Jessica Rosenworcel, nominated by President Barack Obama to be a commissioner at the Federal Communications Commission, will tell the Senate Commerce Committee that her approach to the job will be a strong commitment to public service and a little regulatory "humility" in the face of technological change, guided by the core consumer- and competition-protection values of the Communications Act.
The Federal Communications Commission seeks comment on additional procedures to improve transparency and efficiency in FCC proceedings. In particular, the FCC seeks comment on whether it should require commenters to file materials they cite in pleadings submitted in rulemaking proceedings, so that those materials are more easily accessible to all interested parties.
In particular, the FCC seeks comment on requiring parties to submit full copies of any materials cited in their pleadings or ex parte submissions. Such a requirement may be viable under the Commission’s current electronic filing processes, when it would not previously have been feasible. Further, it could help to ensure that the record timely and unambiguously includes those materials that parties to our proceedings believe to be germane and informative.
What would be the benefits and burdens of such a new procedural requirement in rulemaking proceedings? Should any such rule distinguish among types of documents cited? For example, should data be treated differently from other forms of information and should economic analysis be treated differently from a law review article, court decision, or other government publication? Should ease of access to the cited information matter? If so, how should ease of access be determined? Are there some circumstances in which materials could not practically be placed in the record, such as when third parties do not permit copying (e.g., daily newsletters), the material is very bulky, or the material is in the form of a database? Would parties need to place an entire document in the record or would an excerpt suffice? Should the inclusion of an Internet address (URL) where the document can be viewed be deemed sufficient to satisfy the filing requirement for that document? Might this proposal diminish the quality of the comments received by the Commission, for instance if the additional burden of providing supporting materials outweighs their perceived value to the commenter? Would this proposal impose an undue paperwork burden on filers? Should the proposal be adopted in additional, or different, categories of proceedings?
It is not very often that you get two winners and two losers in the same competition. Yet according to a new report to be issued by Nielsen, the market research firm, Google and Apple are both winning in the mobile smartphone race.
The report, which is being presented by Nielsen’s general manager of digital, Jonathan Carson, notes that 44 percent of all mobile phone owners in the United States now own a smartphone. This number is up from 37 percent in the United States in May, when Nielsen last reported its findings. Of those who own a smartphone, 44 percent are using the Google Android operating system, putting Google in the lead in the mobile operating system race. Apple, though, is the leader in the mobile hardware race. The iPhone now accounts for 29 percent of all smartphone hardware. About 20 percent of smartphone owners have a phone from H.T.C., maker of Android and Windows devices. The Nielsen report also found that Apple and Google were joint leaders when it came to mobile apps. The report found that 83 percent of all apps downloaded in the last 30 days were downloaded on Apple iOS or Google Android smartphones. Microsoft Windows Phone 7 still has a ways to go to catch up to its competitors.
Attorney General Eric Holder announced a public education campaign to discourage people from buying counterfeit products or downloading pirated content at the White House. The campaign consists of television public service announcements, Internet videos, print ads and radio spots. One print ad reads, “That pirated movie you just bought … cost someone her job." MTV Networks partnered with the Justice Department to create a television ad that warns consumers that buying counterfeit products can support violent gangs.
CTIA-The Wireless Association and the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB) announced a newly-developed rating system that six mobile application storefronts will voluntarily support as part of their application submission (or onboarding) process. The CTIA Mobile Application Rating System with ESRB will utilize the well-known and trusted age rating icons that ESRB assigns to computer and video games to provide parents and consumers reliable information about the age-appropriateness of applications. Today’s announcement is an extension of CTIA’s 2010 Guidelines for Application Content Classification and Rating.
AT&T, Microsoft, Sprint, T-Mobile USA, U.S. Cellular and Verizon Wireless are the founding members of the rating system, and other storefronts have indicated their interest in joining. As technologies and build-out schedules differ by each storefront, full implementation timelines will vary; each storefront may make its own announcement on when the rating system will be available for their customers.
When developers submit their applications to a participating storefront they will be able to complete a detailed yet quick multiple choice questionnaire that is designed to assess an application’s content and context with respect to its age-appropriateness. This includes violence or sexual content, language, substances, etc., as well as other elements such as a minimum age requirement, the exchange of user-generated content, the sharing of a user’s location with other users of the application and the sharing of user-provided personal information with third parties. Once developers complete all answers to these questions, their applications are rated within seconds. Each rated app is issued a certificate and a unique identifying code that may be subsequently submitted to other storefronts during their respective onboarding processes, avoiding the need for developers to repeat the rating process. This means consistent ratings across participating storefronts and a convenient, cost-free process for app developers.
To ensure content disclosures were complete and the ratings assigned were appropriate, ESRB will routinely test the most popular applications and closely monitor consumer complaints. If an inappropriate rating is found to have been assigned ESRB will promptly adjust the rating and will notify the developer and the storefront(s) that have the application to ensure consumers have reliable information.
Since the project’s inception, CTIA and ESRB, together with the six founding storefronts and numerous developers, worked closely to incorporate feedback to ensure the system is user-friendly while meeting the needs of consumers. There is no expiration date associated with app rating assignments and no renewal requirement. However, if subsequent updates to an app modify its content in a way that may affect its rating, it should be resubmitted.
Apple and Google, which operate the two dominant app stores, each use their own set of age-based rating guidelines. The App Store labels titles as 4+, 9+, 12+ and 17+, while Google’s Android Market allows developers to designate apps as “All,” “Pre-Teen,” “Teen” or “Mature.” For its part, Google, whose app store offers more than 400,000 titles, doesn’t plan to adopt the CTIA ratings.
House Communications and Technology Subcommittee Chairman Greg Walden (R-OR) unveiled the Jumpstarting Opportunity with Broadband Spectrum (JOBS) Act of 2011.
The JOBS Act will advance wireless broadband service, spur billions of dollars in private investment, create thousands of jobs, help bring interoperable broadband communications to public safety officials, and reduce the deficit by approximately $15 billion. The legislation is the culmination of five hearings and extensive bipartisan negotiations to use voluntary incentive auctions to make more efficient and effective use of the public’s airwaves and support establishment of a nationwide, interoperable, broadband public safety network.
The legislation authorizes incentive auctions, creating the contiguous, 20-MHz block of spectrum public safety officials say they need for broadband by reallocating the 700 MHz D Block and providing for the return of 700 MHz narrowband spectrum, making up to $6.5 billion in grants available for the construction of an interoperable public safety network, and creating a governance structure for construction and operation of the network. The legislation also addresses the relocation of federal government incumbents to make additional spectrum available for commercial services. Following the experiences of the AWS-1 band (1710-1755 MHz), the legislation adopts changes to the Commercial Spectrum Enhancement Act to streamline the existing relocation process, including providing NTIA with funding for spectrum planning prior to relocation auctions, permitting incremental updates to government systems through the relocation process, improving processes for the creation of relocation plans, and improving accountability.
Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-CA), Ranking Member of the House Commerce Committee, Rep. Anna G. Eshoo (D-CA), Ranking Member of the Communications and Technology Subcommittee, and other Democratic members of the Committee announced plans to introduce legislation that would create a nationwide, interoperable public safety broadband network.
The “Wireless Innovation and Public Safety Act of 2011” would also provide the Federal Communications Commission with incentive auction authority to efficiently and responsibly repurpose broadcast spectrum for commercial broadband purposes and unlicensed innovation. The legislation reallocates the D Block spectrum for public safety use. In addition, it promotes efficient spectrum use by enabling sharing of public safety network spectrum and infrastructure to facilitate interoperability among agencies responding to emergencies and promote public/private partnerships to speed network deployment. The legislation would establish a private, non-profit entity, the Public Safety Broadband Corporation, as the national governance vehicle for ensuring fiscal responsibility and accountability. The legislation also directs the Commission to identify and auction approximately 250 MHz of spectrum to be made available for commercial mobile broadband. Proceeds from the auctions will be deposited into the Public Safety Trust Fund. The legislation also provides the FCC with the flexibility to preserve unlicensed spectrum in the TV band. Unlicensed spectrum in the TV band will enable innovators and entrepreneurs to develop applications and services like, super Wi-Fi hotspots, which will drive new economic opportunity and job creation. The legislation also gives the FCC incentive auction authority to compensate licensees for voluntary relinquishment of their spectrum usage rights.
The original cosponsors of the “Wireless Innovation and Public Safety Act of 2011” are Rep. Henry A. Waxman, Rep. Anna G. Eshoo, Rep. Edward J. Markey, Rep. Mike Doyle, Rep. Doris Matsui, Rep. Donna M. Christensen, Rep. Frank Pallone, Jr., Rep. Diana DeGette, Rep. Eliot Engel, and Rep. Jan Schakowsky.
Groups in support of the legislation include the Public Safety Alliance, the National Governors Association, the National League of Cities, the U.S. Conference of Mayors, the National Association of Counties, the International City/County Management Association, Consumer Federation of America, Consumer’s Union, Public Knowledge, the New America Foundation, Free Press, Media Access Project, and the National Emergency Number Association.
There once was a time when the best technology existed in government. You could not afford a computer at home but you had one at work. And if you owned a computer, you had dial-up at home but fast Internet at your government job. Consumer technology has advanced so fast that sometimes I look at the tools we have in government and am amazed at how far behind they are compared to what we use in our daily personal lives. It’s easy to sit and complain, so instead I thought I’d list seven websites that I believe government could model to solve core mission problems: Zipcar; Amazon/Yelp; Google/1-800-ASK-GARY; Freecycle/Craigslist.
As the House Commerce Committee prepares to vote on legislation to increase transparency and accountability at the Federal Communications Commission, Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-MI) and Communications and Technology Subcommittee Chairman Greg Walden (R-OR) expressed concern regarding the lack of transparency surrounding the FCC’s recent universal service proceedings.
The chairmen requested the FCC outline what changes were made to the universal service item between the time it was considered and the time it was adopted. They request responses to a list of requests by Dec. 12, including copy of the item as it existed when it was adopted on Oct. 27, what changes, if any, were made, and an explanation of how the sunshine rules applied to the order between the time of a seven-page executive summary released Oct. 27 and the 759-page order was released Nov. 18, including any ex parte communications.
[Commentary] You haven’t seen a lot of industry lobbying to support the FCC Reform Legislation pushed by House Republicans on the Commerce Committee.
One would think that a bill which requires the FCC to spend three years building up to adopting a rule, imposes all kinds of new burdens on the FCC before adopting a rule so that rulemaking will be even more burdensome and less likely to occur, and generally tries to limit the FCC from regulating or imposing conditions on media and telecom mergers would generate loud applause from industry players supposedly chaffing under the terrible yoke of the FCC. But we haven’t, and we won’t. Oh, Republicans may lean on industry trade associations for some perfunctory applause and ritual chanting about “the burdens of job killing regulation” blah blah Amen. But their heart won’t be in it. This may surprise those who think that the proposed Republican FCC Reform Bill is an industry fantasy crafted by high-paid industry lobbyists and pushed by their wholly owned subsidiaries. The bill contains everything industry always claims to want, so where the heck is the industry cheerleading squad? Why haven’t they shown up to cheer its passage with any enthusiasm? Why aren’t industry lobbyists busy writing op eds about how this wonderful FCC reform bill will make your cell phone bills cheaper, bring us better broadband, and give you free cable? And why are Republicans so determined to push it if no one in industry really wants it?
© 1994-2025 Benton Institute for Broadband & Society. All Rights Reserved.
