Upcoming policy issue

For all the talk of antitrust investigations, the bigger threat to tech platforms like Google and Facebook is an intensifying call from Congress to revamp a law that shields them and other web companies from legal liability for users' posts. House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff joined a group of policymakers calling to reconsider the legal protections afforded to tech platforms.

The go-to metric for antitrust enforcers has long been increasing prices. Critics, however, have begun to question whether that approach needs an update, given that tech giants like Google and Facebook offer free services. And this week, some of the nation’s leading antitrust enforcers made clear they’re willing to take a broader view. Justice Department antitrust chief Makan Delrahim said his office will consider factors like privacy violations or free speech restrictions as signs that product quality and market competition have deteriorated.

State attorneys general are preparing for their own investigations into big tech platforms including Google and Facebook, based on concerns that largely mirror those driving probes by the Justice Department, the Federal Trade Commission and Congress. Several state attorneys general and aides said a core group of AGs has been discussing how to address antitrust-related concerns around big tech companies for some months.

Two House lawmakers looking to craft a consensus data privacy bill found themselves on opposite sides of an emerging debate: whether legislation should create a new privacy division at the Federal Trade Commission. Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), who heads the House Commerce Committee's Consumer Protection Subcommittee, said she’ll pursue that option.

The "Internet is broken." That, according to Rep. David Cicilline (D-RI), is the sentiment animating a bipartisan antitrust review of technology titans in the House of Representatives. He is right to initiate the effort. But exploring the particulars of so sweeping a contention may take years. Meanwhile, there’s one broken thing Congress already knows it has to fix. A small group of companies has substantial control over a massive part of American life. This control has come with costs, from the flourishing of online disinformation to a flood of security breaches.

The FCC’s Universal Service programs are among the most significant “tools in the toolkit” possessed by the federal government to ensure that all Americans have access to voice and broadband services comparable to their fellow citizens. Considering both the success of [USF] programs and the FCC’s statutory mandate from Congress, a cap on the Universal Service program’s overall budget is not the right approach. The proposal would pit deserving beneficiaries—anchor institutions, students, patients, and Americans who lack broadband—against one another in a fight for Universal Service funds.

This is a rulemaking that proposes to limit universal service efforts at the Federal Communications Commission. It is fundamentally inconsistent with this agency’s high-minded rhetoric about closing the digital divide. It is also at odds with our most basic statutory duty to promote and advance universal service. That’s because it suggests a course that could cut off broadband in rural areas, limit high-speed internet access in rural classrooms, shorten the reach of telehealth, and foreclose opportunity for those who need it most.

In my years working on communications policy, I have been tremendously focused on improving the effectiveness of our Universal Service Fund programs to bring broadband Internet to those without access. Part and parcel of that mission is to ensure the USF’s sustainability for years to come, and to protect the hard-earned investments of consumers who pay for our subsidy programs.

What if, suddenly, decades of progress in weather prediction was reversed and monster storms that we currently see coming for days were no longer foreseeable? The toll on life, property and the economy would be enormous. Yet the government’s science agencies say such a loss in forecast accuracy could happen if the Federal Communications Commission and the US wireless industry get their way. Both the FCC and the wireless industry are racing to deploy 5G technology, which will deliver information at speeds 100 times faster than today’s mobile networks.

Can Congress prevent the disproportionate harm inflicted on marginalized communities from at times irresponsible commercial data practices? As our lives increasingly shift online, so, too, have methods of discrimination—using individual data profiles—and our laws have been slow to keep up.