Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Consequences of increased competition on basic existing telecom services
Competition in the mobile phone market
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The Telecommunications Act of 1996
The Telecommunications Act of 1996 can be termed as a major overhaul of the communications law in the past sixty-two years. The main aim of this Act is to enable any communications firm to enter the market and compete against one another based on fair and just practices (“The Telecommunications Act 1996,” The Federal Communications Commission). This Act has the potential to radically change the lives of the people in a number of different ways. For instance it has affected the telephone services both local and long distance, cable programming and other video services, broadcast services and services provided to schools. The Federal Communications Commission has actively endorsed this Act and has worked towards the enforcement and implementation of the various clauses listed in the document. The Act was basically brought into existence in order to promote competition and reduce regulation so that lower prices and higher quality services for the Americans consumers may be secured.
Of particular importance is the deregulation of the telecommunications industry as mentioned in the act (“Implementation of the Telecommunications Act,” NTLA). This reflects a new thinking that service providers should not be limited by artificial and now antique regulatory categories but should be permitted to compete with each other in a robust marketplace that contains many diverse participants. Moreover the Act is evidence of governmental commitment to make sure that all citizens have access to advanced communication services at affordable prices through its “universal service” provisions even as competitive markets for the telecommunications industry expand. Prior to passage of this new Act, U.S. federal and state laws and a judicially established consent decree allowed some competition for certain services, most notably among long distance carriers. Universal service for basic telephony was a national objective, but one developed and shaped through federal and state regulations and case law (“Telecommunications Act of 1996,” Technology Law). The goal of universal service was referred to only in general terms in the Communications Act of 1934, the nation's basic telecommunications statute. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 among other things: (i) opens up competition by local telephone companies, long distance providers, and cable companies ...
... middle of paper ...
...ns especially when it came to deregulating the telecommunications industry. The new law was expected to bring radical changes to the communications industry, providing high quality services to the masses at minimal cost. The act was also designed with the specific purpose of ensuring that advanced telecommunications will be available to every citizen as part of the policy for universal service. The FCC and the states, as the regulatory bodies, implement the law. Its been over three years since the law was passed and most critics have claimed that nothing worthwhile came out of the act besides the mergers of course. Ultimately however, the services brought to the public will depend on the providers of those services and their success in the marketplace.
Bibliography
1. “The Telecommunications Act of 1996.” Available online at: http://www.fcc.gov/telecom.html
2. “Implementation of the Telecommunications Act.” Available online at: http://www.ntia.doc.gov/opadhome/opad_act.htm
3. “The Telecommunications Act of 1996.” Available online at: http://www.technologylaw.com/act.html
Perhaps no other company has benefited more from this deregulation than the company which is the focus of this essay – Clear Channel Communications, Inc (CC). The Telecommunications Act and the actions of the FCC paved the way for the rise of this radio industry behemoth. In 1995, the company owned 43 radio stations nationwide. By 2002, it owned 1,239, making it the largest radio company in th...
B) The critical issue is that Comcast, the biggest internet and cable provider in the nation, is seeking to become even bigger in merging with Time Warner Cable, the second biggest company in the market. This merger will increase the influence Comcast has on TV channels and internet content providers, leaving consumers with fewer alternatives and will reduce competition to the amount where Comcast will control two thirds’ of the cable TV market and about 40% of ...
All in all i feel the govt. ought to regulate cable, telephones, and broadcasting as natural monopolies as a result of it's usually most effective to maintain natural monopolies, if they honestly ar natural monopolies, however subject them to some variety of government regulation with relation to costs, quality of service, etc. the rationale for not breaking it up is, of course, by definition, the actual fact that a natural monopoly will attain a lower cost than might competitive companies within the same trade. This contrasts with the case for different kinds of monopolies, that it's typically most effective for them to be variable into competitive companies.
The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act brought the most significant changes to financial regulation in the United States since the reform that followed the Great Depression. It made changes in the American financial regulatory environment that affect all federal financial regulatory agencies and almost every part of the nation’s financial services industry. Like Glass-Steagall, the legislation passed after the Great Depression, it sought to regulate the financial markets and make another economic crisis less likely. Banks were deregulated in 1999 by the Gramm-Leach-Biley Act, which repealed the Glass-Steagall Act and essentially allowed for the excessive risk taken on by banks that caused the most recent financial crisis. The Financial Stability Oversight Council was established through the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and was created to address the systemic risks in the United States financial system and to improve coordination among financial regulators.
Broadcasting involves specific rules and regulations that must be followed. The paramount justification for regulating broadcast is the scarcity rationale. The radio spectrum is extremely large, and cannot assist the needs of everyone who wants to broadcast. The spectrum as a whole relies on the government to manage and operate it. It is up to them to decide what broadcasters will best serve the public. A scarcity rationale case, NBC v. United States arose when regulations and restrictions were put on radio stations that were to protect “public interest.” Radio Networks proceeded to test the guidelines and licensing laws, resulting in the FCC gaining strong power over regulations of the radio spectrum. Although the Communications Act provides equal opportunities to all candidates with equivalent broadcast time, it still did not confine the FCC from having overall control.
Berners-Lee’s creation of the world wide web has allowed millions upon millions of people to connect and share their ideas in a way that is instantaneous and free. Accessing the internet itself costs no money, it’s acquiring the connection that often costs money. The companies that provide this connection are called ISPs or internet service providers, unfortunately many cities only offer a few options when it comes to ISPs, this lack of competition in the market often creates a monopoly or duopoly where one or two companies provide internet for an entire city, having complete control over the prices they offer and the services they allow. The Obama era net neutrality rules which were repealed by Trump’s FCC “required internet service providers to offer equal access to all web content without charging consumers for higher-quality delivery or giving preferential treatment to certain websites” (Collins), without these regulations service providers can slow service for companies and consumers that don’t pay premiums, creating a discriminatory environment where companies might interfere with comments that make them look bad, block certain applications that they compete with, remove access to union sites during a labor issue, or increase their own profit by making developers pay more to avoid having their data
In the 1990s, the telecommunications market was rapidly changing with the addition of new entrants from a competition standpoint that were forcing WorldCom to decrease prices. Long term leases for
Effective competition is widely seen as a key to the development of telecommunications services. The ability of new telecommunications networks to interconnect fairly and efficiently with existing networks is critical to the development of competition. AT&T has undergone numerous changes since its inception in the late 19th century. The McKinsey 7 S framework as applied by Pascale is recommended to manage the changes they are facing to adopt a greater competitive presence in the global economy. In conjunction with this framework, numerous other models were applied to analyse the global competitive position of AT&T. Recommendations for a revised strategy and direction for AT&T have been made throughout this document including two scenarios of how the telecommunications industry might develop towards 2000, while outlining the impact on AT&T.
This is the main reason why the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) independent agency of the United States government was created in 1934. The function of the commission is to regulate interstate and foreign radio, television, wire, and cable communications. To provide for orderly development and operation of broadcasting services, to provide for rapid, efficient nationwide and worldwide telegraph and telephone service.
Consumers are harmed when a single company can use its power as a distributor to control what content and programming people can access nationwide. Such ‘gatekeeper’ power would allow Comcast to raise costs for rivals, keep programming from being available on new online platforms, interfere with the open Internet, control the market for streaming video devices, and charge Internet companies for access to its massive customer base. This merger could have other side-effects as well--such as decreased consumer privacy, worse customer service, and slower broadband deployment.
This paper will examine some of these changes and try to determine if indeed changes are in order. Issues will be presented from the public manager’s perspective and the position of the justice system, relative to their affect upon citizens. Is it necessary to institute some form of desirable control or regulation over the Internet? If so, will an inordinate amount of public freedom be sacrificed in the process? These questions will be addressed, along with analyzing present policy and possible directions for future legislation.
Throughout the 1970s, concerted industry efforts at the federal, state and local levels resulted in continued lessening of cable restrictions. These changes, couples with cables pioneering to satellite communications technology, led to a pronounced growth of services to consumers and a substantial increase in cable subscribers.
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has worked to create an environment promoting competition and innovation to benefit consumers. Historically, the FCC has not regulated the Internet or the services provided over it. On February 12, 2004, the FCC found that an entirely Internet-based VoIP service was an unregulated information service.
In fact, some of the biggest threats to the company’s growth are the government’s regulation that increases the risk to the underlying business. In addition, the risk of losing the exclusive contract for the iPhone would be a major loss for AT&T. Most of the consumers choose AT&T because of their exclusive contract for the iPhone. Hence, this loss of business will significantly influence the AT&T's profitability and revenue. Moreover, the antitrust authorities play an important role on approved the merger of AT&T.
In the early days of the telephone there was no competition for phone service providers like there is now. With no competition the phone company (Bell) was able to have a monopoly and run up the prices for a call. The national government would recommend a change in rates but the phone company would take its time with the decision taking days, months, or even years. To change this, the federal government should go after monopolies and allow competition on the local level. By increased competition, it would keep prices at a honest level and keep things market driven which would make for a more creative and competitive environment.