Wednesday, December 12, 2018
Headlines Daily Digest
Digital Divide Among School-Age Children
Don't Miss:
Commissioner Rosenworcel on Broadband Mapping
Broadband
Platforms
Ownership
Broadcasting
Privacy/Security
Emergency Communications
Diversity
Elections
Journalism
Government & Communications
FCC Reform
Policymakers
Company News
Stories From Abroad
Broadband
America continues to make significant strides in reducing the digital divide among school-age children. In 2017, 14 percent of the US population between ages 6 and 17 lived in homes with no Internet service, down from 19 percent in 2015. Still, significant challenges remain, especially for the approximately 7 million school-age children that lived in households without home Internet service in 2017. These children were also less likely than their peers to use the Internet from other locations. Among children in offline households, just 16 percent went online while at school, and only 5 percent used the Internet from a library or community center, compared with 60 percent and 20 percent of children with home Internet service, respectively. In fact, only 20 percent of school-age children living in offline households used the Internet at all, leaving nearly 6 million of the 7 million children even less connected as schools increasingly rely upon online resources for communication with parents and instruction.
According to the Federal Communications Commission’s last-published report, 24 million Americans lack access to high-speed internet service, with 19 million of them in rural areas. But last week the New York Times offered new numbers and they’re problematic, too. It found that 162 million people across the country do not use internet service at broadband speeds. There’s a big delta between 24 million and 162 million.
The FCC distributes billions of dollars each year to help accelerate the build-out of broadband so we can connect all our communities. It’s irresponsible for the agency to do so without having a truly accurate picture of where those resources should go. In the interest of keeping is simple, I’ve distilled my ideas for a do-over down to the three C’s of broadband cartography:
- The first c is coordination. Policymakers need to work collaboratively across all levels of government to get our maps right.
- The next c is for correct. We need to put a premium on accuracy.
- The next c is for creative. We need to explore new ideas about how we can improve our maps. Why not give the Universal Service Administrative Company a role validating the data before we make the funds available to carriers? We can use [FCC offices around the country] to spot check the data in our existing maps. We could start a pilot project with postal trucks and have them collect wireless deployment data as they go about their routes in rural communities. Finally, we need to fully embrace crowdsourcing.
The best map will be coordinated, correct, and creative. It will be a Citizens Broadband Map. And the time to startbuilding it is right now.
A series of interactive maps to visualize home internet access, covering more than 65,000 occupied Census tracts in the fifty states and the District of Columbia. On the base maps, NDIA calculated and mapped two crucial data points from census data: 1) What percentage of households in each Census tract had no home internet access at all in 2017 — not even mobile internet or dial-up connections? 2) What percentage of households in each Census tract had “Broadband such as cable, fiber optic or DSL” in 2017?
The maps are based on new Census data released on Dec 6, 2018 as part of the 2017 American Community Survey (ACS) 5-Year Estimates. For the first time, the 2017 ACS includes computer ownership and internet access information for local Census tracts. (Note: The Census uses the term “internet access” to refer to actual household connections, not just availability.) Now that the Census has made its tract-level household internet data public, small communities, city neighborhoods, rural and tribal areas can all get a much better picture of broadband access and adoption among their residents.
In a letter recording a meeting between the Wireless Internet Service Providers Association (WISPA) and the legal advisors to two Federal Communications Commission commissioners, the industry group "emphasized that the Commission’s goals would be better served by directing support to areas that lack any service at all and those that have access only below 10/1 Mbps." "WISPA supports the Commission’s goal that all consumers nationwide, including in rural areas, should ultimately have access to 25/3 Mbps service. However, WISPA believes that, in this instance, the Commission has not yet allowed the unsubsidized market to mature sufficiently, and threatens private investment in areas that would have no service but for the presence of an unsubsidized provider." In other words: you should pay us to introduce internet speeds from 2010 – when the definition of broadband was raised to 4Mbps down and 1Mbps up.
Charlemont, a small MA town, has rejected an offer from Comcast and instead plans to build a municipal fiber broadband network. Comcast offered to bring cable Internet to up to 96 percent of households in Charlemont in exchange for the town paying $462,123 plus interest toward infrastructure costs over 15 years. But Charlemont residents rejected the Comcast offer in a vote at a special town meeting. "The Comcast proposal would have saved the town about $1 million, but it would not be a town-owned broadband network," the Greenfield Recorder reported. "The defeated measure means that Charlemont will likely go forward with a $1.4 million municipal town network, as was approved by annual town meeting voters in 2015." About 160 residents voted, with 56 percent rejecting the Comcast offer. The town plans to charge $79 a month for standalone Internet service with gigabit download and upload speeds and no data caps, though the price could rise to $99 a month if fewer than 40 percent of households buy the service. The town also plans to offer phone and TV service at rates cheaper than Comcast's.
Google’s chief executive, in perhaps the most public display of lawmakers’ unease with his company’s influence, was grilled about everything from search result bias and the data Google collects about its users to plans for a censored service in China. Sundar Pichai, an engineer who rose through Google’s ranks to become its leader three years ago, faced more than three hours of questions from the House Judiciary Committee. Republicans expressed concerns about unfair treatment of conservatives, and lawmakers in both parties zeroed in on privacy issues. In his opening statement, Pichai said, “Even as we expand into new markets we never forget our American roots," and that Google cares about privacy and supports federal privacy legislation.
“Mr. Pichai, it was necessary to convene this hearing because of the widening gap of distrust between Silicon Valley and the American people,” said House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA). He is not a member of the Judiciary Committee but made a point of attending the hearing. “All of these topics—competition, censorship, bias, and others—point to one fundamental question that demands the nation’s attention,” Rep. McCarthy said. “Are America’s technology companies serving as instruments of freedom—or instruments of control?
A partisan divide quickly emerged. Committee Ranking Member Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) dismissed the fears of anti-conservative bias as “fact-free propaganda” and a “right-wing conspiracy theory.” Even if Google were politically biased, Ranking Member Nadler said, it would be within its rights as a private company. He cited the example of right-leaning media companies such as Fox News and Sinclair Broadcasting.
Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) followed on Majority Leader MacCarthy's statement by saying that he was concerned that Google's power had the potential for wide-ranging abuse, including of free speech. He also said he was concerned that Google could be censoring conservative voices. Additionally, he raised concerns with Google’s privacy practices, a day after it revealed its latest data mishap: A security lapse that exposed personal information about more than 50 million users of Google+, the company’s soon-to-be shuttered social network.
Drew Harwell wrote for the Washington Post that the hearing, "was designed from the jump as a scene of performative political outrage at Big Tech, which has spent much of the year as a punching bag over claims of anti-conservative bias. And like previous hearings involving Twitter chief Jack Dorsey and Facebook chief Mark Zuckerberg, Pichai’s hearing had the trappings of a modern Washington circus."
Members of the conservative majority on the House Judiciary Committee spent much of their time hammering [Google CEO Sundar] Pichai with baseless accusations that Google rigs its search results to censor conservative content. The bias obsession has distracted from the more important subjects that Congress has failed to address these past two years. That seems likely to change when Democrats take control of the House in January.
The first subject likely to draw more attention is privacy. Google has gotten ahead of the impending debate by signaling its support for a federal privacy framework, but it’s up to lawmakers to turn vague protection principles into meaningful policy. Committee members also expressed interest in examining Google’s potential anticompetitive behavior. Finally, legislators lambasted Pichai over Project Dragonfly, Google’s exploratory effort to launch a search engine in China. Pichai insisted time and time again that Google has “no plans” to reenter the Chinese market, but he refused to rule out the possibility of a product that would aid in government repression and surveillance.
Fewer minutes spent harping on bias allegations might have allowed time for further-reaching inquiries. Hopefully, that’s what the new year will bring.
The digital era has spurred tremendous advancements throughout human society, but it has also led to immense instability and inequality. Now, a handful of companies maintain unfettered dominance over key components of economic activity, with little signs of slowing. In this paper, Tom Wheeler sheds light on the issues of the information age by demonstarting its parallels with the Gilded Age, during which rapid industrial expansion led to centralized power and eventually gave way to massive reforms.
In this Report and Order, we eliminate the provisions in Parts 1, 5, 73 and 74 of our rules that require the posting and maintenance of broadcast licenses and related information in specific locations. In May 2018, the Federal Communications Commission issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) seeking comment on whether to eliminate license posting rules that appeared to be redundant and obsolete now that licensing information is readily accessible online through the Commission’s databases. Commenters in this proceeding unanimously support the elimination of these rules. As detailed below, we find that eliminating these requirements, which applyin some form to all broadcast licensees, will serve the public interest. In doing so, we advance the Commission’s goal of modernizing our media rules and remove unnecessary regulatory burdens that impede competition and innovation in the media marketplace.
Republican leaders of the House Oversight Committee released a scathing report about the Equifax data breach on Dec 10, detailing a series of security failures that preceded the 2017 compromise of 140 million Americans’ personal information. A few hours later, committee Democrats released a competing report about the consumer credit reporting agency, lashing out at their Republican colleagues for not demanding new cybersecurity laws to prevent the next major data breach. The competing reports highlight how cybersecurity, which was once considered a largely bipartisan topic, has been infected by partisan conflict.
The Democrats’ Oversight report called for new laws that would raise financial penalties for data breaches, simplify how consumers are notified about breaches and boost federal regulators’ cybersecurity efforts. The Republican report hit many of the same issues — but urged government cooperation with the private sector rather than mandates. The Democratic report proposed broadening the Federal Trade Commission’s regulatory power over credit ratings agencies, such as Equifax, for example, while the Republican report simply urged studying those regulatory powers.
Rhode Island is suing Google over a data breach the state said compromised the information of 52.5 million users. That is according to the office of RI General Treasurer Seth Magaziner—the state's pension fund is invested in Google. The pension fund filed a motion with the court to head a class action shareholder suit after it was reported that Google execs had not disclosed the breach, which involved the Google+ attempt by the company to capture some of the social media market. The effort failed and Google announced in Oct it was shuttering the service, a move that came after claims it had hidden security vulnerabilities that led to the breach.
A recap of the Federal Communications Commission's 2018 work to strengthen emergency calling and highlight some of our next steps for 2019. 1) Improving 911 Calling from Multi-Line Telephone Systems, 2) Examining How to Route Wireless 911 Calls More Quickly, 3) Helping First Responders Locate Wireless 911 Callers, and 4) Promoting Transparency About State 911 Fees.
Four different Time covers feature journalists from around the world. Jamal Khashoggi, who was killed in the Saudi embassy in Turkey earlier in 2018, appears alone in one, while staff from the Capital Gazette, the US newspaper where five people were killed this year, feature in another. Pictures of Maria Ressa, Wa Lone and Kyaw Soe Oo appear on the final two. Ressa is the editor of Rappler, a Philippine news website critical of the country's leadership, while Reuters journalists Wa Lone and Kyaw Soe Oo were imprisoned in Myanmar for investigating the massacre of Rohingya Muslims. According to Time, they were chosen "for taking great risks in pursuit of greater truths, for the imperfect but essential quest for facts, for speaking up and for speaking out".
The Federal Communications Commission officially opened of the Office of Economics and Analytics (OEA). This new office will help consistently and thoroughly incorporate economic and data analysis into the policy-making work of the agency. OEA strengthens and centralizes the role of economic analysis by housing the vast majority of Commission economists in one office, including the entire staff of the former Office of Strategic Planning and Policy Analysis. The new office includes four divisions:
- The Economic Analysis Division, which provides analytical and quantitative support for rulemakings, transactions, reviews, adjudications, and other matters.
- The Industry Analysis Division, which designs and administers significant, economically-relevant data collections.
- The Auctions Division, which leads auction design and implementation issues, including for spectrum and universal service auctions.
- The Data Division, which develops and implements best practices, processes, and standards for data management.
More than a quarter of UK homes do not have fast enough broadband to cope with a typical family’s internet needs. Just over 26% of the UK’s estimated 28 million households are getting by on speeds of less than 10Mbps, the level the media regulator, Ofcom, says is the bare minimum requirement for a modern household. “This research lays bare the extent of the UK’s digital divide,” said Dani Warner, a broadband expert at uSwitch. “Streets that are relatively close geographically can be light years apart when it comes to the download speeds they are getting.”
Benton (www.benton.org) provides the only free, reliable, and non-partisan daily digest that curates and distributes news related to universal broadband, while connecting communications, democracy, and public interest issues. Posted Monday through Friday, this service provides updates on important industry developments, policy issues, and other related news events. While the summaries are factually accurate, their sometimes informal tone may not always represent the tone of the original articles. Headlines are compiled by Kevin Taglang (headlines AT benton DOT org) and Robbie McBeath (rmcbeath AT benton DOT org) — we welcome your comments.
© Benton Foundation 2018. Redistribution of this email publication — both internally and externally — is encouraged if it includes this message. For subscribe/unsubscribe info email: headlines AT benton DOT org
Kevin Taglang
Executive Editor, Communications-related Headlines
Benton Foundation
727 Chicago Avenue
Evanston, IL 60202
847-328-3049
headlines AT benton DOT org
The Benton Foundation All Rights Reserved © 2018