Cnet News.com has published a set of FAQs (frequently asked questions) about the U.S. transition to digital television, which is mandated to take place on February 17, 2009.

Polls show that three-fifths of Americans don’t know anything about this transition, which will be the biggest change to television in the United States since the introduction of TV itself. Congress and executive branch officials are concerned that a large portion of Americans will not take the steps necessary to prepare for the end of analog, over-the-air broadcast of television. So there will be a massive public education campaign in the United States over the next year. The National Telecommunications and Information Administration held a public education kick-off event in Washington, D.C. on September 25.

BusinessWeek features an article that looks at the 2008 Presidential candidates’ views on issues of importance to the technology industry, including R&D funding, patent reform, H1B visas for foreign workers, science and math education and national telecommunications policy. The article is focused on the issues important to Silicon Valley, primarily, because of the money and imprimatur of the technology industry. “There has never been this degree of attention paid by Presidential candidates to the Valley,“ says Gary Fazzino, vice president for government affairs of Palo Alto-based Hewlett Packard.

On telecom policy, the article notes that differences on “net neutrality” break along party lines, with Republicans opposing any regulation that would enforce net neutrality, and Democrats generally in favor of such regulation. Barack Obama is singled out in the article as a candidate who has focused on expanding broadband access as a tool of economic development and social equity.

The National Journal reports that the chairwoman of the Federal Trade Commission, Deborah Platt Majoras, has asked Congress for more authority to regulate telecommunications companies, ending an exemption that is left over from the days of regulated monopolies. Majoras said, “the common carrier exemption is likely to frustrate the FTC’s ability to stop deceptive and unfair acts and practices and unfair methods of competition with respect to interconnected communications, information, entertainment and payment services.“

The National Journal noted that Majoras got a sympathetic hearing from Senate Commerce Interstate Commerce Subcommittee Chairman Byron Dorgan, D-ND.

But in an article in PC Magazine, Senator Dorgan was reported to question the FTC’s “hands off” approach on the issue of “net neutrality.“ The FTC issued a report in June advising Congress to “proceed with caution” over net neutrality. Chris Murray, senior counsel with Consumer’s Union, testified before Senator Dorgan that uncovering Internet Service Providers’ discriminatory practices often has to rely on “sheer dumb luck,“ because it is difficult for consumers to document such practices. Majoras responded that “prioritization” of Internet data may be necessary to ensure new services such as video and Voice-over-IP. But Mark Cooper of Consumer’s Union countered that the large telecom companies simply want to gain an advantage in the marketplace over their competitors.

Wired magazine has published an interactive map that shows the price in dollars for 100 kilobytes per second of broadband Internat access around the world. The accompanying text notes:

Only about 3 percent of the world’s population has broadband, and prices vary wildly. In Japan, DSL or cable averages 6 cents per 100 Kbps, with users typically paying 0.002 percent of their monthly salary for high-speed access. But in Kenya, that same hookup speed costs $86.11 — nearly twice the average monthly income.

It is clear from this map and other sources of statistics about broadband access that high-speed Internet is most expensive in the world’s poorest countries.

Rumors are flying that when the FCC auctions off a portion of the analog TV spectrum on January 16, 2008, we could see some new players in the broadband wireless market, including Google, eBay, DirecTV or even Apple.

The 700Mhz spectrum auction requires a $4.6 billion minimum bid, and is expected to bring in $9-$10 billion, so the auction players will have to be well capitalized. This spectrum will allow a wireless broadband signal that can be faster than 3G cell networks or even WiFi, and, like broadcast TV performs now, it can penetrate buildings and cover the entire nation.

The question is whether new entrants would want such a gigantic new service added to their core business—it could be a distraction, to say the least, and would also require a potentially risky investment in capital infrastructure. But some people say this is a “once in a lifetime” opportunity that could completely transform the business of the auction winner.

Peter Burrows at BusinessWeek speculates that Apple —which has plenty of cash—could start its own high-speed network for iPhone customers, vastly expand its reach for iTunes customers who could download music, movies and TV shows anywhere, and cut the tether with AT&T or any other traditional telecom provider. The economics might even work out, because the telcos’ attempt to get fiber to homes is costing them tens of billions of dollars. But would Apple, or Google, want to take on such a huge and different kind of business?

The Seattle Times, in a strongly worded editorial on September 10, 2007, said, “The Federal Communications Commission has failed the people and the democratic system it is supposed to protect.“

The editorial, part of the newspaper’s series called “The Democracy Papers,“ went on to say, “America’s press, and other sectors of the media, will continue to be marginalized unless politicians act on the currents of energy created by the growing media-reform movement. Politicians, both Republicans and Democrats, should push back on the FCC.“

The newspaper identified three areas that need attention by concerned citizens:

Cross-ownership. The bloating of the world’s media conglomerates begs lawmakers to reexamine this rule. Not only does it need to be better enforced, the rule needs to be expanded on a national level. No company should be allowed the reach and power of News Corporation. The FCC has to be alarmed that the conglomerate now owns the New York-based Wall Street Journal, Fox News, two television stations and a daily newspaper in the city. News Corporation is also launching a national financial channel.

Licensing. The FCC should use a licensing program requiring television stations to go through a rigorous renewal every three years. The current system has almost no impact, and renewal is done every eight years. Stations simply send in a postcard.

Network neutrality. This awkwardly named proposal would keep network providers — such as AT&T or Comcast — which supply the pipes through which the Internet moves, from implementing different pay scales for different levels of service. This law would ensure the Internet remains a place for innovation and is not controlled by the companies that own broadband.

The editorial concluded, “It is time the FCC acted in the best interests of the people it was created to serve, instead of large corporations.“

The National Cable and Telecommunications Association, the industry group for cable TV, launched a $200 million ad campaign to tell consumers that if they have cable TV, they will have no problems when the U.S. switches to digital TV in February 2009. The new TV ads can be seen here.

UPDATE: Consumers Union has a different take on these ads, pointing out that cable customers will probably have to upgrade to more expensive digital service and buy or rent a converter box for their television.

In an unusual move, the U.S. Department of Justice issued a press release on Thursday, September 6, that described the DOJ’s opposition to regulations that would require “net neutrality.“ The document says that the DOJ’s Antitrust Division has determined that “‘net neutrality’ could deter broadband Internet providers from upgrading and expanding their networks to reach more Americans.“ The DOJ press release compares differential pricing on the Internet to differently-priced modes of delivery offered by the U.S. Postal Service. As Om Malik notes, however, the USPS is confronted in its marketplace by FedEx, UPS and DHL, among other mail and package carriers, while U.S. broadband consumers typically have no more than two service providers to choose from, and in many areas only one. Moreover, the Postal Service doesn’t examine what you’re sending and make decisions based on what they see you’re doing, the way some “net neutrality” proponents predict telecom companies will act—e.g., blocking certain kinds of services (competing Voice-over-IP, perhaps peer-to-peer file sharing), or “steering” service requests to specific online partners or even their own online sites.

The Associated Press released an article saying that the Federal Communications Commission’s procedures have routinely left the public in the dark about major policy decisions. The article described FCC Chairman Kevin Martin’s recent steps in preparing a plan for the auction of spectrum in the current analog TV band, an auction scheduled for January 16, 2008. The article notes that Martin’s rules in a draft proposal was hidden from public scrutiny and only released 10 days after they had been approved by a Commission vote. Martin said that his plan would provide for a ‘'truly open broadband network—one that would open the door to a lot of innovative services for consumers.‘’ But now it appears that the Commission did not go as far on openness as it could have, and the spectrum auction is likely to reinforce the positions of the current large telecom providers.