Michael Copps

A legend is leaving the Federal Communications Commission as the new year begins. Her name is Karen Peltz Strauss. Some of you may not have heard of her, but to the nation’s disabilities communities, she is a hero. She achieved this status the old-fashioned way. She earned it. In over 40 years in Washington, I have been privileged to work with many brilliant public servants. Karen Peltz Strauss is in the top-most tier of these incredibly able people.  Her star shines brightly in the public service firmament. She came to the agency with a goal, she never wavered from that goal, and she achie

The midterms just completed (except for recounts) were historically important, and in this critical time for our democracy, we must try to make some sense of where we are.  The bad news is split government; the good news is split government.

I’m alarmed at the state of our news. Fake news, “real” news, just about all news—the made-up stuff that comes without corroboration and from God knows where; the infotainment masquerading as news from media outlets that should know better; and the tweets and mistruths that spew forth daily from the White House that attempt, with considerable success, to determine what the rest us will talk about on that particular day. Over time, a society deprived of real news and information will begin to make decisions that work against its better interests.

US District Court Judge Richard Leon’s decision to approve the AT&T-TimeWarner merger was a horse-and-buggy decision utterly blind to the realities of the twenty-first-century economy. His magnum opus means that one of the largest internet service providers is permitted to merge with one of the largest TV and film companies, thereby creating a powerful entity controlling the content and distribution of some of the most important programming in the market.  Marrying content and carriage creates gatekeepers with every incentive to favor their own services at the expense of their competito

[Commentary] Our privacy framework no longer works. It must be changed. Now. Let’s begin by requiring “opt-in.” Before any business shares our personal data, we should have to grant it permission to do so, up-front and right at the outset. Then let’s simplify those ridiculous “terms of service agreements” that require our acceptance before we can even open up an app. Going a step further, let’s require any site that wishes to change its terms of service to notify us that it is doing so AND tell us what those changes will be, BEFORE they are implemented. Getting changes like these implemente

[Commentary] Our current privacy framework no longer works. While the hearings this month offered little in terms of solutions, they did put a spotlight on a problem that’s been glaringly obvious for years: Consumers have little control over their data online. We need a privacy framework that gives consumers control over their own data. Companies across the board must be required to get express consent from their users prior to sharing their data. At the outset, consumers should be asked to respond to a simple statement that they do or do not want their personal data shared.

[Commentary] The big Internet service provider gate-keepers may have bought the silence of Congress, but they cannot buy the silence of the people. We know there is overwhelming popular support for an open internet with strong net neutrality rules.  But we have to demonstrate this support and the power behind it.  We must make our voices heard.  Contacting Congress now on the CRA is vital—your Senators, of course, but your House members, too.  Tell them your vote in the next election depends on their vote now to restore net neutrality. 

This is the year, friends.  The year when the battle for an Open Internet pits the three self-proclaimed wise men of the Federal Communications Commission against an overwhelming majority of the American people.  Every index I have seen—be it popular poll, volume of pleas to Congress, or expressions of anger toward the FCC—makes it crystal clear that we the people want an open internet and an end to ever-increasing monopoly control of our telecom and media markets.  Most Americans would agree with the great Justice Louis Brandeis: “We may have democracy, or we may have wealth concentrated i

[Commentary] It’s a challenge to pick the worst of the furnace-hot verbiage spewing forth from the new Administration; there is just so much to choose from. But to me, one completely frightening statement stands out. It is “deconstructing the administrative state” as the stated purpose of the Trump team. If this statement doesn’t motivate citizens to action, what will? Translated into everyday English, the President, Steve Bannon, and their billionaire cabinet of corporate minions are telling us that their goal is to axe as much government as possible—except, of course, for the already-bloated military-industrial complex which would receive $54 billion more to entrench itself. A seemingly soothing “deconstruction” bromide cannot mask that the destruction of government as we have known it for more than a century is their real objective.

[In 2012, former FCC Commissioner Michael Copps joined Common Cause to lead its Media and Democracy Reform Initiative.]

[Commentary] No citizen should be denied the news and information needed to participate in our democracy. Our freedoms of speech and expression are inextricably linked to freedom of the press and an uninhibited, competitive, and vibrant marketplace of ideas. But freedom of the press is in jeopardy from a president who repeatedly calls our media “the enemy of the American people,” and by others in government who are failing in their duty to protect our liberties.

The new chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, Ajit Pai, has been an eloquent spokesman for freedom of the press. I’m confident he agrees that we should not foreclose any points of view unless they pose a threat of violence. Just last year, he said, “I think it's dangerous, frankly, that we don't see more often people espousing the First Amendment view that we should have a robust marketplace of ideas where everybody should be willing and able to participate.” No one person – not even the president – should have a monopoly on our national discourse. Pai also once said, “In my view, anyone who has the privilege of serving at the FCC—any preacher with a pulpit, if you will—has the duty to speak out whenever Americans’ First Amendment rights are at stake.”

Chairman Pai, we need to hear from you now.

[Michael Copps served on the Federal Communications Commission from 2001–11, and as acting chairman for a period in 2009. He is a special adviser for Common Cause.]