Tom Wheeler

Don’t be fooled: Net neutrality is about more than just blocking and throttling

On October 19, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) voted 3-2 to issue a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to reinstate the agency’s 2015 decision that brought internet service providers (ISPs) under the agency’s jurisdiction as Telecommunications Carriers. This action is necessary because the Trump FCC repealed the previous rule in 2018 at the request of the ISPs.

The Supreme Court’s major questions doctrine and AI regulation

There is reason for optimism about the federal government stepping up to create a policy framework for artificial intelligence (AI) that will keep us safe while enabling innovations that will improve all our lives. But, beneath the surface, there is a shark in the water, ready to obstruct any congressional or administrative action. That shark is the Supreme Court’s “major questions doctrine.” Although Members of Congress have proposed to establish a new federal commission to protect consumers.

Toxic lead telephone lines: Searching for solutions

Millions of Americans could be affected by thousands of miles of toxic telephone cables. These old cables, legacies from the pre-internet, dial-up telephone era, are sheathed in lead, an element found to be toxic in humans.

The three challenges of AI regulation

The drumbeat of artificial intelligence (AI) corporate chieftains calling for government regulation of their activities is mounting. As Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Richard Durbin (D-IL) observed, it is “historic” to have “people representing large corporations… come before us and plead with us to regulate them.” There are three challenges for AI oversight: dealing with the velocity of AI developments, parsing the components of what to regulate, and determining

Are the FTC’s tools strong enough for digital challenges?

In a period of only nine days—April 25 to May 3, 2023—the the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced initiatives to look at unfair and deceptive acts involving AI and proposed banning Meta Platforms from targeting young users. These come on top of two years of antitrust aggressiveness and consumer protection assertiveness. But both actions beg the question, “Are the tools strong enough for the task?” Both the AI and Meta activities are indications of the limitations that FTC Chair Lina Khan and the agency face as a result of being tied to industrial-era statutes and procedures.

Time for a new digital regulatory authority

For platform companies, endorsing the concept of a new digital regulatory authority should be an act of enlightened self-interest. The idea that a handful of platforms can continue to make their own behavioral rules even when those decisions harm the public interest is no longer sustainable. The absence of a uniform federal policy is not only not in the interest of the public, but also it is creating problems for these companies. The ultimate uncertainty is a set of unknown decisions from multiple regulators.

The metachallenges of the metaverse

Online issues such as personal privacy, marketplace competition, and misinformation only become greater challenges in the metaverse. Rather than being distracted by the shiny new bauble, policymakers need to focus on the underlying problems of the digital revolution, which won’t go away with new technological developments.

Don’t replace the digital divide with the “not good enough divide”

COVID-19 demonstrated the need for speed in digital broadband connections. As more and more members of a household were online simultaneously doing schoolwork or working from home, the need for bandwidth increased.

Changing lives by connecting all Americans to broadband internet

Jackson County Kentucky has one stop light in its 347 square miles—but also high-speed fiber optic internet service to rival any big city. In the coal country of eastern Kentucky, the 800-person town of McKee is the hub of a one-thousand-mile fiber-to-the-home network covering two of the nation’s poorest and most remote counties. The fiber link was built almost entirely with dollars from the federal government. It is a powerful example of the infrastructure of the 21st century and the importance of extending those connections to all Americans.

Rebuilding for the vast scope of FCC responsibilities

In this final installment of the "Build Back Better with Biden FCC", we look at the broad sweep of other—yet no less important—issues which the Federal Communications Commission must deal with as the deciding actor including:

Spectrum: The pathway of the 21st century

As a Commissioner during the Trump administration, Federal Communications Commission Acting Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel called out the disarray resulting from the lack of a national spectrum policy. “We are heading into our wireless future with something less than a fully coordinated effort,” she warned. The Biden administration has not repeated the failure to prepare with transition planning.

Restoring non-discrimination to the 21st century’s most important network | Part 4 of Build Back Better with Biden FCC

The ongoing challenge of regulatory oversight in an era of rapid technological change is to maintain the flexibility to deal with unanticipated developments. What is essential for the future of meaningful net neutrality, therefore, is the agility to adjust to new technology and new marketplace behaviors.

Boosting broadband adoption | Part 3 of Build Back Better with Biden FCC

The digital divide and internet equity is more about consumer adoption than it is about network deployment. This paper addresses the adoption problem, how it has been exacerbated by the Trump Federal Communications Commission, and how the Biden FCC will be called upon to think anew and reprioritize in order to connect more Americans. Trump FCC systematically and stealthily worked to weaken the Lifeline program. The Biden FCC’s Build Back Better opportunity for broadband access for low-income Americans has multiple opportunities to reverse that neglect.

The consequences of social media’s giant experiment

The actions of Facebook and Twitter to ban President Donald Trump are protected by Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Act. This is the same Section 230 behind which social media companies have sheltered to protect them from liability for the dissemination of the hate, lies and conspiracies that ultimately led to the assault on the U.S. Capitol on January 6. These actions are better late than never. But the proverbial horse has left the barn.

Transitioning tech policy in an existential crisis

Confronting the Biden transition are five existential crises. The pandemic is surging. The economy is stalling. Social justice is faltering. Climate change is on a rampage. And the government that is essential to dealing with each of these problems has been hollowed out by four years of constant attacks. And, oh yes, these issues must be dealt with despite a potentially divided government and deeply divided citizenry. As a tech policy wonk, I am often asked, “How will the Biden transition handle tech policy?” It is the wrong question.

The Justice Department’s lawsuit against Google will not stop Big Tech’s abuses

The abusive practices of the dominant digital platforms are so widespread and have become so embedded that there is no single solution. What is needed is a cocktail of remedies that blends antitrust with ongoing regulatory oversight. The digital-oversight cocktail, therefore, needs to include the ability to establish industry-wide behavioral rules in addition to antitrust enforcement.

Is spectrum shortage a thing of the past?

The largest user of spectrum, the Department of Defense (DoD), has put out a Request for Information (RFI) that seems to propose that at least some of the spectrum traditionally used by the military could be shared for a fifth generation (5G) wireless network. The DoD cites a component of 5G technology called dynamic spectrum sharing (DSS) as the vehicle to accomplish this. This is a milestone. The Defense Department itself is suggesting that it is possible to share spectrum without harming its operations.

The need for regulation of big tech beyond antitrust

The rapid pace of digital technology means companies can move rapidly to advantage themselves by exploiting consumers and eliminating potential competition. Congress has traditionally created new expert agencies to oversee new technology platforms. Whether the Interstate Commerce Commission (railroads), Federal Communications Commission (broadcasting), Federal Aviation Administration (air transport), Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (finance), or any other of the alphabet agencies, the precedent is clear: new technologies require specialized oversight.

The broadband industry steps up to connect students when the FCC will not

America’s broadband providers have stepped up with the ‘K-12 Bridge to Broadband” to help meet the needs of millions of low-income American students who are unable to get on the internet so they can go to class from home. The new program will do two things the Trump Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has failed to do. First, it will identify households with students that have broadband passing their door but have chosen not to subscribe.

Broadband in red and blue states: Three solutions to low-income internet access

There are almost three times as many Americans without a broadband subscription in blue urban areas than in red state rural areas. The Trump Federal Communications Commission, by focusing its attention on rural areas with a lack of access (i.e., those unable to get broadband) is dealing with only part of the digital divide. The larger part of the digital divide is adoption; those Americans who may have broadband available, but don’t or can’t use it. Here are three solutions the Trump FCC could pursue if they really were dedicated to making the digital divide their “number one priority.”

New Digital Realities; New Oversight Solutions in the US

The digital marketplace is wide-reaching, complicated and self-reinforcing. The systems developed to oversee an earlier time are burdened by industrial era statutes and decades of precedent that render them insufficient for the digital present. In the absence of federal oversight, the dominant digital companies have made their own rules and imposed them on consumers and the market. Just as industrial capitalism operated—and thrived—under public interest obligations, so should internet capitalism be grounded in public interest expectations.

Big Tech and antitrust: Pay attention to the math behind the curtain

It was the “Wizard of Oz” in digital format as the four titans of Big Tech testified via video before the House Antitrust Subcommittee. Just like in the movie, what the subcommittee saw was controlled by a force hidden from view. The wizard in this case—the reason these four companies are so powerful—is the math that takes our private information and turns it into their corporate asset. It is the 21st century equivalent of Rockefeller’s 20th century monopoly over oil. Unlike industrial assets such as oil, data is reusable. Data is also iterative, as its use in a product creates new data.

Could President Trump claim a national security threat to shut down the internet?

“I have the right to do a lot of things that people don’t even know about,” President Donald Trump said in a 2020 Oval Office exchange. One of those powers is his authority to shut down radio, television, both wireless and wired phone networks, and the internet. It is not a big step from using the power of the government to threaten free expression to actually doing something to curtail that expression. All it takes is a unilateral “proclamation by the President” of the existence of a “national emergency.”

5 steps to get the internet to all Americans

We have incorporated the internet as a critical part of our personal and professional lives. This is not going to change. The COVID-19 crisis has sped us forward to a paradigm shift in which we rely on the internet to bring economic and social activity to us—rather than us going to them. Yet, tens of millions of Americans do not have access to or cannot afford quality internet service. The United States has an internet access problem, especially in rural areas. The existing program to extend broadband has become a corporate entitlement for incumbent telephone companies.