Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Unofficial Show Notes for Dwayne Winseck on CANADALAND

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Telus $75/15GB
    Feedback Score

    Post Unofficial Show Notes for Dwayne Winseck on CANADALAND

    Name:  canadaland.png
Views: 172
Size:  99.6 KB

    If ever a podcast needed show notes, it's this one.

    On his latest episode of CANADALAND, host Jesse Brown opens with a glossary of names and organizations for his interview with Professor Dwayne Winseck. Yes, that Dwayne Winseck.

    Before blogging here I used to co-host a podcast called Dyscultured; one of my duties there was assembling the show notes for each episode. I really want you to listen to Professor Winseck's interview and get the most out of it. So consider these the unofficial show notes for CANADALAND Episode 9: Wireless Wars.


    Talk to the Hand

    The interview begins with a quick debrief of Professor Winseck's "debate" with Bernard Lord on an Ottawa radio show. Here is a link to that exact episode — unfortunately there is no archived audio, nor even a mention of these particular guests...

    Winseck asserts that the debate was "stacked" with CWTA talking points, and later draws attention to 1310News being owned by Rogers. Scroll down to the bottom of this page for proof.

    What Winseck was trying to get across was a general point from his recent paper that mobile concentration rates around the world are astonishingly high, and that across Europe, in the United States and in Israel (for example) a fourth national wireless carrier is the norm.

    Bought Research

    The discussion turns to Winseck's appearance at the IIC Canada Conference last month, and to another paper — Wireless Competition in Canada: An Assessment, co-authored by Jeffrey Church and Andrew Wilkins. According to Winseck the paper is not only wrong, it's bought research.

    The Church/Wilkins study makes the following arguments:

    1. There is no wireless competition problem in Canada;
    2. Canada's low OECD ranking is wrong.

    Its authors, Winseck says, have been flown around the country by our Big Three carriers and given op-eds in major media outlets. Two examples cited:

    ... And The Globe and Mail is owned by Bell.

    Professor Winseck maintains that there is a cone of silence around his paper. He calls out Globe reporter Rita Trichur, who heard his talk at the IIC but decided (or was told to?) cover a talk by Bell Media President Kevin Crull instead.


    The Big Three apparently lost $20 billion in market capitalization over rumours of Verizon coming to Canada. I couldn't corroborate that specific figure, but according to Peter Nowak the Big Three lost a collective $6 billion in just two days.


    Back to the IIC conference, Winseck believes that himself, John Lawford and Tamir Israel were on the agenda only as token gestures of balance.

    But in Winseck's appearance with Jeffrey Church the latter's study was "gutted". According to Winseck, Church's paper is fundamentally flawed in at least three ways:

    1. Rogers is used as a proxy for the industry as a whole.
    2. Wireless is incorrectly observed as a single product life cycle; generational changes in technology (GSM, 3G, LTE) are conveniently ignored.
    3. Free cash flow is used as the only measure of profit — equity, operating income, net income are all ignored. Considering these extra metrics, Rogers is, in fact, making super-normal profits.

    Ben Klass

    Ben Klass's complaint to the CRTC is going forward, and it's a big deal. The only question is if the CRTC will treat this as a narrow proceeding considering only Bell, or if the scope will be broadened to include the entire Canadian wireless industry.

    The mainstream media has yet to cover this story. As Winseck puts it, the cone of silence has been imposed. Canada is the North Korea of telecom and media policy.


    Professor Winseck's Twitter account was in suspension for some 48 hours. He has yet to receive an explanation from Twitter; ditto for Jesse Brown.

    Did Winseck trigger a spam alert? In the day or so before his suspension he was repeatedly tweeting the same links, specifically targeting international journalists since their domestic counterparts seemed uninterested and/or unwilling.

    Winseck's colleague Josh Greenburg summed up the suspension in his own tweet: Glitch in the matrix or punishment for industry criticism?

    There is an unfortunate precedent for silencing such criticism. Not so long ago a YouTube video parodying U.S. cable companies was banned in Canada for some reason.


    Professor Winseck has posted an open letter to Twitter on his personal blog. Worth a retweet if you're so inclined.


    • Four or more national carriers are needed for a competitive marketplace.
    • Orange is in Canada kicking the tires. Our government should throw out the welcome mat.
    • A wireless connection, a phone in your pocket are necessities of life.


    These came fast and furious in the closing minutes of the interview. It's basically a list of those aligned with the idea of reforming Canada's wireless sector. I'm already following some of them on Twitter; I'll link to the others' Twitter accounts so we can follow them all:

    Remember too, that Professor Winseck is registered on these very forums. If you have any further questions about his interview, post them below and you might get an answer straight from the source...
    My mobile memoirs — free ebook available here.
    My HoFo feedback... is that still a thing?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Telus $75/15GB
    Feedback Score

    Exclamation Errors & Omissions, via Twitter

    So some stuff I got wrong:

    1. Bell does not actually own the Globe and Mail. Parent company BCE has a 15% stake in the newspaper.
    2. Twitter did in fact respond to Jesse Brown... to say that they don't provide details about suspensions.
    3. "Daniel Tenesent" is actually Daniel Tencer, Business Editor at Huffington Post Canada.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Feedback Score
    The CPAC video of the Church-Winseck debate has been posted at CPAC's website in the "Digital Archives" section

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Telus $75/15GB
    Feedback Score
    Yes! Everyone can see mediamorphis in action right here...

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    FITH BEYOND Thunder Bay
    IR GS BL00D Phone X N0 B.efore C.hrist E.ntity.. |nfinite HELLUS™ TnT $pawn + Ted§ Hell Hound TˇTher
    M¤ther Nature !... @SS2MOUTH Death 0f SELFie -> HardWare Opiates
    Feedback Score
    12 (100%)
    Breaking consolidation of media outlet ownership and regulating some of the wireless services would be a start.
    acurrie there're so few people that know and even fewer people that care. Greed plays lead and coutesy is so rare. Everybodys out to lunch. A Sheep nation that is toiling thinking elected officials have their interests at heart (only Charlie Angus comes to mind in regards) while following the proverbial carrot or these days, smart phone.

    I admit I assisted in creating an audience for these pushers wares. Now the few milk the many mindlessly charging more to support a bloated unethical few. When people look past the ever abundant coloured screens perhaps they will see the ugliness of this new legal addiction. Do they want to see the true reality or a controlled or even scripted one?

    Society as a majority is chemically dependant and changing for the worse our planet. People make billions while billions of living beings suffer. Automobiles were initially a freedom, but are you now free stuck in unsustainable polluting congestion.Don't be a fool and ever claim a car makes you independant This is the ugliness of our addiction/dependency to oil.

    Cellular phones use oil and Blood rare earths in their manufacture. If it was to be proven that wifi and cellular frequencies were detrimental to the health of you, children, beasts, insects and the multitude of pollinators (free food from flying flowers) could you or anyone you know break themselves of this technological addiction? Would you feel your rights and liberties were infringed if your device, your window to the world was legal to be used in only certain restricted areas? Why has the natural spectrum been blanketed by a human made and controled one? We assume information is more and more readily available. But will it be available and at what cost if it and access are controlled and guarded by ownership. Creative commons is free as an example but still needs a delivery system and thats where the Pushers still are in charge. Is there a plan to the digitizing of and access to INFORMATION? You won't get any.

    It's well and good that some are questioning the overcharges for delivery of this Product. But when you have a Cartel be it an Oil, Drugs(illegal and legal), Chocolate, Coffee or IT the fact is a few can do so much and without vast recognition of the addictive components of hardware opiates and the misperceived quality of delivery little to nothing will be done for greater benefits. This new freedom is not.

    only for consideration.
    Last edited by TelecomZombie; 12-05-2013 at 04:00 AM.

Similar Threads

  1. Show car for sale acura 91
    By sence_azn in forum Other Buy/Sell/Trade
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-27-2004, 01:06 PM
  2. ring tone music notes for Samsung R225m
    By clyde in forum Samsung
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-07-2004, 12:43 PM
  3. Reality Show Looking For Aspiring Porn Star
    By TriBand81 in forum The Lounge
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 11-05-2003, 07:20 PM
  4. Entering Notes For Tones- PLEASE HELP
    By Ozzy Reefer in forum Motorola
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-15-2003, 03:57 PM
  5. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-11-2002, 04:29 PM

Tags for this Thread