JOURNAL OF INFORMATION POLICY 3 (2013): 552-574.

SPECTRUM POLICY REFORMS: SUPPORTING DEMOCRACY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN JORDAN

BY RANA F. SWEIS, BENJAMIN LENNETT, † AND TOM GLAISYER‡

The true role of new communications technologies in the dramatic events of the “Arab Spring” in 2011 is still under discussion, but wireless communications were certainly used widely by activists and protesters. This article uses events in Jordan as a case study, and the authors argue that reform of that country’s spectrum licensing policies and speech laws is essential for future democratic progress and economic development. The authors combine research into Jordan’s emergent high-tech industry, and successful and equitable spectrum policies in the United States, to form a series of policy recommendations for the Jordanian government.

INTRODUCTION

Today, lip service to reform will not be enough... Action must be taken to appease an increasingly skeptical public. Arab governments should start by acknowledging reality and putting their countries on a track of political reform.1

It is difficult to have a conversation about the Middle East and North Africa without acknowledging the dramatic impact of the Arab Spring; not just for those states where existing governments have been overturned, but also in countries whose leaders are struggling to change in the face of a tidal wave of protests for further democratic reform. Though there are a number of competing and complementing theories as to what exact factors led to those dramatic events, modern communication technologies played a significant role. Activists and non-activists created content on their mobile phones and other devices and distributed it to their friends, families, and observers through online tools such as blogs, social media, and e-mail.2 According to Eltantawy and Wiest, online social media played a dramatic role in changing “the dynamics of social mobilization” in Egypt.3 “Social media introduced speed and interactivity that were lacking in the traditional mobilization techniques, which generally include the use of leaflets, posters, and faxes. For instance, social media enabled domestic and international Egyptian activists to follow events in Egypt, join social-networking groups, and engage in discussions.”4 Mainstream television and satellite channels then redistributed the online content. Thus, as Ben Wagner argues in the context of the Tunisian protests, “...television, a traditional medium, helped the Internet, a new medium, disseminate information about the Tunisian protests, because those who could not access YouTube could still watch Al-Jazeera.”5

At the core of this communications ecosystem is spectrum. Mobile phones, wireless Internet, and traditional over-the-air television and radio broadcasters all require access to spectrum to offer their respective communications media. This article examines current spectrum policies in the country of Jordan not to focus on disruptive revolutionary change, but to argue that reforming spectrum policy can help support stable democratic progress in Jordan and promote economic growth. In the 21st Century, spectrum is a vital component to creating a vibrant media and communication environment. Spectrum is heavily involved in enabling speech and communication, so the way in which nations determine who has access to spectrum and for what purposes it is used can substantially impact the content of news and media as well as citizens’ access to information and engagement in civil discourse and commerce.

Compared to other countries in the MENA (Middle East/North Africa) region, Jordan is in a unique position to make reforms to its current spectrum policies in order to not only support democratic reforms, but also to spur innovation and economic development. Jordan is already home to a promising number of Internet startups and innovators. As written by Thomas Friedman in the New York Times, Oasis500, an “Arab-owned high-tech accelerator” reminiscent of a Silicon Valley venture capital firm, is headquartered in the capital of Amman and has helped seed “dozens of Arabic-content Internet start-ups.”6 Venture capitalists financed 66 technology companies in the region in 2011 compared to just 17 in 2010, according to a report released in 2012 by Sindibad Business.7 The investments made in 2011 created an estimated 450 jobs, while another 23 companies attracted financing in the first quarter of 2012.8 While the economic impact of the technology sector remains small, reforming spectrum policies to enable more robust and universal mobile broadband and wireless communications could help it grow further.

In this article, we suggest policies that would enable Jordan to more effectively utilize its spectrum resources to benefit democratization, innovation, and economic development. We first review the current rules around spectrum use in Jordan. What we find is that current broadcast policy and press and publication laws are restricting free expression and the development of both commercial and non- commercial news and information outlets. Moreover, there are limited opportunities for new innovators, entrepreneurs, and citizens to gain access to spectrum not just for broadcasting, but also to create new business models for mobile and wireless broadband. We evaluate Jordan’s current spectrum policies and propose reforms by drawing upon lessons learned in the United States. Despite substantial differences between the two countries, the U.S. has a long history of spectrum policy changes and reforms that could offer useful lessons for Jordan. Based upon the U.S. experience, the article offers practical reforms for Jordan’s current spectrum policies on the basis of four principles: transparency, access, competition, and openness. The proposed reforms focus on removing current limitations on news and political programming, lowering barriers to using spectrum for new innovators and citizens through greater license-exempt access, and requiring exclusively-licensed mobile operators to provide access to an open Internet.

Coupled with recommendations for spectrum reforms, this article argues that Jordan also needs to address fundamental problems with its press freedom and speech policies which impart a chilling effect on media and news content through both traditional broadcasting and the Internet, ultimately resulting in a negative impact on economic development. Reforming spectrum policy and minimizing restrictions on freedom of speech can foster a thriving media sector and technological innovation to support economic development.

OVERVIEW OF CURRENT SPECTRUM REGULATION IN JORDAN

In recent years, Jordan has liberalized its spectrum policies to expand the number of non-state- affiliated broadcast outlets as well as encourage the growth of mobile telecommunications services like 3G and 4G. The 2002 Audio Visual Law officially ended the government monopoly on broadcasting and established the Audiovisual Commission (AVC) to license and regulate private radio and television outlets. The law has resulted in the licensing of dozens of independently owned radio stations and regional satellite television stations. It is further expected that operations of the AVC will soon be placed under the Telecommunications Regulatory Commission.

However, most of the radio stations registered with AVC today offer entertainment-based content and shy away from political programming. This is due to several factors, including licensing fees, which are set somewhere between 25,000 and 100,000 Jordanian dinars (approximately $35,000 and $140,000 USD) depending on the license.9 In comparison to the United States, these fees are particularly high. The U.S. charges minimal regulatory fees to commercial broadcasters based on the size of the market and audience and exempts noncommercial broadcasters. For example, annual regulatory fees for radio stations do not exceed $11,500 and fees on broadcast television licenses range from as high as $86,000 for stations in the top ten media markets to just $12,000 for stations in lower-ranked markets.10 In Jordan, until August 2012 fees were 50% higher for radio and television stations that wanted to air news and political programming.11 Although this particular barrier has been removed, at least temporarily, would-be news broadcasters face an additional hurdle in that they must submit a schedule and description of content with their license applications.12 The current rules also give the government the ability to reject licenses without providing a reason.13 According to Daoud Kuttab, director general of Community Media Network, which runs Radio al Balad in Amman and the AmmanNet.net website, his applications for radio broadcast licenses for two stations were refused without explanation by the AVC.14 The first was in the city of Zarqa during 2006 and the other was in the Jordan Valley region during 2008. The case went to the Supreme Court of Jordan but Kuttab said, “They would still not give us a reason.”15

Independent journalists have also complained that loopholes in the Audio Visual Law favor state-run media and skew the playing field towards the detriment of private outlets. For example, the government has only given waivers of the fees to radio stations based in state universities, a government-controlled station in Amman, and a police-owned station, AMEN FM.16 AMEN FM has access to government-owned antennas and transmitters which cover the entire county while private stations do not have the same privileges. In addition, AMEN FM refuses to share traffic reports acquired from police helicopters with other stations.17 Stations such as Al-Balad Radio, a non-profit, community radio station, do not have access to such expensive broadcasting equipment and therefore can only reach a limited listening area.18 Nevertheless, since the Audio Visual Law was introduced in 2002, it has contributed to increased diversity and choice for listeners as well as to the establishment of the first community radio station, Al-Balad.

However, Jordan currently lacks adequate press and free speech protections and has media legislation that creates substantial obstacles in the development of a free and independent press. The Jordanian government has a history of interfering with the independent press in order to achieve certain standards of publication. In 1967, the government imposed regulations on the five existing independently-owned newspapers, requiring them to publish a minimum number of pages in each issue and for a minimum number of days each week.19 Additionally, much like the licensing process for radio and television stations, members of the press must be licensed and given specific credentials from the government.20 The government for many years imposed strict martial law which had significant effects on free speech and news publications.

In 1991, the Jordanian government reformed the most oppressive measures within the press and publications laws, but in more recent years, the government has increasingly implemented measures to restrict press freedom and free speech.21 For example, laws such as the 1998 Press and Publication Law restrict news and reporting critical of the royal family or the armed forces (for example), even if a broadcast license is in the hands of the journalistic organization. Article 7 of the law requires that journalists refrain from publishing anything that might incite violence or discord among citizens. The law includes fines of up to 28,000 dinars ($39,500 USD) for speech that offends religion, the prophet, or the government.22 Similarly, Article 37 prohibits the press from publishing anything that, among a long list of other prohibited activities, disparages the King and Royal Family, commentary that is harmful to the Jordanian Armed Forces, or content that incites strikes, sit-ins, or public gatherings in violation of the provisions of the law.

Although there is no evidence of publishers explicitly restricting their employees from covering certain topics, a great deal of self-censorship remains.23 According to a 2010 survey by the Centre for Defending Freedom of Journalists, journalists tended to avoid criticism of the armed forces (97%), criticism of the judicial authorities (90%), criticism of the security apparatus (87%), criticism of tribal leaders (85%), discussion of religious issues (81%), criticism of leaders of Arab countries (79%), and discussion of issues related to sex (76%).24 Since the Arab Spring began, however, the level of self- censorship has decreased, according to a study on the status of press freedom by the Al Quds Centre for Political Studies, an independent research center. In 2010, 94% of Jordanian journalists surveyed said they self-censored, but in 2011 self-censorship declined to 86%, a shift that could be attributed to the Arab Spring.25 Regardless of these improvements, journalists have reportedly been arrested or even attacked after the Arab Spring.26 In July 2011, the Committee to Protect Journalists called on the government of Jordan to prevent attacks on journalists who cover demonstrations and other forms of civil unrest.27 During a demonstration in Amman in July 2011, security forces beat 16 journalists wearing orange vests that identified them as press during a demonstration and planned sit-in that rapidly devolved into clashes between security personnel, government supporters, and demonstrators.28

Moreover, the Jordanian government announced a bill in August 2012 to alter the existing press and publications law to allow for more control and censorship of local news websites by forcing them to register with the government. The bill would have likely increased instances of self-censorship by making online news sites liable for all content, including reader comments. The proposals followed closely on the heels of the government’s approval of another amendment which would have required Internet service providers to block and censor websites carrying pornographic content.29 To protest these bills, over 150 websites in Jordan voluntarily went dark on August 29, 2012.30 Despite these protests, in early June 2013 the head of the Jordanian Press and Publications Department ordered the Telecommunications Regulatory Commission to shut down over 250 news-related websites.31

Although Jordanians have limited access to locally-produced news programming as a result of the above restrictions, nearly all of the 97% of the households in the Kingdom with a television set have satellite reception.32 Thus, political discourse about regional revolutions across the Arab world and beyond have surely reached Jordanian viewers. Networks like Al Jazeera and Al Arabiya, which broadcasted coverage of the Arab Spring, pose a challenge to local government channels in the region, including Jordan Television, which is government-owned and whose director is appointed by the Council of Ministers. Furthermore, the Internet has afforded independent radio programmers an opportunity to reach audiences beyond their limited broadcast area and to broadcast online when they are not given a license. As noted above, many Internet news sites have been censored by the nation’s telecommunication regulator. However, these actions seem not to have spiraled into government- mandated filtering of all web content, but have instead largely focused on news programming deemed inappropriate by the state.33

Wireless and Mobile Communications

Jordan’s Telecommunications Regulatory Commission (TRC) was established to regulate the telecommunications and information technology sectors and is responsible for allocating spectrum for telecommunications and other services. The TRC generally follows frequency allocations as set by the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) definitions. The TRC’s established spectrum allocation process for mobile and wireless services follows a spectrum market-based approach similar to that in many industrialized nations. The Ministry of Information and Communications Technology (MoICT) notes in its 2007 Statement of Government Policy that the TRC leaves the market to decide who will be allocated spectrum and adopts spectrum pricing in accordance with market demand (using auctions where appropriate), and prevents the anti-competitive acquisition or hoarding of spectrum by dominant operators.34 While supporting the use of auctions, the TRC emphasizes that auctions should be held with simple, understandable, non-discriminatory, and transparent rules. No bidder should be permitted to hold more than one license and all available spectrum licenses should be utilized. It also states that the efficient outcome of the process can be described in terms of the licenses being awarded to those parties with the best and strongest business plans. As such, the bidding process for mobile spectrum is not a traditional auction of the spectrum to the highest bidder (as it is in countries like the U.S.), but rather includes an administrative selection process known as an award system. The decision is made based on the judges’ assessment of the bidder’s planned services, prices, and rollout speed and usually favors those bidders who might guarantee the lowest cost to consumers, invest the most in infrastructure, and stimulate innovation.35
According to the Ministry of Information and Communications Technology, “there are now 24 individual licensees who are eligible to use spectrum, apart from broadcast licenses.”36 MoICT is responsible for regulation of telecommunications in Jordan, which had previously been managed by state-owned Jordan Telecom until 1995 (of which the government now owns 11.6% of company shares). In 1995, Jordan’s mobile sector started expanding when Fastlink (now known as Zain) became the first operator to provide mobile telecommunication services through GSM technology. In 1999 MobileCom (now known as Orange) was granted a license to provide mobile cellular service, and in 2003 Xpress was granted the first license to provide radio trunking services.37 A year later, yet another competitor, Umniah, entered the market and was granted a license to provide mobile telephone services. Additionally, in 2006, five companies were granted licenses for fixed wireless broadband provision.38

Fixed-line, mobile, and data services generate annual revenue of around 836.5 million Jordanian dinars ($1.18 billion USD), which is equivalent to 13.5% of GDP . In the mobile sector, Zain holds the largest share (39%), followed by Orange (36%) and Umniah (25%). Prices for basic mobile service have dropped in recent years, resulting in cellphone adoption in excess of 100%.39 Umniah has recently launched its 3G service,40 and Orange has been considering investing in upgrades from its 2G and 3G services to 4G services by 2015,41 after it was granted a 3G license by the Telecommunications Regulatory Commission (TRC) in 2009.42 Additionally, the use of USB dongles for mobile Internet access has increased in recent years.

REFORMING JORDAN’S SPECTRUM POLICIES TO SUPPORT DEMOCRACY, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, AND INNOVATION

Reformed spectrum policies can encourage new innovators and entrepreneurs in the media, communications, and Internet marketplace as well as facilitate democratic discourse. In evaluating Jordan’s current spectrum policies and developing proposed reforms, we draw upon lessons learned in the United States. Despite differences between Jordan and the United States, the U.S. experience can offer examples of successful and less-than-successful spectrum policies that can help to inspire reforms in Jordan. In developing recommendations for spectrum reforms, we identify a set of broad principles and then propose more specific policy approaches to encourage a more vibrant news and media sector, increase Internet access, and spur new innovation and economic development in Jordan.

Principles for Spectrum Allocation in Jordan

The first principle we recommend is transparency with respect to the process of awarding licenses. We also insist that rules should be applied equally across services. For example, the Federal Communications Commission in the United States follows a standardized set of processes when determining the allocation of spectrum, there is an opportunity for public comment in most decisions, and the agency must provide justifications for every decision. Those decisions can also be appealed to the courts. By contrast, decisions related to the granting of spectrum licenses in Jordan appear to have no requirements for transparency, allowing the government to reject licenses without justification or public input.43

Secondly, we recommend that a diversity of actors, including non-commercial entities, should have access to spectrum with respect to both traditional broadcasting and wireless broadband. Edward Cavanaugh, writing about consolidation among radio broadcasters in the U.S., noted that “fewer owners... [leads] to fewer choices for radio listeners and hence reduced content diversity”44 – a perspective that can also be applied to spectrum policy. Moreover, as recent news and journalism industry challenges in the U.S. reveal, excessive reliance on a commercial sector to serve the information needs of a nation is problematic, so policies should encourage a diversity of business models including non-profit and community-owned broadcasting outlets. Similarly, open, license- exempt spectrum access technologies such as Wi-Fi can also allow for new entrants and community- owned or non-profit networks to provide affordable Internet access as well as serve as an alternative to large mobile network operators that have the resources to purchase exclusive licenses.

The third principle we propose is competition. This can be accomplished in several ways, but should incorporate policies that reduce barriers to entry for new companies as well as the allocation of exclusive licenses in a manner that prevents consolidation of licenses among a small handful of companies. Such policies may also include requiring interoperability of equipment and devices to enable customers to easily switch between providers. Other competitive policies such as open access requirements, wherein a provider agrees to allow competitors to lease capacity on their network for a reasonable fee, may be necessary to support robust competition.

Lastly, we recommend a fourth principle: openness. Openness requirements are particularly critical for mobile and wireless broadband services, where providers have proposed or taken action to block, limit or control what content, applications, and services users can access on their networks. Policies such as network neutrality or open Internet rules to prevent operators from interfering with or discriminating against Internet content and applications can be enacted to promote the free flow of information and ideas, and to maintain the Internet as a platform for innovation and economic opportunity. While network neutrality rules are often criticized for limiting the potential efficiency gains and profits for providers that could be associated with a discriminatory network, the overall social benefit of the Internet is maximized under a system of openness rules.45 In addition to the maintenance of non-discriminatory practices by service providers, the government should refrain from requiring operators to filter specific content or block websites on mobile and wireless networks. The principle of openness can be extended broadly to spectrum access and allocation to enact policies that promote open access to spectrum, such as license-exempt usage or opportunistic usage which allow for innovative new uses and business models.

PROPOSED REFORMS

Below, we develop specific recommendations for Jordan that draw upon the above principles, focusing on spectrum policy reforms that address the most predominant concerns in the country. As noted above, independent of spectrum regulation, there are significant challenges with respect to the content of media (whether through traditional broadcasting or the Internet) in states where the freedoms of speech and press are not legally protected or where there is a legitimate potential for government interference. The lack of protections can have a chilling effect on programming that hinders both speech and the development of a vibrant media sector. Furthermore, the recent amendments to the Press and Publications Law discussed earlier have had a chilling effect on free speech and the growth of online media in Jordan. Free speech and freedom of the press underpin a diverse and thriving media and communications sector; minimizing restrictions on speech and protecting journalists is as important as spectrum reforms for promoting economic development and democracy.
Lower Barriers for News and Political Programing by Radio and Television Broadcasters As previously noted, Jordan levies very high fees to obtain a broadcast license and, for a period of time, the fees were 50% higher for radio and television stations that wanted to air news and political programming. The overall effect was to prioritize entertainment programming and discourage news and political programming since it was more costly to both commercial and non-commercial outlets. Spectrum fees are quite common and used in many countries around the world.46 In contrast to Jordan, the U.S. does not currently levy any spectrum fees on broadcast licensees.47 This policy decision dates back to the 1927 Communications Act, which established a framework that has continued to shape thinking around spectrum allocation and broadcast media for nearly a century. In the act, the U.S. Congress granted broadcasters exclusive use of designated frequencies in exchange

for commitments to serve the public interest.48 Subsequently, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) was granted broad authority by the 1927 and 1934 Communications Acts in establishing and modifying the public interest commitments or obligations required of broadcasters.49 Whether this approach has met Congress’s aspirations to serve the public interest is certainly debatable, and over time, commercial broadcasters have wielded their influence at the FCC and Congress to weaken specific requirements or their enforcement. Currently, the remaining obligations expect that broadcasters will provide educational programming for children, local culture and community affairs programming, electoral campaign coverage and civic information, information during states of emergency, and access to those who are visually or aurally disabled.50
Some media advocates in the U.S. have proposed adopting spectrum fees for commercial broadcast licenses in an effort to secure revenues from valuable spectrum assets for the federal budget, and as a means to obtain a more direct benefit for the public interest from commercial broadcasters. For example, former General Counsel of the FCC, Henry Geller, has long argued that “broadcasters ignore the local public interest, that the ‘public trustee’ framework established in the 1950s is broken. [Instead] of trying to make broadcasters play by the rules we should just make them pay a reasonable fee to support public broadcasting.”51 Geller’s proposal would require a spectrum usage fee of five percent of gross advertising revenues on commercial broadcast television licensees.52
In Jordan, spectrum fees on broadcast licensees appear to be motivated largely by a desire to limit the number of outlets seeking to distribute news and information programming. As noted, previous spectrum licensing configurations had effectively prioritized entertainment content by assessing higher fees for outlets seeking to broadcast news and information. Although the higher fees for news broadcasting have now been cancelled, the barriers to entry for new broadcasters are still high, especially for broadcasting entities focused on more costly and generally less profitable news gathering efforts.
Whether lowering license fees is politically feasible remains unclear. Part of the challenge in reducing the licensing fees is that the Telecommunications Regulatory Commission is covered through the annual license fees that it collects and does not receive funding support from the general treasury.53 Thus, it seems the TRC requires high license fees in order to sustain itself. Although it is unclear how opposed the Commission would be to lowering the fees (and thus losing out on revenue), there is an alternative approach that could maintain the necessary revenue while improving the sustainability of non-commercial and news-oriented outlets: the TRC could collect a more modest upfront license fee and then collect an annual fee based upon a small percentage of advertising revenues. A five percent fee on gross advertising revenues could potentially raise more money for the TRC as well as limit the financial burden on licensees that emphasize news and information programming.

Allow Open Access to License-Exempt Spectrum

Given the eroding dominance of broadcasting in the 21st Century and the convergence of media on broadband networks, the results of spectrum allocations will fundamentally shape the communications landscape. The impact of this changing landscape may be even greater in countries where frequencies allocated to over-the-air television are even more underutilized than in countries of the European Union and the United States. The transition to digital from analog television freed upwards of 100 MHz of spectrum in some nations; this could be even larger in MENA countries and could provide a boon for increasing access and innovation in broadband. Spectrum allocated to broadcast television is ideally suited for serving wide areas with mobile and wireless broadband. Thus, how Jordan allocates these incredibly valuable spectrum resources will have a significant impact on the state of innovation and access to communications in the nation.

Beginning in the 1990s, with advances in wireless communications and mobile phones, the U.S. replaced a comparative hearings model for the licensing of spectrum with competitive auctions in which the license is given to the highest bidder. The statute providing authority for the FCC to organize spectrum auctions did not specify the extent to which auction revenues should direct federal spectrum policy, only instructing the FCC to “pursue the public interest” and forbidding them from “merely equating the public interest with auction revenue.”54 But even as recent spectrum auctions have resulted in billions of dollars for the federal treasury, the United States has seen competition suffer greatly and consolidation increase in the absence of competition policies. Currently, two companies, Verizon Wireless and AT&T Wireless, control over 75% of spectrum licenses auctioned since the 1990s.55 Although regulators blocked AT&T’s attempted acquisition of T-Mobile in 2011, both Sprint and T-Mobile, the third and fourth largest providers, are struggling to keep up with the two leading providers. Compared to the two market leaders, T-Mobile, Sprint, and smaller regional and rural providers are facing a spectrum crunch as data consumption has substantially increased, limiting their ability to scale up their networks.56

Substantially increasing the amount of license-exempt access to spectrum has also been proposed as a way to increase competition in mobile and wireless broadband in the U.S., while also increasing the capacity of networks to keep up with consumer demand for bandwidth.57 License-exempt access to spectrum has become a critically important driver for new technologies and broadband connectivity because they offer an open and level playing field. Typically, spectrum is allocated on specific frequency bands that are granted to users who maintain exclusive rights to the use of the frequency. In the practice of license-exempt spectrum access, rather than establishing a hierarchy of rights and limiting access, spectrum is considered more of an open space, available to all but with established norms or rules for use (i.e. equipment standards).

The benefits of license-exempt spectrum include more efficient use through spectrum sharing (i.e. more traffic can be carried), reduced barriers to entry for new providers, and greater experimentation and innovation.58 Originally, license-exempt spectrum allocations such as the 2.4 and 5 GHz bands in the U.S. were considered “junk bands” with limited value and few possibilities for viable use. However, as digital radio technologies developed and the importance of inter-device connectivity grew, this license-exempt spectrum allocation provided an essential open platform to support applications that had not been previously anticipated.
In the U.S. and around the world, license-exempt spectrum in the 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz ranges is heavily utilized by Wi-Fi capable devices such as home wireless routers, laptops, and smartphones. In addition, mainstream cellular providers in the U.S. like AT&T and Verizon regularly use Wi-Fi to augment their own mobile broadband service offerings and offload smart phone data traffic from their mobile networks.59 Wi-Fi equipment is also utilized in the U.S. by small, mostly rural-based wireless Internet service providers (WISPs) and to build community wireless networks by local governments or NGOs that provide affordable or free wireless Internet access. Indeed, license- exempt access has been critical to providing Internet access in most rural communities where WISPs and other entities that do not have access to the capital to purchase spectrum at auction make widespread use of the open spectrum without paying any licensing fees.

Among the most recent innovations that license-exempt spectrum has provided is the increasing and rapid advance of mesh wireless networking. Rather than relying on a centralized build-out and hierarchical architecture, mesh networking allows users to literally build the network organically over time as devices connect to other devices to create a web of connectivity.60 This in turn lays the groundwork for a network that encourages community and civic uses by creating a community-level intranet. Intranets are common to businesses, where computers connect to share Internet connectivity, printer, and file server access via a local area network (LAN). In a mesh network, devices across the community can be connected to form a community wide-LAN or intranet that allows users to communicate to other local users on the network, create and share content, and design local applications and services to run on the intranet.61 For example, the Athens Metropolitan Wireless Network in Greece “has created dozens of services and applications for its members. These include an auction site wBay; a search engine Woogle; a channel for user-created content wTube... weather reports for each Greek island; and webcams that broadcast traffic, among other applications.”62

Similar to license-exempt use is opportunistic use. Advances in smart or cognitive radio and software- defined radio technologies have fundamentally expanded the options available to increase use of spectrum. This especially holds true for use within vacant or unused spectrum, often referred to as “white spaces,” where smart radios can rapidly scan and process spectrum usage in real time, identify unused frequencies, and utilize these frequencies rather than leaving them fallow.63 In November 2008, the FCC opened these vacant television channels to license-exempt wireless devices.64 These devices are required to employ signal-sensing technologies and a geo-locational database to automatically detect occupied television frequencies and other protected users in the band.65 Currently, the Federal government in the U.S. has exclusive rights to substantial amounts of spectrum, much of it only used sporadically.66

The challenge for Jordan and other MENA countries is to reallocate the spectrum freed up by transitioning to digital television in a manner that maximizes the efficient use of spectrum and, in doing so, enable innovators and new services to emerge. The policy of the TRC is to leave the market to decide who will be assigned spectrum allocation. Auctions are no panacea and can lead to overpricing, speculative bidding by entities looking to flip licenses for a quick profit, and can give an inherent competitive advantage to big players with financial strength to out-bid smaller players or new startups.67 Policymakers should utilize a broad set of spectrum allocation options to promote both competition and continued innovation. In order for this to occur, access to the airwaves for license- exempt and opportunistic use must be firmly established. To truly take advantage of the potential of license-exempt spectrum to spur broadband connectivity and innovation, Jordan needs to reform its regulatory requirements to streamline and eliminate any hurdles that could make it difficult for new startups or communities to utilize existing allocation of typically license-exempt spectrum. In Jordan, the TRC permits users to utilize typically license-exempt Wi-Fi on a personal basis without any specific requirement. However, some providers that use spectrum to provide Internet access must go through the agency and pay a licensing fee. One immediate reform would be to eliminate any TRC licensing fees for providers using Wi-Fi technologies and operating on open spectrum such as in 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz. Second, Jordan should embrace leading-edge models for opportunistic spectrum access such as wireless devices and equipment using the vacant TV channels currently being developed in the U.S. and U.K. In order to enable flexibility in the future to create the space for these new technologies, Jordan should also focus on time-limited, exclusive spectrum licenses. Thus, rather than giving exclusive spectrum licenses for mobile providers in perpetuity, clearly establishing shorter renewal timelines of five years would give the TRC the ability to repurpose the spectrum for new and advanced models of usage as wireless technologies rapidly evolve.

Maintain an Open Internet on Mobile Broadband Networks

Since the exclusive allocation of spectrum to users such as mobile broadband operators involves a tradeoff between a commercial entity’s interests and the public’s access to the use of that spectrum, it is justified to require exclusive licensees to serve the public interest, convenience, and necessity. Low barriers to entry have been the key to much of the Internet’s success in bringing new voices and more conversation into the public sphere, and the creation of new media platforms and services in a market in which individuals and organizations have been able to experiment and innovate with new technologies and reach audiences on an equal footing. Broadcasting requires a certain scale of operation, whereas an open Internet can enable a world in which programming can reach households on terms similar to any large and established commercial content provider.

Internationally, mobile providers have often demonstrated a desire to dictate the content and applications that are available over their networks, contributing to the proliferation of “walled gardens” of competing Internet application stores with gatekeepers, tied to specific devices and networks that look vastly different from accessing the Internet via PCs in the wired world. These corporate-controlled “walled gardens” undermine the Internet’s openness, and risk creating a world in which new innovators and non-commercial entities would simply be unable to afford the price of a ticket on the networks that carry the world’s communications.68 There is a long and unfortunate history of gatekeepers consistently leveraging their market power to prioritize profit and commercial interests over the public interest when there is a lack of regulatory protection.

68 Federal Communications Commission (United States), In the Matter of Further Inquiry Regarding Two Under-developed Issues in the Open Internet Proceeding, Comments of the Center for Social Media, GN Docket No. 09-191, Oct. 12, 2010, accessed Dec. 13, 2013, http://www.cmsimpact.org/sites/default/files/documents/pages/csm_comments_before_fcc.pdf. The present paragraph is adapted from these comments from the Center for Social Media to the FCC.

After a number of years of debate, the FCC enacted open Internet requirements in 2010 for U.S. broadband providers that included three basic rules: 1) transparency with respect to a provider’s network management practices; 2) no blocking of lawful content, applications, services, or non- harmful devices; and 3) no unreasonable discrimination in transmitting a lawful network over a consumer’sbroadbandInternetaccessservice.69 However,itweakenedtherulesformobilebroadband operators, only requiring that operators disclose their network management practices, and not to block “consumers from accessing lawful websites... [or] applications that compete with the provider’s voice or video telephony services.”70 The decision to loosen the rules for mobile operators was not without its share of dissenters at the FCC; Commissioner Michael Copps noted in his concurring opinion, “...the Internet is the Internet, no matter how you access it, and the millions of citizens going mobile nowadays for their Internet and the entrepreneurs creating innovative wireless content, applications and services should have the same freedoms and protections as those in the wired context.”71 Thus far, abuse of the flexibility of the rules by mobile operators has been limited, but there are a few key examples of discriminatory behavior. For example, most operators continue to charge extra money and make it difficult to access free tethering applications that allow consumers to connect another device, such as a laptop, to their smartphone to access the Internet. In 2012, AT&T Wireless blocked subscribers’ use of Apple’s FaceTime application and other video calling applications over the provider’s mobile network; only allowing them to be used over Wi-Fi connections.72 After significant public pressure and the threat of a potential investigation by the FCC, AT&T agreed to allow use of the applications over their LTE mobile network.73

Particularly in Jordan, where many residents are increasingly relying on mobile Internet access through USB dongles provided by mobile operators, and nearly 42% of all cellular phones are smart phones,74 open Internet requirements on wireless broadband networks are the first line of defense in promoting a level playing field for new Internet startups as well as access to diverse media and information. Orange, which currently controls a third of Jordan’s mobile market, has pushed the boundaries even in more regulated European nations with respect to discriminating against specific applications. In a number of markets where it is the dominant provider, Orange charged for use of Skype and other VoIP services that utilize the Internet.75 Without regulatory protections to prevent market abuses and protect an open marketplace where consumers can access all content and applications, network providers have a strong incentive to increasingly monetize scarcity on the network. Current spectrum licenses in Jordan are subject to any instructions or decisions issued by the TRC.76 Thus the TRC has the ability to impose conditions on licensees, including open Internet requirements that prevent them from blocking or limiting access to particular Internet applications and services that consumers access over their networks.

Relatedly, Jordan should not impose any censorship or filtering requirements on mobile providers. Even in the limited context of blocking access to pornographic websites, which has been discussed in Jordan as well as other MENA countries, it is important to be cautious.77 The use of filtering technology is a slippery slope that can lead to more widespread applications that limit individuals’ access to information or have a chilling effect on telecommunications carriers and other platform providers. By imposing such a requirement, the government will make providers liable for the behavior of users on their network that will inevitably lead providers to overzealously filter and block other applications, content, and services.78

Filtering on the basis of content type is extremely difficult to do without also blocking access to legitimate uses of the network. Moreover, it further empowers Internet providers to abuse their filtering obligations to block legal applications, services, and content that could directly compete with their existing offerings. If the infrastructure is already in place to filter pornographic content and sites, then it can be easily expanded to filter other content and sites that are not favored by a mobile provider. The more providers are required to exert greater control over the flow of information on their networks for other purposes, the more incentive they have to further tighten that control to the detriment of the open Internet.

 

CONCLUSION

Jordan is at a moment of opportunity to take advantage of advances in mobile communications and Internet technologies to support a burgeoning technology sector in the MENA region. Spectrum policies are a critical component of this and will be a key factor in the creation of an environment that encourages innovation and economic development. By reforming its current policies to increase transparency, access, competition, and openness, Jordan can maximize the value of its spectrum resources and ensure that new Jordanian entrepreneurs, creators, and innovators have an opportunity to flourish.

The Arab Spring, as well as the introduction of faster Internet, access to social media, community radio, and access to worldwide television stations through satellite, have given Jordan the rationale to accelerate the work on media reform that could ultimately contribute to the country’s hope of a more open and healthy political system and increased economic investment. Media and communications play a vital role in providing information to the public, improving governance, and spurring innovation. The reforms recommended herein may be challenging, but they are essential to truly enabling Jordan to be a full participant in the information revolution.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

• Abbassi, Jawad. “Insights into Arab Consumers Broadcast and Online Consumption Habits.” Presentation at the Joint ITU-AICTO Workshop on Interoperability of IPTV in the Arab Region, Sept. 20-21, 2011. Accessed Dec. 13, 2013, http://www.itu.int/dms_pub/itu- t/oth/06/5B/T065B0000060043PDFE.pdf.


• Abu-Ghazaleh, Fairouz. “Senate Passes Press and Publication Law.” Jordan Times, Aug. 18, 1998. “Access to Jordan News Websites Blocked: Press & Publications Crackdown Launched.” Al Bawaba,
  June 2, 2013. Accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://www.albawaba.com/news/jordan-websites-ban- 496269.


• Al-Balad Radio. “About Us.” Accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://en.ammannet.net/?page_id=111.


• Al Quds Center for Political Studies. “Status of Press Freedom, 2011.” Report (2011). Accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://www.alqudscenter.org/uploads/Alquds_Center_Study3.pdf.


• Al Tamimi & Company. “The Introduction of 3G in Jordan,” Nov. 2008. Accessed Dec. 13, 2013, http://archive.newsweaver.com/altamimi/newsweaver.ie/altamimi/e_article001290090.html.


• Allagui, Ilhem and Johanne Kuebler. “The Arab Spring and the Role of ICTs.” International Journal of Communication 5 (2011): 1435-1442.


• Associated Press. “Jordanian Cancels Most Martial Law Rules.” New York Times, July 8, 1991.


• Accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://www.nytimes.com/1991/07/08/world/jordanian-cancels-most-martial-law-rules.html.


• Audio Visual Commission (Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan). “World Broadcasting for Community Radio Praise Amendment to Broadcasting Licenses.” Regulatory document, AmmanNet, Aug. 16, 2012. Accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://ar.ammannet.net/news/168220#.UEZf-NZlRcT.


• Benton Foundation. “Citizen’s Guide to the Public Interest Obligations of Digital Television Broadcasters.” Report (2005), accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://benton.org/sites/benton.org/files/citizensguide.pdf.


• Brady, Thomas F. “Press Law Shuts Jordan’s Papers; 3 Reorganized Publications Due to Appear Tomorrow.” New York Times, March 26, 1967.


• Calabrese, Michael and Benjamin Lennett. “Mobile Data Demand and the Need for Increased Spectrum Access.” Policy paper, New America Foundation, Oct. 2009. Accessed Dec. 13, 2013,
  h t t p : / / w w w . n e w a m e r i c a . n e t / fi l e s / C a l a b r e s e L e n n e t t _ M o b i l e D a t a D e m a n d . p d f.


• Carew, Sinead. “Wireless Carriers Eye Solutions to Spectrum Crunch.” Reuters, May 11, 2012. Accessed Dec. 13, 2013, http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/11/us-wireless-smallcells-
  idUSBRE84A12G20120511.


• Cavanaugh, Edward D. “De-Regulation of the Air Waves: Is Antitrust Enough?” Journal of Civil Rights and Economic Development 17, no. 1 (2003): 67-80.


• Center for Defending Freedom of Journalists. “Impunity: Media Freedom Status in Jordan, 2011.” Report (2011). Accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://www.cdfj.org/look/P /Media%20Freedom%20Status%20in%20Jordan%202011- EN.pdf. ––––––. “On the Edge: Media Freedom Status in Jordan, 2010.” Report (2010). Accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://www.cdfj.org/look/PDFs/Media%20Freedom%20Status%20in%20Jordan%202010-
  EN.pdf.


• Committee to Protect Journalists. “Attacks on the Press 2003: Jordan.” Report, Mar. 11, 2004. Accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://cpj.org/2004/03/attacks-on-the-press-2003-jordan.php.
  VOL. 3 JOURNAL OF INFORMATION POLICY 571 ––––––. “CPJ Calls on Jordan to Prevent Attacks on Journalists.” Report, July 18, 2011. Accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://www.cpj.org/2011/07/cpj-calls-on-jordan-to-prevent-attacks-on- journali.php.


• Department of State (United States), Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor. “Jordan: 2004.” Report, Feb. 28, 2005. Accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/hrrpt/2004/41724.htm.


• Eltantawy, Nahed and Julie B. Wiest. “Social Media in the Egyptian Revolution: Reconsidering Resource Mobilization Theory.” International Journal of Communication 5 (2011): 1207-1224.


• Federal Communications Commission (United States). In the Matter of Assessment and Collection of Regulatory Fees for Fiscal Year 2013 et al. Report and Order, MD Docket No. 13-140 et al., Aug. 12, 2013. Accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2013/db0816/FCC-13-110A1.pdf. ––––––. In the Matter of Further Inquiry Regarding Two Under-developed Issues in the Open Internet Proceeding. Comments of the Center for Social Media, GN Docket No. 09-191, Oct. 12, 2010. Accessed Dec. 13, 2013,
  h t t p : / / w w w . c m s i m p a c t . o r g / s i t e s / d e fa u l t / fi l e s / d o c u m e n t s / p a g e s / c s m _ c o m m e n t s _ b e fo r e _ fc c . pdf. ––––––. In the Matter of Preserving the Open Internet. Report and Order, GN Docket No. 09-191, Dec. 23, 2010. Accessed Dec. 13, 2013, http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC- 10-201A1_Rcd.pdf. ––––––. In the Matter of Unlicensed Operation in the TV Broadcast bands et al., ET Docket No. 04-186 et al. Second Report and Order and Memorandum Report and Order, Nov. 14, 2008. Accessed Dec. 13, 2013, http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-260A1.pdf. ––––––. “The Open Internet.” Accessed Dec. 13, 2013, http://www.fcc.gov/guides/open-internet.


• Forlano, Laura, Alison Powell, Gwen Shaffer, and Benjamin Lennett. “From the Digital Divide to Digital Excellence: Global Best Practices to Aid Development of Municipal and Community Wireless Networks in the United States.” Policy paper, New America Foundation (2011). Accessed Dec. 13, 2013, http://www.newamerica.net/sites/newamerica.net/files/policydocs/NAF%20Municipal%20an d%20Community%20Wireless%20Report.pdf.


• Freedom House. “Jordan: Freedom of the Press 2010.” Report (2010). Accessed Dec. 12, 2013, h t t p : / / w w w . fr e e d o m h o u s e . o r g / r e p o r t / fr e e d o m - p r e s s / 2 0 1 0 / j o r d a n .
  Friedman, Thomas L. “Jobs@Arabia.com.” New York Times, May 8, 2012. Accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/09/opinion/friedman-jobsatarabiadotcom.html.


• Galperin, Eva. “Jordanians Protest Internet Censorship Law with SOPA-Style Blackout.” Electronic Frontier Foundation, Aug. 29, 2012. Accessed Dec. 12, 2013,
  https://www .eff.org/deeplinks/2012/08/jordanians-protest-internet-censorship-law-sopa-style- blackout.


• Geller, Henry. “Geller to FCC: Scrap the Rules, Try a Spectrum Fee.” Current.org, Oct. 30, 2000. Accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://current.org/wp-content/themes/current/archive- site/why/why0020geller.shtml.


• Geller, Henry and Tim Watts. “The Five Percent Solution: A Spectrum Fee to Replace the ‘Public Interest Obligations’ of Broadcasters.” Spectrum Series Working Paper #3, New America Foundation, May 2002. Accessed Dec. 12, 2013,
  h t t p : / / w w w . n e w a m e r i c a . n e t / fi l e s / a r c h i v e / P u b _ F i l e _ 8 4 4 _ 1 . p d f.


• Ghazal, Mohammad. “Internet Freedom Activists See Bad Precedent in Drive to Censor Porn Sites.” Jordan Times, May 1, 2012. Accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://jordantimes.com/Internet+freedom+activists+see+bad+precedent+in+drive+to+censor+porn+sites-47555.
  ––––––. “Ministry Issues Free Anti-Porn Software in Response to Filtering Demands.” Jordan Times, July 29, 2012. Accessed Dec. 13, 2013, http://jordantimes.com/ministry-issues-free-anti-porn-software-in-response-to-censorship-demands.
  ––––––. “Orange Preparing to Provide 4G Services After 3 Years.” Jordan Times, Mar. 14, 2012. Accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://jordantimes.com/orange-preparing-to-provide-4g-services-after-3-years.


• Goodman, Ellen P. “Spectrum Auctions and the Public Interest,” Journal ofTelecommunications and High Technology Law 7 (2009): 343-368.


• Higginbotham, Stacy. “Verizon’s Spectrum Deal with Cable Is the End of Broadband Competition.” GigaOM, Dec. 2, 2011. Accessed Dec. 13, 2013, http://gigaom.com/broadband/verizons-spectrum-deal-with-cable-is-the-end-of-broadband-competition/.


• Johnson, Bobbie. “Crazy: Orange Censors All Blogs, Not Just GigaOM.” GigaOM, June 11, 2012. Accessed Dec. 13, 2013, http://gigaom.com/europe/orange-censors-all-blogs/.


• Jones, Steven K. and Thomas W. Phillips. “Initial Evaluation of the Performance of Prototype TV- Band White Spaces Devices.” OET Report FCC/OET 07-TR-1006, Federal Communications Commission, July 31, 2007. Accessed Dec. 13, 2013, http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-275666A1.pdf.


• Kuttab, Daoud. “Jordan’s Lack of Appreciation of Public Service Broadcasting.” Menassat, Sept. 23, 2009. Accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://www.menassat.com/?q=en/news-articles/7216-jordans- lack-appreciation-public-service-broadcasting.


• Lennett, Benjamin, Tom Glaisyer, and Sascha Meinrath. “Public Media Policy, Spectrum Policy, and Rethinking Public Interest Obligations for the 21st Century.” Policy paper, New America Foundation, June 21, 2012. Accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://oti.newamerica.net/sites/newamerica.net/files/policydocs/PublicMedia_Spectrum_Pape r_1.pdf.


• Lloyd, Mark. “Forget the Fairness Doctrine.” Center for American Progress, July 24, 2007. Accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://www .americanprogress.org/issues/media/news/2007/07/24/3348/forget-the-fairness-
  doctrine/.


• McHenry, Mark. “Dupont Circle Spectrum Utilization During Peak Hours.” White paper, New
  America Foundation and The Shared Spectrum Company (2003). Accessed Dec. 13, 2013,
  h t t p : / / w w w . n e w a m e r i c a . n e t / fi l e s / a r c h i v e / D o c _ F i l e _ 1 8 3 _ 1 . p d f.


• Meinrath, Sascha and Victor Pickard. “The Rise of the Intranet Era: Media, Research and Policy in the Age of Communications Revolution.” White paper, New America Foundation, Feb. 20, 2009. Accessed Dec. 13, 2013, http://www.newamerica.net/publications/policy/rise_intranet_era.


• Mihalcik, Carrie. “AT&T to Open Mobile Video Chat for All Customers.” CNET, May 20, 2013. Accessed Dec. 13, 2013, http://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-57585381-94/at-t-to-open- mobile-video-chat-for-all-customers/.


• Ministry of Information and Communications Technology (Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan). Statement of Government Policy 2007 on the Information and Communications Technology and Postal Sectors. Regulatory document (2007). Accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://www.moict.gov.jo/en- us/policiesandstrategies/statementofgovernmentpolicy2007.aspx.


• Muasher, Marwan. “How to Achieve Real Reform in the Arab World.” Washington Post, Feb. 2, 2011. Accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp- dyn/content/article/2011/02/01/AR2011020105708.html.
  VOL. 3 JOURNAL OF INFORMATION POLICY 573


• Musil, Steven. “AT&T Reportedly Begins Wide Cellular Support for FaceTime.” CNET, June 17, 2013. Accessed Dec. 13, 2013, http://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-57589748-94/at-t- reportedly-begins-wide-cellular-support-for-facetime/.


• Oxford Business Group. The Report: Jordan 2009. London: Oxford Business Group, 2009.
  Peha, Jon M. “Spectrum Management Policy Options,” IEEE Communication Surveys 1, no. 1 (2008):
  2-8.


• Pickard, Victor W. and Sascha D. Meinrath. “Revitalizing the Public Airwaves: Opportunistic Unlicensed Reuse of Government Spectrum.” International Journal of Communication 3 (2009): 1052-
  1084.


• Reporters Without Borders. “Dismay After Government Approves Repressive Media Bill,” Aug. 30,
  2012. Accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://en.rsf.org/jordan-dismay-after-government-approves-30-
  08-2012,43300.html.


• Shaw, Russell. “Vodafone and Orange are Blocking Skype and Similar Services.” ZDNet, Apr. 25, 2007. Accessed Dec. 13, 2013, http://www.zdnet.com/blog/ip-telephony/vodafone-and-
  orange-are-blocking-skype-and-similar-services/1564.


• Sindibad Business. “Investment Report in Internet & Technology Start Ups in the Arab World: 2012 Update.” Report (2012). Accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://content.argaam.com.s3-external-
  3.amazonaws.com/c68c550e-97be-40a0-8b06-0313f2fa77a6.pdf.


• Sweis, Rana F. “Unrest Encourages Start-Up Funding for the Middle East.” New York Times, June 6, 2012. Accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/07/world/middleeast/unrest-encourages-start-up-funding- for-the-middle-east.html.


• Telecommunications Regulatory Commission (Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan). “A Chronology of the Telecom Sector Development 1921-2008.” Accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://www.trc.gov.jo/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=337&itemid=507&lan g=english. ––––––. Frequency Use and Planning Policy. Issued Pursuant to Board of Commissioners Decision No. 4-19\2008, Mar. 9, 2008. Accessed Dec. 13, 2013,
  h t t p : / / w w w . t r c . g o v . j o / i m a g e s / s t o r i e s / p d f/ F r e q u e n c y _ u s e _ a n d _ p l a n n i n g _ p o l i c y . p d f? l a n g = e n g l ish. ––––––. “Jordan Telecommunications Market Development.” Report, July 24, 2012. Accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://www.trc.gov.jo/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=339&Itemid=506&lang=english.
  ––––––. Telecommunications Law No. (13) of 1995. Official Gazette No. 4072, Jan. 10, 1995.
  Accessed Dec. 12, 2013, h t t p : / / w w w . t r c . g o v . j o / i m a g e s / s t o r i e s / p d f / t e l e c o m u n i c a t i o n % 2 0 l a w . p d f? l a n g = e n g l i s h .
  van Schewick, Barbara. “Network Neutrality and Quality of Service: What a Non-Discrimination Rule Should Look Like.” White paper, Center for Internet and Society, June 11, 2012. Accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/downloads/20120611-NetworkNeutrality.pdf.


• Wagner, Ben. “’I Have Understood You’: The Co-Evolution of Expression and Control on the Internet, Television and Mobile Phones during the Jasmine Revolution in Tunisia.” International
  Journal of Communication 5 (2011): 1295-1302.


• Weir, Andy. “Microsoft Pushing Operators to Open up Skype Access in UK.” Neowin.net, Nov. 30, 2011. Accessed Dec. 13, 2013, http://www.neowin.net/news/microsoft-pushing-operators-to- open-up-skype-access-in-uk. “XPress Launches Radio Trunking and Mobile Telephony Services in Jordan.” Al Bawaba, June 9, 2004. Accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://www.albawaba.com/business/xpress-launches-radio- trunking-and-mobile-telephony-services-jordan.

• Freelance journalist; lead researcher in Jordan for the Open Society Institute-sponsored Mapping Digital Media Study; journalism instructor, Yarmouk University, Jordan.† Senior Research Fellow; Open Technology Institute, New America Foundation.


• Principal, Democracy Fund; former Director of the Media Policy Initiative, Open Technology Institute, New America Foundation.


• Nick Russo, research associate at the New America Foundation’s Open Technology Institute, also contributed to this article.


• 1 Marwan Muasher, “How to Achieve Real Reform in the Arab World,” Washington Post, Feb. 2, 2011, accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/01/AR2011020105708.html. Muasher is a former Deputy Prime Minister of Jordan.


• 2 Ilhem Allagui and Johanne Kuebler, “The Arab Spring and the Role of ICTs,” International Journal of Communication 5 (2011): 1436


• 3 Nahed Eltantawy and Julie B. Wiest, “Social Media in the Egyptian Revolution: Reconsidering Resource Mobilization Theory,” International Journal of Communication 5 (2011): 1213.


• 4 Ibid.


• 5 Ben Wagner, “’I Have Understood You’: The Co-Evolution of Expression and Control on the Internet, Television and Mobile Phones during the Jasmine Revolution in Tunisia,” International Journal of Communication 5 (2011): 1298.


• 6 Thomas L. Friedman, “Jobs@Arabia.com,” New York Times, May 8, 2012, accessed Dec. 12, 2013, h t t p : / / w w w . n y t i m e s . c o m / 2 0 1 2 / 0 5 / 0 9 / o p i n i o n / fr i e d m a n - j o b s a t a r a b i a d o t c o m . h t m l .


• 7 Sindibad Business, “Investment Report in Internet & Technology Start Ups in the Arab World: 2012 Update,” report (2012), accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://content.argaam.com.s3-external-3.amazonaws.com/c68c550e-97be-40a0-8b06- 0313f2fa77a6.pdf.


• 8 Rana F. Sweis, “Unrest Encourages Start-Up Funding for the Middle East,” New York Times, June 6, 2012, accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/07/world/middleeast/unrest-encourages-start-up-funding-for-the- middle-east.html


• 9 Conversion calculated at CurrencyConverterRate.com, http://www.currencyconverterrate.com/usd/jod.html (conversion rate: 1 USD = 0.708 Jordanian dinar). See also Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, “Arab Political Systems: Baseline Information and Reforms – Jordan,” white paper (2008), accessed Dec. 12, 2013, w w w . c a r n e g i e e n d o w m e n t . o r g / fi l e s / J o r d a n _ A P S . d o c .


• 10 FederalCommunicationsCommission(UnitedStates),IntheMatterofAssessmentandCollectionofRegulatoryFeesforFiscal Year 2013 et al., Report and Order, MD Docket No. 13-140 et al., Aug. 12, 2013, accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2013/db0816/FCC-13-110A1.pdf.


• 11 Audio Visual Commission (Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan), “World Broadcasting for Community Radio Praise Amendment to Broadcasting Licenses,” regulatory document, AmmanNet, Aug. 16, 2012, accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://ar.ammannet.net/news/168220#.UEZf-NZlRcT. According to Daoud Kuttab (founder of Radio Balad and AmmanNet), the government cancelled these fees in August 2012.


• 12 Telecommunications Regulatory Commission (Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan), “Jordan Telecommunications Market Development,” report, July 24, 2012, accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://www.trc.gov.jo/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=339&Itemid=506&lang=english.


• 13 Committee to Protect Journalists, “Attacks on the Press 2003: Jordan,” report, Mar. 11, 2004, accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://cpj.org/2004/03/attacks-on-the-press-2003-jordan.php.


• 14 See http://ar.ammannet.net/; or http://ar.ammannet.net/news/category/english.


• 15 Personal interview with Daoud Kuttab, April 2012.


• 16 Daoud Kuttab, “Jordan’s Lack of Appreciation of Public Service Broadcasting,” Menassat, Sept. 23, 2009, accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://www.menassat.com/?q=en/news-articles/7216-jordans-lack-appreciation-public-service- broadcasting.


• 17 Freedom House, “Jordan: Freedom of the Press 2010,” report (2010), accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://www.freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-press/2010/jordan


• 18 Al-Balad Radio, “About Us,” accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://en.ammannet.net/?page_id=111.


• 19 Thomas F. Brady, “Press Law Shuts Jordan’s Papers; 3 Reorganized Publications Due to Appear Tomorrow,” New York Times, March 26, 1967.


• 20 Department of State (United States), Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, “Jordan: 2004,” report, Feb. 28, 2005, accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/hrrpt/2004/41724.htm.


• 21 Associated Press, “Jordanian Cancels Most Martial Law Rules,” New York Times, July 8, 1991, accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://www.nytimes.com/1991/07/08/world/jordanian-cancels-most-martial-law-rules.html.


• 22 Fairouz Abu-Ghazaleh, “Senate Passes Press and Publication Law,” Jordan Times, Aug. 18, 1998.


• 23 Center for Defending Freedom of Journalists, “Impunity: Media Freedom Status in Jordan, 2011,” report (2011), accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://www.cdfj.org/look/PDFs/Media%20Freedom%20Status%20in%20Jordan%202011- EN.pdf.


• 24 Center for Defending Freedom for Journalists, “On the Edge: Media Freedom Status in Jordan, 2010,” report (2010), accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://www.cdfj.org/look/PDFs/Media%20Freedom%20Status%20in%20Jordan%202010- EN.pdf.


• 25 Al Quds Center for Political Studies, “Status of Press Freedom, 2011,” report (2011), accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://www.alqudscenter.org/uploads/Alquds_Center_Study3.pdf, 27.


• 26 Center for Defending Freedom of Journalists, “Impunity: Media Freedom Status in Jordan, 2011.”


• 27 Committee to Protect Journalists, “CPJ Calls on Jordan to Prevent Attacks on Journalists,” report, July 18, 2011, accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://www.cpj.org/2011/07/cpj-calls-on-jordan-to-prevent-attacks-on-journali.php.


• 28 Ibid.


• 29 Reporters Without Borders, “Dismay After Government Approves Repressive Media Bill,” Aug. 30, 2012, accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://en.rsf.org/jordan-dismay-after-government-approves-30-08-2012,43300.html.


• 30 Eva Galperin, “Jordanians Protest Internet Censorship Law with SOPA-Style Blackout,” Electronic Frontier Foundation, Aug. 29, 2012, accessed Dec. 12, 2013, https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/08/jordanians-protest- internet-censorship-law-sopa-style-blackout.


• 31 “Access to Jordan News Websites Blocked: Press & Publications Crackdown Launched,” Al Bawaba, June 2, 2013, accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://www.albawaba.com/news/jordan-websites-ban-496269.


• 32 Figures can be found at Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, Department of Statistics, http://www.dos.gov.jo/dos_home_e/main/index.htm.


• 33 Mohammad Ghazal, “Internet Freedom Activists See Bad Precedent in Drive to Censor Porn Sites,” Jordan Times, May 1, 2012, accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://jordantimes.com/Internet+freedom+activists+see+bad+precedent+in+drive+to+censor+porn+sites-47555.


• 34 Ministry of Information and Communications Technology (Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan), Statement of Government Policy 2007 on the Information and Communications Technology and Postal Sectors, regulatory document (2007), accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://www.moict.gov.jo/enus/policiesandstrategies/statementofgovernmentpolicy2007.aspx.


• 35 Oxford Business Group, The Report: Jordan 2009 (London: Oxford Business Group, 2009), 93-96.


• 36 Personal interview with Yara Abdel Samad, 2012. Samad is Policies and Strategies Director at the Ministry of Information and Communications Technology.


• 37 “XPress Launches Radio Trunking and Mobile Telephony Services in Jordan,” Al Bawaba, June 9, 2004, accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://www.albawaba.com/business/xpress-launches-radio-trunking-and-mobile-telephony-services-jordan. The service offers subscribers the ability to instantly communicate with a single individual (one-to-one) or with a group (one-to-many) through the push of a button – a sort of integrated, digital “walkie-talkie.”


• 38 Telecommunications Regulatory Commission (Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan), “A Chronology of the Telecom Sector Development 1921-2008,” accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://www.trc.gov.jo/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=337&itemid=507&lang=english.


• 39 Oxford Business Group, 95-96.


• 40 “Umniah Prepares for 3G Launch,” TradeArabia, April 25, 2012, accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://www .tradearabia.net/news/IT_216541.html.


• 41 Mohammad Ghazal, “Orange Preparing to Provide 4G Services After 3 Years,” Jordan Times, Mar. 14, 2012, accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://jordantimes.com/orange-preparing-to-provide-4g-services-after-3-years.


• 42 Telecommunications Regulatory Commission (Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan), “A Chronology of the Telecom Sector Development 1921-2008.”


• 43 Telecommunications Regulatory Commission (Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan), Telecommunications Law No. (13) of 1995, Official Gazette No. 4072, Jan. 10, 1995, accessed Dec. 12, 2013,h t t p : / / w w w . t r c . g o v . j o / i m a g e s / s t o r i e s / p d f / t e l e c o m u n i c a t i o n % 2 0 l a w . p d f? l a n g = e n g l i s h .


• 44 Edward D. Cavanaugh, “De-Regulation of the Air Waves: Is Antitrust Enough?” Journal of Civil Rights and Economic Development 17, no. 1 (2003): 68.


• 45 Barbara van Schewick, “Network Neutrality and Quality of Service: What a Non-Discrimination Rule Should Look Like,” white paper, Center for Internet and Society, June 11, 2012, accessed Dec. 12, 2013, h t t p : / / c y b e r l a w . s t a n fo r d . e d u / d o w n l o a d s / 2 0 1 2 0 6 1 1 - N e t w o r k N e u t r a l i t y . p d f.


• 46 Benjamin Lennett, Tom Glaisyer, and Sascha Meinrath, “Public Media Policy, Spectrum Policy, and Rethinking Public Interest Obligations for the 21st Century,” policy paper, New America Foundation, June 21, 2012, accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://oti.newamerica.net/sites/newamerica.net/files/policydocs/PublicMedia_Spectrum_Paper_1.pdf.


• 47 Ibid.


• 48 Ibid.


• 49 Ibid.


• 50 Benton Foundation, “Citizen’s Guide to the Public Interest Obligations of Digital Television Broadcasters,” report (2005), accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://benton.org/sites/benton.org/files/citizensguide.pdf, 4.


• 51 Quoted in Mark Lloyd, “Forget the Fairness Doctrine,” Center for American Progress, July 24, 2007, accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/media/news/2007/07/24/3348/forget-the-fairness-doctrine/. See also Henry Geller, “Geller to FCC: Scrap the Rules, Try a Spectrum Fee,” Current.org, Oct. 30, 2000, accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://current.org/wp-content/themes/current/archive-site/why/why0020geller.shtml.


• 52 Henry Geller and Tim Watts, “The Five Percent Solution: A Spectrum Fee to Replace the ‘Public Interest Obligations’ of Broadcasters,” Spectrum Series Working Paper #3, New America Foundation, May 2002, accessed Dec. 12, 2013, http://www.newamerica.net/files/archive/Pub_File_844_1.pdf, 12.


• 53 Telecommunications Regulatory Commission (Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan), Frequency Use and Planning Policy, Issued Pursuant to Board of Commissioners Decision No. 4-19\2008, Mar. 9, 2008, accessed Dec. 13, 2013,http://www .trc.gov .jo/images/stories/pdf/Frequency_use_and_planning_policy.pdf?lang=english.


• 54 Ellen P. Goodman, “Spectrum Auctions and the Public Interest,” Journal of Telecommunications and High Technology Law 7 (2009): 354.


• 55 Stacy Higginbotham, “Verizon’s Spectrum Deal with Cable Is the End of Broadband Competition,” GigaOM, Dec. 2, 2011, accessed Dec. 13, 2013, http://gigaom.com/broadband/verizons-spectrum-deal-with-cable-is-the-end-of- broadband-competition/.


• 56 Sinead Carew, “Wireless Carriers Eye Solutions to Spectrum Crunch,” Reuters, May 11, 2012, accessed Dec. 13, 2013, http://www .reuters.com/article/2012/05/11/us-wireless-smallcells-idUSBRE84A12G20120511.


• 57 Michael Calabrese and Benjamin Lennett, “Mobile Data Demand and the Need for Increased Spectrum Access,” policy paper, New America Foundation, Oct. 2009, accessed Dec. 13, 2013, http://www .newamerica.net/files/CalabreseLennett_MobileDataDemand.pdf.


• 58 Jon M. Peha, “Spectrum Management Policy Options,” IEEE Communication Surveys 1, no. 1 (2008): 6.


• 59 Ibid.


• 60 Laura Forlano, Alison Powell, Gwen Shaffer, and Benjamin Lennett, “From the Digital Divide to Digital Excellence: Global Best Practices to Aid Development of Municipal and Community Wireless Networks in the United States,” policy paper, New America Foundation (2011), accessed Dec. 13, 2013,h t t p : / / w w w . n e w a m e r i c a . n e t / s i t e s / n e w a m e r i c a . n e t / fi l e s / p o l i c y d o c s / N A F % 2 0 M u n i c i p a l % 2 0 a n d % 2 0 C o m m u n i t y % 2 0 W ireless%20Report.pdf.


• 61 Sascha Meinrath and Victor Pickard, “The Rise of the Intranet Era: Media, Research and Policy in the Age of Communications Revolution,” white paper, New America Foundation, Feb. 20, 2009, accessed Dec. 13, 2013, http://www.newamerica.net/publications/policy/rise_intranet_era.


• 62 Forlano, Powell, Shaffer, and Lennett, 41.


• 63 Mark McHenry, “Dupont Circle Spectrum Utilization During Peak Hours,” white paper, New America Foundation and The Shared Spectrum Company (2003), accessed Dec. 13, 2013, http://www.newamerica.net/files/archive/Doc_File_183_1.pdf. Some analysts suggest that at any given time the majority of the current spectrum could be technically considered a “white space.”


• 64 Federal Communications Commission (United States), In the Matter of Unlicensed Operation in the TV Broadcast bands et al., ET Docket No. 04-186 et al., Second Report and Order and Memorandum Report and Order, Nov. 14, 2008, accessed Dec. 13, 2013, http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-260A1.pdf.


• 65 Steven K. Jones and Thomas W. Phillips, “Initial Evaluation of the Performance of Prototype TV-Band White Spaces Devices,” OET Report FCC/OET 07-TR-1006, Federal Communications Commission, July 31, 2007, accessed Dec. 13, 2013, http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-275666A1.pdf.


• 66 Victor W. Pickard and Sascha D. Meinrath, “Revitalizing the Public Airwaves: Opportunistic Unlicensed Reuse of Government Spectrum,” International Journal of Communication 3 (2009): 1052-1084.


• 67 Al Tamimi & Company, “The Introduction of 3G in Jordan,” Nov. 2008, accessed Dec. 13, 2013, http://archive.newsweaver.com/altamimi/newsweaver.ie/altamimi/e_article001290090.html.


• 69 Federal Communications Commission (United States), “The Open Internet,” accessed Dec. 13, 2013, h t t p : / / w w w . fc c . g o v / g u i d e s / o p e n - i n t e r n e t .


• 70 Federal Communications Commission (United States), In the Matter of Preserving the Open Internet, Report and Order, GN Docket No. 09-191, Dec. 23, 2010, accessed Dec. 13, 2013, http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC- 10-201A1_Rcd.pdf, 55.


• 71 Ibid., 142.


• 72 Carrie Mihalcik, “AT&T to Open Mobile Video Chat for All Customers,” CNET, May 20, 2013, accessed Dec. 13, 2013, http://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-57585381-94/at-t-to-open-mobile-video-chat-for-all-customers/.


• 73 Steven Musil, “AT&T Reportedly Begins Wide Cellular Support for FaceTime,” CNET, June 17, 2013, accessed Dec. 13, 2013, http://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-57589748-94/at-t-reportedly-begins-wide-cellular-support-for-facetime/. 74 Jawad Abbassi, “Insights into Arab Consumers Broadcast and Online Consumption Habits,” presentation at the Joint ITU-AICTO Workshop on Interoperability of IPTV in the Arab Region, Sept. 20-21, 2011, accessed Dec. 13, 2013, http://www .itu.int/dms_pub/itu-t/oth/06/5B/T065B0000060043PDFE.pdf.


• 75 Russell Shaw, “Vodafone and Orange are Blocking Skype and Similar Services,” ZDNet, Apr. 25, 2007, accessed Dec. 13, 2013, http://www.zdnet.com/blog/ip-telephony/vodafone-and-orange-are-blocking-skype-and-similar- services/1564; Andy Weir, “Microsoft Pushing Operators to Open up Skype Access in UK,” Neowin.net, Nov. 302011, accessed Dec. 13, 2013, http://www.neowin.net/news/microsoft-pushing-operators-to-open-up-skype-access-in- uk.


• 76 Telecommunications Regulatory Commission (Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan), Frequency Use and Planning Policy.


• 77 Mohammad Ghazal, “Ministry Issues Free Anti-Porn Software in Response to Filtering Demands,” Jordan Times, July 29, 2012, accessed Dec. 13, 2013, http://jordantimes.com/ministry-issues-free-anti-porn-software-in-response-to- censorship-demands.


• 78 Bobbie Johnson, “Crazy: Orange Censors All Blogs, Not Just GigaOM,” GigaOM, June 11, 2012, accessed Dec. 13, 2013, http://gigaom.com/europe/orange-censors-all-blogs/.

When Saddam Hussein fell, we Iraqis were disoriented. For all our lives, he had always been there. His image was everywhere,' says photographer Jamal Penjweny, whose series Saddam is Here depicts Iraqis in everyday locations covering their faces with pictures of the former dictator. 'His image was in the cities where we live, on the walls of our schools, on our money, everywhere. Then he vanished. So taking a picture with Saddam was breaking a taboo that was created after the fall of the regime.' Penjweny, a former shepherd, will show his work in the Iraq pavilion at the Venice Biennale (Welcome to Iraq, 1 June to 24 November).

Read more