>> this week on "the communicators," a discussion about julius genachowski, president obama's choice to lead the federal communications commission. this week the senate commerce committee held a confirmation hearing in which he addressed the expansion of broadband in the u.s., media ownership rules,

and the so-called fairness doctrine. >> host: well, the senate commerce committee this week held nomination hearings on julius general caw sky to be the new fcc chief, and joining us to talk about that, andrew feinberg and fawn johnson of dow jones news wire. mr. feinberg, before we review the hearing itself, give us a little background on julius genachowski. >> guest: well, the guy's been everywhere. he's been at the fcc, he's been in the private sector on both the entertainment side, he's been with venture capitalists actually right here in washington with launch box digital which is a d.c.-based start-up incubator, and he's sort of been a tech con cigly yea to the obama campaign all the way through, and now he's probably going to be our next fcc chairman barring anything

horrible or strange. >> host: fawn johnson, given his background what do we know about him now, and where do you think he'll take the fcc? >> guest: well, we know he's passionate about the internet, and this comes from the obama presidential campaign. he was one of the early supporters of obama. he was actually one of the first to bring the telecom community around him in supporting him. he brought people in who have never given money to a presidential candidate before, so we know that just from his experience on the obama campaign that he is going to be very, very clearly his first goal is to blanket the country with internet access which scores very well with barack obama. that's what he wants to do as well, and it also squares nicely with congress because they put that into the economic stimulus bill. we also know he is sensitive to the private sector's needs and concerns about being overregulated, but he's a democrat, he's progressive, they are going to see some scrutiny,

probably not like they've had in the previous administration. >> host: several of the articles coming out of the hearing described him as pro-consumer. what does that mean? >> guest: well, i'm not sure there was anything in the hearing besides his own words that indicated he was pro-consumer. he's really, there's so much talk about this guy, and, you know, i say it in the nicest possible way, but we really know nothing about him other than his resumé. and whether or not he's pro-consumer, you know, all we really know is he'd like to make the fcc web site better. that's really the only thing that we know. so whether or not he's pro-consumer i think that we'll see after he's confirmed. >> guest: and let's keep in mind that everybody is pro-consumer in this business. all of the big telco companies will use consumers as their excuse for almost anything, so in a way it's a word that we're not quite sure what it means yet.

we'll find out. >> host: well, in the hearing one of the issues that all of is senators who questioned him talked about was the national broadband strategy and the dollars that are going towards that. here's what julius genachowski had to say about it. >> the growing consensus that we need a national broadband strategy in this country, in fact, the requirement that the fcc develop and issue a national broadband plan is a recognition that we as a country are not where we need to be with respect to our communications infrastructure. we should have, i believe, a communications infrastructure that is world leading, a 21st century infrastructure that generates economic growth, opportunity, prosperity and critically we should have in this country 21st century communications infrastructure that extends to all americans and that does so to your point

meaningfully, in a way that they can afford to sign up and use and take advantage of the opportunities that communications technology offers. >> host: i think that that's the perfect example of what, that lays out what julius genachowski wants to do as fcc chairman. like he has said and barack obama has said he wants to make sure that everybody has access to high-speed internet and however that's possible. the question is going to be how to do that, and the fcc has already begun a series of questions about how to actually bring these connections to people in very hard-to-reach air areas. i can't hear in that answer or at the hearing any specifics about how we're going to pay for it and whether or not the government will have to pay for some people to be connected who simply can't be connected any other way. so we'll have to see how he handles that one. >> guest: well, it's interesting to note that that question, that

answer he gave wasn't actually answer to a question about broadband, it was a question about whether or not the fcc was i believe the words were structurally capable of reform. and it was a wonderful speech about broadband and illustrates the president's priorities and what i think will be his priorities at the commission, and broadband is a good thing, but i just think it's worth noting that that wasn't the question that he was answering. >> host: well, another question that was asked by the senate commerce chair, senator rockefeller, was about the fcc being more open to the public. >> question, do you agree that the fcc should be more open to the public? >> yes. >> and how? >> well, senate, the first thing is it requires a commitment throughout the agency to principles of openness, transparency, fairness, fact-based decision making and if confirmed, i would want to lead the fcc in that direction.

i don't see how it could be otherwise, the issues are just too complex. we need an fcc that's smart about technology, smart about the law, smart about economics, smart about businesses and smart about what consumers go through every day in navigating a complex communications world. so i think this is quite important, quite important. i had the same experience that you did in trying to navigate the fcc web site. the fcc should be a model for transparency, openness, and fairness. there's a lot of work to do, but i'd like to see the fcc be a model with respect to using communications technologies to communicate openly with the american people and with all the constituencies that are interested in what the commission does. >> host: and along that same line, senator dorgan had a statement he made. >> let me, let me say, however, that it seems to me you will

lead a rather unhealthy agency, and by that i mean we've been through a period of substantial secrecy. i believe a very difficult work environment, questions about unbiased policy research studies, some of them perhaps don't match someone's impression of what should have come out of the studies, so they weren't released. a lot of very important, serious questions were raised about the stewardship of the fcc, and so i'm pleased that we have an opportunity now for a new direction. mr. copse, commissioner copps has, i think, done a fine job in an acting capacity, but, you know, we need more transparency, more openness in policy development. >> host: andrew feinberg. >> guest: well, transparency, great, openness great. these are all buzz words of the obama administration, and i'll believe it when i see it. again, new web site. that will be wonderful. i think it's worth noting that the administration has talked a

lot about open government and transparency and made it sort of their mantle and taking this on, they had an open government directive, but it's really been limited to a small number of groups and solutions. it's really been a lot of the sunlight foundation, they do great work, and people like that. a very limited notion of what open government means. it's more technology-centered than people-centered. i think there's a sense that anything could be better than the fcc under former chairman martin, but how much better, again, we don't know. we're going to have to see what happens. >> guest: it's worth noting, also, that the former fcc chairman, kevin martin, had made some efforts in this area as well. it's true that his administration was considered very secretive, and he was very good at conducting last minute deals, but he also put all of the orders circulating around the fcc up on the web site.

it wasn't always easy to find, but i did it after a while, and he would hold press concerns when it was time to announce the agenda which is the purview of the chairman. you know, there are parts of the fcc which institutionally are difficult to make public, especially when they're trying to put together a difficult rule. remember, there's five commissioners, they're all independent, they all get to weigh in. so i think we can believe mr. genachowski at his heart. this is really what he wants to do. i agree, though, i'm not so sure we're going to be able to see it in the rulemaking process. >> host: well, you're two professionals who follow these issues, do you have trouble with the fcc web site? >> guest: i don't, but when i first started covering it, it took a little while to find some of the filings that people would be putting through. but i think it definitely could become more user-friendly, for sure. >> guest: i think 1998 called

its web site back. the information's all there, but the interface could be better, and chairman genachowski talked a lot about i think he said web 2.0 at one point, another crossoff in your buzz word bingo chart, but that would be an improvement. the site has the information you need if you know how to find it. >> guest: yeah. no matter how good the site is if it doesn't have the information we're looking for, we're still going to be calling up all of the staff and asking them to tell us. >> host: well, kay bailey hutchison had played quite an act i role in this -- active roil in this hearing, too, and one of the questions she asked about was the media ownership issue. >> when i first came to the senate, i was a person who believed that a newspaper should not have too much television presence in a market. baiz i think more media --

because i think more media outlets are a good thing. since i came to the senate the technology world has exploded, and i no longer think that we need to police that, and now we have the most incredible situation which i don't think any of us ever anticipated in our lifetimes that major newspapers would be on the brink of literally going out of business and not having that avenue for news coverage for the citizens of big communities is now a viable possibility. so my question is, the fcc does still rules against dual ownership, and i think it is important that you look at that and determine if, really, we ought to be doing everything we can to keep newspapers alive in order to have the most outlets

for people who like to get their news in different ways. >> senator, very early in my career i worked on a newspaper in college, and then i reestablished the oldest newspaper at the college that i went to. my heart is filled with respect for the role that newspapers play in our society and our democracy, and a little bit later in my career i spent time in the broadcasting industry where i learned both that it's a special business, plays a special role in our country, and also that it's a hard business especially in these times. it's a unique business, it's still our broadcasting, our only universal medium and source for news and information, and so excessive consolidation is something, i think, that still needs to be paid attention to. but at the same time it wouldn't be right for the fcc to ignore the changes in the marketplace that are apparent and the

struggles in the various parts of the traditional media business. >> host: fawn johnson. >> guest: that was a classic example of maneuvering very deftly around a really controversial and difficult question. senator hutchison was asking genachowski whether or not in these difficult times we might be able to allow some of more consolidation in media to save, frankly, some of our jobs. and if you can tell, he very charmingly talked about his experience in the media and did one of these on the one hand to the other. we need to pay attention to the accounts consolidation, but we have to be careful about the marketplace, and i think we're going to see a lot of that coming from him, trying to balance the needs of, you know, the advocates some of whom have sported him -- supported him greatly and the businesses who say, look, we just can't handle more regulation. >> guest: i thought, i think he's a very good dancer.

newspapers, the news business is good. you know, i don't know if business is good, but the business is good at least fawn and i can agree on that. i think that the issue that senator hutchison was raising speaks more to republican fears or worries about overreaching, sweeping regulations that are going to be almost the anti-martin administration. and, you know, it's noteworthy, though, she was only one of two repalins who actually -- republicans who actually came to the hearing. >> guest: senator thune was also there briefly at the end but, yeah, there was not a whole lot of republicans there. >> host: i want to go back to the media ownership before we move on to that. she was very clear about her position on this issue, wasn't she? >> guest: i think so. it was a statement in the form

of a question. and i think he responded to it very deftly and didn't raise any hackles with it. >> host: and speaking of senators attending, it did not seem that the full committee was there to attend this hearing. >> guest: i would say maybe half of the members were there for some of the time. in fact, i don't know if you have this on your clips, but senator rockefeller actually got a little angry about senators showing up and asking their questions and leeing. leaving. to be fair, this hearing has been a long time in the making, there's a lot going on in the senate, but still it was not particularly well attended by the -- it was well attended by the immediate ya and lobbyists but not so much the members. >> host: why? >> guest: you know, it's the problems surrounding the delay for genachowski's confirmation have not had anything to do with him. everything likes him. any problems anyone would have we don't know about yet.

it's been about the rest of the fcc going forward and what it'll look like. and once the republicans finally settled on their members, and there was another nominee who also had his confirmation hearing, robert mcdowell, at the same time. once they settled on those guys, it was almost like the dispute was over and now we're just sort of seeing it through. i think that was part of it. >> host: is robert mcdowell's renomination controversial is any way? >> guest: i don't think so. i think that he's almost a perfect pick for obama. he's very much his own man, he's, he's a republican, but he's gone against the grain. his first, the first thing he did on the commission was recuse himself, didn't make people very happy on some sides of the issue. but he's, he said he's going to be an independent commissioner and agency, and i think that's the kind of republican the president wants.

>> guest: he'll do a good job of keeping genachowski honest and other democrats in terms of the statute because he's very careful about that. it's, it's a little unclear how much the industry supports him. one major carrier raised a few problems about him when they were vetting it through the republicans. so we'll see how that works out. that was at&t, by the way. >> host: why did they have problems with his renomination? >> guest: it's not entirely clear. you know, it was at&t's merger with bell south that mcdowell recused himself from even after he was asked by then chairman kevin martin to, please, vote, that it's okay. that caused some problems for at&t, they were forced to make some concessions in order to have that merger, but there's other decisions he's made along the lines i don't think they've been too happy with. as i said, he looks to the statute first, so he might not necessarily look to what an individual carrier might want in any particular context.

>> guest: he's not a party man. >> guest: that's right. >> host: has another republican been nominated yet or more than past the discussion stage? >> guest: i don't believe so. >> guest: the word on the street is that meredith atwell baker who is the former ntia at the commerce department under president bush, she's not been formally named by the president. as i understand it and these plans can shift around, the idea is to have her, her nomination go forward with clyburn who is the democrat from south carolina who is the other nominee. >> host: and the daughter of james clyburn, the majority whip. >> guest: right, right. so that's the plan. >> host: well, senator cantwell was at the hearing, and she talked about low-power -- i'm sorry, she talked about net neutrality, and this was mr. genachowski's answer. >> if there is a competitive market for broadband services where consumers could purchase broadband from multiple

independent providers, would the discussion over net neutrality change? >> well, i think that the in a market of unlimited competition it might change. the goal as i see it of the net neutrality debate is to preserve the internet as the greatest platform for innovation and small business creation that we've ever had. more competition, more consumer choice would, of course, help achieve that, and that would be an excellent thing. >> but, obviously, not -- i mean, the concern, obviously, is not to artificially segment off parts of the population and giving them a higher cost. so you see more competition in broadband services. >> competition is clearly a goal for the fcc and the communications act and something that i'd hope to pursue and promote at the fcc. >> host: andrew feinberg, what did you hear in that answer?

>> guest: i heard him say competition a lot of times. that, you know, again, playing the bingo card did very well on that. i think that he, again, tap danced very nicely between what his position and the administration's position clearly is which is one towards transparency and i'll say it, network neutrality no matter what you want to call it. and, you know, the other side which is afraid of sweeping overregulation and antibusiness, antibusiness practices. so i think that he answered it in the only way he could without jeopardizing his confirmation. >> host: was it significant, fawn johnson, that senator cantwell from washington state asked that question? >> guest: oh, you mean she represents the state where microsoft is located? i think so. yeah, i clearly -- you know, microsoft is one of the

companies that's worried about, well, i would say excessive overregulation in this area. i don't think that they're going to object to the current status where the fcc is doing now. they've got some principles that they're looking at, they cited comcast last year, but, yeah, this is one of the examples of the senator asking a question on behalf of an industry that employs a lot of people in her state. and i agree with andrew, this was a very deft response. i noted that he turned the question about network neutrality and openness into a question about competition. and he doesn't actually use the term openness which is a buzz word of the obama campaign, so very nicely done. >> host: senator klobuchar, democrat of minnesota, was also there. she talked about interoperability with julius genachowski. >> co-chair of the 9/11 caucus, i'm a former prosecutor, i saw

firsthand some of these interoperability issues, the good when we had our bridge collapse, an area in the metropolitan area did a good job of interoperability, and then i've seen difficulties in some of our rural areas with that, and it seems to me that's just one of the areas of our nation's information infrastructure that may continue to elude us absent some federal action and federal involvement in terms of making our emergency services more interbl. is it interbl? that's a trick question. [laughter] interoperable. do you think that's something you would be willing to work on? >> very much so. my wife and i were not very far from the world trade center on 9/11, most of my family was in either new york or washington. none of us should be satisfied with where we are on public safety. chairman rockefeller, who stepped out, others on this committee have been leaders on

this. as one of your colleagues mentioned earlier, 9/11 commission urged the country to do something about public safety interoperability, and we have to do it. it's just not acceptable that firefighters and police officers arrive at the scene of an emergency and can't communicate with each other, and we have a new opportunity now that we need to seize, i think, as quickly as possible around mobile broadband. now that we're through the digital television transition, there's spectrum available for advanced mobile public safety applications for our first responders. i don't think we can move too quickly in tackling that, and it's something that i look forward to working with you on. >> thank you. >> host: fawn johnson of dow jones. >> guest: that was a very succinct way of describing the problem, and the previous fcc has tried to address that problem by getting private sector companies to come in and partner with the firefighters and the police officers to form an interoperable network, and it

didn't work. i actually think that this is something that congress is going to have to look at. >> host: and mandate? >> guest: and mandate, yes. the current chairman, michael copps, has already put on the table giving it away because, quite frankly, nobody in the private sector wants it if they have to partner with somebody else. but the problem is congress has to mandate that. the fcc chairman can't do it. so he did a fine job of talking about the problem, but he really can't answer it, i think, at this point. i will note, though, that his segwaying into the wireless broadband was interesting because the wireless industry has for, you know, since i've been covering the fcc been worried that they get left behind sometimes in these conversations about broadband. and the fact that he mentioned wireless and talked about its potential should make them very happy. there are numerous ways that we can use broadband in a wireless

context throughout the country, and so i'm hoping that as i'm watching the fcc this might be something that genachowski would try and merge the people who deal with the traditional landline connections and the other people, which are different, who deal with the wireless connections and help them kind of work together. so that was interesting. >> guest: i think that it was interesting that he didn't mention specifically the failed d block auction. he did in passing, but he didn't go into a lot of detail. but i think that something that got totally left out was the issue of spectrum reform, and senator kerry has a bill to do a spectrum map inventory, i believe, i forget who he's co-sponsored it with. >> guest: senator snow, i think. >> guest: you're right. something the fcc can deal with is reforming how we allocate spectrum. there's a great debate about whether there's a scarcity in

spectrum or permission to use the spectrum. and this huge swath that's just now sitting there, yeah, they could give it to public safety, or they could give it to everyone, or they could give it to both. and you could have a real change in our spectrum policy that we haven't had in many, many years, but we'll see. >> host: well, we're almost out of time, but we wanted to show one more clip and get your response to it. senator pryor talking about broadband. >> i would like to ask you about the broadband technology and opportunity program in the stimulus package. do you know much about that, and do you have a sense of how that's going to be administered? >> my understanding is that it's the commerce department and the agriculture department that have the grant-making authority. the fcc, as i understand it, has responsibilities to consult with those agencies as they put

together the plans for distributing the grants. >> and i know you're not there yet, but is your understanding that the fcc is involved in that process? >> my understanding is that there's been consultation, yes. >> and is it, are you happy with what you hear on that, or do you think the fcc should be more involved, and do you think that program's going to actually get to unserved areas as senator hutchison was referring to? >> senator, i don't have any access to nonpublic information. from what i've heard publicly, i believe that active, healthy consultation processes are going forward. i think these kinds of activities are ways to demonstrate how government can work together collaboratively to pursue a common end. the fcc is the expert agency around communications and our communications infrastructure, it's more than appropriate that the fcc play a consul thattive role, and it's certainly something that i would want to jump into