Why Does The CDC Have Better Data On Mobile Penetration Than The FCC?
from the that's-what-we-call-regulatory-capture dept
It's well known that the FCC has long had incredibly bogus data when it comes to broadband and mobile penetration in the US. In many cases, this is due to efforts from legacy providers who don't want accurate penetration info to get out there, because that might lead the government to realize how little actual competition there is in the market. Kevin Werbach points us to the fact that it appears that when people are interested in mobile phone penetration in the US, it's not the FCC who has the data, but the Center for Disease Control (CDC), who went out and collected their own damn data because it needed to know that data to make sure its phone surveys remained accurate. It's quite telling of the state of the FCC when it's the CDC that has better data about the industry the FCC regulates.
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Just like it's the department of Homeland security's job to track medical issues like the Swine Flu.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TB5-Y08qbjo
Pretty soon it will be the FDA's job to track astrophysics.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The FCC - whose mandate is to track this stuff, is obviously doing a poor job of it. This is not news...
The CDC - in no way in overlapping fields with the FCC needed CORRECT statistical data concerning mobile phone/mobile broadband services (in relation to a variety of health concerns). As the FCC data was spurious/irrelevant/incomplete; they just went out and got their own.
I envy you--I've never had to overcome such incredible reading comprehension problems like those you seem to possess. Very brave, keep it up! Someday, it'll be easier.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Obviously he's mentally deficient and attempting to better himself. The least we can do is try to show a little support in his brave, brave, special needs struggle.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
And you've never made a mistake. Please, Anonymous Coward, I've caught you contradict yourself several times already. People make mistakes. I just skimmed through it too quickly is all.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
It's that easy.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Well buddy, that's the last time I stick up for a 'tard!!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The point is, it's not the same guy/gal posting everytime. I know it gets confusing. I just assume every AC is a different person.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
The point
1. The CDC needs statistical data to make sure they're surveys are being accurately utilized
2. The FCC is responsible for gathering this data, and I assume would make it available to the CDC
3. The CDC wrinkled its nose and said, "Yeah...no thanks", then proceeded to get the data themselves
How damning is it of a government affiliated regulating commission that another govt. group don't recognize their data as being accurate or worth anything? And more importantly, if the govt. doesn't trust their own data, why should we?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
It's that easy."
In reading your contradictions I was aware of the possibility that someone could impersonate you. And no, it's NOT that easy. There is such a thing as a hostmask that does identify you, Mike has access to it and he can tell. If you know about the internet you'll know that.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
AND I don't contradict myself
AND you're calling out Anonymous Coward for something that :Lobo Santo said.
AND yes, Mike can tell, but it's not displayed on the general thread, so YOU can't. My point is that the contradictions are typically done by trollers.
AND nobody likes it when people get upset when they're called on they're own shortcomings; CTFU
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Twitter
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
There is a Reply to this comment link directly below the comment you would like to link to. I have no idea who you're replying to half the time.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
See "Your Preferences" at the top right of this page. Select Threaded View.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
You never contradict yourself? That's a tall claim.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
I simply pointed out that there was no reason to resort to personal attacks for making a mistake. After all, it's clearly not like you've never contradicted yourself or made obvious fallacies. Correcting someone and resorting to personal attacks are not the same thing.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
NOTICE WHO'S MAKING THE POSTS!
In this thread alone there have been DJ(myself), Anonymous Coward, :Lobo Santo, Travis, kirillian, Chrono S. Trigger, Tgeigs and yourself. We are NOT all the same person. If you don't like what someone says, please respond to THAT person, and do not attribute to him/her what someone ELSE has said.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
True, but I'm sort of like God, Bhuddah, or Ron Jeremy: There's a little bit of me in everyone.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
If it's not anonymous coward then I apologize to him. Lobno Santo shouldn't impersonate you here
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090518/0211554920.shtml
"AND yes, Mike can tell, but it's not displayed on the general thread, so YOU can't. My point is that the contradictions are typically done by trollers."
Well, either you're the same person or you're impersonating him. Either way you're the troll impersonating others.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
I'm not used to this structure, still need more getting used to. I'm used to being able to edit my posts for mistakes later on. Thanks for the advice though.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
just click "reply to this comment"
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
This is Bettawrekonize. Testing, testing.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Thanks so much for pointing that out to me. That's nice to know.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
OMG
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: OMG
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Advice For All Commenters
Go to top right of this page. Your Preferences. Select Threaded view.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Advice For All Commenters
The only ill side effect I see with threaded view is in order to find the latest comments, one has to scroll up and down checking each thread. With flattened view I simply skip to the bottom to see the latest posted comments.
Any insight??
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Advice For All Commenters
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Advice For All Commenters
As to the story, that's hilarious. Did the CDC contract out the work though? Also, isn't there some sort of accountability on the FCC to have accurate data?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Advice For All Commenters
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Advice For All Commenters
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Advice For All Commenters
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Sad
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Comments
Next time Wreckage-ize, please think before posting. That way you won't need a ton of posts to make one or two or less than one point. One post would have done.
And I am always happy to see Lobo Santo and TGiegs post. You guys have the most amusing serious posts in general. =)
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Could it be?
I got the feeling that I was watching an Artificial Intelligence (AI) evolve as I read through all the 'Bettawrekonize' stuff above...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Add Your Comment