1. Monthly archive
  2. March 2017

March 2017

The New FCC Chairman’s Plan to Undermine Net Neutrality

At the Mobile World Congress in Barcelona, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai suggested that the reclassification and resulting restrictions have hindered telecoms from investing in improved infrastructure. It’s a tricky game—advocates on both sides can make the numbers say what they want.

But Pai’s gambit appears in part to hinge on convincing people that net neutrality, at least as currently enforced, will slow the spread of 5G, the next iteration of ultra-high speed wireless. Chairman Pai says his deregulatory strategy will help prepare the US for 5G. “It’s not a forgone conclusion that we will fully realize this technological potential,” he said in Barcelona. “After all, building, maintaining, and upgrading broadband networks is expensive.” In other words, he’s worried that if he doesn’t get rid of the Open Internet Order, carriers won’t upgrade their infrastructure to 5G. Ultimately, the bigger threat to the Open Internet Order may come from Congress, where Republicans have been trying to kill it since before the FCC passed it. Pai doesn’t seem likely to wait around for them, even if that means making his case in court.

Net neutrality is two years old this week — and Republicans still want to kill it

Feb 26 marked the two-year anniversary of network neutrality passing at the Federal Communications Commission. Unfortunately for advocates, the anniversary hasn’t been so sweet. “It’s kind of tragic that we're observing the second anniversary of its passing with all signs indicating a frontal assault is going to be launched against it,” said Michael Copps, a former FCC commissioner.

You’d think that with net neutrality now in effect, we’d be able to look around to see what kind of impact the policy has had — whether it’s lived up to advocates high hopes or whether it’s destroyed the internet as opponents warned. But for the most part, net neutrality opponents are sticking with the same arguments they used two years ago: the rules rely on law that’s too old, they’ll hurt investment, and they’ll leave internet providers uncertain of their fate. “Contrary to the over-hyped fears of the carriers and their friends, nothing bad has come to pass,” says Gigi Sohn, who worked as a counselor to former FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler while the net neutrality rules were being put in place. “They continue to invest heavily in their networks, they’re buying other properties ... they continue to buy edge companies and other telecoms.”

Broadband is the infrastructure challenge of the 21st Century

[Commentary] The Trump administration has rightly recognized the importance of advanced communications networks, having included telecommunications in an initial list of critical infrastructure priorities. More than 100 members of Congress, both Democrats and Republicans, also recently joined in urging President Trump to include broadband within any broader infrastructure initiatives. As our policymakers gear up for action, here’s a simple roadmap for ensuring a brighter broadband future for all Americans:

Build on What Has Worked: Leveraging of the existing Universal Service Fund programs could, if done right, provide the most effective path to ensuring greater broadband access at lower costs and also avoid problems of delay and duplication.

Remove Regulatory Barriers: While the challenging business case for ongoing operations may be the greatest barriers to greater rural broadband deployment, regulatory burdens involving permits, pole attachments, franchising requirements, and rights-of-way can increase costs and cause lengthy delays that in some cases postpone promising projects for more than a year. Streamlining or eliminating regulations and addressing other deployment obstacles could help alleviate these burdens.

[Shirley Bloomfield is chief executive officer of NTCA–The Rural Broadband Association. Jonathan Spalter is president and chief executive officer of USTelecom.]

Sen Schumer asks FCC for waiver to trace Jewish center bomb threats

Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-NY) asked the Federal Communications Commission for a waiver to unscramble anonymous phone numbers that had been used to call in bomb threats to a New York Jewish Community Center. A wave of anti-Semitic acts, including bomb threats to JCCs and vandalism of Jewish cemeteries, has drawn concern in Washington and around the nation. Since the start of 2017, there have been roughly 100 threats to 81 JCCs across the US.

Sen Schumer's letter specifically referred to a series of bomb threats that were made on Feb 27 to 11 JCCs, several of them in or near New York. Sen Schumer called on FCC Chairman Ajit Pai to issue a waiver that would allow law enforcement to trace the anonymous calls. Sen Schumer recalled former Chairman Tom Wheeler granting a waiver to handle a bomb threat problem at a school in Long Island (NY). “The access enabled critical school personnel and law enforcement officials to coordinate with one another in their attempts to quickly respond to swatting calls made to the School District,” Sen Schumer said.

Uphill Battle Expected for AT&T-Time Warner Foes

Opponents of AT&T’s plan to acquire Time Warner may have to rely on the Department of Justice as their sole federal option for blocking the $85.4 billion deal, as it looks increasingly likely that the Federal Communications Commission won’t review it. Public Knowledge President Gene Kimmelman, whose group opposes the merger, acknowledged as much Feb. 28 when he told state attorneys general that they needed to give the deal a closer look than they might otherwise would have. “I would urge you to look at it carefully as I’m not sure it will get as much scrutiny at the federal level as it would in the past,” he said. Without FCC review, the arguments against the deal have shifted away from a “public interest” standard to a narrower anti-competitive standard. That improves the chances for AT&T and Time Warner and makes the case more difficult for opponents.

Kids Entering The Digital Age At Young Ages

Many kids are entering the digital age before they are entering double digits in age. According to Nielsen’s Mobile Kids report, about half (45%) of kids get a mobile phone with a service plan between the ages of 10 and 12, with most of them (22%) getting them when they’re 10. Beyond that, 16% of 8-year-olds are also receiving phones. The mobile child, according to the study, skews male (56% vs. 44%) and about 20% of them are Hispanic. The majority (94%) of these kids are on their parents’ service plan, and nearly three-quarters (72%) of them have the entire suite of wireless services including voice, messaging and data. While Nielsen doesn’t have the data to determine whether kids’ experience with phones is trending younger, the logical assumption is that it is, according to the company. Among the top usage for kids on their phones: texting (81%), downloading apps (59%), playing pre-installed games (54%) and browsing Web sites (53%).

WH Memo: For the Heads of Departments and Agencies

This memorandum and the attachment provide an overview of the Executive branch's formal legislative coordination and clearance process. Adherence to the requirements of the clearance process serves the needs of the President by ensuring that agency legislative proposals and recommendations, as well as testimony, are consistent with his policies and programs.

We request that agency legislative proposals, letters, and testimony discussing or involving legislation be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) as far in advance of a needed clearance as feasible. OMB runs a clearance process on these items, which requires sufficient time to review and coordinate with all relevant agencies, and offices in the Executive Office ofthe President. OMB Circular No. A-19 details the requirements and procedures for legislative coordination and clearance. The attachment summarizes the major elements and the essential purposes ofthe clearance process. We will be working with you to ensure the timely transmittal to Congress of legislative proposals necessary to support the President's legislative agenda and the Fiscal Year 2018 Budget. As decisions are made on these matters, we will be in contact about details related to the drafting, review, and clearance of these proposals.

Open Data Privacy Playbook

Cities today collect and store a wide range of data that may contain sensitive or identifiable information about residents. As cities embrace open data initiatives, more of this information is available to the public. While releasing data has many important benefits, sharing data comes with inherent risks to individual privacy: released data can reveal information about individuals that would otherwise not be public knowledge. In recent years, open data such as taxi trips, voter registration files, and police records have revealed information that many believe should not be released. Effective data governance is a prerequisite for successful open data programs. The goal of this document is to codify responsible privacy-protective approaches and processes that could be adopted by cities and other government organizations that are publicly releasing data. Our report is organized around four recommendations:

  • Conduct risk-benefit analyses to inform the design and implementation of open data programs.
  • Consider privacy at each stage of the data lifecycle: collect, maintain, release, delete.
  • Develop operational structures and processes that codify privacy management widely throughout the City.
  • Emphasize public engagement and public priorities as essential aspects of data management programs.

Each chapter of this report is dedicated to one of these four recommendations, and provides fundamental context along with specific suggestions to carry them out. In particular, we provide case studies of best practices from numerous cities and a set of forms and tactics for cities to implement our recommendations. The Appendix synthesizes key elements of the report into an Open Data Privacy Toolkit that cities can use to manage privacy when releasing data.

© 1994-2024 Benton Institute for Broadband & Society. All Rights Reserved.