Editorial

It has been over 4 months since the Federal Communications Commission voted to overhaul the Educational Broadband Service (EBS) spectrum band (2.5 GHz) and prepare it for commercial auction. As EBS licensees, Voqal strongly opposed the FCC’s decision because it was an enormous missed opportunity not only to strengthen educational benefits but also to close the homework gap and digital divide in rural areas.

President Donald Trump says he wants the US to dominate 5G ultra-fast internet, and Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai has been clearing regulation to speed the way. But now they appear to have succumbed to Washington rent-seekers and their political mouthpieces. Chairman Pai notified Congress that the FCC plans to repurpose spectrum that is currently licensed to satellite providers for 5G and auction it off to other users.

The Federal Communications Commission adopted the ambitious National Broadband Plan in 2010, laying out a policy framework meant to end the connectivity gap over the decade.

At a time when millions of Americans still do not have access to broadband of any kind, Next Century Cities is a resource for local leaders who are searching for connectivity solutions. Lifting up the voices of local broadband advocates, our work helps to ensure that lawmakers and policymakers understand what is at stake for our member communities, especially those that are still struggling to provide reliable, affordable broadband access for their residents.

Christopher Terry recently published an article for the Benton Institute that details how the National Broadband Plan has failed. In my opinion, the National Broadband Plan never had the slightest chance of success because it didn’t have any teeth. Congress authorized the creation of the plan as a way for politicians to show that they were pro-broadband.

Public comment processes are supposed to promote government of the people, by the people and for the people. So what happens when the people aren’t who they say they are? BuzzFeed reports that political operatives are engaging in campaigns of impersonation to co-opt opportunities for everyday Americans to tell officials and lawmakers what they think of pending policies.

Seventy-five years ago, in October 1944, my grandfather, William Benton, delivered a clarion call in the pages of Forbes magazine by articulating a forward-looking agenda on behalf of a coalition of business leaders (“the capitalists who cared enough about the system to save it”) to deliver a more peaceful and prosperous American future in the (then-expected) wake of winning World War II. William Benton recognized that American progress rested on the connection between economic opportunity and democracy.

Like their south side University of Chicago economists, the Editorial Board of the Tribune waxes poetic and snarky about the virtues of the marketplace and how it can solve any and all network neutrality ills. The Editorial Board dismisses a particularly egregious throttling episode as “humiliating customer service failure” for Verizon when the company’s software automatically slowed transmission speeds of California first responder handsets as they tackled life and property threatening fires.  Does deliberate slowing down of transmission speed and commensurate service degradation wa

The Federal Communications Commission voted to nix network neutrality, effective June 2018. A year-plus later, broadband download and upload speeds have quickened rather than slowed. Internet providers haven’t bifurcated service into different speeds for rich and poor households. Mobile networks, too, move data more swiftly than before. Broadband investment in better technology again has accelerated. Who knows, maybe the internet providers are lying in wait to pounce on their customers. Where’s the internet Cybergeddon the naysayers predicted, and predicted, and predicted?

For twenty years, the US’ approach to protecting privacy has relied primarily on notice and consent. As US policymakers work to develop legislation to protect users’ privacy, however, it is time to move away from that regime. Users want more control over the data they provide companies, and granting users certain rights over their data can facilitate increased control.