Impact of various media on health

President Donald Trump’s coronavirus task force and Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai spoke to broadcasters to assess how they can help. Vice President Mike Pence said public service announcements will boost Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidance, while Chairman Pai is urging broadcasters to air public service announcements (PSAs) to promote social distancing. The National Association of Broadcasters announced a PSA campaign last week.

With the introduction of a bill titled Data Mapping to Save Moms’ Lives Act in both the Senate and House of Representatives, some legislators believe high-speed Internet could make a difference for pregnant mothers. The bill would require information on maternal health to be included in the Federal Communications Commission’s 

According to the federal government, the majority of American homes now use cellphones exclusively. “We don't even have a landline anymore,” people began to say proudly as the new millennium progressed. But this came with a quieter, secondary loss—the loss of the shared social space of the family landline. Meanwhile, the physical medium of communication has shifted from telephone poles, visually linking individual homes, to the elusive air.

1969 was the year that saw the first host-to-host communication of ARPANET, the early packet-switching network that was the precursor to today’s multibillion-host internet. Heading into the network's 50th anniversary, Pew Research Center and Elon University’s Imagining the Internet Center asked 530 of technology experts how individuals’ lives might be affected by the evolution of the internet over the next 50 years. Some 72% of these respondents say there would be change for the better, 25% say there would be change for the worse, and 3% believe there would be no significant change.

What passes for innovation by Big Tech today isn’t fundamentally new products or new services, but ever more sophisticated exploitation of people. It’s time we demanded more of Big Tech than it demands of us. That's why I’ve proposed banning the “dark patterns” that feed tech addiction. I’ve introduced legislation to provide consumers a legally enforceable right to browse the internet privately, without data tracking. I’ve advocated stepping up privacy safeguards for children and requiring tech companies to moderate content without political bias as a condition of civil immunity.

The Chicago Tribune recently published test results indicating that some cellphones can emit radiation causing exposure up to five times higher than current limits allow. This shocking data comes on the heels of the government of France’s revelations that phones emit radiation between four and 11 times their allowable limits. For more than a decade, the Federal Communications Commission has knowingly relied on unrealistic test methods to evaluate radiofrequency radiation from a single phone selected for testing by major manufacturers.

Cities and towns throughout Northern California are issuing ordinances that would exclude new 5G cell sites from residential areas, citing supposed health concerns. Whatever the basis for residents’ objections to new cell towers, countless mayors, governors, and council members across the country—have little or no power under current rules to act on their constituents’ wishes. Nor do they have the leeway they once did to set pricing for cell sites, a lucrative source of funding for civic initiatives.

Sen Josh Hawley (R-MO) introduced legislation to curb addictive and deceptive techniques that tech giants use to exploit users. The Social Media Addiction Reduction Technology (SMART) Act would ban certain features that are designed to be addictive, would require choice parity for consent, and would give users the power to monitor their time spent on social media. The bill:

The question we face in the digital age is not how to have it all, but how to maintain valuable activity at a societal price on which we can agree. Just as we have made laws about tolerable levels of waste and pollution, we can make rules, establish norms, and set expectations for technology.  Perhaps the online world will be less instantaneous, convenient, and entertaining. There could be fewer cheap services. We might begin to add friction to some transactions rather than relentlessly subtracting it. But these constraints would not destroy innovation.