T-Mobile Text Blocking Raises Old Issues in New Way

T-Mobile USA has been sued by EZ Texting, a provider of marketing campaigns using text mesaging. because T-Mobile USA blocked one of EZ Texting's campaigns.

The issue is far more complicated than some seem to believe. On one hand, this is pitched as an infringement of "free speech" rights. On the other hand it is seen as within the purview of any ad network or content publisher to decide what it will run, and what it will not run.

In other words, it is a manifestation of an ancient debate: Does the right of political speech belong to the speaker or the listener?

Also, though communications is regulated on a "common carrier" basis, which implies no "right of free speech" for the carrier (no blocking, for example), a commercial text messaging campaign is the use of a common carrier capability for an advertising campaign.

Historically, content publishers and media have had the nearly absolute right to reject any discrete bit of advertising, exercising their "free speech" rights.

These issues are not easily resolved. One might argue it is clear enough that the original intent of the U.S. Constitution was to preserve the right of free political speech for "speakers," not "listeners," originally for publishers of political tracts, pamphlets and the forerunners of newspapers.

More recently, the rules have shifted for electronic forms of communication, putting new emphasis on the "rights" of listeners or viewers. That's the foundation of all "local content" or "diversity" rules, for example.

But those interpretations conflict. Is the right of free speech primarily or necessarily for the speaker, or for the audience?

Secondarily, in this case, is texting a form of media, and therefore protected by free speech rights, when the use case is "advertising and marketing" rather than person-to-person communication of the common carrier type (private conversations and messaging)?

If the former, then T-Mobile has the right to reject an ad; if the latter, then all the messages must be delivered.

These sorts of questions have gotten more complicated as media have evolved, but there is a basic contradiction here, nonetheless. Is the right something that belongs to the speaker, or the listener? Courts have ruled both ways.

T-Mobile Claims Right to Censor Text Messages

What's the Form Factor for the Mobile Phone of the Future?

As much as the Apple iPhone has changed the expectations users have about what a mobile device should look like, and how the interface should work, there are no end of ideas about where device form factors and user experience are headed.

One Point of View on Net Neutrality

It isn't a view I agree with, but Tim Wu is an articulate proponent of the argument in favor of net neutrality.

Stimulus didn't save the nation from depression

Economists now say the Great Recession ended in June of 2009, when the economy began growing again. And now people are arguing the the trillion dollar American Reinvestment and Recovery Act "saved" us from a worse outcome. Really?

The ARRA was passed in February 2009. The recession ended in June 2009. By the end of September 2009 (after the recession had ended), just $36.2 billion had actually been received, either by agencies that would disburse funds, or directly by individuals.

Do you really believe less than $36 billion in ARRA spending had any meaningful impact?

http://www.recovery.gov/Transparency/RecipientReportedData/Pages/QuarterlySum.aspx?qtr=2009Q3

Stimulus didn't save the nation from depression | detnews.com | The Detroit News

A Scary Chart

There is something about this chart that should worry you. Note the length of the 1929 recession, about 44 months.

If you know your U.S. history, you know that the United States was in a "Great Depression" throughout the 1930s, getting out only sometime during World War II.

So the "official" recession last less than four years, though the Great Depression lasts up to a decade and a half.

Part of the reason is that there were two separate "recessions" during the Great Depression, if we can say something that sounds nonsensical.

Also, despite the moniker "roaring twenties," and the undeniable growth of that period, there were recessions in 1920, 1923, 1926 and 1929. Every three years, a reversal from growth to decline.

Given current worry about a double dip recession, and recent comments by the Federal Reserve suggesting it is worried about that happening, despite other "happy talk" about the low possibility of such an event, the 1920s and even 1950s record suggests one can say it is possible, perhaps even likely, there could be a growth reversal every three years, even in an otherwise robust economic climate.

If the last recession "ended" in June 2009, that might suggest another recession starting in June 2012 or so. Maybe its not strictly a "double dip," but two separate recessions. Americans won't care.

Nor does it provide any comfort to note there were "just" two recessions in the era we call the Great Depression. In other words, the formal definitions are one thing; the human experience quite another thing.

What If Verizon Never Gets the iPhone?

It could be a blessing in disguise.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/pcworld/20100924/tc_pcworld/whatifverizonnevergetstheiphone_1

Adding voice to text

Some firms see an opportunity.

http://www.trendcentral.com/WebApps/App/SnapShots/Article.aspx?ArticleId=7963