February 3, 2014 (Network Neutrality and other topics)

EDUCATION

FCC TO DOUBLE BROADBAND SPENDING UNDER E-RATE
[SOURCE: New York Times, AUTHOR: Edward Wyatt]
The Federal Communications Commission will double the amount of money it devotes to adding high-speed Internet connections in schools and libraries over the next two years, in an effort to meet President Obama’s promise to provide broadband service for an estimated 20 million American students in 15,000 schools. Financing for the new spending will come from restructuring the $2.4 billion E-Rate program, which provides money for “advanced telecommunications and information services” using the proceeds of fees paid by telecommunications users. The proportion that goes to broadband service in schools and libraries will increase to $2 billion a year from $1 billion. The changes will not require any additional taxes or assessments, according to an FCC official who spoke on the condition of anonymity because a formal announcement was being planned. The commission’s chairman, Tom Wheeler, is expected to announce details of the plan on Feb 5 at an event for Digital Learning Day, which promotes the use of technology in education. Most of the redirected spending in 2014 will come from funds left over from previous years. Next year, much of the money will come from changes to the E-Rate program, including the elimination of programs that pay for outdated technologies, like paging services, dial-up Internet connections and email programs that are available free elsewhere. The spending will be used to increase available broadband speeds and provide wireless networks in schools, which are increasingly in demand for students using tablets and laptop computers.
benton.org/node/173803 | New York Times
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

INTERNET/TELECOMMUNICATIONS

PRESIDENT OBAMA ON NET NEUTRALITY: I WOULDN’T BE PRESIDENT WITHOUT AN OPEN INTERNET
[SOURCE: ars technica, AUTHOR: Jon Brodkin]
President Barack Obama spoke about the recent court decision that gutted the nation's network neutrality law, saying that he expects the Federal Communications Commission to take action to preserve the open Internet, which proved crucial in his presidential campaign. "It's something that I've cared deeply about ever since I ran for office, in part because my own campaign was empowered by a free and open Internet and the ability for citizens all across the country to engage and create and find new ways and new tools to mobilize themselves," President Obama said. "A lot of that couldn't have been done if there were a lot of commercial barriers and roadblocks and so I've been a strong supporter of net neutrality." President Obama said he expects the FCC to do something, although he said he won't intervene directly.
benton.org/node/173802 | Ars Technica | The Verge | Free Press
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

PAYING TO TRAVEL IN INTERNET’S FAST LANES
[SOURCE: New York Times, AUTHOR: Nick Bilton]
For a subject that sounds mind-numbingly dull, “network neutrality” is the most important issue facing the Internet since, well, the Internet. The idea behind net neutrality is that the web material we see on our laptops and smartphones, whether from Google or a tiny little blog, should flow freely through the pipes of the Internet, regardless of origin, destination or content. No one gets special treatment. But what if someone is willing to pay for her data to go faster? This is capitalism. Can’t the people who own the pipes charge more? The issue has come to the fore now that a federal appeals court has ruled that the Federal Communications Commission can no longer stand in the way of AT&T, Verizon and other Internet service providers that might want to create Internet express lanes. Count on it: This battle isn’t over yet. On Jan 31, President Barack Obama said the FCC was considering an appeal with the goal of maintaining “a free and open Internet.” The question is, Has the Internet become so fundamental to our lives that it is, in essence, a utility that should be subject to regulation?
benton.org/node/173801 | New York Times
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

CHARTING A NEW PATH FOR NET NEUTRALITY
[SOURCE: GigaOm, AUTHOR: Paul Sweeting]
[Commentary] Should the three-way deal come together between Time Warner Cable, Comcast and Charter, it could -- or at least in my view should -- open up a new chapter in the unfinished story of network neutrality. The deal would come as the Federal Communications Commission is in the midst of formulating a new approach to enforcing net neutrality standards now that the court has vacated its formal net neutrality regulations. That convergence of circumstances offers an opportunity for the FCC and antitrust regulators together to take a more comprehensive view of net neutrality than the FCC’s previous rules would admit. Should a deal result in Comcast taking over Time Warner Cable’s systems in New York City, New England and North Carolina, as analyst Craig Moffett anticipates, Comcast would have something on the order of 25 million subscribers, on systems blanketing most of the East Coast of the US. That would be a very formidable hurdle for any over-the-top service to get over unless it was willing to play ball with Comcast. The merger review process, however, offers regulators an opportunity the impose some limits on how high Comcast and Charter could raise those hurdles, particularly since Comcast is already operating under a consent decree, giving the government a lot of leverage. [Paul Sweeting is Principal, Concurrent Media Strategies]
benton.org/node/173800 | GigaOm
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

WHY THE FCC CAN SAVE NET NEUTRALITY
[SOURCE: Free Press, AUTHOR: Matt Wood]
[Commentary] The Electronic Frontier Foundation’s recent post on network neutrality started off well. It rightly noted that “[v]iolations of network neutrality are a real and serious problem: in recent years we have seen dozens of ISPs in the US and around the world interfere with and discriminate against traffic on their networks.” This is indeed a huge problem. But then EFF took a wrong turn, asserting that we shouldn’t trust the Federal Communications Commission to save Net Neutrality. “The power to enforce equal treatment on the Internet,” the post reads, “can easily become the power to control the Internet in less beneficent ways. … We are not confident that Internet users can trust the Federal Communications Commission, or any government agency, with open-ended regulatory authority of the Internet.” This faulty argument is not at all in character for an Internet freedom, digital rights and civil liberties superstar like EFF. It’s also not good enough given the recent gutting of the Federal Communications Commission’s Net Neutrality rules. As a close friend and ally of EFF, we at Free Press offer a respectful counter-argument to the notion that the FCC should not be in charge of ensuring the Internet remains free and open. EFF worries about agency capture at the FCC, and about unchecked grants of “power to control the Internet.” So do we. But like it or not, the FCC is the agency Congress charged with overseeing our nation’s communications infrastructure. It used to do a really good job of drawing clean legal lines separating the networks that connect us from the content riding over those networks. It’s only very recently that the FCC has moved away from that approach. It’s our job now to get the agency back on track. One, the agency needs to reclassify broadband as a “telecommunications service.” All reclassification means is the FCC calling broadband what it actually is: a service that allows users to transmit the information of their choosing between the points of their choosing. Reclassification is the right way -- and really the only way -- to prevent rampant blocking and discrimination. Because the truth is, the FCC has all the authority it needs -- if it chooses the right route. Which leads to the second point: The FCC needs the right legal theory and statutes to preserve open Internet access without actually regulating the Internet. [Matt Wood is Policy Director at Free Press]
benton.org/node/173757 | Free Press
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

WE NEED STRAIGHTFORWARD RULES TO PROTECT NET NEUTRALITY
[SOURCE: Public Knowledge, AUTHOR: John Bergmayer]
[Commentary] Telecommunications lawyers just can't stop coming up with complicated answers to simple problems. The reason the Federal Communications Commission lost its network neutrality case at the DC Circuit was simple. It tried to both de-regulate broadband access, by classifying it as an "information service" (something like a website or a social network), while applying traditional "telecommunications" rules to it -- things like prohibitions on blocking content and discriminating against competing services. The DC Circuit Court of Appeals said -- sorry, FCC. If you want to treat broadband access like a communications service, you need to formally classify it as one. Clever legal tricks aren't going to get you around this. Apart from that legal technicality, the court did find that the FCC put forward a good case as to why net neutrality rules are needed. Reclassifying broadband access is a clear, and importantly, simple path toward bringing back these important protections, in a way that is on much firmer legal footing.
benton.org/node/173756 | Public Knowledge
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

A WAR AT&T, OTHERS DON'T SEEM TO WANT TO FIGHT
[SOURCE: USAToday, AUTHOR: Chip Bayers]
[Commentary] Randall Stephenson sounded like anything but a rapacious monopolist about to squeeze billions in new revenue out of his Internet services thanks to the end of network neutrality. "The industry has come a long way since then," the AT&T CEO said about a Federal appeals court ruling which suggested telecom companies could demand higher fees from bandwidth-intensive content providers like Netflix, Amazon, or Google. He was responding to an analyst during his company's quarterly results conference. "In the last couple of years, the industry has worked and agreed to a framework for Net Neutrality. So the court order really changed nothing." Why so conciliatory in what should have been a moment of triumph? Perhaps it is because Stephenson knows that for AT&T and its telecom peers to begin exploiting this potentially huge new revenue opportunity, they'll have to overcome a much bigger challenge than the Federal courts or regulators. Actually two challenges: Apple and Google. The implicit threat behind all this activity is that any move by the likes of AT&T, Verizon, or Comcast to throttle or charge more for Google services like YouTube will result in an all-out war. Apple hasn't yet threatened to go down this road, but it certainly has the sort of cash hoard to participate in the fun if it wants to. [Chip Bayers is a journalist covering technology and business]
benton.org/node/173755 | USAToday
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

COMING CLEAN ON NET NEUTRALITY
[SOURCE: Huffington Post, AUTHOR: Timothy Karr]
[Commentary] I'm relieved that network neutrality's opponents have finally come clean. Sort of. For years, a lineup of phone and cable industry mouthpieces had called network neutrality "a solution in search of a problem." The principle that prevents online censorship and blocking by service providers is irrelevant, they claimed, as these companies would never lift a finger to harm the open Internet. But then they changed their tune. Especially since January’s federal appeals court ruling overturning the Net Neutrality rules -- phone and cable company proxies are saying that the problem does exist, but that it's not really a problem after all. "Payola (paying radio stations directly for extra airplay) ... is frequently derided by those who misunderstand it, but it actually helps new artists break through," argue Berin Szoka and Geoffrey Manne in a Wired commentary. "Sponsored data and other prioritization arrangements on the Internet are just a further extension of this." (To Szoka and Manne's credit, they do run a disclaimer at the end of the article. The writers apparently receive their own payola, in the form of checks from network providers.) In any case, the new industry rhetoric assumes three things:
Giving ISPs the right to block and filter Internet content is a good thing.
The whole network is simply a business model; one that's ripe for exploitation by access providers.
Internet users should simply trust companies like Verizon, AT&T and Comcast to protect the open Internet.
That point one directly contradicts point three is cause for concern. The debate against Net Neutrality is filled with such inconsistency. [Timothy Karr is Senior Director of Strategy, Free Press]
benton.org/node/173753 | Huffington Post
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

WILL NON-PROFIT FOUNDATIONS STEP UP TO SAVE THE INTERNET?
[SOURCE: The Guardian, AUTHOR: Dan Gillmor]
[Commentary] The best foundations and philanthropies exist to address market failure, working to solve problems that business and government ignore or make worse. Andrew Carnegie funded public libraries in America. Bill and Melinda Gates are working to save lives in the developing world. The Ford Foundation puts social justice at the core of its programs. Now it's time for our major foundations and philanthropists to address an impending new failure. They can help save the kinds of open, decentralized systems that gave us personal computing and the Internet. Like a python that suffocates its prey, the forces of centralization -- corporate and governmental -- are inexorably strangling democratized technology and communications. They have power, and they have money, and they're not even slightly interested in allowing tomorrow's technology and communications to be controlled by the users, because that would threaten their power and profits. They don't do this because they necessarily have evil goals. Rather, like the python, it is in their nature. [Dan Gillmor is director of the Knight center for digital media entrepreneurship at Arizona State University's Walter Cronkite school of journalism and mass communication]
benton.org/node/173752 | Guardian, The
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

COULD LATINOS END UP CENSORED ONLINE? IT CERTAINLY LOOKS LIKE IT...
[SOURCE: Huffington Post, AUTHOR: Hugo Balta, Axel Caballero]
[Commentary] As Latino filmmakers and journalists, we understand that the stories we tell matter. But too often, the stories that are being told on the local news, on cable outlets or on the big screen about Latinos reinforce dangerous stereotypes to the detriment of our community. It is why we are deeply troubled by the impact of a recent court decision on our online free speech rights. Earlier in January 2014, a federal court struck down the Federal Communications Commission's open Internet rules, which were intended to prevent Internet service providers like Verizon and AT&T from blocking content or discriminating online. Now these companies are free to interfere with Web traffic. We understand the open Internet provides our members and community with the means to speak for themselves, which has been difficult to do in the mainstream media. One reason is that Latinos own few broadcast stations or major entertainment companies. Despite making up 17 percent of the US population, only 4 percent of journalists working at daily newspapers are Latinos and 5.5 percent working at English-language TV stations. This has made us dependent on large media companies to tell our stories. So, in recent years, our members have turned to the Internet to tell the stories that are often ignored by the media. But the court decision will now make it harder for our members to tell those stories since ISPs like Verizon can now block Web content and sites that are relevant to our community. As the two largest organizations representing Latino journalists and filmmakers, we are calling on the Federal Communications Commission to take quick action to reestablish its legal authority and pass strong Net Neutrality protections. We urge our members and our community to sign the petition from Presente.org that calls on the FCC to preserve Network Neutrality. [Hugo Balta is President of National Association of Hispanic Journalists and a coordinating producer for ESPN; Axel Caballero is Executive Director of National Association of Latino Independent Producers & Founder of Cuentame and Metafora Politica]
benton.org/node/173738 | Huffington Post
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

THE FCC WILL MONITOR PEERING FIGHTS TO ENSURE INNOVATION PREVAILS
[SOURCE: GigaOm, AUTHOR: Stacey Higginbotham]
Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler expressed the same frustrations with his Netflix streams that consumers have in forums around the Internet. And because he’s the chairman of the agency in charge of ensuring that the companies providing broadband remain competitive and consumer-friendly, he’s in a position to do something about it. When asked about what the FCC’s stance is on the ongoing peering fights between ISPs and application providers like Netflix or Google, the Chairman said that the agency would look into the practice with the eye to ensuring that parties are not hurting the consumer nor engaging in anti-competitive practices.
benton.org/node/173754 | GigaOm
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

WHO WANTS COMPETITION? BIG CABLE TRIES OUTLAWING MUNICIPAL BROADBAND IN KANSAS
[SOURCE: ars technica, AUTHOR: Jon Brodkin]
Legislation introduced in the Kansas state legislature by a lobby for cable companies would make it almost impossible for cities and towns to offer broadband services to residents and would perhaps even outlaw public-private partnerships like the one that brought Google Fiber to Kansas City. The bill doesn't list any lawmaker as its sponsor, and there's a reason -- a state Senate employee said it was submitted by John Federico on behalf of the Kansas Cable Telecommunications Association, of which he is president. It's a lobby group with members such as Comcast, Cox, Eagle Communications, and Time Warner Cable. Instead of promoting development in broadband networks, the bill actually limits the possibility of them being built. A municipality would not be able to offer broadband "through a partnership, joint venture, or other entity in which the municipality participates," the bill says. The city or town also would not be able to use its powers of eminent domain to condemn any facility "for the purpose of enabling a private business or entity to offer, provide, carry, or deliver video, telecommunications, or broadband service to one or more subscribers."
benton.org/node/173728 | Ars Technica
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

TELECOM/FCC REFORM

COMMITTEE WORKS TO PROTECT TAXPAYER DOLLARS, SEEKS BUDGET AND OPERATIONS INFORMATION FROM FCC
[SOURCE: House of Representatives Commerce Committee, AUTHOR: Press release]
Republican members of the House Commerce Subcommittees on Communications and Technology and Oversight and Investigations wrote to Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler requesting detailed information regarding the commission’s budget and operating expenses. Members are seeking this information as they continue their work to protect taxpayer dollars as part of larger efforts to improve transparency and efficiency at the commission. In the letter to FCC Chairman Wheeler, the committee members wrote, “In the current economic climate, it is more important than ever that agencies and the federal government are fiscally responsible and spend American citizens’ money wisely. The need to cut federal spending is not in dispute, and eradicating waste and promoting efficient and effective spending must be a priority. In our committee’s oversight role, we are looking at the operating budget of the FCC with a focus on expenditures designated as auction-related expenses, as well as employee distribution and compensation more generally.” The letter was signed by full committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-MI) and the Republican members of the Subcommittees on Communications and Technology and Oversight and Investigations.
benton.org/node/173748 | House of Representatives Commerce Committee | B&C
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

HOUSE COMMERCE COMMITTEE GETS PLENTY OF ADVICE ON COMLAW REVAMP
[SOURCE: Multichannel News, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
The House Commerce Committee is getting a sense of what the Federal Communications Commission faces as it processes a boatload of comments solicited in the ongoing communications regulations rewrite initiative launched by Chairman Fred Upton (R-MI) and Communications Subcommittee Chairman Greg Walden (R-OR). If the Broadband for America submission is any gauge, cable operators have a lot to say about revamping regulations, much of it about not presumptively applying legacy regulations to Internet protocol delivery and not singling out one stakeholder for special regulatory treatment. Here is a sample of the input coming into the committee, according to filings provided by the parties. The committee has not yet posted these and others on its site, but plans to. Broadband for America (Comcast, AT&T, Time Warner Cable, Charter are members) offers proposals such as: "A global Internet cannot be subject to balkanized regulation” and “technological differences are not an appropriate basis for regulatory or jurisdictional distinction.” Mobile Future and CenturyLink are also getting in on the act, offering advice, including “relying on dynamic competitive forces” and gearing legislation more toward public interest rather than detailed prescriptive regulation.
benton.org/node/173799 | Multichannel News
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

MERGE FTC AND FCC?
[SOURCE: The Hill, AUTHOR: Julian Hattem]
The right-leaning American Enterprise Institute wants to merge the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). In a comment submitted to the House Commerce Committee, a team of scholars affiliated with the think tank argues that the country’s communications law should be rewritten to combine the “FCC’s industry expertise and capabilities with the generic statutory authority of the FTC.” They criticized the FCC’s current “silo-based” approach, which applies different rules to different forms of communication, like television and telephone service. The agency’s current structure “is a poor fit for the modern, converged, communications marketplace,” they wrote.
benton.org/node/173798 | Hill, The
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

WORKING GROUP: LOTS OF WORK TO DO ON FCC REFORM
[SOURCE: Multichannel News, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
The working group on Federal Communications Commission process reform has come up with more than 100 recommendations to make the FCC more effective, efficient and responsive to both consumers and stakeholders. Diane Cornell, who is leading the effort, briefed FCC commissioners on the report, which will soon be released for public comment. Among its recommendations is to improve accountability, streamline internal review of FCC processes, reduce backlogs, "rework" licensing, modernize consumer complaint procedures, improve the drafting process for policy documents, improve the IT infrastructure and improve Web site functionality. The report on FCC process reforms was one of FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler's first instructions as chairman, and he promised it would provide a roadmap to action.
benton.org/node/173731 | Multichannel News | See FCC report
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

TELEVISION/VIDEO/RADIO

VIDEO COMPETITON NOI
[SOURCE: Federal Communications Commission, AUTHOR: Public Notice]
This Notice of Inquiry solicits data, information, and comment on the state of competition in the delivery of video programming for the Federal Communications Commission’s Sixteenth Report. The Commission seeks to update the information and metrics provided in the Fifteenth and report on the state of competition in the video marketplace in 2013. Using the information collected pursuant to this Notice, the FCC seeks to enhance its analysis of competitive conditions, better understand the implications for the American consumer, and provide a solid foundation for FCC policy making with respect to the delivery of video programming to consumers. Comments are due March 21, 2014; reply comments due April 21, 2014.
benton.org/node/173747 | Federal Communications Commission
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

FCC GETS PITCHED ON SHARING LIMITATIONS
[SOURCE: TVNewsCheck, AUTHOR: Doug Halonen]
Watchdog groups have resurrected a proposal to ban most TV sharing arrangements -- in response to Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler’s recent announcements that he is considering beefing up agency scrutiny of the combinations. Under the proposal, which public interest groups pitched during a behind-the-scenes lobbying session at the FCC in early January 2014, joint sales and shared services agreements in which the stations share management or in which one of the stations in the combo sells 15% or more of the advertising time of the other would be barred. In addition, the proposal, which was originally presented by watchdog groups to the FCC in 2012, would bar sidecar deals under which:
One broadcaster provides “all or substantially all” of the local news programming for the other station.
One station negotiates retransmission consent deals for the other.
Both stations use all of the same facilities.
More than half of one station’s revenues go to the other.
benton.org/node/173788 | TVNewsCheck
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

WIRELESS

SPRINT TO MEET WITH CHAIRMAN WHEELER
[SOURCE: Wall Street Journal, AUTHOR: Ryan Knutson, Gautham Nagesh]
Sprint Chairman Masayoshi Son is scheduled to meet with Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler as he continues to press the case for consolidation in the US wireless business. The meeting will cover a range of issues and wasn't called to discuss a specific transaction, a person familiar with the matter said. But Son is expected to argue for allowing mergers that would create a viable competitor to market leaders Verizon Wireless and AT&T, people familiar with the matter said. Proponents of consolidation say that a Sprint-T Mobile deal wouldn't take the wireless industry from four national players down to three. Instead, a Sprint deal for T-Mobile would expand the number of solid competitors in the industry from two to three, the people said. AT&T and Verizon Wireless are so dominant that the only way to introduce lasting competition into the industry is to combine the smaller players, they said. Sprint Chief Executive Dan Hesse is to attend an event Feb 4 with President Barack Obama to discuss an initiative announced during the State of the Union address that would provide wireless connectivity to thousands of schools, two of the people said. Son may also attend, one of the people said.
benton.org/node/173812 | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | Bloomberg
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

GOVERNMENT AND COMMUNICATIONS

PRESIDENT OBAMA SAYS CLAPPER SHOULD HAVE BEEN MORE CAREFUL
[SOURCE: CNN, AUTHOR: Jake Tapper]
President Barack Obama said that Director of National Intelligence James Clapper “should have been more careful” when he testified to a Senate panel in 2013 that the National Security Agency did not collect data on millions of Americans. President Obama did not suggest that he was disappointed with National Intelligence Director James Clapper for not being honest in his testimony before Congress in 2013 about the mass surveillance programs that were revealed by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden. Clapper later justified his untrue answer by saying it was the "least untruthful" one he could give. "Least untruthful" was not exactly a term President Obama used on the campaign trail. So did he have concerns about what Clapper said? "I think that Jim Clapper himself would acknowledge, and has acknowledged, that he should have been more careful about how he responded," President Obama said. "His concern was that he had a classified program that he couldn't talk about, and he was in an open hearing in which he was asked, he was prompted to disclose a program, and so he felt he was caught between a rock and a hard place." The President acknowledged that the leaks, including details about the wide-ranging use of the surveillance programs, damaged the confidence of Americans as well as other nations. "It's going to take some time" to win back that confidence, he said. "It's going to take some work, partly because the technology has just moved so quickly that discussions that needed to be had didn't happen fast enough."
benton.org/node/173736 | CNN | The Hill
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

JOURNALISM

PRESIDENT OBAMA VS O’REILLY
[SOURCE: New York Times, AUTHOR: Peter Baker]
Some of the hardest hits of Super Bowl Sunday came a couple of hours before kickoff. In keeping with his tradition of appearing on the network broadcasting football’s championship game, President Obama found himself confronting a full-scale blitz by Bill O’Reilly of Fox News. In the interview, conducted live before the game, President Obama was grilled about the botched rollout of the health care law, his discredited assurances that anyone who liked their insurance could keep it, the attack on the American post in Benghazi, Libya, and the Internal Revenue Service scrutiny of conservative groups. His answers shed little if any new light on some of the most controversial moments of Obama’s presidency, but it was a feisty 10-minute encounter that exposed the different world views of Mr. Obama and some of his sharpest critics. For President Obama it may have been an unpleasant duty that was more or less unavoidable but for some conservative fans of Fox, it was an opportunity to watch the president challenged in a way they believe he has not been by the rest of the news media.
benton.org/node/173816 | New York Times | Fox
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

POLICYMAKERS

FCC COMMISSIONER JESSICA ROSENWORCEL AND THE MANTLE OF MICHAEL COPPS
[SOURCE: Tales of the Sausage Factory, AUTHOR: Harold Feld]
[Commentary] In a 5-0 vote, in addition to a number of other important first steps, the Federal Communications Commission adopted a set of governing principles for the phone-to-broadband transition based on the core values of Universal Service, Consumer Protection, Competition, and Public Safety. The principles did not just drop out of thin air. Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel first proposed them in a December 2012 speech. While few have noticed, Rosenworcel continued to quietly, and effectively push this framework, culminating in a unanimous vote with broad approval from both corporations and public interest groups. More amazing for this hyper-partisan and contentious times, the principles capture both progressive values and conservative values, traditionally shared by Republicans and Democrats alike. But as essential and shared as these values are, no one was talking about them as the basis for the Phone Transition, or how to bring them forward into what Chairman Wheeler calls “The Fourth Network Revolution,” until Commissioner Rosenworcel started the conversation. Like her colleague Commissioner Mignon Clyburn, Commissioner Rosenworcel exemplifies the virtue of “say little, perform much.” Slowly but surely, without any blowing of trumpets or massive fanfare, we moved from a place where no one even talked about values or how the transition would serve the public interest to a place where Republicans and Democrats affirmed the fundamental values she proposed as the framework for the transition by acclaim. By bringing the transition of the phone system back to a focus on values, Commissioner Rosenworcel showed that she also has what it takes to carry the banner of the public interest. Until now, everyone has respected Rosenworcel for her depth of knowledge and policy expertise. But her quiet, determined style and her focus on critically important but wonky and technical things -- such as expanding E-Rate and upgrading our public safety infrastructure for the 21st Century -- have often caused people to underestimate her passion and effectiveness as a champion of the public interest.
benton.org/node/173726 | Tales of the Sausage Factory
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

STORIES FROM ABROAD

NHK
[SOURCE: New York Times, AUTHOR: Martin Fackler]
First, there was the abrupt resignation of the public broadcasting chief accused by governing party politicians of allowing an overly liberal tone to news coverage. Then, his successor drew public ire when he suggested the network would loyally toe the government line. Days later, a longtime commentator for the network angrily announced that he had resigned after being ordered not to criticize nuclear power ahead of a crucial election, unleashing new criticism. These are hard times for the broadcaster, NHK, which is widely considered the country’s most authoritative television and radio news source and like its British equivalent, the BBC, has been troubled by scandal. But the current controversies at NHK have also stoked Japanese liberals’ fears about Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and his supporters, who critics believe are behind what they call the efforts to muzzle criticism amid a push to impose an expansive right-wing agenda.
benton.org/node/173806 | New York Times
Share: Twitter | Facebook
back to top

Benton

Search

Benton

Daily Digest

Analysis

February 3, 2014 (Network Neutrality and other topics)