Lauren Frayer

With most results now in, the US pay TV industry lost about 762,000 video subscribers in the first quarter of 2017, a worst-ever result for the period, according to a new report from MoffettNathanson. “For the better part of fifteen years, pundits have predicted that cord-cutting was the future. Well, the future has arrived,” MoffetNathanson’s Craig Moffett declared in his Q1 2017 Cord-Cutting Monitor.

He noted that video losses from Q1 was more than five times as large as last year’s loss of 141,000. “It leaves the Pay TV subscriber universe shrinking at its worst ever annual rate of decline (-2.4%). And it was the worst ever accelerate in the rate of decline (60 bps),” Moffett explained, adding later that the incremental number of cord-cutter and cord-never homes has grown to more than 6.5 million since 2013.

SpaceX said its planned constellation of 4,425 broadband satellites will launch from the Falcon 9 rocket beginning in 2019 and continue launching in phases until reaching full capacity in 2024. SpaceX gave the Senate Commerce Committee an update on its satellite plans during a broadband infrastructure hearing. Satellite Internet access traditionally suffers from high latency, relatively slow speeds, and strict data caps. But as we reported in November, SpaceX says it intends to solve these problems with custom-designed satellites launched into low-Earth orbits.

For the first time since George W. Bush’s presidency, Republicans (28%) are more likely than Democrats (15%) to say they can trust the government in Washington to do the right thing just about always or most of the time. The share of Democrats expressing trust in government is among the lowest levels for members of the party dating back nearly six decades. The national survey by Pew Research Center, conducted April 5-11 among 1,501 adults, finds that the overall level of trust in government remains near historic lows; just 20% say they trust the government to do what’s right always or most of the time. Far more say they trust the government only some of the time (68%); 11% volunteer that they never trust the government to do what’s right.

Sen Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV) has introduced a bill, the Gigabit Opportunity (or GO) Act, that she says would accelerate the deployment of high-speed broadband in low-income and rural communities. It would also add some Hill imprimatur to proposals already offered up by Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai. The bill would give tax breaks to companies for investing in gigabit-capable expansion into those communities, direct the FCC to release a framework that encourages states, counties and cities to voluntarily adopt streamlined broadband laws and be designated as a “Gigabit Opportunity Zone," and defer capital gains for upgrades and allow companies to expense the cost of creating those zones, as well as allow states to more easily issue tax-exempt bonds.

FCC chairman Ajit Pai has launched two proceedings to make it easier to build out broadband, wireless and wired, and has proposed creating Gigabit Opportunity Zones providing such tax breaks and streamlined approvals for buildouts.

Introduced by Sen Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), the Gigabit Opportunity (GO) Act is an important step toward closing the digital divide, and one that has my full support. Next-generation networks are increasingly critical to economic opportunity, job creation, and civic engagement. But too many parts of rural and urban America can’t attract the investment needed to deploy those networks. With targeted tax incentives and regulatory streamlining, the GO Act aims to remove the major barriers holding back Internet access in economically challenged areas.

I commend Sen Capito for her vision of extending digital opportunity to all Americans. The Federal Communications Commission shares that vision and stands ready to provide any necessary assistance to Congress as it considers this critical legislation.

Network neutrality is under threat and advocacy groups such as Free Press, Fight for the Future and others are pushing to save it. That's not how Verizon, one of the Internet Service Providers hoping for a reversal of Federal Communications Commission rules enabling net neutrality, sees it.

"You gotta understand, there are a lot of advocacy groups out there that fundraise on this issue," said Craig Sillman, executive VP-public policy and general counsel at Verizon. "So how do you fundraise? You stir people up with outrageous claims. Unfortunately, we live in a time where people have discovered that it doesn't matter what's true, you just say things to rile up the base."

[Commentary] No act of the recklessly authoritarian Trump Administration poses a greater threat to democratic discourse than the now-announced plan to gut network neutrality rules. With newspapers dying, radio syndicated, broadcast television commercialized beyond relevance, and cable television mired in scandal and dead-end punditry, the internet is the essential tool for the communication of ideas and the mobilization of those who choose to resist the autocratic impulses of President Trump and his crony-capitalist cabal.

“Chairman Pai’s plan to gut the Federal Communications Commission’s net neutrality rules will devastate black communities,” said Rashad Robinson, the executive director of Color of Change, the civil rights group that played a vital role in securing the FCC’s embrace of genuine net neutrality in 2015. “Net neutrality is essential to protecting our free and open internet, which has been crucial to today’s fights for civil rights and equality.”

A Q&A with Sam Frank, the Executive Director of Blue Boost.

Network neutrality is like a public park that anyone can use. ‘Pay-To-Play’ is a private club that only rich members use. What happens to the internet when access isn't equal? How could this impact consumers, businesses and non-profits? How could this impact charities and non-profit groups? To find out, I interviewed Sam Frank, the Executive Director of Blue Boost. He led the Digital Operations and Data for the Women's March on Washington and understands the consequences of this proposed change. “The FCC announcement to roll back almost all regulatory protections for content providers and get rid of ‘Net Neutrality’ is a big deal," said Sam Frank. "Organizing the Women's March on Washington would have been much harder without Net Neutrality. We may not even have been able to afford it."

What will happen if the Federal Communications Commission successfully eliminates President Barack Obama’s network neutrality rules? Unfortunately, that seems like anyone’s guess, and such an uncertain environment could leave us with even less investment by Internet service providers and content providers alike—more than 800 tech startups wrote FCC Chairman Ajit Pai recently, urging him not to kill the rules.

It’s plausible that we could end up with no regulations at all, at least for a time. The agency could try to enact new rules, which would likely be more business-friendly and allow certain things that weren’t allowed under Obama’s rules, like Internet fast lanes. Ultimately, Congress has the power to step in and clarify the situation with legislation that establishes some sort of yet-to-be determined protections for content providers. If recent history is any guide, however, it's a long shot that this Congress will come up with a compromise on net neutrality anytime soon.

[Commentary] Among the many fragile regulatory frameworks being attacked with sledgehammers by the Trump Administration is “network neutrality,” a very important issue that will dictate how the internet evolves (or doesn’t) for years to come. The problem, though, is that net neutrality is very tough to sell as important to people, because it is one of the most boring topics in the world.

Net neutrality is a fight over whether your cable company gets to screw you. That’s the one sentence you need to remember. If you support net neutrality, you want to prevent cable companies from screwing over their customers by slowing down certain websites. If you support the Federal Communications Commission rolling back Title II regulations, you support the ability of cable companies to slow down the websites you love to visit.