Editor's note.

• Author: Holtzman, Robyn M.

Welcome to the first issue of Volume 53 of the Federal Communications Law Journal. Our staff has several exciting initiatives in store for the Journal this year--in print, on the Web, and at the Indiana University-Bloomington School of Law--and we look forward to involving you in these developments.

Last spring, as the Journal staff discussed plans for Volume 53, we invited each of the Commissioners of the Federal Communications Commission to contribute written works to the Journal on topics of their choice and to visit the Law School to present oral remarks on the same or related topics. While these and any future Articles from the Commission--like all pieces published by the Journal--do not reflect the views of the Editorial Staff, the Federal Communications Bar Association, or the Law School, the Journal is pleased to provide a neutral forum for the important debate surrounding communications public policy issues. We are honored to present the first of these contributions in Issue 1--a series of pieces by Commissioner Harold W. Furchtgott-Roth and members of his staff.

In the first of these Articles, Helgi Walker discusses the need for the FCC to adopt a viewpoint-neutral approach in implementing its regulations. In the second Article, Rebecca Beynon reviews the FCC's implementation of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. In the final Article of the series, Bryan Tramont offers a critical perspective on the FCC's use of voluntary agreements in extracting concessions from licensees. We are grateful to Commissioner Furchtgott-Roth and his staff for their contributions, and we invite both readers and others to join the dialogue on these matters.

Two practitioners' Articles also relate to timely and relevant issues of telecommunications law and policy. In the first of these Articles, Yale Braunstein uses economic analysis to quantify the barriers to entry facing minority broadcasters. In the second Article, James Lister compares the costs and benefits associated with the decision to become a common carrier versus a non-regulated communications provider.

In the first of our student-written Notes, Emily Dawson advocates specialized universal funding subsidies for technological advancements that target high-cost areas to prevent a widening gap between services in high- and low-cost regions. In the second Note...