<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Citizen Journalists and a Greedy Telecom Company&#039;s Policy</title>
	<atom:link href="http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/03/12/citizen-journalists-and-a-greedy-telecom-companys-policy/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/03/12/citizen-journalists-and-a-greedy-telecom-companys-policy/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 23 Aug 2009 21:40:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Dan Gillmor</title>
		<link>http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/03/12/citizen-journalists-and-a-greedy-telecom-companys-policy/comment-page-1/#comment-102</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan Gillmor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Mar 2006 01:49:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/03/12/citizen-journalists-and-a-greedy-telecom-companys-policy/#comment-102</guid>
		<description>You haven&#039;t begun to refute the reporting that Evslin -- formerly a senior telecom industry executive -- and others have done on this. I&#039;m not claiming corruption on the part of Pentagon procurement people, but to have a system that offers customers no alternatives, when it would not be difficult to offer them, is hardly a sign of smart planning.

And to suggest that no one would offer calling services if AT&amp;T bailed out of its sole-source and restrictive contract is ridiculous. Genuine competition would be a novel approach for this government.

You claim I have an &quot;agenda&quot; apart from being outraged. My beefs with the telecom industry on network neutrality are unrelated. But your insinuation prompts me to wonder: Do you have a separate agenda here?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You haven&#8217;t begun to refute the reporting that Evslin &#8212; formerly a senior telecom industry executive &#8212; and others have done on this. I&#8217;m not claiming corruption on the part of Pentagon procurement people, but to have a system that offers customers no alternatives, when it would not be difficult to offer them, is hardly a sign of smart planning.</p>
<p>And to suggest that no one would offer calling services if AT&#038;T bailed out of its sole-source and restrictive contract is ridiculous. Genuine competition would be a novel approach for this government.</p>
<p>You claim I have an &#8220;agenda&#8221; apart from being outraged. My beefs with the telecom industry on network neutrality are unrelated. But your insinuation prompts me to wonder: Do you have a separate agenda here?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jake</title>
		<link>http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/03/12/citizen-journalists-and-a-greedy-telecom-companys-policy/comment-page-1/#comment-101</link>
		<dc:creator>jake</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Mar 2006 01:00:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/03/12/citizen-journalists-and-a-greedy-telecom-companys-policy/#comment-101</guid>
		<description>Not to throw water on your &quot;Big Telecom Bashathon&quot;, but maybe you should consider:

This story comes up every time someone is having a policy dispute with the telecom industry. This time the issue is over “neutral” pricing for data services.  The last time it was objections to the initial consolidation of the Baby Bells.  And the time before that, the breakup of AT&amp;T.  One would think you guys could come up with a new story to use when trying to influence telecom policy.  This one is getting old.

The assumption in this storyline is that the cost of making calls from a war zone on the other side of the planet should be the same or similar to calls from metropolitan areas in Europe, Asia or wherever.  Mightn’t you all take into account the expense of operating in Iraq?

Further, implicate in the argument that AT&amp;T is “ripping off” our military is that there is limited oversight by the Pentagon procurement folks, or that they are incompetent, or (the most fun) they are corrupt.  For journalists, whose industry is rife with circulation scandals, agenda journalism and/or just plain bad product, to accuse our military people of not doing their jobs properly is pretty rich.

As a former Marine officer, I am as sympathetic as the next person (probably more) to the plight of our fighting forces overseas.  But I marvel at avalanche of articles on this subject, particularly in places that just happen to also think that telecom data pricing should be &quot;neutral&quot;, and from people who one can assume have little sympathy for our military folks.  Please excuse me if I&#039;m skeptical of your &quot;concern&quot;.

Of course Econ 101 tells us that if AT&amp;T can’t make a return on these services they will simply not offer them, leaving our military people no way to call home.  So if you have some evidence that the company is making monopoly profits in Iraq, let’s see the numbers.  Otherwise, just address the data service pricing directly and leave the military out of it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not to throw water on your &#8220;Big Telecom Bashathon&#8221;, but maybe you should consider:</p>
<p>This story comes up every time someone is having a policy dispute with the telecom industry. This time the issue is over “neutral” pricing for data services.  The last time it was objections to the initial consolidation of the Baby Bells.  And the time before that, the breakup of AT&amp;T.  One would think you guys could come up with a new story to use when trying to influence telecom policy.  This one is getting old.</p>
<p>The assumption in this storyline is that the cost of making calls from a war zone on the other side of the planet should be the same or similar to calls from metropolitan areas in Europe, Asia or wherever.  Mightn’t you all take into account the expense of operating in Iraq?</p>
<p>Further, implicate in the argument that AT&amp;T is “ripping off” our military is that there is limited oversight by the Pentagon procurement folks, or that they are incompetent, or (the most fun) they are corrupt.  For journalists, whose industry is rife with circulation scandals, agenda journalism and/or just plain bad product, to accuse our military people of not doing their jobs properly is pretty rich.</p>
<p>As a former Marine officer, I am as sympathetic as the next person (probably more) to the plight of our fighting forces overseas.  But I marvel at avalanche of articles on this subject, particularly in places that just happen to also think that telecom data pricing should be &#8220;neutral&#8221;, and from people who one can assume have little sympathy for our military folks.  Please excuse me if I&#8217;m skeptical of your &#8220;concern&#8221;.</p>
<p>Of course Econ 101 tells us that if AT&amp;T can’t make a return on these services they will simply not offer them, leaving our military people no way to call home.  So if you have some evidence that the company is making monopoly profits in Iraq, let’s see the numbers.  Otherwise, just address the data service pricing directly and leave the military out of it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bayosphere</title>
		<link>http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/03/12/citizen-journalists-and-a-greedy-telecom-companys-policy/comment-page-1/#comment-100</link>
		<dc:creator>Bayosphere</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 12 Mar 2006 19:09:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/03/12/citizen-journalists-and-a-greedy-telecom-companys-policy/#comment-100</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;Citizen Journalists and a Greedy Telecom Company&#039;s Policy...&lt;/strong&gt;

Tom Evslin: AT&amp;T is Ripping Off American Soldiers. It&#8217;s bad enough that they overcharge domestic customers but we have alternatives.  The soldiers don&#8217;...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Citizen Journalists and a Greedy Telecom Company&#8217;s Policy&#8230;</strong></p>
<p>Tom Evslin: AT&#38;T is Ripping Off American Soldiers. It&#8217;s bad enough that they overcharge domestic customers but we have alternatives.  The soldiers don&#8217;&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
