FEED: You mentioned that idea of public service. Most of the platforms, technology and infrastructure we use are in private hands. Does this need to change?
HOWARD HOMONOFF: In short, yes.The question then is, what should we do about it?The States has always – and some might say to a fault – been private enterprise focused. More or less, the government allocated broadcast frequencies to private parties, who didn’t have to pay for those broadcast licences. But what we did in broadcasting – and then cable – was make certain public interest demands, which have been lessened over time.We used to have the Fairness Doctrine – if you had a broadcast licence and, for example, televised public affairs handling controversial issues, you had to treat them in a in a fair manner.There was an equal time doctrine, where both sides had an opportunity to be heard. In the cable world, you had more or less free reign over what you carried on your system, but with some allocation for local access, public education and governmental
channels. And cable operators also had to pay – and still do – a franchise fee to the local community, based on their revenues. So, you didn’t have public ownership, but you did have responsibilities to the people. Will, or should, the government own Amazon, Facebook or Netflix? I don’t think that’s realistic, or the solution. But we should be thinking hard about what
“WE SHOULD BE THINKING HARD ABOUT WHAT RESPONSIBILITIES THESE BIG COMPANIES HAVE TO THE PUBLIC”
responsibilities these big companies have
to the public.There are important questions around privacy.That’s an area in which Europe is taking the lead, demanding greater protections for personal data. Equally, you could look at how these platforms handle news and public affairs. Or, you could consider representation – should companies have to provide some subsidy to low-income people? These are all things that we have done in the past.
feedmagazine.tv
Powered by FlippingBook