Editorial staff

Of the new priorities Bozeman city commissioners added to their strategic plan recently, perhaps none will prove to be more consequential than declaring broadband internet service to be essential infrastructure – just as important as streets, bridges and water and sewer systems. It was a logical next step in the city’s broadband policy evolution. It started six years ago with the formation of committee of professionals and business owners that identified a demand for high-speed internet service in the city.

In an innocuous-sounding "rule change" to the Communications Act of 1984, the Federal Communications Commission would allow cable providers to deduct "in-kind" services from a local franchise fee to municipalities required by the Act, specifically a maximum five-percent levy on gross revenues. "In kind" is currently a term without a clear definition, and in a particularly diabolical twist, the FCC plans to leave it to the cable companies to determine the monetary value of such nebulous services (and exactly what those services are) before deducting that value from their mandated fee.

Democrats in Congress say they want to “save the Internet” with a net neutrality law. But they will need Republicans’ help to do it. The bills introduced in the House and Senate this week, unfortunately, are unlikely to inspire any cooperation. The bills introduced this week miss the mark. They bring back Title II. Democratic bills would make permanent limitations on rate-setting and other regulatory practices that have alarmed providers, but the classification is still toxic — and outdated.

Government Technology editorial staff reviewed each State of the State adress across the country and rated it from 1 to 5 based on the strength of its technology initiatives.

In a year-end report, the Committee to Protect Journalists counted 53 journalists killed between Jan 1 and Dec 14, including 34 targeted in reprisal for their work — nearly double the 18 such murders it recorded in 2017. The growing number of journalists jailed or attacked on that pretext [of dissemintating "false" or "fake" news] is one illustration of the deleterious influence that President Donald Trump has had on press freedom globally. His labeling of the US media as the “enemy of the people” and charges of “fake news” have been imitated by regimes around the world.

Members of the conservative majority on the House Judiciary Committee spent much of their time hammering [Google CEO Sundar] Pichai with baseless accusations that Google rigs its search results to censor conservative content. The bias obsession has distracted from the more important subjects that Congress has failed to address these past two years. That seems likely to change when Democrats take control of the House in January.

The received wisdom was once that a unified, unbounded web promoted democracy through the free flow of information. Things don’t seem quite so simple anymore. All signs point to a future with three internets: one internet led by China, one internet led by the United States, and one internet led by the European Union. All three regions are generating sets of rules, regulations and norms that are beginning to rub up against one another.

Trying to protect an open internet state by state, rather than by federal law, is a daunting and unwieldy goal. Unfortunately, it’s also entirely necessary, given that the Trump administration and Congress are more than happy to let internet providers restrict what we — the American people — can see and access online. As much as the internet has been abused by bogus web and social media sites, an independent internet is an important part of maintaining an informed citizenry. Getting rid of net neutrality means you might pay more for such things as streaming movies from particular sites.

The fight over net neutrality today can be reduced to a single sentence: Everyone is suing everyone else. Congress should step in. The Federal Communications Commission abdicated its responsibility on net neutrality when it repealed the old rules with no adequate replacement. Now, without setting forth its own rules, the federal government is seeking to block states from creating their own. That may be frustrating to Americans who want an Internet where providers do not dictate what information reaches them and how fast.

[Commentary] Of all the mind-dizzying hypocrisies that have emanated from President Donald Trump’s communications office, it is hard to find any more outlandish than claiming to “support a free press” while barring a reporter from an open White House event simply because it didn’t like her questions. Outlandish, but not laughable; there’s nothing amusing about the administration’s retaliation against CNN correspondent Kaitlan Collins.