Washington Post

The Republican National Committee recently issued a major rebuke of the National Security Agency, condemning the spy agency's collection of bulk telephone records from American citizens. The party's resolution roundly criticized the program as "an intrusion on basic human rights" and set conservatives on a path to draw civil libertarians into the fold. But surprisingly, at the largest conservative confab of the year, the issue of NSA surveillance is nowhere to be found.

The agenda for this year's Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) doesn't once mention President Barack Obama's signals intelligence program. Nor are there any booths on the convention floor blasting the secret FISA court, attempts to break into tech companies' server links or the sharing of NSA data with domestic law enforcement agencies like the Drug Enforcement Administration.

[March 7]

[Commentary] Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter are just a few of my favorite things. These Web sites and apps help me keep in touch with my friends and family, find out what interesting events are going on and see and share photographs within my social circle.

There couldn’t possibly be anything wrong with that, can there? For a long time, I believed the answer to be no.

However, the more time I spent online -- to socialize, not study -- the less sleep I received, and the worse I felt. I was moody and tired, and focusing on classroom lectures and interactions became increasingly difficult, particularly after spending hours online on my computer or on my iPhone. I began to wonder whether or not there could be a relationship between the hours I spent using recreational screen time and the negative effects it had the next day at school. To answer my question, I dove into neuroscience research.

[Rahman, 17, is a finalist in the Intel Science Talent Search 2014]

[March 7]

[Commentary] Comcast is extending its $10-a-month broadband program for low-income Americans.

The discounted service, known as Internet Essentials, was set to expire three years after Comcast's merger with NBC-Universal in 2011. But now the cable company says it's making the program available to eligible people "indefinitely." The Comcast-Time Warner Cable merger must still be approved by the Justice Department and the Federal Communications Commission, and analysts say Comcast's latest moves are part of a charm offensive designed to win over skeptical regulators.

Comcast's motives aside, giving poorer Americans the same access to broadband that wealthier people enjoy has been a longtime goal of the Obama Administration. Internet Essentials makes a dent by connecting some 300,000 households to broadband -- the equivalent of 1.2 million individuals, according to Comcast.

Other cable providers have since followed suit, working with the FCC in a program called Connect to Compete that also aims to provide a similar discount. Making sure everyone, rich or poor, gets adequate access to the Web is something businesses should be doing of their own volition -- which brings us back to Comcast. Industry watchers say Comcast's compliance with the FCC's previous requirements, along with the changes that would result from a merger with Time Warner Cable, might encourage regulators to ask for more concessions this time around. Thing is, it probably shouldn't take a merger to produce them.

[Commentary] Google's choice to enter new broadband markets depends on a few factors.

One is the state of the existing infrastructure. Another factor involves getting the necessary permits and other paperwork to build fiber where it doesn't yet exist. Laying fiber below ground, or stringing it on poles above it, requires Google to negotiate deals with cities and utilities for rights of way.

These agreements can come at a cost, though as we'll see, Google has in some cases managed to skirt these issues.

The third factor is the real kicker, and it's how badly a mayor might want Google Fiber for his town. To help assess a city's commitment, Google provides it with a checklist of things it has to complete in order to qualify for Fiber. Any smart mayor who wants the service is going to do everything he can to appease the search giant in hopes of attracting it to town -- and then some.

While smaller cities may find it necessary to attract investment by wooing influential companies, denser metropolitan aren't likely to prostrate themselves in quite the same way. They probably couldn't, even if they wanted to; there are so many moving parts to a New York or a Chicago that giving Google free rein would be an extremely complex endeavor.

[Commentary] One thing is certain about Comcast’s proposed merger with Time Warner Cable: It doesn’t pass the smell test.

Comcast claims that the combination of the number one and number two cable companies will somehow enhance rather than diminish competition and lead to greater consumer satisfaction. Don’t worry, Godzilla will play nice on the playground. Comcast is just digesting its previous mega-merger, the takeover of NBC Universal that should have been blocked by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). That leaves Comcast controlling an empire that includes NBC, CNBC, MSNBC, USA Network, Telemundo and other networks. Here the merger doesn’t just impact the marketplace of cable; it threatens the marketplace of ideas.

The protection of free speech under our Constitution depends on citizens having access to many ideas, many sources, many ways of getting ideas and information. Letting mega-corporations consolidate control of key parts of the media infrastructure is a direct threat to that access. So blocking the merger, which should be a no-brainer, will require an aroused public opposition