[ChuckMcM]

Media has always been that. Why, during a military coup, is the first thing that is attacked are the TV stations? Control the message, control the culture.

It is fascinating to see the Internet (and in this case Facebook) displacing the multi-billion(trillion?) media estate. I remember the dot.com bubble where the media claimed that statements that the Internet would make them obsolete was crap. 20 years ahead of its time I guess.

The policy question is similar to the phone system one, is it in the people's best interest that their be a standard phone system? And if so, can you regulate it sufficiently to avoid abuses? Those were the questions surrounding the original Bell network in the US. What does a monopoly look like in the Internet world, and do we, can we, regulate it? Pretty important questions.

[ethbro]

We ultimately decided landlines needed to be subjected to pretty stringent regulatory requirements in return for their monopoly (before ultimately breaking them up). Hopefully the same will happen to Facebook if they retain market share in 20 years.

[WalterBright]

The government created the AT&T monopoly.

[ethbro]

I defer to you, but my take would be that the government simply declined to fight it on anti-trust grounds between ~1910-1970.

On the other hand, I don't think you can ignore Bell Labs or the fact they they did build some amazing infrastructure. Would the world have been better off on the whole with more competition in AT&T's heyday?

[jacobolus]

Go read Tim Wu’s book The Master Switch. The details of these media/communications monopoly histories are fascinating.

It’s hard to answer your counterfactual definitively, but probably, yes.

[drvdevd]

Thanks for this. Looks interesting.

[drvdevd]

Including this great quote from the front:

"At stake is not the First Amendment or the right of free speech, but exclusive custody of the master switch." — FRED FRIENDLY