Editorial

[Commentary] The city of New York has released a new Request for Information seeking technical and operational input from industry sources. The city wants to know what types of strategies for public/private cooperation it should consider in an effort to deliver "universal gigabit-class broadband" throughout the five boroughs.

[Commentary] The Federal Communications Commission took its first major step toward overhauling the controversial Lifeline program in a move that will punish not just low-income citizens but perhaps small, innovative service providers as well.  Yes, Lifeline was once teeming with fraud, waste and abuse. Yes, the program still has significant flaws. And yes, companies that fail to provide adequate services should be forever barred from Lifeline for preying on some of our most vulnerable citizens.

[Commentary] Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai contends his proposed reforms to the Lifeline program will “more effectively and efficiently help close the digital divide by directing Lifeline funds to the areas where they are most needed.” Opponents, however, believe the proposed changes “will gut the program and continue to widen the digital divide.” The likely outcome, if the proposal is enacted as currently written, will be somewhere in between. Some of these proposed reforms are important, positive steps that will improve the Lifeline program’s efficiency.

[Commentary] Congress doesn’t need to legislate on Net Neutrality. What it needs to do is rein in Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai and the Trump FCC and get them to enforce the laws and rules already on the books. Of course, I’m not so naive to think that Pai isn’t going to go forward with a vote to take away Title II and probably erase the rules altogether as soon as December. But that won’t be the last word. Given the arbitrary and capricious way the agency has proceeded, I like our chances in court.

[Commentary] I was struck this week by two inside-baseball journalism stories following Oct 30’s Mueller investigation bombshells that spoke, tangentially but notably, to what I have often said about a main obstacle in our industry’s ability to regain the trust of the public: The conflation in many information consumers’ minds between responsible journalism and the opinion media. I invoke the spirit of Walter Cronkite to make some points that I believe are critical in our current time.

[Commentary] Broadcasters have been expecting good things from new Federal Communications Commission chief Ajit Pai. And he didn’t disappoint with the agenda for Nov's FCC meeting. There was good news on two fronts. First was the plan to relax the local ownership rules. Then came word that the FCC will greenlight ATSC 3.0.

[Commentary] Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai’s comments at George Mason were as disappointing as they were predictable. Last March, after President Donald Trump called CNN, ABC, CBS and NBC “the enemy of the American people,” Pai was asked by Sen Tom Udall (D-NM) at an oversight hearing if he agreed with the president. Chairman Pai took a pass, saying he didn’t want to “wade into the larger political debates.” But what about the FCC’s two Democrats, Commissioners Jessica Rosenworcel and Mignon Clyburn? Surely, they came down hard on the Trump for trying to intimidate the media through the offices of the FCC. Nope.

Perhaps the problem is, they don’t have anybody on staff who writes tough. Allow me.
For Rosenworcel: I don’t have time or the inclination to educate that ignorant, two-bit real estate hustler on freedom of the press. But let me be clear: I will treat any Trump-inspired complaint against NBC with the same contempt I would Trump himself.
For Clyburn: As a former newspaper publisher, I will burn this place to ground before I let Trump or any other political hack use the FCC processes to intimidate or silence the news media in any fashion.

[Commentary] To allow stations in the middle of a retransmission fight when hurricanes or other disasters loom as Lilly Broadcasting and Hearst did is not too smart. In addition to possibly depriving viewers of access to vital information, it gives retransmission foes more ammunition in their fight against this valuable second revenue stream.

[Commentary] Months ago, when we started planning this issue and framing our subject as “The Year That Changed Journalism,” we thought we might be accused of hyperbole. Now it’s understatement that has us worried. The world of journalism is a fundamentally different place as a result of the election of Donald J. Trump. In this issue of the Columbia Journalism Review, we’ve set out to catalogue what’s changed—and to chart where we’ll go from here.

[Commentary] To get internet with adequate speed into more rural areas, you could offer incentives for companies to build lines in places where there would otherwise be too few customers, and you could offer subsidies to residents to make the customer base as large as possible. Or you could just change the definition of “adequate.” Unfortunately, the Federal Communications Commission is looking hard at the latter option, and that’s bad news for the thousands of Mainers living in parts of the state unserved by high-speed internet.

Maybe one day, wireless internet on par with fixed broadband will become a reality – but that day is not here yet. FCC rules now state that areas should have access to both wireless and fixed broadband internet, and that should not change. True high-speed internet is a necessity for an economy driven by the latest technology. The areas that lack it are already in trouble and are falling further behind, and that won’t stop unless the government does something more than change a definition.