Recent Articles:

Comcast’s Fabulous Spread for Hill and White House Staffers; Hand-Rolled Cigars, Gourmet Meals

Phillip Dampier May 5, 2014 Comcast/Xfinity, Competition, Public Policy & Gov't Comments Off on Comcast’s Fabulous Spread for Hill and White House Staffers; Hand-Rolled Cigars, Gourmet Meals
MSNBC: The hoi polloi of DC and beyond mingle at the MSNBC after party at the National Building Museum in Washington, D.C. Comcast pays the bills.

MSNBC: The hoi polloi of DC and beyond mingle at the MSNBC after party at the National Building Museum in Washington, D.C.
Comcast pays the bills.

After the inside-the-beltway media and a who’s who of D.C. political celebrities finished hobnobbing at this weekend’s White House Correspondents’ Dinner, Capitol Hill and White House staffers that usually spend their free time at Starbucks or the nearest watering hole were treated to something special this year, courtesy of everybody’s favorite cable company.

Comcast, using the MSNBC brand to keep things from being too obvious, splurged on an after-party-to-remember at the National Building Museum. Only a select crowd got invitations to the bash, featuring hand-rolled cigars and the best cigar cutters, Bravo’s Top Chef contestants preparing their signature dishes, an open bar, and plush couches to enjoy a set played by Jimmy Eat World.

“We see a lot of money thrown around D.C., but not money like this. They pulled out all the stops,” an insider who works closely with NBC told New York magazine. “I go to 200 events a year. And this is like, whoa.”

In addition to MSNBC’s on-air talent, the invitation list focused on Congress and White House staffers, a group normally left off the guest list of corporate-sponsored receptions and dinners.

It is no coincidence the bash was being paid for by Comcast, which is currently currying favor for its $45 billion deal to acquire Time Warner Cable.

“These are all staffers that go out for five-dollar happy hours; they don’t get invited to stuff like this,” the insider said.

“The committee staffers, they advise their bosses, the harried senators and congressmen who don’t have enough time to do their own research on whether or not the merger makes sense,” the insider added. They are going to come in here and they are going to drink and eat, they’re going to bring their girlfriend and they’re going to get laid, and then they’ll go, ‘Wow, this Comcast-Time Warner thing is not such a bad thing.'”

Online Access to Viacom Programming Blocked for Cable ONE Customers

Phillip Dampier May 1, 2014 Cable One, Consumer News, Online Video Comments Off on Online Access to Viacom Programming Blocked for Cable ONE Customers

cableoneViacom has blocked website content for Cable ONE customers in an escalating dispute with the cable company over the cost of the programmer’s cable networks.

Cable ONE dropped 15 Viacom channels from its cable systems nationwide April 1 claiming Viacom’s contract renewal price was unreasonable. Subscribers found a way around the dispute by accessing Viacom streamed content online. This week, Viacom closed that loophole and blocked access to all streaming content for Cable ONE subscribers.

“Cable One has chosen to no longer carry Viacom programming and, as a result, it is no longer available to Cable One customers in any form,” Viacom said in a terse statement.

All 730,000 Cable ONE customers in 19 states found the Viacom networks replaced on the cable lineup with alternative programming from BBC America, Sprout, The Blaze, Hallmark Channel, National Geographic, Investigation Discovery, TV One and SundanceTV.

Cable ONE is used to playing hardball with programmers and dropped Time Warner-owned Turner Network programming from its systems for three weeks last fall over a similar dispute, now resolved.

There is no word about the current status of negotiations between Viacom and Cable ONE.

 

FCC’s Tom Wheeler Promises to “Preempt” State Laws Banning Municipal Broadband

LUS Fiber if Lafayette, La., municipal broadband provider.

LUS Fiber is Lafayette, La., municipal broadband provider.

During remarks at the National Cable Show in Los Angeles, FCC chairman Thomas Wheeler promised he would stimulate more broadband competition by overriding state laws that presently restrict or ban municipal broadband networks.

“One place where it may be possible is municipally owned or authorized broadband systems. I understand that the experience with community broadband is mixed, that there have been both successes and failures. But if municipal governments—the same ones that granted cable franchises—want to pursue it, they shouldn’t be inhibited by state laws. I have said before, that I believe the FCC has the power – and I intend to exercise that power – to preempt state laws that ban competition from community broadband.”

After making the remarks, a debate has emerged over the exact definition of “preempt.” With at least 20 states limiting or banning community-owned broadband networks, the FCC would have to overturn or invalidate the state laws to render them moot.

At least one judge — Laurence Silberman — believes the FCC has the authority to take “measures that promote competition in the local telecommunications market or other regulating methods that remove barriers to infrastructure investment.” In a footnote, Silberman wrote that “[a]n example of a paradigmatic barrier to infrastructure investment would be state laws that prohibit municipalities from creating their own broadband infrastructure to compete against private companies.”

A FCC spokesperson, in response to inquiries about Wheeler’s remarks, was less conclusive.

“It’s too early to say how [Wheeler] will address existing state laws,” said the spokesperson.

That leaves open the question about whether the FCC intends to cancel existing state laws or simply prohibit new ones from being enacted. That distinction could make a tremendous difference in states like North Carolina, where a fierce battle over protecting municipal broadband was lost when Republicans took control of the state government. Telecom lobbyists, often working under the auspices of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) have either directly banned municipal broadband networks from getting off the ground or placed so many restrictions on service to make projects untenable.

The Consumerist points out in Pennsylvania, municipal broadband is only allowed in communities if a telephone company does not provide any type of broadband to anyone in their service area. In Nevada, only towns with fewer than 25,000 people or counties with 50,000 can host community-owned broadband networks — numbers likely too low to sustain such a venture financially.

Glenn Britt’s Money Party Continues: Ex-Time Warner CEO Sells Another $4.2 Million in Stock

Phillip Dampier May 1, 2014 Consumer News Comments Off on Glenn Britt’s Money Party Continues: Ex-Time Warner CEO Sells Another $4.2 Million in Stock
Britt

Britt

While your cable bill reached an all-time high this year, Time Warner Cable’s retired CEO Glenn Britt dumped another 30,000 shares of his stock in the cable company on Monday, raking in another $4,208,400.

Ordinary shareholders have to pay $140.28 a share for Time Warner Cable stock at this week’s prices. But Britt was able to acquire many of his shares at a substantial discount last fall – paying the executive-only discount “strike price” of just $23.48 a share.

It seems no matter how many shares Britt sells, he never seems to deplete his stock in Time Warner Cable. In January, Britt had 158,947 shares remaining in Time Warner Cable. But after selling 30,000 shares in February, his number of shares remaining actually increased to 177,542 shares. Despite this week’s sale, Britt still owns the same amount of stock — 177,542 shares — the same as before, worth $24.9 million at current prices.

Britt has sold about $4.3 million in Time Warner Cable stock just about every month since last fall, earning around $4.2-4.3 million a month.

North Carolina’s GOP Senate Candidates Fall All Over Themselves Attacking Net Neutrality

Net Neutrality = Socialism?

Net Neutrality = Socialism?

The four leading candidates in North Carolina’s Republican U.S. Senate primary, including one heavily backed by the state’s largest telecom companies, all said Monday they oppose Net Neutrality and would not allow the federal government to intervene in the business interests of cable and phone companies.

Dr. Greg Brannon, Heather Grant, Rev. Mark Harris, and current state House Speaker Thom Tillis all agreed during an hour-long televised debate that the government had no business telling companies like Time Warner Cable and AT&T how to manage Internet traffic.

Thom Tillis, who became speaker of the house in 2011, is heavily backed with financial contributions from AT&T, Time Warner Cable, and Verizon. While speaker, Tillis supported the Time Warner Cable-backed bill to ban community-owned broadband networks in the state and helped shepherd the legislation through the General Assembly.

Tillis told viewers that North Carolina customers already have a choice of Internet Service Providers so there is no reason for the government to interfere.

“The last thing we need is the government to tell cable providers and Internet providers how fast or slow the content needs to be,” Tillis said.

Tillis was honored in 2011 as ALEC's "Legislator of the Year" and received an undisclosed cash reward.

Tillis was honored in 2011 as ALEC’s “Legislator of the Year” and received an undisclosed cash reward.

Last year, Tillis was accused of having a secret business relationship with Time Warner Cable by Rep. Robert Brawley (R-Iredell), who resigned his chairmanship of the Finance Committee over the matter.

Brawley’s district is served in part by MI-Connection, a community-owned cable company that was prevented from expanding by a state law restricting municipal broadband.

“You slamming my office door shut, standing in front of me and stating that you have a business relationship with Time Warner,” Brawley wrote in his resignation letter. “MI-Connection is being operated just as any other free enterprise system and should be allowed to do so without the restrictions placed on them by the proponents of Time Warner.”

Dr. Brannon said without the Constitution giving direct authority for the federal government to regulate broadband, it cannot legally get involved. There was no broadband service to regulate when the Constitution was signed on September 17, 1787.

“The worst thing in the world we could do is for the federal government to put in barriers to make things fair,” Brannon said. Any attempt to impose fairness on Internet traffic would be a clear-cut case of socialism, Brannon added.

Grant and Harris both agreed with the others.

The four candidates are vying for the Senate seat held by Democrat Kay Hagan. She holds a different view.

“I support Net Neutrality because it speaks to the values central to our American Democracy – free speech and equal opportunity,” Hagan said in 2008. “With an open Internet, we can ensure communities throughout the state of North Carolina and the nation receive equal access to the Internet as well as the information contained there, to help ensure our country can compete on a global level.”

[flv]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/UNC-TV NC GOP Senate Debate 2014 – Net Neutrality – Free Market or Socialism 4-30-14.flv[/flv]

Watch occasionally incoherent remarks from four Republican candidates debating the Internet and Net Neutrality as part of the North Carolina Senate primary. (4:31)

Search This Site:

Contributions:

Recent Comments:

Your Account:

Stop the Cap!