William H. Dutton
William H. Dutton is the Quello Professor of Media and Information at MSU, where he directs the Quello Center. Bill’s research is focused on Internet Studies, and the elaboration of his conception of ‘The Fifth Estate‘ of the Internet realm, which has generated new research projects and a book in progress. Prior to arriving at MSU, Bill was the Professor of Internet Studies, University of Oxford, where he was the Founding Director of the Oxford Internet Institute (OII), and Fellow of Balliol College. Before coming to Oxford in 2002, he was a Professor in the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Southern California, where he remains an Emeritus Professor. In the UK, he was a Fulbright Scholar 1986-87, and was National Director of the UK’s Programme on Information and Communication Technologies (PICT) from 1993 to 1996.
Monday, June 18th, 2018
The Natural Stupidity of Artificial Intelligence
A. Michael Noll
June 17, 2018
© Copyright 2018 AMN
Clearly, the future is coming, but at times we seem mostly to be chasing the past. Artificial intelligence is today’s “new” rage. But I think it is mostly hype and faith, coupled with a blind, and perhaps deliberate, ignorance of what was done decades ago.
In the 1960’s, digital computers were programmed and used at Bell Telephone Laboratories (Bell Labs) to “compose” music. Today the same algorithmic approach is called artificial intelligence. Digital computers were also programmed in the early 1960s at Bell Labs to create art. And today this too is called artificial intelligence. Back then decades ago, the intelligence was the human who wrote the program and also the human who chose which computer-generated music and art was most liked.
A modern jetliner can fly itself. But is this artificial intelligence, or simply computer control following algorithms? The human pilots are just there to take over in case of an emergency.
What is “artificial intelligence?” “Artificial” means false, fake, not natural. “Intelligence” is the ability to process information and then to perform appropriate actions. It seems to imply some sort of innate human ability. Clearly, a machine is not human and thus cannot possess human qualities, such as intelligence. The “intelligence” of a machine consists of programmed algorithms that the machine carries out. It is not a human quality – it is fake.
I am reminded of decades ago when we were told that the human brain was like a digital computer, and that neurons rather than bits were involved. Well, this theory went nowhere and the human brain is still much of a mystery. There was decades ago the computer program ELIZA created by Joseph Weizenbaum that could act as a psychotherapist.* Weizenbaum explored in his book the human fascination with autonomous machines. – and this was over four decades ago. I expressed concern in 1961 about computers that could learn and act.**
Today there clearly is considerable hype and publicity being given to artificial intelligence. It promises much, but seems mostly to attract investors and big companies that hope to cash in on it all (or the next “new” thing). The ignorance of what went on in the past, coupled with the lust of greed, is the natural stupidity of artificial intelligence.
* Joseph Weizenbaum, Computer Power and Human Reason, W. H. Freeman and Company (New York), 1976.
** A. Michael Noll, “Electronic Computer – Friend or Foe?” the Orbit, Vol. 5, No.3 (March 1961), Newark College of Engineering, pp. 8 & 16.
Friday, June 8th, 2018
True to news in the digital age, we’ve been scooped by the Internet and Twitter, specifically. But if you have not seen the news yet, we are most pleased to report that Johannes M. Bauer has accepted an offer from the College of Communication Arts & Sciences to serve as the next Director of the Quello Center, and the new Quello Chair in the Department of Media and Information. His appointment is effective August 16, 2018.
Professor Bauer has been affiliated with the Quello Center since its inception in 1998, and during his tenure as Chair of the Department of Media & Information. Both through his involvement in Center research and as chair of our home department, Johannes has been closely tied to the Quello legacy, making his appointment a strong move in support of continuity with the Center’s mission. As Advisory Board Member Marjory Blumenthal with the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) put it: “The Center will be in excellent hands with Johannes.” And as Board Member Richard E. Wiley, Chairman of Wiley Rein LLP, said: “a great choice”.
Professor Prabu David, Dean of the College of Communication Arts & Sciences, said in announcing Professor Bauer’s appointment, that Johannes “is an accomplished scholar with an exemplary record in communication policy research and an ideal fit for this position.”
Indeed, Professor Bauer is an economist with an interdisciplinary perspective and a focus on the digital economy, having recently edited The Handbook on the Economics of the Internet (2016) with Michael Latzer at the University of Zurich. His work has been funded by major research organizations, including the US National Science Foundation and the Ford Foundation, as well as by industry and government, such as the US Department of Commerce. He has been on the boards of major journals and associations in his fields of expertise, and as an associate editor of a key journal in the field, Telecommunications Policy, and as a board member of the Research Conference on Communications, Information and Internet Policy, formerly the Telecommunications Policy Research Conference (TPRC).
With Johannes Bauer’s appointment, the Quello Center is set for a smooth transition to its next phase. Professor Bauer said he was honored to have been offered this opportunity and noted: “Communication policy faces important and often contentious issues. I will work hard on growing the reputation of the Center as a place conducting high-quality research and a forum for stakeholders to find common ground for good, forward-looking policy solutions.”
His new colleagues in the Center stand ready to support his transition as Director, and want to thank the faculty, the Quello Advisory Board, and the search committee, for drawing the search process to a successful conclusion. To quote the Chair of the Quello Advisory Board and CEO of the National Emergency Number Association, Brian Fontes: “Congratulations to the search committee for an excellent selection.”
More information about Johannes M. Bauer: https://msu.edu/~bauerj/
Information about the James H. and Mary B. Quello Center: http://quello.msu.edu/
Members of the Quello Advisory Board: http://quello.msu.edu/people/advisory-board/
Monday, May 21st, 2018
The Innovation Garden
A. Michael Noll
May 20, 2018
© Copyright 2018 AMN
Long before Silicon Valley invaded California, there was an “Innovation Garden” flourishing in New Jersey. Which easily qualified as the Invention State.
Thomas A. Edison and his laboratory in West Orange, New Jersey cemented New Jersey’s role in innovation. Many smaller manufactures of electrical equipment became located in New Jersey, all wit their on innovations. RCA Laboratories in Princeton, New Jersey was formed in 1942 and a host of inventions resulted, including color television.
One of the more famous R&D facilities in New Jersey was Bell Telephone Laboratories, Inc. (Bell Labs). The freedom to take risk, coupled with a proximity to practical problems, characterized Bell Labs. These factors are today associated with Silicon Valley, but were present decades before at Bell Labs and the other R&D facilities located in New Jersey. The very “silicon” in Silicon Valley came from William Shockley, one of the inventors of the transistor at Bell Labs who later went to California.
New Jersey is known as the Garden State, but it also should be credited as being an early “Innovation Garden.”
The story of Bell Labs, from my personal perspectives, can be downloaded at: http://quello.msu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Memories-Noll.pdf
Wednesday, May 16th, 2018
Discussion of so-called fake news is gradually – maybe rapidly – shifting to the concept of ‘junk news’, and I fear this could be a dangerous move. I agree that the concept of fake news has many downsides, not the least of which is the degree it has been politicized. However, the shift to junk news might have even worse implications. My main concern is that it provides more of a rationale for blocking or filtering news, as if it were spam, for example.
This evening, the science reporter at PBS, Miles O’Brien, delivered an informative story about ‘Junk News‘. It was well produced, but it captured a concern of mine that has been growing throughout the debate over misinformation. It also gradually moved into a discussion of work at Facebook designed to move so called junk news off the screens of more users. Facebook representatives were thankfully adverse to agreeing they should edit the news, as if they were a newspaper, but they felt justified in looking for algorithms to diminish the visibility of news they viewed of low quality.
I for one am worried about this drive, as it will clearly do more than accomplish its stated objective. It will also be likely to promote mainstream news outlets even more than presently favored, since they will be safe sources. It will downgrade blogs and the opinions and views of networked individuals, which are at the heart of a more democratic collective intelligence.
So I will stop using junk news except as a target of criticism. I lean towards crowd sourced ratings of blogs and posts as I’d prefer the wisdom of the crowd over the wisdom of Facebook monitors, but that is what search seeks to accomplish. At least fake news is understood to be a politically charged concept, but junk news is a concept which also has serious political implications, if my fears are justified.
Wednesday, May 16th, 2018
On May 10th, 2018, Google’s ‘father of the Internet’, Vint Cerf gave the Quello Lecture at MSU, entitled ‘The Unfinished Internet’. Before the interview, he was interviewed by Scott Pohl of WKAR public radio. Here is that interview: http://wkar.org/post/googles-father-internet#stream/0
Wednesday, May 16th, 2018
AT&T’s Tarnished Brand
A. Michael Noll
May 16, 2018
© Copyright 2018 AMN
The payment by AT&T of over $1/2 million to President Trump’s attorney Michael Cohen has tarnished AT&T’s reputation and brand. It also raises concerns about the wisdom and competence of AT&T’s senior management.
Decades ago, the AT&T brand meant a lot to most consumers in the United States. AT&T owned the Bell System, which supplied telecommunication service as a regulated monopoly. In those old days, AT&T took its responsibility to the public strongly to supply quality service at affordable prices. However, AT&T was broken up and went through various divestitures, until in 2005, what was left of AT&T was acquired by Southwestern Bell. In effect, Southwestern Bell, a former Bell telephone company, cloaked itself in the AT&T identity (its former parent). And now the AT&T brand has been tarnished, as it has been revealed that AT&T paid over a $1/2 million to Michael Cohen, virtually as a gift, with no real work expected or received.
The two large remaining Baby Bells today are AT&T and Verizon, and they usually act in concert. If AT&T paid off Cohen and Verizon did not, a plausible explanation is that AT&T clearly was hoping that Cohen would exert influence to obtain government approval of AT&T’s proposed acquisition of Time Warner.
The proposed acquisition of Time Warner by ATT is fraught with questions. Would this acquisition create far too much control over content and the network conduit? Would it be too much vertical integration with no benefit to consumers? What does AT&T know about the entertainment business, other than that its antics certainty seem entertaining?
A. Michael Noll is a retired professor emeritus of communications. His earlier opinion of the AT&T proposed acquisition of Time Warner is at: http://quello.msu.edu/att-goes-hollywood/
Tuesday, May 1st, 2018
THE QUELLO CENTER PRESENTS
INTERNET PAST, PRESENT & FUTURE
BY VINTON CERF
THURSDAY, MAY 10TH @ 3:30 PM // COMM ARTS RM. 147
The Internet grew out of a successful US Defense Department experiment in packet switching and became a platform upon which a wide range of new applications have evolved. New technologies such as smart phones have reinforced the utility of the Internet by spreading access to it at increasing bandwidths and geographic scope. The Internet is estimated to have reached about 50% of the world’s population. As this decade comes to a close, what challenges remain and what new ideas may be pursued? Security, safety, reliability, misinformation, botnets, privacy, and a host of other concerns clamor for attention. Powerful machine learning tools and collaborative technologies are increasing our capacity to solve problems and ask new and challenging questions.
This talk raises questions and poses problems that need attention if we are to make of the Internet the tool it has the capacity to become.
Vinton G. Cerf is vice president and Chief Internet Evangelist for Google. He contributes to global policy development and continued spread of the Internet. Widely known as one of the “Fathers of the Internet,” Cerf is the co-designer of the TCP/IP protocols and the architecture of the Internet. He has served in executive positions at MCI, the Corporation for National Research Initiatives and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency and on the faculty of Stanford University.
Vint Cerf served as chairman of the board of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) from 2000-2007 and has been a Visiting Scientist at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory since 1998. Cerf served as founding president of the Internet Society (ISOC) from 1992-1995. Cerf is a Foreign Member of the British Royal Society and Swedish Academy of Engineering, and Fellow of IEEE, ACM, and American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the International Engineering Consortium, the Computer History Museum, the British Computer Society, the Worshipful Company of Information Technologists, the Worshipful Company of Stationers and a member of the National Academy of Engineering. He has served as President of the Association for Computing Machinery, chairman of the American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) and completed a term as Chairman of the Visiting Committee on Advanced Technology for the US National Institute of Standards and Technology. President Obama appointed him to the National Science Board in 2012.
Cerf is a recipient of numerous awards and commendations in connection with his work on the Internet, including the US Presidential Medal of Freedom, US National Medal of Technology, the Queen Elizabeth Prize for Engineering, the Prince of Asturias Award, the Tunisian National Medal of Science, the Japan Prize, the Charles Stark Draper award, the ACM Turing Award, Officer of the Legion d’Honneur and 29 honorary degrees. In December 1994, People magazine identified Cerf as one of that year’s “25 Most Intriguing People.”
His personal interests include fine wine, gourmet cooking and science fiction. Cerf and his wife, Sigrid, were married in 1966 and have two sons, David and Bennett.
Thursday, April 26th, 2018
Smart Devices – Foolish Users
A. Michael Noll
April 26, 2018
© Copyright 2018 AMN
It seems we have become slaves to our computers and smart phones, with near constant updating, synching, and battery recharging. The devices might be considered “smart,” but the users seem to be “foolish” and perhaps even “stupid.”
We are slaves to these devices. We need to feed them electricity to keep them charged, and groom them with updates. They disturb us with interruptions and demands for our attention. We become mesmerized and perhaps hypnotized by what they display to us on their screens.
We discover that their real owners are the suppliers of information, such as Facebook, Google, and the “cloud.” We willingly give over our most intimate personal information, and then seem surprised when it is misused.
They will evolve, we are told, with artificial intelligence into even smarter devices. We will be left wondering whether their artificial intelligence should be contrasted with our apparent natural stupidity. But the myth of the coming artificial intelligence is nothing new – we have been waiting for decades for the dawn of this new age. For me, I am not smart enough for a smart phone, but if I had one, I would put it away in a drawer — and forget it. It could then linger in its “smartness,” while I have my own life to enjoy without interruption and caring for its upkeep.
Monday, April 23rd, 2018
[Written by Quello’s Ruth Shillair and posted by Bill Dutton, with her permission]
I was honored to be selected as one of the 50 cybersecurity scholars from around the world to attend the annual global RSA cybersecurity conference. It is a gathering of 50,000 cybersecurity professionals and researchers held in San Francisco. The theme this year was “Now Matters” and cybersecurity issues certainly something that we need to address “now” rather than in the future.
The overwhelming theme that I saw was that cybersecurity has gotten over the “silver bullet” fantasy. We realize there will be no killer app or magic formula that will ultimately solve cyber insecurities and protect networks, systems, and individuals from attack. The human factor has often been cited as the weakness of cybersecurity; however, it was refreshing to hear that many leaders are realizing that humans are also the strength and core of cybersecurity. Many sessions discussed how cybersecurity needs to be holistic, a long-term commitment, an imbedded culture and an overall mindset.
Chris Young, CEO of McAfee spoke on the importance of building a cybersecurity culture- part of a “sustained cycle of measures, rewards, and advocacy.” Even though technical advances make systems stronger than ever, the attackers also are intelligent and adaptive, making it important for us to work as a team. He quoted Christopher Painter, former coordinator for cyber issues at the U.S. State Department, “The failure to ‘mainstream’ cyber issues into larger national security and policy debates has real consequences” (Click here to read more from Mr. Painter ). Mr. Young went on to compare the current Facebook issues as the Exon of today. After the oil spills people start to re-think the costs and benefits that cheap energy policies had on the overall environment. Even though cheap oil prices had caused a boom in the economy, there was a price to pay. Now, people are starting to re-think the costs and benefits of “free” social networking services that facilitate networking and the exchange of information. The surveillance economy has caused an economic boom also, but there are long term implications that we are just beginning to understand.
This cybersecurity mindset takes a team mentality. Brad Smith, the president of Microsoft used the metaphor of a crew rowing a boat together. Stakeholders need to learn to trust each other and communicate well in order to navigate the uncertain waters ahead. He also shared about the human impacts of the recent WannaCry ransomware attacks. This was a cyber based state-backed attack on citizens during a time of peace. It crippled the national health service in Great Britain, shutting off access to critical health records and blocking individuals from all but critical emergency care. As a result, Microsoft, and many other companies are working together at unprecedented levels to help build resilience against similar attacks in the future.
The hundreds of possible sessions ranged from technical training on the latest penetration testing techniques to policy discussions. Several sessions discussed the implications of artificial intelligence and the growing concerns about how human bias and discrimination are magnified by these systems if not guided by policies and standards to protect individuals. An entire track of sessions was dedicated to the human dimensions of cybersecurity and the importance of policy. The recent congressional meetings with Mark Zuckerberg illustrated the challenge ahead to reach policy makers so they understand the basics of cybersecurity, privacy, and what can or can’t be done to help improve our current systems.
One of my favorite sessions was led by Bruce Schneier (Schneier on Security and of the Berkman Klein Center at Harvard University). He spoke of the urgency to build policy and regulations for the growth of the Internet of Things (IoT). It used to be that cybersecurity threats were ultimately losing control of files of data, now threats are physical, real and imminent. Instead of just attacking one self-driving car and taking it over, what will happen once hackers take control of all the self-driving cars of a particular make or model? He spoke of the complexity of keeping a device up to date as systems become compromised and updates may have unintended consequences. To check updates before rolling them out to car owners, car manufacturers will have to keep track of all the makes and models to test updates and make sure systems don’t fail as patches are rolled out. Beyond cars being basically computers on wheels, many of the devices in our homes and factories are now IoT devices. In today’s marketplace consumers have no idea which IoT devices are safe, have backdoors, or if they are even updatable. His upcoming book, Click Here to Kill Everybody, should be very interesting.
Overall, this conference was encouraging and overwhelming all at the same time. It was encouraged to see progress in viewing cybersecurity as a cultural and mindset issue rather than just a technical problem. It was encouraging to see so many young scholars, educators, and technologists working tirelessly to make the world a better place. It was discouraging to see so few women in the conference. Yes, there were special “Women in Cybersecurity” sessions -and there was some tremendous mentoring going on- but there are few women and minorities in this field. The telling point was during session breaks where the men’s bathrooms had long lines going down the hall, at the same time the women’s bathrooms had no lines at all. However, seeing the mixture of young cybersecurity scholars I am hopeful that in the future we will see a representation that is more diverse, bringing with them the insights and experiences that will help build a cybersecurity mindset that can be widely embraced and core to our culture.
PhD Candidate and Quello Research Assistant
Thursday, April 19th, 2018
Reflections, Visions, and Challenges: Discussions of the 20thAnniversary of the James H. and Mary B. Quello Center
On 12 April 2018, the Quello Center celebrated the 20thAnniversary of its founding with an open house at the Center and forum that engaged friends and associates of the Center in reflecting on its past and future with short presentations on key challenges on the road ahead.
The day was similar to many academic events in showcasing informative presentations about the issues of policy and regulation in the digital age, but unusual in creating a stronger sense of responsibility to ensure the realization and continuation of James Quello’s dream for his Center. It is difficult to convey the personal stories and presentations that led to such a powerful outcome of this event, but the following points of summary and conclusion seek to capture key aspects of each session and the day as a whole.
The Welcome and Introduction
The Director of the Quello Center, Professor Bill Dutton, welcomed everyone to the forum, outlining the plan for the day. Dutton noted the context that Mark Zuckerberg provided over the two previous days of testimony to the U.S. Congress about the issues facing Facebook. The Facebook fiasco illustrated so well the degree that there is an absence of clear and appropriate policy and regulatory approaches to the issues facing the Internet, social media and related media, information, and communication technologies of the digital age. The mission of the Quello Center – to stimulate and inform policy and regulation for the digital age – is clearly of value in the present and foreseeable context. The public and politicians are asking for something to be done to protect privacy and other key values, but we lack appropriate models for accomplishing their aims.
Bill Dutton introduced the Chair of the Quello Center’s Advisory Board, Brian Fontes, who is the CEO of the National Emergency Number Association since 2008. Fontes was on Commissioner Quello’s staff at the FCC well before the Center was established and has served as the Chair of its Advisory Board since its inception. He spoke of the commitment and personality of Jim Quello, and conveyed the early steps in establishing the Center. An initial contribution from John Kluge was discussed as a contribution to creating a Chair at MSU in honor of Jim and Mary Quello. It was discussion of the chair with MSU Dean James Spaniolo and others that led to the larger idea of a Chair associated with a Center in their name. Fontes ended by thanking everyone for joining the forum, and introduced Susan Quello, the granddaughter of Jim and Mary.
Susan Quello, herself a researcher at the Scripps Institute in La Jolla, California, conveyed the loyalty and love of MSU that was held by her grandparents, who met while students at MSU. She was able to communicate the depth of their commitment to the university, and the pride they felt in the establishment of the Center in their names for perpetuity. She reminded the attendees of Jim Quello’s compulsive drive to succeed and that her grandfather lived and breathed for broadcasting and broadcasting regulation. Susan Quello concluded with a definition of success to describe her grandfather, “when you wake up every morning, however old or young, and bound out of bed because there is something out there that you love to do. Something that you believe in, that you’re good at. Something bigger than you are, and you can hardly wait to get out and begin today.”
Reflections on James H. Quello and the Center
Professor Bibi Reisdorf, Assistant Director of the Quello Center, and Assistant Professor in the Department of Media and Information, introduced the speakers for this first session, and moderated the discussion. She organized the discussion around a set of questions about how each first met James Quello, special moments and memories, how the idea for a research Center in his name first began, and events or other notable things that stood out to the panelists throughout the 20-year history of the Center.
Richard E. Wiley, Chairman and Co-founder of the Washington, DC law firm of Wiley Rein LLP, was on the big screen, teleconferencing from DC. Wiley described Jim Quello as being a practical person with unusually strong common sense. He emphasized the commitment of Quello to supporting scholarly research but also to moving beyond research for its own sake to contributing to its practical application, such as in shaping policy and practice. He applauded the Center for its work in realizing this vision on behalf of James and Mary Quello.
Karole White, the President and CEO of the Michigan Association of Broadcasters (MAB), communicated a personal sense of the man and his colorful language and character. She told a touching story of how he was always supportive of her to the point that during his very last days he called to support her, saying how she was so gifted with people that she should be a politician. All were amazed to learn of how so much of his last days were spent in building up his friends, associates, and family.
The Founding Director of the Quello Center, and Quello Professor Emeritus Professor Steve Wildman, spoke of how he knew of James Quello by reputation long before he met him. Wildman was amazed by Quello’s network of friends and associates in the FCC, government and industry, and the force of his drive and personality – even exhibited in his driving his many awards and plaques all the way from Washington, DC to East Lansing in the back of his car.
The session was rounded off by additional memories and responses from Brian Fontes and Susan Quello, who both recalled James Quello’s vision for the Center as an independent and cutting edge research center that would not only result in high quality research, but also inform policy in media, communication, and information.
Visions of the Next Decade(s)
Professor Laleah Fernandez, a post-doctoral researcher and fellow at the Quello Center, introduced and moderated the second session, focusing on ways forward for research and outreach of the Center.
Dean of the College of Communication Arts and Sciences, Prabu David, emphasized some of the strategic directions of the College. The Dean described how the Quello Center’s work fits into major initiatives, such as its interest in policy and its initiative with WKAR to create an innovation lab for next generation public broadcasting.
Professor Natascha Just of the Department of Media and Information spoke of some of the key intellectual challenges in moving forward, such as in reconceptualizing key issues and conceptualizations for the digital age. Just described how the Center is well poised to help shape and redefine the conversation surrounding media and information policy research.
Professor Johannes Bauer, Chair of the Department of Media and Information, conveyed his vision of the Center. Bauer said he sees the Center becoming a hub for the College and the University – a place to connect academics across the university, but also to connect academics with people in the policy community from the local to global arena on such issues as freedom of expression, ownership, and communication policy generally.
Two presentations followed the panels. The first focused locally, on networking Detroit, and the second on the future of broadcasting, with implications for local developments at WKAR.
Marc Hudson, the Co-founder and CEO of Rocket Fiber, described his transition from a student in telecommunications at MSU’s College of Communication Arts and Sciences. This background, he explained, led to a job at Quicken Loans, which fostered his idea of building a fiber optic network in Detroit. That fiber network, known as Rocket Fiber, was first intended to link the many acquisitions of Dan Gilbert, the founder of Quicken Loans and Rock Ventures. Now the CEO of Rocket Fiber, Hudson spoke about the early years of Rocket Fiber and their plans for the future. He also described his current roles in the FCC’s Broadband Deployment Advisory Group of the FCC, and Michigan Consortium for Advanced Networks. Rocket Fiber supported Quello Center research in 2018 that examined the nature of the Detroit digital divide.
Moving to the Next Generation of Broadcasting
Vincent Curren, a Principal in Breakthrough Public Media Consulting, then spoke about the history and future of broadcasting, focusing on the development and implementation of the new broadcasting standard ATSC 3.0, which will foster Internet Protocol (IP) broadcasting. Curren noted that the development of ATSC 3.0 is currently focused on commercial use. He emphasized the role that Quello could play in exploring public service capabilities in the development of ATSC 3.0 by partnering with WKAR.
Concluding Discussion of Reflections, Visions, and Challenges
Bill Dutton moderated the final panel that raised some concluding points of summary and discussion for the day.
Roderick (Rick) Coy, with the law firm of Clark Hill, led off with an overview of the decades since the introduction of the Quello Center 20 years ago, tracing change in the technical and policy landscape over the years. Coy referred to the Quello Center as a “God send” when it entered the scene in 1998. He recalled how the media landscape was changing dramatically at the time, and increasing complexities surrounding telecommunication law and regulation lacked objective research to help inform decision makers and professionals.
Brian Fontes returned to a discussion of the many personal qualities of James Quello and his visions for the Center. He reminded attendees of Quello’s optimism and excitement about the potential of information and communication innovations. Fontes stressed how Quello was most interested in and concerned about the impact of innovation on both business and communities served. He applauded the Quello Center for its focus on industry and community impact projects and research.
Jim and Mary Quello’s granddaughter, Susan Quello, concluded by thanking the participants, and noting how honored and pleased her grandfather would be – in fact the might well be smiling on the proceedings. She reiterated the qualities and strengths of her grandfather, including his ability to bridge partisan divides and make decisions based on his moral compass. Susan Quello thanked the Center for taking care of Jim Quello’s legacy through passion driven research.
Bill Dutton thanked everyone, particularly Susan Quello, for making this anniversary so memorable, and instilling a sense of responsibility to ensure that the Center maintains and enhances its mission of stimulating and informing debate over the policy, regulatory and management issues of the digital age in ways that have practical relevance for the industry and society as a whole.
Bill Dutton, Laleah Fernandez, and Bibi Reisdorf