Colin Rhinesmith

There is a public hearing tomorrow at the State House at 10am in Gardner Auditorium. The future of locally produced community television, Public, Educational, and Goverment access cable in Massachusettes hangs in the balance of bill sponsored by Verizon that will be debated by those who support and oppose the bill.

But there is much more at stake, including the ability for local governments to retain control over their public rights-of-way (city streets and sidewalks) and to ensure access to enhanced communications technologies (e.g., Verizon FiOS TV and high speed internet) for residents in all communities, not just the wealthiest, in Massachusetts.

In searching the web to find what people are saying about the hearing tomorrow, I found a helpful post with some good discussion about the bill over on Dan Kennedy’s blog. Dan provides some great background on the issues, including a space for those who support and oppose the bill to debate. He also highlights Nolan Bowie’s Op-Ed in the Globe today. Nolan Bowie is adjunct lecturer in public policy and a senior fellow of the Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy at Harvard University. He writes

Verizon’s new proposal would reduce the number of dedicated access channels and it would cost municipalities more to produce locally responsive and relevant content and operate local access channels.”

Cambridge Community Television (where I serve on the Board) writes

Verizon is pressing hard to change the way that cable companies do business in the Commonwealth. They have proposed a bill at the State House that threatens CCTV’s channels and funding, as well as the City’s control over our streets and sidewalks. We need YOU to come to the State House on June 5th at 10 AM to tell our legislators to Kill the Bill!”

Here’s some bullet points regarding what Verizon has to say about the “Cable Choice and Competition Act” (thanks to Dan for the link):

• The Massachusetts Cable Choice and Competition Act will accelerate cable competition in Massachusetts.
• This bill is a win for our customers and for local governments.
• This legislation is good for the Commonwealth.

Personally, I oppose this bill (not a surprise by the title of this blog post). Local access to community media and information, via cable TV, helps to strengthen communities. Public access TV centers are community centers where people come together, learn from one and another, and have a place to tell their own stories directly to others, via cable TV, in their communities. I have been inspired by many of the people I have met from communities in Massachusetts and across the country whose lives have been enriched because of their involvement in public access TV.

If this bill passes, I hope our legislators will ensure that Verizon keeps its promise to provide franchise fees for PEG TV and to allow municipalities to retain full rights over their public rights-of-way, as the Verizon site says. If our legislators fail, then we should be prepared for a drastic reduction in resources that would have helped to ensure that all residents of Massachusetts receive fair and equal service and are ensured a public space on cable TV where locally produced news and information could be accessed.

I trust Nolan Bowie’s views on this issue because I’ve spoken with him and respect his judgment. I trust the position of Cambridge Community Television on this issue because I serve on the board there and believe strongly in their mission and the mission of public access TV more broadly. I trust Dan Kennedy when he writes, “In fact, the bill represents a massive assault on local media by the telecom giant Verizon”, because I have followed Dan’s work for a number of years and trust his reporting.

Whatever side you’re on tomorrow is an opportunity to participate in the practice of democracy and make your voice heard.

Community Media, PEGTV, Public Access TV, Telecom Legislation