me the ownership rules and the

so-called fairness doctrine. >> host: the senate commerce committee this week held nomination hearings on julius genachowski to be the new fcc chief, and joining us to talk about that this week on the communicators, andrew fine virga broadband census.org and fawn johnson of dow jones newswires. mr. feinberg, before we had reviewed the hearing itself, give us a little background on julius genachowski. >> guest: the guy has been everywhere. he is than that the fcc. he has been in the private sector on both the entertainment side. he has been a venture capitalist, actually weisser in washington with a d.c.-based start of incubator and he served-- sort have been a tech and city terry to the obama campaign all the way through. he is on the advisory committee, and now he is probably going to be our next sec chairman, barring anything horrible or

strange. >> host: phone johnson, given his background what we know about him now and where do you think he will take the fcc? >> guest: we know he is passionate about the internet and this comes from the obama presidential campaign. he was one of the early supporters of obama. he was actually when 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 squares very well with barack obama. it also squares nicely with congress because they put that into the stimulus bill. we also know that he has having spent time in the private sector is sensitive to their needs and their concerns about being overregulated but he is a democrat, he is progressive. they are going to see some scrutiny, probably not like they

have had in the previous adminstration. >> host: several articles describe him as a pro-consumer. what does that mean? >> guest: i am not sure that there's anything in the hearing besides his own words that indicated he was broke consumer. he is really, there's so much talk about this guy and i will say in the nicest possible way but we know nothing really about him other than his resume. whether not he is broken simard, all we really know is he would like to make the fcc web site better and that is really the only thing that we know. so, what they are not he is pro-consumer i think that, we will see after he is confirmed. >> guest: 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 and a way, it is a word that we are not quite sure what it means yet and we will find out. >> host: in the hearing this week one of the issues all of

the senators to question him talked about was the national broadband strategy and the dollars that are going towards that. here is what julius genachowski had to say about it. >> the growing consensus that we need, the national broadband strategy in this country, in fact the requirement that the fcc developed an issue in 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 bleeding, a 21st, a 21st century have infrastructure that generates economic growth opportunity and prosperity and critically we should have in this country 21st century communications infrastructure that extends to all americans and it does so to your point, meaningfully. in a way that they can afford to

sign up and use and take it bandage of the opportunities that communications technology offers. >> guest: i think that is a perfect example of what, plays out what julius genachowski wants to do with the sec chairman. lucky is said and barack obama has said, he wants to make sure everybody has access to high-speed internet, and however that is possible with. 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 hard to reach areas. i didn't hear in that answer, i didn't hear at the hearing any specifics about how we are going to pay for it and whether or not the government will have to pay for some people to be connected to simply cannot be connected and the other way, so we will have to see how he handles that one. >> guest: it is interesting to note that that answer he gave wasn't actually in 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 is worth noting here that that wasn't the question that he was answering. >> host: another question that was asked by the senate commerce chair, senator rockefeller was about the fcc being more open to the public. myths bead question, do you agreed the fcc should be more open to the public? >> yes. >> and, how? >> senator the first thing is a requires a commitment drop the agency to principles of openness, transparency, fairness, the fact based decision-making when 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 sec that a smart about technology, a smart about the law, smart about economics and smart about what consumers go through every day in navigating the complex communications world. so i think this is quite important what. i had the same experience that you did in trying to navigate the fcc web site. the fcc should be in model for transparency, openness and fairness of. there is a lot of work to do but i would like to see the fcc remodeled 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. with. >> let me say however that it seems to me you will lead a

rather unhealthy agency, and by that i mean we have been for a period of substantial secrecy. i believe very difficult work environment, questions about unbiased policy research studies, some of them perhaps don't match some impressions of what should have come out of the studies of the war released. a lot of very important, serious questions raised about distortion of the fcc become a solheim please that we have an opportunity for new direction. mr. cops, commissioner copps is done a fine job and an acting capacity but we need him more transparency, more openness in policy development. >> host: andrew feinberg for coburn. >> guest: transparency, great, openness great. these are all buzzwords of the obama administration and i will believe it when i see it. anew web site will be wonderful. i think it is worth noting that the new administration has

talked a lot about open government and transparency and made it sort of their mantle and taken this on, and open government directive but it is limited to a small number of groups and solutions. it has really been a lot of the foundation does great working people like that, and very limited notion of what open government means. it is more technology center then 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 are going to have to see what happens. >> guest: it is worth noting also that the former fcc chairman kevin martin had made some efforts in this area as well. it is true that his administration was considered very secretive and he was very good it conducting deals but he also put all of the orders that were circulating around the fcc up on the web site. it was always easy to find and i did it after a while.

he would hold press conferences when it was time to announce the meeting's agenda which was the purview of the chairman. there are parts of the fcc which institutionally are difficult to make public, especially when they are trying to put together a difficult world. remember there are five commissioners. they are all independent, the elbie to wait and so i think we can believe mr. jankowski had. this is really what he wants to do. i agree, i'm not so sure we are going to be able to see it in the rulemaking process. >> host: you are to professionals the fall of these issues. do you have trouble with the fcc web site? >> guest: when i for started covering it, took a little while especially 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 is all there,

but the interface could be better and the chairman genachowski top the lot about, i think he said web 2.0 wit one point and another cross off of your banko chart but that would be improvement. would help but there were some modern tools built then but the site is the information you need it you know how to find it. >> guest: no matter how good the site is the does nav the information we are looking four, we are soon going to be calling up all the staff and asking them to tell us. >> host: the ranking member, kay bailey hutchison, played quite an active role in this hearing too and one of the question 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, 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. it is now a viable possibility. so, my question is, the fcc does still have 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 were lined both it is a special business, plays a special role in our country and also aided a hard business, especially in these times. it is a unique business. the stellar broadcasting, are only a 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 the maneuvering ferry deathly around controversial and difficult questions. senator hutchison was asking genachowski whether not in these difficult times we might be able to allow some more consolidation , 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 consolidation but we have to be careful about the marketplace. i think we are going to see a lot of that coming from him, trying to balance the needs of the advocates, some of whom have supported him greatly and businesses to say we can't handle more regulation. >> guest: i think he is a very good dancer.

newspapers, the news business is good. i don't know if business is good but fawn and diet can agree on that. i think 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 it is noteworthy though, she was only one of two republicans who actually came to the hearing. the other was i believe mike johanns. >> guest: center finn from south dakota was also there briefly. there's 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, was and she? >> guest: i think so. it was the statement in the form of a question and i think he

responded to it very deftly and did not raise any haggles with her. >> host: 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 senator showing up and asking questions and leaving. to be fair, this hearing has been a long time in the making. there is a lot going on in the senate but still, it was not particularly well attended. it was well attended by the media and the lobbyists. >> host: why? >> guest: you know, the problems surrounding the delay for julia genachowski's have not had anything to do with him. everyone likes him. annie problems anyone what have we don't know about yet. and his then about the rest of

the fcc going forward in what will look like. once the republicans finally settled on their members and there was another nominee who also had his confirmation hearing, robert mcdill, at the same time, it was almost like the dispute was over, and this now is just saying for a. i think that was part of it. >> host: is robert mcdowell's confirmation-- >> guest: he is almost a perfect fit for obama. he is very much his own man. he is a republican, but he has gone against the grain. the first thing he did on the commission was recuse himself. he didn't make people very happy on some sides of the issue. but, he said he is going to be the independent commissioner and an independent agency and i think that is the kind of republican approach than the ones. >> guest: he will do a good job of keeping genachowski

honest in terms of the statute because he is very careful about that. it is a little unclear how much the industry supports him. one major carrier raised a few problems. when they were getting it through the republicans, so we will see how that works out. that was at&t by the way. >> host: why did they have problems with his renomination? >> guest: it is not entirely clear. was at&t's merger with bellsouth, the mcdowell recused himself from even though he was asked by chairman kevin martin to please both, that it was okay. that cause problems for at&t. they were forced to make concessions in order to have that merger but there were other decisions he has made along the lines. as i said, he looks to the statute for so he might not necessarily look to what in individual carrier might want in any particular context.

>> host: has another republican in nominated get for more than passed 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, the commerce department under president bush, she has not been formally named by the president. as i understand and these plans can shift around, the idea is to have her nomination go forward mignon clyburn, who was the other nominee. haass god and the daughter of james clyburn, majority whip. senator cantwell was at the hearing and she talked about low-- she talked about net neutrality, and this was mr. genachowski's answer. >> if there's a competitive market for broadband services where consumers can purchase broadband for multiple independent providers with the

discussion over net neutrality change? >> well, i think that any market of unlimited competition it might change. the cult, as i see it, of the net neutrality debate is to preserve the antonette as the greatest platform for innovation and small business creation that we have never had. the more competition, more consumer choice would have course help achieve that and that would be an excellent thing. >> but obviously, the concern obviously is not to artificially segment off parts of the population in giving them a higher cost? so, you see more competition in broadband services? >> competition is clearly a goal for the fcc and of the communications act and something that i would hope to pursue and promote at the fcc. >> host: ander feinberg of broadband census.com. >> guest: i heard him say

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

i would say, excess of overregulation in this area. i don't think they are going to object to the current status that the fcc is doing now. they have got some principles they are looking at. they cited comcast last year, but yeah, this is one of the examples of this 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 know he termed a question about network neutrality and openness into a question about competition and he didn't actually use the term openness. so come a very nicely done. >> host: senator klobuchar, a democrat from minnesota, was also there. she talked about interoperability with julius genachowski. >> the cochair of the caucus, a former prosecutor. i did that for years and saw first-hand some of these interoperability issues.

when we had a bridge collapse and had done a very good job of interoperability because of our shariff and others and then i have seen difficulties in the past and some of our rural areas with that and it seems to me that is just one of the areas of our nation's information for infrastructure, that may continue to luby's, absent some federal action and federal involvements in terms of making our emergency services more interval. is it in trouble? that is a trick question. interoperable? i think that is something you'd 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 and 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 is just not acceptable that firefighters and police officers arrived 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 the around mobile broadband. now that we are through the digital television transition there is spectrum available ford vance mobile public safety applications for a first responder. i don't think we can move to quickly and tackling that had something i look forward to working with you on. >> host: fawn johnson of dow jones. >> guest: that was a very succinct way of describing a problem, and the previous fcc has tried to address the problem by getting private sector companies to come in and partner with the firefighters and police officers to form and interoperable network and it didn't work. i actually think this is

something congress is going to have to look at. >> host: and mandate? >> guest: and mandate, yes. michael copps has put on the table the idea of just giving this valuable tv airways away to the public safety groups because quite frankly nobody in the private sector wants it. if there to partner with somebody else. so, but the problem is congress had demanded that. the fcc chairman can do it so he did a fine job of talking about the problem, but he really can't answer it i think this point. i will note the that is seguing into the wireless broadband was interesting because the wireless industry has, for since i have been covering the fcc, been worried that they left-- you left behind in conversations about brunvand and the fact the mentioned wireless and talked about its potential should make them very happy. there are numerous ways that we can use broadband and wireless contacts throughout the country.

and so, i am hoping that as i'm watching the fcc that this might be something that genachowski would merge the people who deal with the traditional land line connections and the other people, which are different, who deal with wireless connections and help them kind of work together, so that was interesting. >> guest: i think it was interesting that he didn't mention specifically the failed d block option even in passing. i think something that got totally left out was the issue of spectrum reform, and senator kerry has a bill to do a specter map inventory i believe, i believe it is co-sponsored-- senators snowe. something the fcc can deal with is reforming how we allocate spending. there's a great debate always going on whether there's a scarcity in spectrum or permission to use the spectrum.

this huge swat that is just now sitting there, the bicking given 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 will see. >> host: we are almost out of time but we wanted to show one more clipping get response. senator pryor mac talking about broadband. >> i would like to ask you about this btop, the broadband opportunity program in the stimulus package. do you know much about that, and you have a sense of how that is going to be administered? >> my understanding is that it is the commerce department and the agriculture department that have the grant making authority. dscc, as i understand has responsibilities to consult with those agencies as they put

together the plans for distributing. >> i know you were not there yet but is it your understanding the fccism bald? >> my understanding is there has been consultation, yes. >> are you happy with what you hear on that or do think the fcc should be more involved and you think that program is going to actually get to on served areas as senator hutchison was referring to? >> senator, i don't have any access to nonpublic information. from what i have 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 and. the fcc is the expert agency around communications in our communications infrastructure. is more than a appropriate that the fcc play consultative role and is certainly something that i would want to jump into if confirmed and work with you to understand ideas that he might

have on the grant program. >> guest: i thought that he gave the correct answer. not only is it absolutely appropriate for the fcc to play consulates of world, it is in the statute in for a minute i was wondering if senator pryor had forgotten or maybe skip the part of the legislation when he was reading through, because the fcc has no grant making authority in the btop program. all they are doing is defining certain on served. also helping map, but all the money is agriculture and ntia. >> host: and, fawn johnston you mentioned earlier that the room was full of lobbyists, lots of lobbyists? >> guest: lots of lobbyists. >> host: from all aspects of the industry? >> guest: the thing to remember here is that this is the guy who was going to be dictating the future for