@jbtaylor on tech

Saturday's New York Times editorial endorsing the Federal Communications Commission's National Broadband Plan is worth a read. The Plan, which was released by the FCC last week, sets ambitious and important goals for the country.

The New York Times predicted that the Plan's proposal to foster competition is a "likely flashpoint". Perhaps they've met the lobbyists from AT&T, Qwest and Verizon -- those companies probably have the most invested in the status quo which the FCC seeks to change. They're also the biggest roadblocks to competition.

After reading The Times editorial, it's clear the editorial board understands the underlying flaws in the business of broadband, particularly the broken special access market which harms the wireless industry and business generally.

As The Times writes:

"Lack of competition allows big wire-line telecom companies to charge big fees to carry the signals of mobile providers over their wires."

That's the argument made by the NoChokePoints Coalition, of which Sprint is a member. As the FCC moves to implement the Plan, I expect you'll hear more about this issue.

Sprint and the members of the Coalition believe that the FCC must act to fix the special access market if taxpayer dollars destined for broadband expenditures are going to invested efficiently.

The Coalition's spokeswoman, Maura Corbett, addresses this underlying issue of competitiveness in the above video.

I just got back from my very first South by Southwest. I was there for most of SXSW Interactive and one night of SXSW Music. I've been reading the news and blog coverage from Austin and this photo from the Washington Post caught my eye.

While it was taken during the Music Week (after all the bloggers from SXSWi had gone home) I have to agree with the sentiment.

There's a HUGE amount of ego among some in the blogosphere -- we ran into some of that last Monday at a karaoke party Sprint co-sponsored. But my experience in Austin was a lot like my experience dealing with people who work in politics here in DC. The people who really are important, don't act like it; that kind of behavior usually comes from someone who isn't a big deal at all.

I'd say, generally speaking, there's an inverse relationship between someone's importance and how important they act.

But that's just me.