Op-Ed

[Commentary] There is some grounds for asking whether the Trump administration actions have a lot more to to with President Trump’s dislike of CNN than with a supposed concern about monopolies. Judging from other actions, President  Trump and his appointees don’t harbor a serious concern about the impact of media consolidation on the American public.

[Commentary] The Constitution’s Commerce Clause provides Congress with the power to regulate interstate commerce. Given that the internet permits consumers and businesses to connect to others in different states (as well as countries), broadband services are inherently interstate services and must therefore be protected from state and local interference.

[Commentary] Dear Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai:

[Commentary] The day after the Trump Justice Department sues to block the vertical integration of AT&T and Time Warner, the Trump Federal Communications Commission (FCC) proposes eliminating rules that could be used to prevent the same harms to consumers. Right hand…meet left hand. Fighting against monopolization in the internet era…meet ideologically-driven “do what the big guys want.” The Trump FCC’s proposal to eliminate the over-two-year-old Open Internet Rule is a shameful sham and sellout. The assertion that the FCC proposal is somehow pro-consumer is a sham that doesn’t pass the

[Commentary] Eliminating net neutrality is, in the best and worst case scenarios, either necessary to keep the internet up and running, or will lead to a dystopian future where a few major corporations control our thoughts. The more prosaic reality, however, is that a world without net neutrality will work just fine. I am therefore not incensed (or very excited) about the Federal Communications Commission proposal. Proponents of net neutrality are typically worried about the monopoly and pricing power held by cable companies and other internet service providers.

[Commentary] The Federal Communications Commission is expected to release its draft Network Neutrality Order on Wednesday, November 22—just before Thanksgiving. This timing has created an uproar among some opponents of the Order, who claim that the timing is merely part of what is admittedly an unfortunately common strategy among governments to release unpopular news when it thinks the public is least likely to see it. In this case, however, the claim has several problems.

[Commentary] Are the very large, very successful tech megaplatforms a problem that needs solving? Are they suppressing competition, innovation, free speech, democracy? I’m skeptical that case has been proven to the extent a strong public policy response is required ASAP. And I am equally skeptical of the solution set being offered by those who are quite comfortable that the anti-tech case has been proven. 

[Commentary]  Recently, 19 towns across Colorado voted to allow the exploration of creating a local, public alternative to expensive private providers. Fort Collins (CO) voters went the furthest, passing a measure to finance an assessment of starting a city-owned broadband utility, which would aim to provide faster service at a cheaper price. That means residents could have a say in whether a new public network maintains the principle of network neutrality, whatever the Federal Communications Commission decides in the future.

[Commentary] The high rate of rural hospital closures is one factor driving the increasing interest in telemedicine, which uses high speed internet services to connect patients with healthcare providers. What some may not understand is that the push for telehealth may very well be the secret to advancing broadband itself in underserved communities, both rural and urban. By aligning healthcare institutions with schools and libraries that have telemedicine applications and services into a healthcare hub, a community can produce a powerful infrastructure.

[Commentary] Even if Trump is trying to undermine the press for his own calculated reasons, when he talks about bias in the media — unfairness — I think he has a point. I believe some of my colleagues — many of my colleagues — think this president has gone so far over the line bashing the media, it has given them an excuse to cross the line themselves, to push back. As tempting as that may be, I think it’s a big mistake. We are not players in the game. We are umpires, or observers, trying to be objective witnesses to what is going on. That doesn’t mean we’re stenographers.