On June 27, 2024,  former ITS Chair Professor Erik Bohlin and fellow ITS Board member Professor Seongcheol Kim delivered keynote speeches at the 29th Shanghai Television Festival “Magnolia Dialogue” television forum held at Shanghai Broadcasting Television Station. The theme  of the forum was “Focusing on New Qualities of Media Production Power: Dialogue on AIGC Usage and Governance.”

Prof.  Bohlin presented a paper titled,  “AIGC Governance and Ethics: European Union Cases and Issues.” He discussed the world’s first AI legislation—the European Union’s “Artificial Intelligence Act”—and explored value- and ethics-based risk assessment methods. He also provided several cases related to AI governance in the EU. His analysis included the trade-offs between different policy options and governance measures.

Prof. Kim spoke on “AIGC Usage and Governance: The Korean Cases and Issues.” He provided a comprehensive overview of the applications of generative AI at various stages of production within South Korea’s creative industry, supported by numerous case studies. His deep analysis covered the current state of generative AI applications across different fields in South Korea, addressing the legal, ethical, and socio-economic challenges currently being faced and reflecting on future pathways for harmonious coexistence between humans and AI.

The forum was jointly organized by Shanghai Broadcasting Television Station and Shanghai University, with “Shanghai Broadcasting Television Research” magazine and the School of Journalism and Communication at Shanghai University serving as hosts. ITS Board member, Prof. Yu-li Liu served as the host of the forum. Nearly a hundred industry experts from companies involved in artificial intelligence, including Baidu, SenseTime, and Tencent, took part in the event.

The 52^nd Telecommunications Policy Research Conference (TPRC) was held at American University Law School on September 20 and 21, 2024. A full program of extremely interesting papers, panels and keynote sessions on topics ranging from the Satellite and Space Economy to Antitrust and competition was convened by Program Chair Professor Marcela Gomez (University of Pittsburgh) and a cast of 24, including ITS Board members Petrus Potgieter and Volker Stocker. The papers were generally of a high standard. The highlight for me personally was a lively exchange of views on “Digital Regulatory Agencies: Reboot, Retrofit, and Reform” between former Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chair Tom Wheeler, arguing that digital regulation needs to move on from the structural approach dominating the industrial economy of the 20^th century, and Lawrence (Larry) Spiwak from the Phoenix Center for Advanced Legal and Economic Scholarship, who questioned the outcomes of regulation during that era and the bases for various interventions. In the true spirit of TPRC, they demonstrated the benefits of being able to freely “kick the tires” of all policy ideas so that decisions can be fully informed of all perspectives –  something that Peruvian panelist Roxana Barrantes noted was not always possible in some jurisdictions.

The “social” program fed participants well, both figuratively and literally. Former ITS Board member Johannes Bauer entertained Friday night dinner guests with a free and frank discussion of his experiences as Chief Economist at the Federal Communications Commission. Johannes confessed to being humbled, honored and informed during his time at the FCC, and convinced that the restructuring of the economics role in the Commission to a single unit supporting all inquiries and activities, introduced by past Chair Ajit Pai has strengthened the quality of decision making. Friday’s lunch address by Professor Ellen Goodman of Rutgers University illustrated the real challenges posed by Artificial Intelligence creations, and the difficulty of distinguishing false and misleading content from the authentic and well-intentioned. While technological tools may help verify where content has been created and/or emended electronically, the question of the intent of the creator (“mens”) still matters for content recipients.

The Conference concluded on Saturday with long-time TPRC Board member and Chair Amit Schetjer signing off and handing over to Professor Sharon Strover (University of Austin at Texas) and a board including ITS Vice-Chair Jason Whalley. The Program Committee forTPRC53 , which is scheduled for September 2025 and to once again  be held at American University, will be led by Sarah Oh Lam of the Technology Policy Institute. We look forward once more to good friendship, scholarship and ongoing co-operation between TPRC and ITS.

Several ITS members are involved in the Global Media & Internet Concentration Project under the leadership of Dwayne Winseck at Carleton University in Ottawa, Canada, with the support of the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. The project studies telecommunication and media industry concentration across the globe using standardized definitions to produce comparable data and concentration measures for 24 sectors in 34 countries. The project leverages the methodology and results of an earlier project that culminated in the publication of the book Who owns the world’s media?: media concentration and ownership around the world, edited by Eli Noam and published by Oxford University Press in 2016.

During 2024, the project showcased its results and approach at three major events: the International Communication Association (ICA) conference on Australia’s Gold Coast, a two-day workshop in Sydney and at the International Association for Media and Communication Research (IAMCR) conference in New Zealand. The trilogy of events builds nicely on the momentum of the past  year,  one in which the project released ten reports and their associated data sets.

We wait. But it does not look good for any sort of regulation of some parts of the internet and telecommunications. Space communication and internet disinformation both seem poised to become especially interesting—and contentious—battlegrounds. With Elon Musk’s increasing involvement in space technology and communications infrastructure, as well as his outspoken and often polarizing public persona, these areas may soon face significant upheaval. Musk’s leadership style and vision could drive innovation, but they also bring unpredictability, particularly in industries that intersect with national security, public trust, and global governance.

Meanwhile, the new administration is entering office with a clear skepticism toward the major players in the tech and telecommunications sectors. Many of these companies, some of which openly supported the outgoing administration during the election, have long been a source of frustration for policymakers. Public statements and early moves suggest that the new administration may take a harder line, with whispers of stricter regulations and increased government oversight growing louder. The talk of “more government at their doorstep” may signal a turning point for these industries, potentially reshaping their relationship with Washington in ways that could have global implications.

For companies and policy researchers who have not demonstrated loyalty to the folks now setting up shop in Washington, it may be time to reevaluate their strategies. The current climate suggests that those outside the administration’s circle of influence – or perceived as oppositional – could find it increasingly difficult to secure partnerships, funding, or policy support. For some, this might mean seeking new allies, exploring alternative funding sources, or even pivoting their focus to areas less likely to draw regulatory attention.

Still, the broader implications remain uncertain. Will the government’s actions lead to meaningful reforms, or will they result in a standoff that stalls progress? How will players like Musk and his companies navigate these new dynamics, particularly as their influence continues to grow? And, critically, what will this mean for the future of industries like space communication, where the boundaries between public good, private enterprise, and global competition are increasingly blurred?

But, who knows? It’s politics. Even the most carefully laid plans can unravel in the face of shifting alliances, unexpected events, and public pressure. The only certainty is that uncertainty itself will continue to dominate. So, we wait – and watch – as the story unfolds.