October 2017

Net Neutrality and the Role of Antitrust

Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial and Antitrust Law
House Judiciary Committee
November 1, 2017
10 am
https://judiciary.house.gov/hearing/net-neutrality-role-antitrust/

Witnesses

  • Acting Chairman Maureen Ohlhausen, Federal Trade Commission
  • Michael Romano Senior Vice President, Industry Affairs & Business Development, NTCA (The Rural Broadband Association)
  • Commissioner Terrell McSweeny, Federal Trade Commission
  • Robert McDowell, Former Commissioner, Federal Communications Commission


Fix this democracy — now

In so many ways, the underlying conditions of US democracy need repair. Among American citizens, ideological and philosophical divisions seem insurmountably sharp; among their representatives in Washington, compromise appears impossible. Whatever side you were on in last year’s election, it’s clear that the campaign brought these problems dramatically to the surface of our national life; it’s also clear that these challenges would have been with us, in equal measure, no matter who won. And so, as we approach the one-year anniversary of the election, we asked dozens of writers and artists to look beyond the day-to-day upheavals of the news cycle and propose one idea that could help fix the long-term problems bedeviling American democracy. The result: 38 conservative, liberal, practical, creative, broad, specific, technocratic, provocative solutions for an unsettled country.

No network has interviewed President Trump more than Fox. Here’s what they’ve asked him.

CBS’s Mark Knoller crunched the numbers. After President Donald Trump’s interview with Lou Dobbs on the Fox Business Network on Oct 25, President Trump has now participated in interviews with Fox News Channel or affiliated networks 18 times — out of 26 television interviews in total. Combined, President Trump has granted five interviews to NBC, MSNBC, ABC and CBS, in total. He has given three to the Christian Broadcasting Network and Trinity Broadcasting Network. And he has given zero to CNN.

House Judiciary Committee to hold Nov 1 hearing on net neutrality, antitrust issues

The House Judiciary Committee has scheduled a hearing on network neutrality and the role of antitrust for Nov 1. The Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial and Antitrust Law, which will hold the hearing, has not released details, but the event is likely to address concerns that internet service providers stifle competition. The hearing comes as Republicans in the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) put their finishing touches on a plan to scrap net neutrality. The agency has not released a timeline for when it will release and vote on the final version of Chairman Ajit Pai’s proposal to roll back the rules, but telecommunication insiders speculate that a vote could come as soon as December.

Rep Maxine Waters demands info on Russia-linked Twitter accounts she says targeted her

Rep Maxine Waters (D-CA) is demanding Twitter provide information on Russia-linked accounts she says targeted her and her congressional district. In a statement released Oct 26, Rep Waters said she has never publicly discussed this before now but has suspected for a while that she was a target. "I have been aware for some time that I was targeted by Russian operatives whose interests were aligned with Donald Trump," Rep Waters said in the statement. "I have often noticed that every time I tweeted about Trump and Russia, dozens of strange accounts would immediately tweet various lies and falsehoods that fringe alt-right websites would subsequently use as a basis to write fake news stories." Rep Waters, a vocal critic of President Trump, said she wants the American people and Congress to understand they may also be "vulnerable to this type of foreign disruption."

How Facebook, Google and Twitter 'embeds' helped Trump in 2016

Facebook, Twitter and Google played a far deeper role in Donald Trump's presidential campaign than has previously been disclosed, with company employees taking on the kind of political strategizing that campaigns typically entrust to their own staff or paid consultants, according to a new study released Oct 26. The peer-reviewed paper, based on more than a dozen interviews with both tech company staffers who worked inside several 2016 presidential campaigns and campaign officials, sheds new light on Silicon Valley's assistance to Trump before his surprise win last November.

While the companies call it standard practice to work hand-in-hand with high-spending advertisers like political campaigns, the new research details how the staffers assigned to the 2016 candidates frequently acted more like political operatives, doing things like suggesting methods to target difficult-to-reach voters online, helping to tee up responses to likely lines of attack during debates, and scanning candidate calendars to recommend ad pushes around upcoming speeches. Such support was critical for the Trump campaign, which didn’t invest heavily in its own digital operations during the primary season and made extensive use of Facebook, Twitter and Google "embeds" for the general election, says the study, conducted by communications professors from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and the University of Utah.

Cambridge Analytica used data from Facebook and Politico to help Trump

Cambridge Analytica used its own database and voter information collected from Facebook and news publishers in its effort to help elect Donald Trump, despite a claim by a top campaign official who has downplayed the company’s role in the election. The data analysis company, which uses a massive database of consumer and demographic information to profile and target voters, has come under the scrutiny of congressional investigators who are examining the Trump campaign.

This week, the group became the focus of a new controversy after the Daily Beast reported that the company’s chief executive, Alexander Nix, had contacted Julian Assange in 2016. Nix allegedly asked the WikiLeaks founder whether he could assist in releasing thousands of e-mails that had gone missing on a private server that had been used by Hillary Clinton. Assange confirmed the contact but said the offer was rejected. The news prompted a top former campaign official, Michael Glassner, who was executive director of the Trump election campaign, to minimise the role Cambridge Analytica played in electing Trump, despite the fact that it paid Cambridge Analytica millions of dollars in fees. In a statement on Oct 25, Glassner said that the Trump campaign relied on voter data owned by the Republican National Committee to help elect the president. “Any claims that voter data from any other source played a key role in the victory are false,” he said. But that claim is contradicted by a detailed description of the company’s role in the 2016 election given in May by a senior Cambridge Analytica executive.

House Speaker Ryan: FBI will hand over documents related to Trump-Russia dossier

The FBI has pledged to hand over documents related to a controversial dossier linking President Trump to Russia, House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI) said. The House Intelligence Committee has been seeking the documents for months, hoping to learn more about the bureau’s relationship to the dossier’s author, a former British spy named Christopher Steele, and whether the document was used by federal investigators to bolster their probe into ties between Russia and the Trump campaign.

Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes (R-CA) in August had issued two subpoenas to compel the FBI and Justice Department to turn over the documents. He set an Oct 27 deadline for them to comply. “The FBI got in touch with us yesterday afternoon, and they have informed us that they will comply with our document requests, and that they will provide the documents Congress has been asking for by next week,” Speaker Ryan said. “And we expect the FBI to honor that commitment.”

How Europe fights fake news

[Commentary] Soon, a new law against hate speech will go into effect in Germany, fining Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and other social media companies up to €50 million if they fail to take down illegal content from their sites within 24 hours of being notified. For more ambiguous content, companies will have seven days to decide whether to block the posts. The rule is Germany’s attempt to fight hate speech and fake news, both of which have risen online since the arrival of more than a million refugees in the last two years. Germany isn’t alone in its determination to crack down on these kinds of posts. For the past year, most of Europe has been in an intense and fascinating debate about how to regulate, who should regulate, and even whether to regulate illegal and defamatory online content.

Unlike the US, where we rely on corporate efforts to tackle the problems of fake news and disinformation online, the European Commission and some national governments are wading into the murky waters of free speech, working to come up with viable ways to stop election-meddling and the violence that has resulted from false news reports.

[Anya Schiffrin is the director of the Technology, Media and Communications specialization at Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs.]