By conduit I mean the telecommunications pipes, and the firms that own them. The problem now is that the US Supreme Court has been interpreting the First Amendment to mean that not only do large media corporations have the right to speak, they also have the right to silence others who disagree with their views. And now free speech via the telephone may be threatened. For these reasons I have long advocated on principle that those who own and control the conduits should be totally separate and independent of those who provide the content. Our 1982 divestiture decision may be the closest the US has come to the Australian interpretation of privatisation.
Competition is usually the last thing on earth that an American business executive really wants.
Most of the ones I dealt with in Washington were coming for subsidies, approval of anti-competitive mergers, restrictions on competitive imports anything but competition. So you will understand my skepticism when this year's Telecommunications Act was rushed through Congress and signed by the President, in the name of 'competition, lower prices and better service'. And if true, it would have been the first time in history that business had come to Washington to plead for more competition, lower prices and higher quality for consumers. You will also understand my lack of surprise when, a mere two months later, Nynex and Bell Atlantic decided to merge. They have even formed a consortium with the Walt Disney Company.