1. Monthly archive
  2. April 2016

April 2016

Next Century Cities Announces New Awards for Tech-Powered Civic Engagement

Next Century Cities announced the new Next Generation Engagement Awards, aimed at rewarding communities harnessing high-speed Internet to enhance citizens’ democratic participation and engagement. Winning communities will receive financial resources, technical support from experts, and workshops to connect with other innovators. The competition is designed to strengthen and learn from cities’ efforts to drive more participatory democracy and civic engagement using high-speed broadband.

Winning communities will be awarded up to $30,000 to implement or enhance projects that tap high-speed Internet access to better engage their citizens in the democratic and civic process. At least three communities will win the inaugural Awards. Applications will be accepted through June 15, 2016 and winners will be announced in late summer. Examples of areas ripe for innovation include: Participatory budgeting; Public transportation and urban planning; Involvement in local government deliberations; or Community concern reporting and response.

FCC makes essential Lifeline progress

[Commentary] It is rare that a Federal Communications Commission meeting evokes thoughts of “The Little Prince.” Still, reading accounts of last week’s contretemps over Lifeline—a program to promote telecommunications access for low-income households—reminded me of the prince’s observation that “what is essential is invisible to the eye.” The stories focused on the conflict, ignoring the consensus forged and more important, the essential progress made. The meeting stopped and restarted several times as Commissioner Mignon Clyburn and the two Republicans negotiated over the program’s budget. Eventually Clyburn rejoined the two Democrats and voted for the Chairman’s budget proposal. I don’t deny the drama of the cliffhanger negotiations, nor the WWE-worthy accusations of foul play that followed when those negotiations broke down.

The excitement, however, distracts one from the simple truth about the Lifeline budget. Its parameters will be decided by November’s election, not by the five current commissioners. March 31’s vote was an opening bid but is subject to many adjustments down the line. Far more important was the essential and long-lasting structural transition of Lifeline’s voice-centric framework to one reflecting the centrality of broadband. The commission also took steps to transfer the determination of eligibility from the carriers to a third party and remove barriers to more carriers participating. Nothing will do more to improve the value delivered to the intended beneficiaries than robust competition in that market segment.

Telecom-Backed Papers Like This One Are How ISPs Rewrite America's Laws

[Commentary] A telecommunication-funded policy paper slamming local government-owned broadband networks published April 6 is masquerading as a serious “economic analysis,” but is yet another example of the dominant players in telecommunications manipulating the political system to suit their interests.

In the last couple years, there’s been a strong push by local municipalities to provide Gigabit fiber Internet connections for their residents, whether that means incentivizing a company like Google to come to their city, partnering with a startup Internet service provider, or building the entire network by themselves using taxpayer money. The “municipal-owned” broadband networks are the ones taken on by "The Impact of Government-Owned Broadband Networks on Private Investment and Consumer Welfare", and are, at least in theory, the ones that present the biggest threat to existing ISPs. There's no doubt that the paper will be used as a study to support telecom-written legislation that are passed to governors and state lawmakers as evidence that taxpayer-funded Internet services just don’t work.

Sen Cotton slams WhatsApp for turning on encryption

Sen Tom Cotton (R-AR) is slamming messaging platform WhatsApp for turning on end-to-end encryption for all of its users. “The WhatsApp and Facebook decision to add end-to-end encryption to all of WhatsApp’s services with no secure method to comply with valid search warrants continues a dangerous trend in the tech and data world,” he said. “We cannot allow companies to purposefully design applications that make it impossible to comply with court orders. I strongly urge WhatsApp and Facebook to reevaluate their decision before they help facilitate another terrorist attack.”

Hundreds of requests to unlock phones flood FBI

At the same time the FBI was struggling to unlock the iPhone of San Bernardino (CA) terrorist Syed Farook, the agency was being inundated with requests from state and local law enforcement seeking help accessing the contents of hundreds of encrypted or damaged cellphones linked to unrelated criminal investigations scattered across the country. Requests involving more than 500 such devices streamed into the bureau’s Computer Analysis Response Team and the agency’s Regional Computer Forensic Laboratory programs during a four-month period beginning last October, two months before agents seized Farook’s device in the aftermath of the mass shooting that left 14 dead, according to the FBI. The numbers, the most recent accounting provided by the agency, offer an assessment —albeit limited — of the mounting investigatory challenges posed by encryption and other technological hurdles beyond the San Bernardino case that launched the government’s recently aborted court battle with Apple.

The Emperor’s New Clothes: “Rate Regulation” as an Excuse to Gut FCC Consumer Protection Authority

[Commentary] Recently we highlighted the rapid effort to pass the “No Rate Regulation of Broadband Internet Access Act" (HR 2666) as a poorly crafted effort to prohibit rate regulation. We pointed out a variety of options to mitigate the consequences of the broad sweeping language. Consequences which we allowed were perhaps unintended. It turns out we can now see they are very much intended.

House Rules Committee announced they will be bringing an amended version of the bill to the floor as soon as the week of April 11. Boiled down: the effect of this bill as it is currently written authorizes a variety of consumer rip-offs. If that is not what its authors intend, then it must be defeated or amended. On its face, the bill has been cleverly rewritten to work in a couple of specific carve-outs, such as exempting enforcement of the “no paid prioritization” rule or protecting interconnection between network providers. Taken individually, these added provisions look at first glance like an attempt at compromise. But it actually exposes what we fear is the bill’s true intent: The outright authorization of broadband Internet access service providers’ ability to charge monopoly rates - and taking the cop who exists to protect consumers from this off the beat.

© 1994-2026 Benton Institute for Broadband & Society. All Rights Reserved.