In the public interest.

Video dial tone, wireless communication systems, high-speed data streams, digital video, information networks: we are in the midst of a vast technological revolution. Rapid developments in the computer and telecommunication industries force us to reevaluate and adapt the ways information is produced, distributed and consumed. The complex web of information resources known as the internet is no longer a closed society of scientists, academicians and hackers. Personal computers, cellular phones and multimedia products pressed on CD-ROM are no longer exotic playthings of the wealthy. Like the printing press, these new technologies are opening up new worlds of information. The question is, who will have access to the production and distribution of this information?

The Alliance for Community Media (ACM), which represents about 950 community television centers and their constituencies, is one of the few organizations advocating for public, non-commercial access to information networks. With the core of its membership coming from PEG (public, education and government) cable access centers and local origination stations (both of which are made possible through franchise agreements between local communities and their cable television provider), ACM has traditionally focused on the concerns and needs of the community television producer. However, the nearly 20-year-old organization, which was founded as the National Federation of Local Cable Programmers (NFLCP), changed its name in 1992 to reflect the shifting landscape of communications technology and the evolving role of the community media producer.

By reaching out to community computing and media arts centers, as well as redefining cable access centers as community communication centers, ACM is preparing for a future in which television, the telephone and the computer are one and the same. A future in which moving images will flow through fiber optic cables or beam directly into an individual's home without the need for coaxial cable. A future in which cable franchise fees may no longer support public access facilities. A future in which the voice of the public may be increasingly muffled.

Intended to address the impact of new communication technologies upon local communities and freedom of speech, ACM's 1995 International Conference and Trade Show entitled "Community Media: Thriving in the Technology Revolution" was held this summer in Boston, a location conference organizers described as the "hub of technology and community media." The message seemed to be that community media and the public's access to the means of communication (no matter what the tools may be) is a vital and essential part of democratic life. The four day conference was expansive in format and designed to meet the needs and interests of the diverse constituencies served by the Alliance: access center managers, trainers, producers, educators, activists, policy makers, technicians and artists engaged in panel discussions and workshops focused on public policy, education, government, activism, youth, fund raising, training, community participation, the internet and computer-based applications, technical how-tos and international partnerships. With up to 11 concurrent workshops, 11 pre-conference seminars, six special events, and over seven locations, the ability to fully participate in the entire conference was an impossible task even for the most energetic of conference goers.

This wide scope was a key element in the planning of the event. Chaired by Rika Welsh of Malden Cable Access Television, the conference program committee aided by a Boston-based planning group was diverse in its membership. With individuals from area cable access, computer access and media arts organizations, the committee purposefully designed the conference to meet the concerns of ACM's multi-faceted constituency. Most notably, ACM has formed successful bonds with constituencies concerned with computer-based networks and community access to them. With prominent input from organizations such as Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility, the Boston Computer Society (BCS) and Playing To Win (a national alliance of community computing organizations), the 1995 ACM conference blended internet information sessions, a cyberschool, and a free internet access center (sponsored by BCS) into its agenda. This blending of technologies seems natural. Many public access stations are now incorporating or forming partnerships with computer learning centers. With compatible organizational structures and complementary missions, the desire to merge PEG access and community computing networks into community media centers is strong. With the merging of telecommunications technologies, and current debate in the public policy arena on their use, ACM views these alliances as crucial to the survival of First Amendment rights to free speech.

In addition to continual First Amendment battles, ACM members are facing threats to franchise funding (the small price cable companies must pay for their monopolies), and the possible elimination of PEG access due to technological and policy shifts. New technologies such as video dial tone and microwave transmitters promise to replace coaxial cable. Telephone companies vie with cable interests to dominate information/entertainment networks. Legislation currently being voted on will shape telecommunications networks and the public's access to them well into the next century. [Ed. note: see article by Laurie Ouellette on p. 3] Therefore, it is not surprising that ACM's leadership sees the need to be aggressively involved in the shaping of public policy on telecommunications.

With legislative measures rapidly changing and the fate of access at stake, a significant number of the nearly 700 participants at ACM's conference were engaged in the six-part public policy workshop track that covered everything from an update on telecommunications policy to the protection of non-commercial free speech to video dial tone to regulation, franchise renewal and coalition strategies. Panelists from PEG access stations, ACM leadership, the Federal Communications Commission, People for the American Way, a half dozen or so law firms, and a member of the National Cable Television Association (which represents cable companies and often opposes PEG access interests) sifted through the various workshops informing and defining the key policy issues for conference participants.

For the conference participant, these sessions were important, though not the most emotionally engaging. Mercurial policy shifts, combined with complicated legislative jargon and even more perplexing technological advances, have dissuaded many in the general population from engaging in telecommunications legislation. ACM's policy track was an attempt to clarify the issues and charge access personnel with the task of informing their communities about the real threats to free speech and democratic participation.

These legislative concerns also highlighted the only down side to the 1995 ACM conference: the lack of a strong presence of media arts representation. Partly because this constituency is not often directly connected to PEG access, the meeting ground is not readily apparent. In addition, ACM's commitment to these constituencies is not as strong as it could be. While the 1995 Boston meeting heavily involved community computing networks, the formal inclusion of the media arts community was limited to a couple of panels on fund raising and collaborative networks. This is unfortunate, since the media arts community has already battled the legislative and funding dragons looming before the access community. The wounds inflicted from the severe attacks on the National Endowment for the Arts, National Endowment for the Humanities and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting are still fresh, and the "obscenity" battles are being eerily echoed in the Exxon amendment to the 1992 Cable Act currently being challenged by ACM in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. (The amendment would allow local cable television operators to "censor" content that "contains obscene material, sexually explicit conduct, or material soliciting or promoting unlawful conduct.") The arts community and independents have much to offer in the struggle for public media.

Still, the overwhelming strength of ACM's annual conference was to provide a location where those who are active in the access arena can come together and share information. Finding out how others have tackled problems and approached issues is invaluable. Panels dealing with youth, alternative media networks and activism used the ACM gathering as an opportunity to brainstorm, network and create meaningful exchanges. This gathering of groups in a ritual affirmation of an access community is a necessary tonic, and is especially relevant in a political climate that is unconcerned with acting in the public's interest. Unless of course that "public" is of a decidedly commercial/corporate bent.

The 1995 ACM Conference's most exciting moments occurred in the presence of actual community-based media productions, especially the presentation of the 1995 Hometown Video Festival Awardees. These glimpses into the lives and concerns of local access producers (and their communities) as well as the culture of discourse streaming through the internet, are all the rationale ACM needs for protecting the public's right to access to the means and tools of media production. The visions of these communities are strong and powerful. Is it any wonder that current telecommunications policy makers want to silence them?

FELICIA M. SULLIVAN is a writer, media activist and Education Director of the Boston Film and Video Foundation.