Response to Harold Furchtgott-Roth
Federal Communications Law Journal, Vol. 65, No. 3, 2013
2013
- 1,646Usage
- 2Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Paper Description
I have great respect and affection for Harold Furchtgott-Roth, and it seems from his review of Captive Audience that he has respect and affection for me. Luckily for the rest of you, my view of his personality — and his view of mine — is irrelevant. I wanted to begin, though, by acknowledging his personal graciousness towards me. What is relevant is the striking number of issues in his review on which he and I completely agree. We agree that U.S. presidential administrations for a long time have not thought of the FCC as an important agency or its role in the U.S. economy as vital. We agree that communications policy in the U.S. is not necessarily being made based on the merits of particular situations. We agree that the federal government would probably be terrible at running a nationwide network itself. Where we differ is in our prescriptions, given this agreed-on background. Mr. Furchtgott-Roth’s conclusion from these premises is that the only answer is to give up. And my conclusion is that we cannot give up. My conclusion, unlike Mr. Furchtgott-Roth’s, is based on the reality of consumers’ experience in America when it comes to high-speed Internet access. Based on how people actually use these connections and how much they are required to pay, consumers are being gouged; the rich are paying too much for services that are both noncompetitive and second-class, and not enough Americans are being served adequately or at all.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know