Multichannel News

[Commentary] The Internet service providers and ad-industry lobbyists disingenuously claim that having the Federal Trade Commission protect consumer privacy for all Internet companies, including ISPs and data giants like Google, is the most effective approach. It would be so, perhaps, if the FTC had any real clout.

The ISPs, data-marketing companies and their supporters are also fighting against the privacy rule because they know we are also on the eve of a new era — the Internet of Things — that will generate even more personal information about us. In today’s digital era, data is power. That’s why we shouldn’t let Congress and the broadband companies overturn the first real protections we can have. This will be an opportunity to challenge Donald Trump’s vision of the United States as principally a corporatist society where the welfare of commercial special interests is more important than the needs of the average American.

[Jeff Chester is executive director of the Center for Digital Democracy, a Washington-D.C.-based consumer digital rights group.]

Groups representing Internet service providers, tech companies and online advertisers said March 28 that congressional repudiation of the Federal Communications Commission's broadband privacy framework was a "vital step" toward creating a "truly comprehensive and effective privacy framework for the entire Internet based on the successful FTC approach." They also suggested talk of the collapse of privacy protections in the absence of the yet-to-be applied rules had a Chicken Little flavor to them.

Demand Progress is asking for contributions for a "grassroots" push to fight Republicans' effort to repeal the Federal Communications Commission's broadband privacy rules.

The Senate voted recently along party lines (50 to 48 (with two senators not voting) to invalidate the October order, which Internet service providers, advertisers and some others want either Congress or the FCC to roll back. The House is expected to vote on the bill March 28. In an e-mail solicitation on March 26, Demand Progress made it all about Comcast--a frequent Big Media target. "Will you chip in $5 to help stop Comcast from selling my personal financial information and browsing history?," it asked, pointing out that the bill would now be taken up in the House, "unless we can kill this awful idea."

Not surprisingly, Dish blamed Hearst for the ongoing retransmission consent impasse that kept Hearst stations of the satellite operator. That came in response to a letter from Rep Anna Eshoo (D-CA) late last week. Rep Eshoo, whose constituents are affected by the impasse, said the failure to reach a new deal--Hearst stations in 26 markets have been off Dish for the past two-plus weeks--was harming viewers. She said she was unhappy that the companies did not take steps to keep Hearst stations on Dish during the impasse.

Rep Eshoo pointed out that the station in her market KSBW, was also off during a Hearst-DirecTV impasse earlier this year. She said she hoped they would resolve the dispute ASAP, and said she would continue to push for making retrans "blackouts" illegal, saying consumers should not be pawns in such disputes.

The nation’s largest cable operators again took the lion’s share of broadband subscriber adds in 2016, according to a new analysis from Leichtman Research Group. The top cable companies added 3.3 million broadband subscribers in 2016, the most net adds in any year since 2007, while the top telecommunication companies lost about 600,000 high-speed Internet customers in 2016, widened from a loss of 185,000 in 2015, LRG said. Cable’s dominance continues to deepen, as the top cable companies netted 122% of broadband adds in 2016, versus 106% in 2015, and 89% in 2014. From a broader view, the top 14 cable and telecommunication providers in the US, representing 95% of the market, added 2.7 million net additional high-speed Internet subs in 2016, down from 3.1 million net adds in 2015, LRG said.

The House Communications Subcommittee will hold a hearing March 21 on how to eliminate barriers to broadband infrastructure. On the agenda is a draft bill, “Broadband: Deploying America’s 21st Century Infrastructure," to streamline permitting and siting at the federal level.

"Broadband is a necessity for business in the 21st century and its time our policies reflect that," said Subcommittee Chairman Marsha Blackburn (R-TN). "In fact, many communities across the country would rather have better access to broadband than an additional lane on a highway. For too long problems with permitting and siting have held back further investment in expanding broadband infrastructure across the country,” she said in announcing the hearing. “Constituents and businesses back in Tennessee consistently have issues gaining access to broadband. And without a high-speed internet connection, it remains difficult to attract businesses and jobs to these rural areas."

[Commentary] When it comes to using your data from Web browsing and app usage, the Federal Trade Commission has been the regulatory cop on the beat. Determined to be relevant in the digital economy, the Federal Communications Commission created its own, radically different set of privacy regulations targeting just Internet service providers. By requiring an Internet service provider’s customers to give permission for their data to be used, the FCC’s new privacy rules subject ISPs to a different and more restrictive set of regulations than their online advertising rivals.

If and when the FCC’s new privacy rules are overruled, the statute that empowers the agency to police privacy abuses by ISPs will still apply. And nothing prevents the FCC from designing a different (and more symmetric) regulatory standard. Repeal of the FCC’s new rules will simply restore the regulatory environment that existed for more than 18 months between its reclassification decision and its privacy rules. Given the myriad layers of protections and regulatory options, the notion that repeal would leave the ISPs without any privacy regulator is patently false.

[Hal Singer is a principal at Economists Incorporated and a senior fellow at the Progressive Policy Institute.]

[Commentary] The question then before policymakers is actually this: Must we harness our broadband infrastructure to the yoke of 20th century Title II regulations designed for public utilities in order to maintain an open Internet? The only reasonable answer to that question is no.

Regulating broadband under utility-style Title II regulations crafted decades ago puts these consumer benefits and the robust investment that make them possible at risk. This in turn undermines the goal we all share—making more of broadband’s opportunities available to all Americans. Essential to making broadband work for everyone is ensuring everyone’s broadband is strong, open and growing swiftly for us all.

[Diane Smith is the interim chair of Mobile Future]

Time Warner shareholders approved the pending $108.7 billion merger with AT&T on Feb 15, putting the mega-deal on a path for a year-end 2017 close. Time Warner said about 78% of its outstanding shares voted in favor of the deal, with the rest not casting a vote. Of the shares that were voted, 99% were in favor of the transaction.

House Commerce Committee Chairman Greg Walden (R-OR) outlined a broad agenda for the committee and its Communications Subcommittee Feb 14, with items ranging from legislative action on Title II to a comprehensive examination of Federal Communications Commission and National Telecommunications and Information Administration "reauthorization" to accelerated rural broadband deployment to increased oversight of federal cybersecurity initiatives.

At the monthly luncheon of the Media Institute, Chairman Walden endorsed the "process reforms" that FCC Chairman Ajit Pai (who was in the audience) has already introduced. Chairman Walden complimented Pai for successfully doing administratively "what Congress has been trying to do legislatively." As for the Open Internet rules, the Chairman Walden said, "Republicans are open to legislative solutions" and that net-neutrality decisions "should be done legislatively." But he acknowledged "it will take time" to develop new procedures, saying, "We have draft legislation" in the works. Chairman Walden called deployment of rural broadband a top priority on the Committee's communications agenda, pulling in examples of the need for wireless broadband. In particular, he emphasized the need to "lower the cost of broadband development."