IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/telpol/v35y2011i4p314-324.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Who shapes network neutrality policy debate? An examination of information subsidizers in the mainstream media and at Congressional and FCC hearings

Author

Listed:
  • Kim, Minjeong
  • Chung, Chung Joo
  • Kim, Jang Hyun

Abstract

Recognizing policy-making process as a communicative process, this study examines who has subsidized information relating to the net neutrality policy debate. Empirical data has been collected from net neutrality stories published in four national newspapers, as well as from hearings by Congress and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), during the period of February 2004 through January 2009. Study findings reveal that corporate interests have played a significant role in subsidizing information on net neutrality, both to the public through the mainstream media and to legislators through Congressional hearings. Furthermore, study results show that experts played a larger role in defining net neutrality through the mainstream media and FCC hearings than they did through Congressional hearings. Finally, the role of advocacy group representatives was more apparent at Congressional hearings than via the other two available information channels.

Suggested Citation

  • Kim, Minjeong & Chung, Chung Joo & Kim, Jang Hyun, 2011. "Who shapes network neutrality policy debate? An examination of information subsidizers in the mainstream media and at Congressional and FCC hearings," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 314-324, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:telpol:v:35:y:2011:i:4:p:314-324
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308596111000188
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:telpol:v:35:y:2011:i:4:p:314-324. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/30471/description#description .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.