Remarks of FCC Commissioner Rachelle Chong
                to American Women in Radio and Television's
                         44th National Convention

                         Beverly Hills, California

                               June 2, 1995
                                     
                        "A WOMAN'S PERSPECTIVE ON
                     CONVERGENCE IN COMMUNICATIONS"

Introduction

     Good afternoon.  It is a great pleasure to be at my first national convention of
American Women in Radio and Television.  As someone whose job it is to look at the big
picture, I have come to offer you one woman's perspective on convergence in
communications and what that might mean for our future as women in the industry.

     I will tell you right up front that I am bullish on communications!  We could not
be working in a more fascinating and dynamic industry -- an industry that touches the life
of every American.

     As I was thinking about what to say to you, I was reminded of an observation
about the late Ginger Rogers.  I bring to your attention that Ginger Rogers -- although far
less acclaimed -- danced every step that her partner Fred Astaire did -- only backwards and
in high heels!

     There is a lesson for all of us in this observation -- namely, we should all recognize
the talent and energy that women bring to any endeavor.  We should also recognize the
constraints -- social, economic and cultural -- under which women often operate.

      Successful women in our demanding industry -- for example, Lucie Salhany, your
impressive Silver Satellite Award winner -- multitask from dawn to dusk, because we
usually have to be outstanding at three jobs -- in our day job, and in our jobs as wives and
primary care providers to our children.  In sum, women in the communications industry
generally face more challenges than their male counterparts, and we should therefore
celebrate our successes that much more. 

     Speaking of successes, women hold two FCC Commissioner seats out of five now --
doesn't holding 40% of the FCC seats qualify as another success for women in
communications?!

     I thought I would share a story that nonetheless illustrates some of the lingering
notions about FCC Commissioners.  A few weeks ago, I was in the FCC ladies room and
greeted a young FCC employee that I see in there from time to time.  She told me that
after the first time we had chatted in the bathroom, she had spoken to her grandmother on
the phone that night.  She told her grandmother that she had met an FCC Commissioner
in the bathroom.  There was a shocked silence on the phone.  Her grandmother then
demanded to know what she was doing in the men's restroom!
 
     Given this true story, I just wanted to say that I think you've got your convention
theme just right -- "promoting progress, creating change."   We've come a long way, baby,
but we still have a ways to go!

     In today's speech, I am going to focus on new opportunities that are being created
by the convergence and globalization of the communications and information industries,
and our movement towards an Information Superhighway.  

     These new opportunities will give you new horizons for work because new players
will soon be offering video programming and will need your expertise.  The FCC and
Congress are also creating new opportunities on the facilities side for women to be owners
of new services such as PCS.

     I will then briefly describe some of the broadcast portions of the pending
telecommunications reform bills on the Hill, so that you can evaluate their impact on the
broadcasting industry, if passed.  Finally, I will give you an idea on how to better forward
women's issues in Washington, especially before my agency, the FCC.


Information Superhighway/Globalization of the Industry

     Let's first talk about the much ballyhooed Information Superhighway -- also called
the National Information Infrastructure or NII.  In a nutshell, the idea of the Information
Superhighway is that of a network made up of many local, regional and national
information and communication networks.  

     Through this "network of networks," we will be able to swiftly and inexpensively
exchange whatever kind of information we want to send, whether this information is an
architectural drawing, a sound recording, a video program, or simple text.  With this
interconnected network of networks, it will be as easy to send this information across the
street as across an ocean.

     My vision of the future Information Superhighway is that communications will be
increasingly personal.  No longer will you have a phone that is tied to a geographic
location like home or work.  You will carry a tiny personal communicator everywhere
with you, and it will provide you with telephone, paging and voicemail services.

     In your future home, another communications device -- perhaps a computer or
television or some mix of the two -- will enable you to order entertainment video
programs, receive personalized news and electronic mail messages, perform research for a
term paper, chat on a live computer forum, or send a message to your child's teacher about
her homework.

     Let me also be clear that government is not going to build the Information
Superhighway.  We believe our role is to be referees and cheerleaders who are encouraging
the private sector to build the networks and ensure their interoperability and access to all.

     It's been suggested that the NII be expanded to encompass a global Information
Superhighway.  On Monday and Tuesday of this week, I represented the FCC at an Asian
Pacific Economic Council Ministerial Meeting in Seoul on exactly this topic.  It was a high
level meeting of telecom ministers and officials from 17 Asian Pacific countries.  

     We shared ideas about how these services can improve the lives of people who live
both developed and undeveloped countries.  Some of these Asian Pacific countries are
experimenting with testbed projects on applications for the Information Superhighway: 
projects involving tele-education (distance learning), tele-medicine, and digital libraries that
can be accessed by schools easily.  We hope to share the results of these testbed projects so
we all have the benefit of our learnings.

     The less developed countries -- many still struggling to provide basic telephone
service to their people -- are trying to ensure that their countries are not left out of the
information revolution.  They realize that if they don't move to modernize their
information infrastructure to state-of-the-art technology, their people will be left behind.

     After spending two days talking with ministers from other countries, I am happy to
report that they have "caught the fever" about the many benefits an Information
Superhighway will bring to their economies and their citizens.  Nearly all countries appear
to view a move towards a global "network of networks" as inevitable.

     I mention this to make the point that communications is an industry that is
increasingly global in nature.  More and more, American communication companies are
looking outside our borders for customers, and other countries are increasingly seeking
their services.  I foresee that the globalization of communications systems will bring great
change to our industry, and will represent new opportunities for you to work abroad or
with foreign counterparts.


Women and the Information Superhighway

     I think women and minorities, along with other groups, should have a special
interest in making the Information Superhighway a reality.  You see, the new Information
Superhighway will enable such groups to easily and inexpensively share information about
issues that concern them on a nationwide or even international basis.

     Many groups have already discovered that the Internet, the computer network, is an
ideal way to share their concerns and expertise, and to motivate community or political
action.  (By the way, some people talk about the Internet as if it is the Information
Superhighway.  This is not so; the Information Superhighway will be much more.  The
Internet is only an early prototype of a more advanced network.)  

     So, one way to think about the Superhighway is as a tool that will encourage the
notion of "community" -- community based not on geographic proximity, but on electronic
connections -- sort of a "cybercommunity" created in the dark recesses behind your
computer or television screen!

     My personal hope is that the Superhighway will be a method of empowerment for
groups like women, by creating the ability to quickly connect and interact with a broader
community, a community that can be accessed right in your home, your school, or in your
community center.  For example, nearly all of us have access to a personal computer at
work and often one at home.  

     I have heard that AWRT has a home page on the Internet for this convention, but I
understand you don't have one for the group in general.  I suggest that a permanent home
page may be a great way for you to perform outreach to additional potential members.

     I think that the 'Net also may be a way for each of you to be better plugged into
what is going on in Washington.  The FCC has a home page on the Internet.  Right now,
you can access FCC public notices, decisions and speeches by FCC commissioners by
downloading them from the 'Net.  You can also contact the FCC commissioners by Email
if you can't afford to come see us in person.


Convergence and Technological Development

     Now, some say that this is a lot of "pie in the sky."  Some people think of the Info
Superhighway as "gee-whiz Buck Rogers 21st century" hype -- as gimmicks that won't
really change people's everyday lives.  I think they are wrong.  If you look at the changes
that are taking place in the communications industry and the technological advances that
are driving those changes, it is clear that we are in the midst of an information revolution.

     It has become very apparent in the past few years that there are no longer truly
discrete worlds within the communications industry.  Once upon a time, we could neatly
divide common carriers from broadcasters.  Common carriers were companies that carried
any customer's message for a price -- telephone and telegraph companies.  Broadcasters, on
the other hand, were companies that programmed their own content and sent it out to a
mass audience.  

     This classic distinction between common carriers and broadcasting is breaking down
today.  Telephone companies are building systems to enter the video programming market
and go head to head with cable companies.  Some cable companies want to offer telephone
service and compete with the local telephone companies.  

     With the advent of digital broadcasting, coming soon to a television screen near
you, broadcasters are looking hard at new uses of the broadcast spectrum that have many
common carrier-like characteristics such as subscription services delivering data or
interactive services.

     What is driving this astounding convergence of previously separate industries?  The
answer is simple -- technology.  The basic tools of communication are changing.  

     One critical development has been the development of fiber-optics.  Fiber-optics
offer major advances in signal capacity and clarity over the traditional copper cable.  A
single fiber-optic strand the width of a human hair can carry 65,000 times more
information than copper phone wires, and can carry it at least 30 times faster.   

     Another development has to do with the rise of computer technology and dramatic
advances in digitalization.  Advances in computer technology allow us to take just about
any type of information -- voice, data, or video -- and digitize it -- turn it into ones and
zeros -- so that the information can be manipulated, stored and sent, across a variety of
communication pipelines, with the version received almost indistinguishable from that
transmitted.

     Because digital information has the same characteristics regardless of the kind of
information transmitted, a variety of systems, wired or wireless, can be used to transmit
any type of message.  For example, a digital message could be sent via a cable TV network,
through the telephone network, through a computer network and even over broadcast type
facilities.  

     Now, admittedly, not everyone is a fan of all this technological development.  There
are a lot of people who have technophobia.  Why, even in the U.S., a recent independent
survey found that 74% of people polled have trouble programming their VCR to record a
program at a later time.  Another telephone survey by a Washington polling firm, found
that about 16% of 2,000 adults polled admitted that they can't figure out how to stop the
darned VCR clock from flashing "twelve o'clock, twelve o'clock, twelve o'clock."

     These advances are just part of a long process in which new technologies are
supplanted by newer technologies.   After all, it was not that long ago that the telephone
was a newfangled device, thought by some to be the downfall of Western civilization!

     My point is that we should not dread convergence and technological advances. 
Instead, as my friend and colleague Commissioner Susan Ness noted this morning, we must
view these advances as opportunities.  As an example, I foresee that convergence will result
in potential new jobs for those with broadcasting experience.  You see, there will be
demand by the new entrants into video programming -- the telephone companies with their
so-called "video dialtone" systems -- for people to help run their new video companies.  

     Think about it, telephone companies don't know how to program content.  Up to
now, these common carrier companies provided pipes -- telephone lines -- for other people's
content.  So broadcasters may have new opportunities to run some of these new video
programming companies run by the telephone companies.

     As a second example, the FCC has actively encouraged the introduction of literally
hundreds of new video outlets.  For example, the FCC licensed Direct Broadcast Satellite
services and MMDS or "wireless cable" services.  These new video providers are competing
head to head with cable operators right now, and creating new markets for programming.

     Meanwhile, operators of the now mature cable industry are upgrading their capacity
and their systems to offer hundreds of new channels to consumers.  Again, this has
stimulated the cable programming market.  No longer do the three TV networks dominate
programming.

     Even traditional broadcasters may soon have new opportunities to provide multiple
video signals using digital technology.  While up to now, broadcasting has largely served a
mass audience, resulting in rather homogenous programming, but the explosion in the
number of video outlets created by new technology is creating a demand for fresh
programming.  

     One clear trend is that more niche markets are finally being served, and we are
starting to see our programming finally reflect the rich cultural mix of our country.  This
diversity is refreshing.  I predict many new opportunities for content providers in the
multimedia world of the future. 

     These new opportunities are not just limited to video.  I also believe that there will
be many opportunities in audio programming.  The FCC is currently working on new
audio services such as the proposed Digital Audio Radio Service.  DARS promises to 
deliver more diverse and creative radio programming via satellites.  Again, these new
services offer new opportunities for women, and will help ensure that diverse programming
be enhanced especially to ethnic or special interest groups who may be currently
underserved.

     You can see that this is a time of great opportunity for those involved in the
communications industry.  For any job that has become obsolete, there will be many jobs
to replace it as the industry undergoes a transformation into the Information Age.  


Promoting Progress Through PCS

     Let's move away from the content side of the communications industry.  One
should not overlook the opportunities that await on the facilities side of this information
revolution.  New opportunities lie in personal communications services, or PCS, a service
now being licensed through auctions by the FCC.  PCS is a family of wireless personal
devices that promises to deliver telephony, information and advanced paging.

     The FCC hopes that PCS will provide an opportunity for women and minorities to
be active participants in the development of the Information Superhighway.  The FCC
adopted rules last year to encourage small businesses, businesses owned by women and
minorities, and rural telephone companies to bid for PCS licenses.  

     We call those four groups "designated entities" -- or DEs -- because Congress
specifically designated them in language contained in the 1993 Omnibus Budget Act.  In
this Act, Congress gave the Commission auction authority to give out new licenses for the
first time.  

     In addition, Congress mandated that the FCC's regulations shall ensure that women,
minorities, small businesses and rural telephone companies be given the opportunity to
participate in the provision of spectrum-based services.  You see, Congress realized that, in
an auction, the entity with the deepest pocket would win.  Congress wanted to encourage a
wider dissemination of licenses among applicants.

     So, the Commission (with the help of AWRT, let me add) compiled a public record
that confirmed what Congress already knew -- that the major problem facing women and
minorities who wish to get involved in the communications industry was the lack of access
to capital.  At an auction, the inability to raise financing translates into an inability to win
a license.  The Commission's tailored its PCS rules to address this specific problem for
women and minorities, and the other two groups identified by Congress.

     The Commission established entrepreneurs' block licenses to insulate smaller
applicants from bidding against very large, well-financed entities.  We made bidding credits
in the broadband auction available to small businesses, women and minority-owned
companies.  

     In the entrepreneurs' block, we adopted provisions that allow the winners to pay
the license price in installments, and pay reduced upfront payments.  Finally, we
established partitioning rules to allow rural telephone companies to get a license for a
portion of a bigger service area in order to expedite the availability of PCS service in rural
areas.

     There's no doubt the Commission took a bold step in adopting these rules.  We
could have done something less risky from a constitutional standpoint.  But we took very
seriously Congress' directive.  We fashioned our rules to create a truly meaningful
opportunity for women and minorities to participate in the PCS auctions.

     Now as many of you know, there was a blip on the PCS screen regarding these
entrepreneur block auctions.  The A and B Block broadband PCS auctions ended on March
13th.  By all accounts, these auctions were a great success.

     The FCC wanted to start the C Block auction -- the first of the entrepreneurs' block
auctions -- licenses in June.  But, earlier this year, Telephone Electronics Corporation, or
TEC, a rural telephone company, filed for and got an Emergency Stay in the D.C. Circuit
Court of Appeals.  TEC is an entity that is too large to qualify to bid in the entrepreneur's
block.

     Well, this was considered a disaster by our entrepreneur block applicants. 
Fortunately, TEC reached a private settlement with another wireless company and has
dismissed its suit.  The stay was dissolved, and the FCC moved swiftly to schedule the C
Block auction for August 2, with short form applications due on June 15.  I understand
there are some AWRT members applying for these PCS licenses, and wish those that do
good luck.


Legislative Update
     
     Let me turn now to another area that is getting all the headlines now.  I am talking
about the current debate before Congress on whether our trusty 1934 Communications Act
should be overhauled.  While most policymakers agree that we must update the Act, there
is dispute over how far and how fast we should go.

     Last year's efforts to pass a telecom reform bill came to naught.  But this year, there
is cautious optimism that a bill will indeed be passed.  I am going to focus on the two
comprehensive telecom reform bills that are being discussed in the Senate and the House
right now.  

     Let's start with the House bill -- HR 1555.  It was introduced by Tom Bliley,
Chairman of the House Commerce Committee in early May.  This bill was voted out of
the Commerce Committee on May 25 by a vote of 38 to 5.  Current expectations are that
it will be considered by the full House in July.

     On the other side of the Hill, Senate Bill 652 has been voted out of the Commerce
Committee under the leadership of Senator Larry Pressler.  Last week, Senator Pressler said
this bill could come before the full Senate as early as June 5 for three days of debate. 
However, Majority Leader Bob Dole has indicated that he may not bring the legislation to
the floor if Democrats plan to offer unrelated amendments.

     I only have time to hit a few points on these bills.  I thought it might be useful if I
briefly highlighted some provisions that may be of specific interest to you.

     Advanced TV

     Both bills require the FCC to allow broadcasters to offer ancillary or supplementary
services if the Commission decides to issue licenses for advanced television services.  If the
broadcaster charges the public for an ancillary or supplementary service, the FCC may
require the licensee to pay an annual spectrum fee.

     The House bill also requires the Commission to limit the initial eligibility for
advanced television licenses to existing television broadcast licensees, and current
broadcasters to surrender either the additional or original license at a future time. 

     Multiple Ownership

     Upon enactment, both bills would increase the cap on how much of the national
audience one commercial TV owner can cover from 25% to 35%.  The House bill would
go one step further and increase the cap to 50% after one year.

     The House bill would also allow common ownership of two or more broadcast
stations or a broadcast station and any other "medium of mass communication," either
nationally or locally.  However, it prohibits common ownership of two or more television
stations in the same TV market in circumstances where the FCC determines that the
combination would result in an undue concentration of media voices in a local market.  A
new aspect that would also be determinative is if all the media of mass communication in a
local market would be owned or controlled by fewer than 3 people.

     License Renewal Term

     Both the House and the Senate bills would extend the current broadcast license
terms which currently are at 7 years for radio stations and 5 years for television stations. 
The House bill would increase the license term for television to 7 years, to match the radio
license term.  The Senate bill would increase the terms for both television and radio to 10
years.

     License Renewal Reform

     Both bills would replace the current broadcast license renewal procedure with a new
two-step process to minimize the delay that can result when petitions to deny are filed
against a renewal application.

     Cable Regulation and Video Dialtone

     Both bills relax cable rate regulation to some degree.  Both also encourage
competition to cable through video dialtone service provided by telephone companies.  But
they take different approaches.

     The Senate bill would allow a telco to enter a video market without having to
obtain authority from the FCC or establish a separate subsidiary.  

     In contrast, the House bill requires a separate subsidiary to be formed by the
telephone company to provide video programming directly to subscribers in its telephone
service area.  

     Forecast
  
     Will a version of one of these bills pass?  I think it is quite possible, and I personally
hope so.  Based on conversations I have had with key lawmakers on the Hill, I can report
that they are optimistic that a bill can be achieved this year.  But, again, they said that last
year.  We'll just have to see.


Creating Change

     As you can see, there are tremendous changes being wrought in communications
due to convergence, the Information Superhighway, and everyone trying to get into
everyone else's business!  This is a time of great change in our industry, but as I've said,
this change will provide a myriad of new opportunities for you to be key players. 

     One of my key messages today is that it is very important that women's groups like
yours step forward and advocate women's issues in Washington.  Let me give you an
example of why your input was so important to the FCC and why I think you should
increase your efforts to be heard by Washington policymakers.

     In writing our rules for PCS to ensure that the four DE groups, including women,
had meaningful opportunities to bid for the new licenses, the Commission needed to have
record evidence that women had faced historical problems accessing capital.  There would
have been no evidence on the record as to these problems for women if AWRT had not
filed its pleading containing statistics on small businesses owned by women and evidence of
historical problems accessing capital.  

     I raise this point with you because I'm not sure that AWRT or other women's
telecommunications groups realize how important your input is to the Commission.  There
are few groups that proffer evidence to us on women's issues.  So, the women of America
owe a debt to AWRT for its efforts to promote women's issues in important FCC
proceedings, such as our PCS proceeding and the television multiple ownership proceeding.

     I recognize that AWRT probably hasn't got the kind of resources that are required
for this kind of lobbying, and has generally relied on the pro bono work of its members. 
While this is a cost-saving approach, I wonder if this provides an optimal result on all
issues of interest.  In the PCS proceeding, if AWRT had not come up with the necessary
data on lack of access of capital as to women, it is possible that the preferences for women
would not have been put in place!

     I believe a higher priority should be placed on lobbying the Commission on
women's issues.  To prove that I am not someone who lodges a complaint without a
suggested solution, I recommend that a way to solve the funding problem would be to
form a loose alliance with other women's groups for the purpose of lobbying in
Washington.

     I am thinking about women's groups like Women in Cable, Women in
Telecommunications, Women in Communications Inc., Women in Wireless, and perhaps
the female members of the Federal Communications Bar Association.  I'm sure there's lots
of other women's groups interested in communications.  

     My idea is that if all those women's groups could contribute some funding into a
lobbying pool, you could probably afford to hire specialized counsel on the key issues of
importance to women and get more bang for your collective bucks.

     If such an alliance is appealing, I suggest that the key officers of each women's
group gather one day this summer to discuss the feasibility of this shared approach.  I
emphasize that I do not envision any group to give up its identity or merge with another,
but merely to just share the costs of lobbying the Commission and even Congress to create
more opportunities in communications for women.  

     I next wanted to make a personal plea for each of you to individually create positive
change in the coming year.  I believe women are doing well in communications, but I
believe that we can do even better if we continue to support each other.  And whether you
realize it or not, each of us is an important role model to the next generation.

     To support my proposition, I will share with you that as a teenager, my burning
ambition was to become a journalist or newscaster.  It was in high school that I learned
that I enjoyed news writing during work on my school newspaper.  This experience led to
my decision to become a college journalism major, which in turn led me to decide in
college on a career in communications law.  This in turn led my extraordinary opportunity
for me to serve as an FCC commissioner.

     What I want to highlight is that while I was in high school in the 1970's, I had one
very important female role model, Connie Chung.  You see, Connie broke all the
stereotypes that Asian-American women suffer from, namely that we are timid, quiet,
deferential to men, or sexy dragon ladies.  

     To me, Connie was a professional, articulate Asian woman who was not afraid to
ask tough questions.  She was a role model to many Asian American girls like me, who up
to then would not have dared think that a career on national television was even a
possibility. 

     Knowing how important having a role model was to my career choice back in high
school, I support women's groups such as AWRT who encourage mentoring women so
they can break through the glass ceiling.  

     Women indeed have been breaking the glass ceiling in broadcasting and cable.  Take
dynamos like Lucie Salhany who began as a secretary and is now the first woman to head a
television network.  I read an interview of Lucie yesterday in an AWRT newsletter.  In it,
she emphasized the importance of having a solid grounding in your industry, in having
strong self esteem, and in having good mentoring.

     I'll next give you a quote -- from a woman, of course!  Madame Curie, the great
Polish-born physicist, once said, "You cannot hope to build a better world without
improving the individuals.  To that end, each of us must work for [her] own improvement,
and at the same time share a general responsibility for humanity."

     I couldn't agree with Lucie and Madame Curie more.  An key role of AWRT is
being a vehicle to improve its individual members, so they can succeed in the fiercely
competitive world of communications.

     I would like to ask each of you to consider doing me a personal favor  -- it would
be your contribution to create more success in our industry for women.  Sometime during
the next year, I ask you to commit to mentor a young woman -- whether she is a student,
an intern, a colleague or someone you've never met.  

     Spend a half an hour with her over a cup of coffee to spark her interest in a career
in communications, to encourage her forward in her career, or to pass on a few tips for
success.  A few months later, give her a call and ask how she's doing.  That's it.  Please, if
you think this is something you can do, raise your hand.  I'm talking about a commitment
of an hour to mentor a young woman to be a success in our great industry!

     Thank you to all of you (nearly everyone!) who have just volunteered your time.  I
believe that if we each do our part, if we remember that we are all pathfinders for the next
generation, we will continue to be successful in a great industry.  Thank you very much
for inviting me.