Friday, February 23, 2007
Trib gets it wrong, kinda
Jon Van's a good telecom reporter with a nose for what's going on, so maybe the Trib's editors put the telco spin on Van's story today, entitled, "Videos have Net bursting at the seams."
This "bursting at the seams" spin is not supported in the body of the article.
But the subtitle, "As Web's capacity nears its limits, debate rages over what to do next," and a one sentence Paragraph #3, " But no one disagrees that the Web's capacity is being pushed to its limits," reinforce the mis-directing spin.
Actually, if you read the body of the article, Andrew Odlyzko disagrees, John Ryan a SVP at Level 3 disagrees, and I disagree. We're all quoted further down the page.
Even Qwest CTO Pieter Poll, quoted in Paragraph #4, can be read to disagree. He says he doesn't see "anything catastrophic near-term."
The spin of these leading sentences is only supported by a Deloitte partner. Deloitte was hired by the Bells to write the report that the story hinges on. And it is supported by Walter McCormick, head of Bell-funded USTA. They want people to believe, "2007 may be the year of the tipping point where growth in capacity cannot cope with use." But NOBODY in the article, save the Deloitte guy and McCormick (and maybe the Trib's editor) seems to believe in a 2007 capacity crunch.
I talked to Jon Van for 45 minutes or so. I explained that Odlyzko's research shows Internet core traffic has been growing quite predictably for years at about 100% per year, and any capacity crunch at the core could have been anticipated long ago . . . and ameliorated, if there were a will to do so. I am certain he understood the point. I made sure he talked to Odlyzko, and he did. Good man.
I also talked to Van about how the telcos were spinning the capacity issue to construct a case for network neutrality. Apparently Odlyzko did too. The text of the article makes it clear that Jon Van got it.
But the casual reader skimming the headlines will get the telco message. Seems that's what the Trib's editors intended.
This "bursting at the seams" spin is not supported in the body of the article.
But the subtitle, "As Web's capacity nears its limits, debate rages over what to do next," and a one sentence Paragraph #3, " But no one disagrees that the Web's capacity is being pushed to its limits," reinforce the mis-directing spin.
Actually, if you read the body of the article, Andrew Odlyzko disagrees, John Ryan a SVP at Level 3 disagrees, and I disagree. We're all quoted further down the page.
Even Qwest CTO Pieter Poll, quoted in Paragraph #4, can be read to disagree. He says he doesn't see "anything catastrophic near-term."
The spin of these leading sentences is only supported by a Deloitte partner. Deloitte was hired by the Bells to write the report that the story hinges on. And it is supported by Walter McCormick, head of Bell-funded USTA. They want people to believe, "2007 may be the year of the tipping point where growth in capacity cannot cope with use." But NOBODY in the article, save the Deloitte guy and McCormick (and maybe the Trib's editor) seems to believe in a 2007 capacity crunch.
I talked to Jon Van for 45 minutes or so. I explained that Odlyzko's research shows Internet core traffic has been growing quite predictably for years at about 100% per year, and any capacity crunch at the core could have been anticipated long ago . . . and ameliorated, if there were a will to do so. I am certain he understood the point. I made sure he talked to Odlyzko, and he did. Good man.
I also talked to Van about how the telcos were spinning the capacity issue to construct a case for network neutrality. Apparently Odlyzko did too. The text of the article makes it clear that Jon Van got it.
But the casual reader skimming the headlines will get the telco message. Seems that's what the Trib's editors intended.
Technorati Tags: Astroturf, Framing, NetworkNeutrality, Press, AndrewOdlyzko
Comments:
I showed up here while doing some Google searches trying to prove that Jon Van was actively whoring for Qwest. I read the article you've linked and it's definitely a PR piece. I had no idea beforehand who Jon Van was, but apparently he's a legitimate writer for the Chicago Tribune. Why he's so clearly whoring himself and spreading this crap, I have no idea. I could name a whole fistful of things that are wrong with the "reasoning" in that article.
BTW, this isn't the first time he's written with an obvious pro-Qwest bias. See here.
BTW, this isn't the first time he's written with an obvious pro-Qwest bias. See here.
# posted by 
: 2/25/2007 5:39 PM
: 2/25/2007 5:39 PM
I've actually seen some reports (see IGI Group's Internet Growth 2006 report) that claim internet traffic growth isn't even reaching the 100%/year figure that Andrew Odlyzko has researched - they're claiming it's more on the order of 40%-50% per year.
Have you seen any recent authoritative studies, like the one Andrew did back in 2003, on this number?
Post a Comment
Have you seen any recent authoritative studies, like the one Andrew did back in 2003, on this number?
