ACRL College & Research Libraries News

Association of College & Research Libraries

Washington Hotline

Carol C. Henderson Carol C. Henderson is deputy executive director of the American Library Association ’s Washington Office; (202) 547-4440 (Bitnet: NU_ALA WASH@CUA)

Policy debate on the pro- vision of broadband telecom- munications capacity and the delivery of electronic infor- mation services is heating up again in the wake of recent court decisions, Federal Com- munications Commission proposals, and pending leg- islation. A series of ads in major daily newspapers by the newspaper and tele- phone industries (specifically by the Regional Bell Operat- ing Companies or RBOCs) have raised questions among librarians about ALA’s position concerning the issues addressed by the ads. In one ad, ALA was listed as a po- tential information provider.

The issue prompting this campaign for public attention is under what conditions the regional phone companies should be allowed to provide information services. The issue itself dates back to the breakup of the Bell system in 1982 through an antitrust decision (the Modified Final Judgment or MFJ). Judge Harold Greene of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, who has continued to preside over issues resulting from divestiture, prohibited the RBOCs, newly created in 1984, from entering unregulated businesses such as electronic publishing because of the RBOCs’ dominant power in their local service areas. While this dominance over local telephone service is eroding, most telephone customers are still able to obtain local service from only one company. Judge Greene last year reluctantly lifted the restrictions.

The RBOCs now have what they want through the courts and oppose any legislation to undo the court decision or to impose restrictions on their provision of information services, but they would like to get into other areas still off limits to them—provision of cable TV signals and programming, and provision of long distance service. The regional telcos claim they need to carry TV signals as economic incentive to replace copper wire with high-capacity fiber to the home. The cable industry would like to get into the phone business. The newspaper publishers are the most vocal opponent of RBOC entry into informa- tion services, fearing loss of classified ad revenue. Add- ing to the policy ferment are FCC proposals to further de- regulate the telecommuni- cations industry, including allowing the phone compa- nies to provide a “video dialtone” service. Various bills (among them, HR 3515, S. 2112, HR 2546, S. 1200, and HR 3701) are pending in Congress supported by one industry group or another, and hearings have been held on most of them. Public interest, consumer, and education group reactions have been mixed.

ALA’s Committee on Legislation, active in recent years on telecommunications issues such as opposing access charges on enhanced service providers, and promoting library interests in legislation to establish the National Research and Education Network, has not yet recommended an ALA position on the issue of RBOC provision of information services. The arguments for opposing phone company provision of information services are strong. The RBOCs, which often have monopoly power in their local service areas, would have the incentive and the ability to discriminate against competing information providers or to subsidize their own information services with regulated revenues, despite statutory protections. For protection of free expression, the common carrier controlling the local conduit should have no control over the content carried over that conduit.

However, some librarians have argued that sophisticated information services will never reach rural libraries or residents of rural and sparsely populated areas until the phone companies are permitted to provide them. Some have suggested that libraries should work with phone companies and negotiate favorable arrangements to make library services available to the public via phone company gateways.

The Committee on Legislation discussed these issues recently, felt that further information is needed by the ALA membership, and that the committee needed wider ALA input into its deliberations on how to protect basic principles and library interests as policy evolves. Steps taken by committee chair E. J. Josey at the ALA Midwinter Meeting in January include:

■ Establishing an ad hoc subcommittee on telecommunications, chaired by Elaine Albright of the University of Maine. (Albright is chair of the Legislation Assembly.)

■ Focusing the Committee on Legislation’s Information Update Session on these telecommunications issues at the ALA Annual Conference in San Francisco. The time slot is Saturday, June 27, from 9:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.

■ Holding a hearing at the ALA Annual Conference to solicit opinions from ALA members and units on Sunday, June 28, from 7:00 to 9:00 p.m.

An issues background paper and information about the conference activitieswill be distributed to ALA units this spring. Carol Henderson is staff liaison to the committee.