Lobbying

The vice president for news for Sinclair Broadcast Group, Scott Livingston, said that he understands why some people may be concerned that the company asked top managers to contribute to the company's Political Action Committee, but he says he does not believe it is a journalistic conflict of interest.  "I do understand the concern but I don’t believe this compromises our journalistic integrity. Our local stations don’t cover the ins and outs of the broadcast regulatory reform." And, Livingston said, the political action committee is "working to save local broadcasting."

[Commentary] AT&T has decided it’s good business to advocate for an “Internet Bill of Rights.” Of course, that catchy name doesn’t in any way mean that what AT&T wants is a codified list of rights for Internet users. No, what AT&T wants is to keep a firm hold on the gains it has made in the last year at the expense of its customers’ rights. There is nothing in the history—the very recent history—of AT&T to make anyone believe that it has anyone’s actual best interests at heart.

Demand Progress, which strongly opposes Sinclair's proposed purchase of Tribune, wants the Federal Communications Commission inspector general (IG) to investigate FCC Chairman Ajit Pai over what it suggests are decisions meant to favor the broadcaster. "From the beginning, chairman Pai has been eager to roll out the red carpet for Sinclair and grease the wheels to enable this merger to happen," Demand Progress said in launching the petition.

[Commentary] Anyone doubting the power lobbyists still hold in Washington need only look at the ongoing, shameful net neutrality travesty.  It was bad enough that Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai, a former Verizon lawyer, engineered the repeal of President Barack Obama’s landmark rules prohibiting Internet Service Providers from blocking or slowing down the internet or giving preference for certain online content.

3:04 p.m. December 20, 2017: “This just came out,” said President Donald Trump. “Two minutes ago, they handed it to me. AT&T plans to increase U.S. capital spending [by] $1 billion and provide [a] $1,000 special bonus to more than 200,000 U.S. employees, and that’s because of what we did. So that’s pretty good. That’s pretty good.” The Republican lawmakers surrounding the president applauded. The moment represented a big win for AT&T, which Trump's Justice Department is suing to block an $85 billion acquisition of Time Warner.

Even if the Federal Communications Commission wins in court, large Internet serivce providers still need to find a way to prevent any future FCCs from simply reinstating the network neutrality rules. That’s why the same giant ISPs that backed the FCC’s assault on net neutrality are now pushing for a “legislative solution” in Congress. The goal: they want a law that contains so many loopholes as to be effectively meaningless, yet prevents the FCC from crafting any real, tough laws down the road.

[Commentary] When the Federal Communications Commission voted December 14 to repeal the rules protecting a fast, fair, and open internet, the lobbyists for the internet service providers realized their long-envisioned strategy to gut the authority of the agency that since 1934 has been charged with overseeing the activities of the nation’s essential networks. The companies’ goal: to move regulatory jurisdiction from the Federal Communications Commission to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).

Three of the largest internet service providers and their trade association have spent at least $26.3 million on lobbying the federal government since April 1 -- about $1.12 for every public comment filed with the government on a repeal of net neutrality rules. The battle over net neutrality shapes up as another defeat for Americans, who have been outmuscled by corporate money in the nation's capital on issues ranging from climate change to Ajit Pai, the former Verizon lawyer-turned-FCC head, announced that the commission would vote on a proposal to eliminate net neutrality on Dec 14.

[Commentary] If you’re scared of a future America without network neutrality, I want to terrify you. The potential repeal of what should be a civic right should chill you to the bone. After spending twelve years running a company that helps millions of people to break through the barriers of censorship imposed by oppressive governments, I am quite familiar with the ramifications of such repressions.

While it is clear that alignment with the Internet service providers is currently drawn along party lines, the industry’s attempt to gain favor with lawmakers is not partisan. Entrenched telecommunications companies liberally spread money and attention to everyone who holds office. Sometimes that influence comes in the form of lavish parties with Olympic athletes and lobbyists, but consistently it comes in the form of contributions to campaigns.