Internet/Broadband

Summer 2017, the West Virginia state legislature decided to take some leftover funds for water and sewer projects and reinvest it in another essential public utility: the internet. These funds were evidently needed, because half of all counties in the state—27 of 55—have already applied for a piece of the pie.

In a blog post, AT&T lobbyist Bob Quinn tried to argue that the immense criticism being levied at the Federal Communications Commission for its decision to scrap net neutrality is based largely on “misinformation” and “rhetorical excess.”  "We will not block websites, we will not throttle or degrade internet traffic based on content, and we will not unfairly discriminate in our treatment of internet traffic (all consistent with the rules that were adopted—and that we supported—in 2010, and the rules in place today.)”

In a speech on Nov 28, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai angrily denounced celebrities and tech companies who have been criticizing his plans to undo the 2015 rules. Hollywood is always a good scapegoat, of course, and Republicans looking to stir up anger in 2017 do well to frame their issues as a response to the unchecked power of Silicon Valley.

As the Federal Communications Commission prepares to vote on a proposal to dismantle current network neutrality rules, professors at Harvard Business School and the School of Engineering and Applied Sciences cautioned against several aspects of the proposal. 

[Commentary] Like all major government efforts to deregulate industries, from telephones to airlines, the Federal Communications Commission’s move to do away with net neutrality is destined to have a major impact. We think consumers will benefit because increased competition is a greater spur to technological innovation than government fiat.

[Commentary]  Democrats are missing the boat in demonstrating to millennials that they will fight for an issue that matters to them. The tech-savvy generation, more than others, understands what the end of net neutrality means—and they don’t like it at all. If Democrats had been louder on this issue, they would have shown that the party cares about what’s important to young people.

[Cliston Brown is a communications executive and political analyst in the San Francisco Bay Area]

Critics of Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai's proposal contend the end of net neutrality could create a tiered internet system that would hurt poorer Americans and small businesses, while bolstering the coffers of big businesses like Comcast and Verizon.

As municipal governments in New York City, Seattle and elsewhere vocally oppose a repeal, leaders also say they are preparing resources to monitor its impact once it happens.  City gov tech leaders said that a repeal is all but certain to make it more difficult for municipal governments to foster digital equity. As Internet access has become essential to modern life — for applying for jobs, helping kids with homework, finding health care, etc.

Sen Maggie Hassan (D-NH) led 27 of her colleagues in a letter to Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai, expressing concern over reports that bots filed hundreds of thousands of comments to the FCC during the network neutrality policymaking process and calling on the Chairman to delay the planned December 14th vote to roll back net neutrality rules until an investigation of the state of the record is conducted.

One of the main fears that school officials have about curtailing “net neutrality” is that internet service companies will have new powers to throttle or block the flow of online content that serves as academic lifeblood for many districts. But gauging whether those worries are justified or overblown requires a lot of speculation about industry behavior, and how it would apply to schools. Chris Lewis, a vice president of the advocacy group Public Knowledge, said dire scenarios envisioned by some school officials are not unrealistic.