1. Monthly archive
  2. May 2017

May 2017

Open Internet Process: Then and Now

In 2014, Commissioner Ajit Pai gave some advice to the Federal Communications Commission when it adopted a notice of proposed rulemaking on network neutrality. Will Chairman Pai take Commissioner Pai's advice?

Commissioner Pai’s Advice (2014): “A dispute this fundamental is not for us, five unelected individuals, to decide. Instead, it should be resolved by the people’s elected representatives, those who choose the direction of government — and those whom the American people can hold accountable for that choice.”
Chairman Pai’s Actions (2017): "Moving forward with action at the FCC, with only three Commissioners."
Chairman Pai's Advice (2014): “I recommended that the Commission seek guidance from Congress instead of plowing ahead yet again on its own.”
Chairman Pai's Actions (2017): "Deciding the FCC is the appropriate venue, instead of waiting for Congress to act."

Rep Eshoo and Others: FCC Should Hold 'RT' to Transparency Standards

On the same day the Senate is grilling former Obama and Trump Administration officials about Russian interference in US elections, a group of Democratic Reps has asked the Federal Communications Commission to apply transparency requirements to RT (formerly Russia Today) broadcasts delivered over the airwaves. RT broadcasts from Washington (DC) studios. While it lists 19 cable systems, satellite operator Dish, Roku, Google and Apple apps, IPTV outlets and a lot of hotel channels, the only terrestrial outlet identified is MHz4 in Washington, one of a suite of noncommercial digital subchannels of WNVC and WNVT, although their spectrum was sold in the FCC inventive auction and will be going off the air soon, according to what they told the FCC.

The legislators said they were not looking to chill speech, just identify it. They asked whether the FCC's sponsorship rules should apply to foreign-state-sponsored channels. The letter comes following a January report from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence finding that RT played a propaganda role in Russia's efforts to influence the election outcome. The letter was spearheaded by former House Communications Subcommittee ranking member Anna Eshoo (D-CA).

America’s growing news deserts

As local newspapers have closed across the country, more and more communities are left with no daily local news outlet at all. Rural America isn’t the only place local news is disappearing. It’s also drying up in urban areas around the country.

In search of a local news solution

[Commentary] This issue of the Columbia Journalism Review is about what has happened—and likely will happen next—to one of America’s great national institutions, its local press. Just as the local-news financial picture seems more daunting than ever, new energy is building to address the problem. Is it fixable, or are America’s local newsrooms going away for good? What are the implications for open records, for accountability—for our democracy? This issue of CJR is one step toward answering those questions.

Could Sinclair launch a Fox News rival?

The Sinclair-Tribune deal has set tongues wagging in Washington (DC) as to whether Sinclair, a Maryland-based television station owner that has often pushed right-leaning programming, will try to position itself as a rival to Fox News.

The Washington Post reported in December that during the 2016 campaign, news stories and features favorable to then-candidate Donald Trump or challenging Democrat Hillary Clinton were distributed to Sinclair stations on a “must-run” basis. Earlier that month, POLITICO reported that the president's son-in-law and adviser, Jared Kushner, told business executives the campaign had struck a deal with Sinclair for better media coverage, a characterization Sinclair disputed. The group also recently hired Boris Epshteyn, a White House aide who oversaw Trump's television surrogate operation, as chief political analyst. Given those recent decisions, many in Washington wonder if Sinclair has its sights set on Fox News.

Trump’s new rules will let Sinclair gobble up Tribune

For the moment, the fate of the Sinclair-Tribune deal rests in the hands of the Federal Communications Commission as well as the nation’s antitrust regulators. As with any merger of this size, the government has the ability to review and block the merger, permit it to proceed as proposed, or require Sinclair and Tribune to make certain changes in order for them to proceed.

Already, though, Sinclair has benefited greatly from the Federal Communications Commission: Under its Republican chairman, Ajit Pai, the agency has relaxed media ownership rules, beginning with a change in the way some stations are counted toward a company’s national footprint. That deregulatory move made Sinclair’s bid for Tribune fathomable, analysts have said. During the 2016 election, Sinclair stations appeared to have great access to the presidential candidate. While the company claimed it was not playing favorites, President Trump’s closest aide, Jared Kushner, said in December that Sinclair had actually struck a deal with Trump’s campaign with respect to its coverage. (Sinclair said the deal never happened.) Months later, Sinclair snapped up Boris Epsteyn, one of Trump’s spokespeople in the White House, as a chief political analyst.

The world’s most valuable resource is no longer oil, but data

[Commentary] A new commodity spawns a lucrative, fast-growing industry, prompting antitrust regulators to step in to restrain those who control its flow. A century ago, the resource in question was oil. Now similar concerns are being raised by the giants that deal in data, the oil of the digital era.

These titans—Alphabet (Google’s parent company), Amazon, Apple, Facebook and Microsoft—look unstoppable. They are the five most valuable listed firms in the world. Internet companies’ control of data gives them enormous power. Old ways of thinking about competition, devised in the era of oil, look outdated in what has come to be called the “data economy”. A new approach is needed. Rebooting antitrust for the information age will not be easy. It will entail new risks: more data sharing, for instance, could threaten privacy. But if governments don’t want a data economy dominated by a few giants, they will need to act soon.

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