Agenda

An ambitious Federal Communications Commission plan to kill a raft of limits on media companies’ reach is likely to wind up in court.

As I participate today in Silicon Harlem's annual conference, I'm reminded of the 929,000 New Yorkers, including those who live and work in the heart of Harlem, that depend on the Federal Communications Commission's Lifeline program for affordable telecommunications services. I am saddened to affirm, during a conference that seeks to find solutions to narrow technology divides and create enhanced opportunities for the disconnected, that the FCC majority has issued a so-called proposal for the Lifeline program which promises to jeopardize our efforts at ubiquitous and affordable services for the citizens of New York and the rest of the country.

If the goal of the current FCC majority is to widen existing divides, and ensure that our nation's most vulnerable are less likely to be connected, this item sets us on that path. It will harm those less fortunate, those who need to dial 911, stay in touch with their children's educators, keep a job, and stay healthy. The day we head down such a path, is a sad one indeed. I commit to doing everything in my power to ensure that the only universal service program designed to close the affordability gap, remains a shining and successful means for economically-strapped citizens to have voice and broadband services.

Sen Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) is demanding that Facebook and Twitter turn over reams of new data about Russian disinformation spread on their platforms during the 2016 US presidential election. Her requests — detailed in exhaustive letters to the two tech giants’ chief executives — are part of her broader probe into the Kremlin’s potential coordination with President Donald Trump’s campaign.

Specifically, Sen Feinstein seeks information about any Russian-connected user accounts, pages, organic content and ads that targeted their efforts at the United States. And with Twitter, in particular, she asks the company to share some direct messages sent and received by Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks. In both cases, though, Sen Feinstein demands answers by Nov 6. That’s five days after Facebook and Twitter are set to send their senior legal advisers to Capitol Hill for back-to-back hearings before the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, which have spearheaded lawmakers’ Russia investigations.

[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] It is this committee’s mission to protect consumers, and in the coming months, we will be taking a more expansive look at the online experience to ensure safety, security, and an unfiltered flow of information. Recently, the Equifax data breach compromised the personal information of 145 million Americans, including social security numbers, addresses, credit card numbers, and more. This committee held a hearing on the breach and will continue to deeply scrutinize the staggering amount of personal information changing hands online and the business practices surrounding those transactions.

My colleagues and I will hold a separate hearing to assess identity verification practices, and determine whether they can be improved to protect personal data on the web even after a consumer’s information has been breached. These hearings are just the start of a long-term, thoughtful, and research-focused approach to better illuminate how Americans’ data is being used online, how to ensure that data is safe, and how information is being filtered to consumers over the web. While technology is responsible for a lot of positive change in our world, malignant behavior online can have consequences that are not fully disclosed to the American people.

At our November open meeting, we'll be tackling top priorities: curtailing unlawful robocalls, unleashing 5G wireless connectivity, enabling the next generation of broadcast television, speeding infrastructure deployment, and modernizing our media ownership rules.

Lifeline: Speaking of bridging the digital divide, the Lifeline program is an important component of the Commission's efforts to bring digital opportunity to low-income Americans. But when I testified on Capitol Hill last month, I heard loud and clear from Democratic and Republican Senators alike that the program is in need of serious reform. For starters, we need to crack down on waste, fraud, and abuse. And we will. For instance, right now, Lifeline recipients in cities like Tulsa, Oklahoma, and Reno, Nevada receive an enhanced Tribal subsidy, intended for rural Tribal lands, of $34.25 a month, while those in other cities receive the standard $9.25 subsidy. Giving residents of Tulsa and Reno an extra $25 per month subsidy is a waste of money given that the cost of providing service in those cities is far lower there than it is in poorer, rural areas. Therefore, at our November meeting, the Commission will aim to close this loophole and limit the enhanced Tribal subsidy to those actually living on Tribal lands in rural areas. We'll also vote to solicit public input on how to effectively and efficiently direct Lifeline funds to the areas where they are most needed and to do so consistent with the FCC's legal authority. And we'll give Lifeline recipients better service and more choices–such as by eliminating a current prohibition on Lifeline broadband beneficiaries changing service providers for an entire year.

Media Ownership: We will be voting on modernizing our media ownership rules to reflect the marketplace of the present, not the past. President Clinton's first FCC Chairman stated, "Under current conditions, the FCC's [newspaper/broadcast cross-ownership] rule is perverse." In 2017, the FCC is poised to finally bring our media ownership rules into the digital age. If this proposed Order is adopted, the FCC would make five significant nods to reality. First, we would once and for all eliminate the newspaper/broadcast cross-ownership rule. In this day and age, if you want to buy a newspaper, you deserve a roadmap, not a roadblock. Second, we would eliminate the radio/television cross-ownership rule, which is unnecessary in today's marketplace given the Commission's separate local radio and local television ownership rules. Third, we would revise the local television ownership rule to eliminate the eight-voices test and incorporate a case-by-case review into the top-four restriction. This would better reflect the competitive conditions in local markets. Fourth, we would eliminate the attribution rule for television joint sales agreements, finding that JSAs serve the public interest by allowing broadcasters to better serve their local markets. And fifth, we would finally establish an incubator program to encourage greater diversity in and new entry into the media business and seek comment on what the details of that program should be.

The House Judiciary Committee has scheduled a hearing on network neutrality and the role of antitrust for Nov 1. The Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial and Antitrust Law, which will hold the hearing, has not released details, but the event is likely to address concerns that internet service providers stifle competition. The hearing comes as Republicans in the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) put their finishing touches on a plan to scrap net neutrality. The agency has not released a timeline for when it will release and vote on the final version of Chairman Ajit Pai’s proposal to roll back the rules, but telecommunication insiders speculate that a vote could come as soon as December.

Since this is my first official speech, I want to highlight a few of the issues I hope to focus on during my time on the Federal Communications Commission. I intend for this to be the beginning of a conversation. I welcome all stakeholders to reach out with ideas on where you think the FCC should be heading.

I want to focus my remarks this morning on some of the ways the FCC can incentivize even greater broadband deployment. This is particularly important as we make the transition to 5G—a shift that will require a massive investment in both wired and wireless infrastructure. In fact, if we get the right policies in place, this transition could mean $275 billion in network investment, three million new jobs, and a half a trillion dollars added to the GDP. So how do we get there? How do we ensure that the United States wins the global race to 5G? I want to talk this morning about three of the key pieces—(1) spectrum, (2) infrastructure, and (3) ensuring we have the skilled workforce in place to deploy these next-generation networks—before I talk more broadly about the need for regulatory reform.

For years, the country’s biggest technology companies have been virtually untouchable in Washington. The public adored the companies’ new devices, educators embraced their tools and politicians extolled their contributions to the economy. Even traditionally powerful voices, like media and telecom businesses, found little success in criticizing the technology industry. But now, as lawmakers look into how Russia used Google, Facebook and Twitter to influence the 2016 presidential election, many critics see a rare opening — and are lining up to take their shots.

The action is nascent, but gaining momentum fast. Lawmakers are pushing for regulations for technology companies for the first time in years, encouraged along by big tech’s broad assortment of rivals. For several weeks, a group of companies including smaller tech companies and entertainment and retail businesses has informally begun regular meetings and conference calls to compare notes about Google, Facebook and Amazon and to find a way to join in a stronger opposition force. But even as they sense an opportunity today, the rivals say that challenging the internet companies remains a daunting task. They doubt they can put a dent into the online ad duopoly of Facebook and Google. It will also be difficult, they say, to restrain Amazon’s fast movement into new markets, given the company’s willingness to lose money to gain a foothold.

The Federal Communications Commission will vote in Nov to eliminate a decades-old rule designed to preserve media diversity in local markets, FCC Chairman Ajit Pai said Oct 25. The move is aimed at supporting economically struggling media outlets in an age of digital consumption. But critics say it will lead to greater media consolidation and the loss of independent voices.

The regulations, passed in 1975, prevent any single company from owning both a full-power TV station in a given market and a daily newspaper at the same time. “The marketplace is nothing like it was in 1975,” Chairman Pai told House Communications Subcommittee members at a hearing, arguing that the restriction on newspaper/broadcast cross-ownership was outdated. “The FCC's rules still presume the market is defined by pulp and rabbit ears.” The FCC vote, expected Nov 16, could also eliminate a rule that prevents TV stations in the same market from merging if the outcome leads to fewer than eight independent stations operating in that market. “If the federal government has no business intervening in news, then we must stop the government from intervening in the news business,” he said.