the-air and cable delivery.

The Commission sought responses to six main themes, the third of which has attracted calls for a levy to fund Canadian content:

1. Defining broadcasting in new media
2. The significance of broadcasting in new media and its impact on the Canadian broadcasting system
3. Are incentives or regulatory measures necessary or desirable for the creation and promotion of Canadian broadcasting content in new media?
4. Are there issues concerning access to broadcasting content in new media?
5. Other broadcasting or public policy objectives
6. The appropriateness of the new media exemption orders

There are a number of different visions being set in front of the Commission.

CBC does not yet see evidence of new media displacing conventional TV viewing, given stability in weekly TV viewing hours. It notes that

most of the professional video content that is being consumed on the Internet continues to originate from traditional media. At the present time and into the foreseeable future we see new media and traditional media as being co-dependent.

CBC also observes that its new media broadcasting activities are not self-supporting at this time, nor does CBC expect this to change in the near to medium term.

Many creative groups are calling for ISPs and mobile operators to contribute to a new fund to support the creation of Canadian content. Others are telling the CRTC to keep its light touch, if not hands-off, approach to new media.

In his October, 2008 speech at the Canadian Association of Broadcasters’ convention, Ofcom Chair Philip Graf said that the UK regulator viewed its role as more of a facilitator than regulator. CAB’s submission quotes him suggesting that government should:

• Encourage providers to develop classification, search and filtering systems that parents can use to inform themselves and protect their children.
• Promote transparency and informed consent for adults, for example in the areas of behavioural advertising.
• Promote kite marking and branding by responsible site operators including those of the traditional broadcasters and newspapers who have web sites and
• Promote media literacy so that parents and children understand how to sensibly access, understand and use material.

We’ll be monitoring to see how the Canadian model unfolds.

---

Update [February 10, 9:10 am]
Thanks to Pamela for pointing out that the hearings are only running for 2 days next week [Tuesday and Wednesday (Feb 17/18) before resuming for a week on Feb 23, taking a week off and finishing during the week of March 9. The agenda that shows who is appearing on each day can be found on the CRTC website.

On Thursday of last week, the UK released its interim Digital Britain report, setting out a strategy for building their knowledge economy.

The report contains more than 20 recommendations, including specific proposals on network issues as well as cultural issues such as the future of radio and intellectual property rights.

Of most immediate relevance to regulatory activities underway in Canada, the report sees no grounds for net neutrality legislation. It is concerned that net neutrality regulation might prevent pricing innovation, differentiation of offers and serve to discourage investment in higher-speed access networks.

Ofcom has stated that provided consumers are properly informed, such new business models could be an important part of the investment case for Next Generation Access, provided consumers are properly informed.

On the same basis, the Government has yet to see a case for legislation in favour of net neutrality. In consequence, unless Ofcom find network operators or ISPs to have Significant Market Power and justify intervention on competition grounds, traffic management will not be prevented.

The full report can be downloaded [ pdf, 1.07MB]. It sets out 5 main objectives:

• Upgrading and modernizing Britain’s digital networks – wired, wireless and broadcast – so that Britain has an infrastructure that enables it to remain globally competitive in the digital world;
• Creating a dynamic investment climate for UK digital content, applications and services, that makes the UK an attractive place for both domestic and inward investment in our digital economy;
• UK content for UK users: content of quality and scale that serves the interests, experiences and needs of all UK citizens; in particular impartial news, comment and analysis;
• Fairness and access for all: universal availability coupled with the skills and digital literacy to enable near-universal participation in the digital economy and digital society; and
• Developing the infrastructure, skills and take-up to enable the widespread online delivery of public services and business interface with Government.

Note that in the fourth bullet, universal availability is tied to near-universal adoption. As I wrote in November, as we increase broadband service availability, we need to focus on getting people to actually get on-line.

The Digital Britain report calls for a digital Universal Service Commitment to be effective by 2012, delivered by a mixture of fixed and mobile, wired and wireless means. Their target is a modest 2Mbps service. There are no suggestions on how to fund this Commitment – that is left to later.

How will Britain address service adoption? It will encourage the development of public service champions of universal take-up.

Technorati Tags:
Digital Britain, net neutrality

I had breakfast with a colleague last week and we were speaking about the growing chorus calling for various levels of governments to set out their innovation vision. I have some thoughts that have emerged from that meeting that I plan to share over the next few days.

I noticed that the Hill Times had a special Innovation supplement on November 5 with various interest groups submitting textual versions of the Ottawa handshake – you know the move – hold your right hand in front of you, palm facing to the left, straighten elbow, cup your hand and rotate it upward. Michael Geist’s column in that section has a subtitle that says we need more than tax breaks to maximize the value of research. I agree.

Let’s go back a few years. When the National Broadband Task Force was launched, its objective was to explore the best approaches to make high-speed broadband Internet services available to businesses and residents in all Canadian communities by 2004.

Unfortunately, as we approach the end of the year 2007, we still aren’t there.

In any case, I’d submit that broadband availability was insufficient as an ultimate goal; it is just a piece of the solution space. One step along the way.

If we are looking for Canada to lead in electronic literacy, what programs are we willing to establish to get there? This ties to a couple of my comments last week about the need to create the right environment to enable all citizens to be drinking from the digital fountain of knowledge.

Are any of the provinces willing to move forward on their own to set their own digital objectives? Across the broad spectrum of agencies, health care appears to have the lowest hanging fruit.

Ontario’s premier Dalton McGuinty has established a new $165M venture fund to “help create the jobs of the future by boosting cutting-edge companies here in the province”. It is an important contribution. But it strikes me as similar to making a charitable donation in lieu of rolling up your sleeves to volunteer sweat. We need governments to commit more than just money.

For an innovation strategy to take hold, can we energize further progress by changing the way government and public institutions deliver services?

For example, why are medical diagnostic labs still producing radiological films that require physical media rather than digital images? Doctors still keeping illegible paper records. Under a digital strategy, provinces would set a firm date by which all labs must upgrade in order to continue to be licensed or receive funding. Doctors – prepare to digitize your records.

What is the bold vision? Where is the leadership across all sectors and all levels of government to drive spending consistent with that innovation agenda. Where will innovation rank on political agendas?