October 2016

Digital Equity Planning in US Cities

The Federal Communications Commission has recently tasked its Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau with the development of a plan to identify and work to address non-price related barriers to digital inclusion. Here, we share strategies that local/regional governments can implement in their digital equity planning process. We are currently investigating the digital equity planning processes in Austin (TX), Portland (OR), and Seattle (WA) -- three US cities with their own established stand-alone plans. We have interviewed local government officials and other key stakeholders as well as reviewed city-level policy and planning documents. Based on our preliminary examination of the digital equity plans and through our own interviews with local policymakers, we offer these recommendations:
Local governments should employ a central planning and coordination office with legitimate authority to facilitate digital equity planning.
Local planners should ensure that traditionally-excluded groups are included in digital equity planning.
Local decision-makers should use research from a variety of sources to inform digital equity planning.
We offer these preliminary findings and recommendations as key insights to assist local, state, and federal policymakers in creating effective digital equity plans.

[Dr Brandon Brooks is an Assistant Professor of Digital Media Studies in the James L. Knight School of Communication at Queens University of Charlotte. Dr Colin Rhinesmith conducts original Benton research and is an assistant professor in the School of Library and Information Science at Simmons College and a faculty associate with the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University. Angela Siefer is the Director of the National Digital Inclusion Alliance (NDIA).]

A Grand Bargain to Make Tech Companies Trustworthy

[Commentary] Companies share information about us in any number of unexpected and regrettable ways, and the information and advice they provide can be inconspicuously warped by the companies’ own ideologies or by their relationships with those who wish to influence us, whether people with money or governments with agendas. To protect individual privacy rights, we’ve developed the idea of “information fiduciaries.”

In the law, a fiduciary is a person or business with an obligation to act in a trustworthy manner in the interest of another. Examples are professionals and managers who handle our money or our estates. An information fiduciary is a person or business that deals not in money but in information. Doctors, lawyers, and accountants are examples; they have to keep our secrets and they can’t use the information they collect about us against our interests. Because doctors, lawyers, and accountants know so much about us, and because we have to depend on them, the law requires them to act in good faith—on pain of loss of their license to practice, and a lawsuit by their clients. The law even protects them to various degrees from being compelled to release the private information they have learned. The information age has created new kinds of entities that have many of the trappings of fiduciaries—huge online businesses, like Facebook, Google, and Uber, that collect, analyze, and use our personal information—sometimes in our interests and sometimes not. Like older fiduciaries, these businesses have become virtually indispensable. Like older fiduciaries, these companies collect a lot of personal information that could be used to our detriment. And like older fiduciaries, these businesses enjoy a much greater ability to monitor our activities than we have to monitor theirs. As a result, many people who need these services often shrug their shoulders and decide to trust them. But the important question is whether these businesses, like older fiduciaries, have legal obligations to be trustworthy. The answer is that they should.

[Jack M. Balkin is the Knight Professor of Constitutional Law and the First Amendment at Yale Law School, and the founder and director of Yale's Information Society Project. Jonathan Zittrain is a professor at Harvard Law School.]

Donald J. Trump Promises Immediate Action on Cybersecurity in his Administration

I’d like to address one of the most important aspects of America’s national security, and that’s cybersecurity. To truly make America safe, we must make cybersecurity a major priority for both the government and the private sector. Cyber theft is the fastest growing crime in the United States. As President, improving cybersecurity will be an immediate and top priority for my Administration. One of the very first things I will do is to order a thorough review of our cyber defenses and weaknesses, including all vital infrastructure. Cyber-attacks from foreign governments, especially China, Russia, and North Korea along with non-state terrorist actors and organized criminal groups, constitute one of our most critical national security concerns.

As President, I will instruct the Department of Justice to create Joint Task Forces throughout the United States to work together with Federal, State, and local law enforcement authorities and international law enforcement to crush this still-developing area of crime. I will make certain that our military is the best in the world in both cyber offense and defense. I will also ask my Secretary of Defense and Joint Chiefs to present recommendations for strengthening and augmenting our Cyber Command. As a deterrent against attacks on our critical resources, the United States must possess the unquestioned capacity to launch crippling cyber counter-attacks. This is the warfare of the future, America’s dominance in this arena must be unquestioned.

AT&T to Drop ‘Internet Preferences’ Program for GigaPower

AT&T confirmed that it is sunsetting Internet Preferences, a targeted Web advertising program it has been using in tandem with its lower-cost GigaPower broadband service tiers. In Austin (TX), for example, AT&T has been selling a Premiere tier of the 1-Gig service for $70 per month, when subscribers agreed to participate in Internet Preferences alongside a Standard version, without the targeted ad option, for $99 per month.

AT&T said that, starting in October, all GigaPower customers, regardless of whether or not they previously chose to opt-in, will receive the stand-alone 1-Gig service for $70 – a price that happens to match up with Google Fiber’s stand-alone gigabit offering. “To simplify our offering for our customers, we plan to end the optional Internet Preferences advertising program related to our fastest internet speed tiers,” AT&T said. “As a result, all customers on these tiers will receive the best rate we have available for their speed tier in their area."