- Email: [email protected]
Breaking up bell
Book reviews
solid, well-documented and ably exposed. His main concern is the possbility of ‘bypassing’ the local telephone network with alternative information ‘conduits’. In particular, he singles out cable systems as the most powerful competitor against the local phone loop. Principally he discusses the legal issues rather than the technical problems involved (the tree structure of cable systems or wireless satellite-delivered phone systems cellular telephony). Legal issues are also emphasized by William Read who urges a ‘unitary legal approach to mass media’ (p 307) rather than an eighteenth-century standard for the press and a twentiethcentury standard for broadcasting. Read puts his case well, but much of the substance of his argument has been presented with more force and scope by Pool in Technologies of
there are no references to research work; consequently this review of literature has little to offer policy makers in new media. Those seeking some understanding of the new media will not find much in this book taken as a whole. Categorization of data, tables of figures, matrices of media characteristics, lists of rhetorical questions, all may help in some mental housekeeping, but they do not provide understanding. For a fast (and cheaper) introduction to new media I would recommend instead F. Williams (Annenberg), The Communications Revolution. In Under-
TELECOMMUNICATIONS
Christopher Podmore Communication Department Ottawa University Ottawa, Canada
AT&T had a great fall BREAKING UP BELL Essays on Industrial Organization and Regulation
Freedom.
John Legates whisks us through a breezy defence of the newspaper, ‘generations, not just minutes, ahead of the technological competition’ (p 296). While his chapter is clearly written, it lacks sufficient reasoning or evidence to convince the unpersuaded. Further, he fails to make the important analytical distinction between the media (technology) and the owners or controllers of media. If, for example newspaper publishers set up a separate online classified advertising service and then cross-subsidize a loss making paper (because a paper may carry political clout or social prestige), then that hardly means the newspaper (as technology) is surviving. Even Legates admits ‘electronic delivery of information will eventually become very appealing economically’ (p 195). Elsewhere in the volume, Rosenbloom also wonders out loud whether there is a future for commercial radio (P 211). The longest and least likely to be read chapter is by Christine Urban. After a literature survey of 350 items for the period 1934-80 that deal with factors influencing media consump tion, Urban turns to the new media with empty hands: ‘existing research . . . [is] not acceptable for extrapolation to the future media environment’ (p 251). In her section on new media
New Media the interested reader should first read McLaughlin’s paper on the mapping of the new media. Then, since the book does have an excellent index, you may wish to poke here and there according to your interests. Since the volume is disjointed and without a unifying thesis, nibbling may be the most nourishing strategy.
standing
edited by David S. Evans North-Holland, 298 pp, f25.00
Amsterdam,
1983,
DISCONNECTING BELL The Impact of the AT&T Divestiture edited by Harry M. Shooshan III Pergamon Press, New York, 1984, 160 pp, $19.50 On 1 January 1984, AT&T - the ‘Bell System’ which served over 80% of the telephones in the USA and interconnected them with a nationwide network - divested itself of those parts of the system that provide local telephone service. The action came in the form of a settlement of the antitrust suit brought against AT&T in 1974 by the US Department of Justice (DoJ) and was approved in a Federal Court presided over by Judge Harold H. Greene. In return for the divestiture, AT&T remained vertically integrated and was relieved of burdens resulting from the 1956 settlement of a similar suit, which limited AT&T’s activities to provision of telecommunication services under regulation. The form of the settlement followed the schema presented in a paper writ-
POLICY June 1985
ten by William Baxter when he was on the Stanford University faculty, and before he became the US Attorney General (head of the DoJ) who eventually concluded the litigation.’ In his theory, those portions of AT&T providing local telephone service were deemed to be more of a natural monopoly than those offering intercity services, and formed ‘bottlenecks’ which AT&T could use to limit opportunities of other intercity carriers and terminal suppliers. The local service providers were not only separated from AT&T, but also were restricted in the settlement: they could not own manufacturing facilities, ie not be ‘vertically integrated’; and they could only offer certain equipments and services through separated entities. Local service remains regulated, and the restrictions help prevent cross flow of funds from regulated to nonregulated activies. Breaking up Bell and Disconnecting Bell both contain articles covering issues and actions that led to divestiture. The former consists of essays by seven economists who were consultants to the DoJ staff: Robert Bornholz, William A. Brock, Sanford J. Grossman, James J. Heckman, Michael Rothschild, Jose A. Scheinkman and David S. Evans. Evans is coauthor of eight of the ten essays as well as editor of the book. Disconnecting Bell, too, is a collection of essays, most written by people responsible for one or another aspect of US telecom-
173
solid, well-documented and ably exposed. His main concern is the possbility of ‘bypassing’ the local telephone network with alternative information ‘conduits’. In particular, he singles out cable systems as the most powerful competitor against the local phone loop. Principally he discusses the legal issues rather than the technical problems involved (the tree structure of cable systems or wireless satellite-delivered phone systems cellular telephony). Legal issues are also emphasized by William Read who urges a ‘unitary legal approach to mass media’ (p 307) rather than an eighteenth-century standard for the press and a twentiethcentury standard for broadcasting. Read puts his case well, but much of the substance of his argument has been presented with more force and scope by Pool in Technologies of
there are no references to research work; consequently this review of literature has little to offer policy makers in new media. Those seeking some understanding of the new media will not find much in this book taken as a whole. Categorization of data, tables of figures, matrices of media characteristics, lists of rhetorical questions, all may help in some mental housekeeping, but they do not provide understanding. For a fast (and cheaper) introduction to new media I would recommend instead F. Williams (Annenberg), The Communications Revolution. In Under-
TELECOMMUNICATIONS
Christopher Podmore Communication Department Ottawa University Ottawa, Canada
AT&T had a great fall BREAKING UP BELL Essays on Industrial Organization and Regulation
Freedom.
John Legates whisks us through a breezy defence of the newspaper, ‘generations, not just minutes, ahead of the technological competition’ (p 296). While his chapter is clearly written, it lacks sufficient reasoning or evidence to convince the unpersuaded. Further, he fails to make the important analytical distinction between the media (technology) and the owners or controllers of media. If, for example newspaper publishers set up a separate online classified advertising service and then cross-subsidize a loss making paper (because a paper may carry political clout or social prestige), then that hardly means the newspaper (as technology) is surviving. Even Legates admits ‘electronic delivery of information will eventually become very appealing economically’ (p 195). Elsewhere in the volume, Rosenbloom also wonders out loud whether there is a future for commercial radio (P 211). The longest and least likely to be read chapter is by Christine Urban. After a literature survey of 350 items for the period 1934-80 that deal with factors influencing media consump tion, Urban turns to the new media with empty hands: ‘existing research . . . [is] not acceptable for extrapolation to the future media environment’ (p 251). In her section on new media
New Media the interested reader should first read McLaughlin’s paper on the mapping of the new media. Then, since the book does have an excellent index, you may wish to poke here and there according to your interests. Since the volume is disjointed and without a unifying thesis, nibbling may be the most nourishing strategy.
standing
edited by David S. Evans North-Holland, 298 pp, f25.00
Amsterdam,
1983,
DISCONNECTING BELL The Impact of the AT&T Divestiture edited by Harry M. Shooshan III Pergamon Press, New York, 1984, 160 pp, $19.50 On 1 January 1984, AT&T - the ‘Bell System’ which served over 80% of the telephones in the USA and interconnected them with a nationwide network - divested itself of those parts of the system that provide local telephone service. The action came in the form of a settlement of the antitrust suit brought against AT&T in 1974 by the US Department of Justice (DoJ) and was approved in a Federal Court presided over by Judge Harold H. Greene. In return for the divestiture, AT&T remained vertically integrated and was relieved of burdens resulting from the 1956 settlement of a similar suit, which limited AT&T’s activities to provision of telecommunication services under regulation. The form of the settlement followed the schema presented in a paper writ-
POLICY June 1985
ten by William Baxter when he was on the Stanford University faculty, and before he became the US Attorney General (head of the DoJ) who eventually concluded the litigation.’ In his theory, those portions of AT&T providing local telephone service were deemed to be more of a natural monopoly than those offering intercity services, and formed ‘bottlenecks’ which AT&T could use to limit opportunities of other intercity carriers and terminal suppliers. The local service providers were not only separated from AT&T, but also were restricted in the settlement: they could not own manufacturing facilities, ie not be ‘vertically integrated’; and they could only offer certain equipments and services through separated entities. Local service remains regulated, and the restrictions help prevent cross flow of funds from regulated to nonregulated activies. Breaking up Bell and Disconnecting Bell both contain articles covering issues and actions that led to divestiture. The former consists of essays by seven economists who were consultants to the DoJ staff: Robert Bornholz, William A. Brock, Sanford J. Grossman, James J. Heckman, Michael Rothschild, Jose A. Scheinkman and David S. Evans. Evans is coauthor of eight of the ten essays as well as editor of the book. Disconnecting Bell, too, is a collection of essays, most written by people responsible for one or another aspect of US telecom-
173