Sen. Warner’s Platform Regulation: A good step forward, but what about ISPs?
Reprinted with permission from ProMarket. See full article at https://promarket.org/sen-warners-ambitious-plan-regulate-social-media-giants-ruin-internet-save/
August 2018
Analysis
Analysis
Daily Digest 8/14/2018 (How Fast is Broadband?)
Send date
Tue, 08/14/2018
Tuesday, August 14, 2018
To uphold its integrity, the Trump FCC must proceed with Sinclair hearing
Sinclair Broadcasting has a right to establish that that they did not engage in “misrepresentations and/or lack of candor”—an assertion by the Federal Communications Commission—in matters related to its $3.9 billion acquisition of Tribune Media. The FCC has designated the matter for an administrative hearing before an administrative law judge. That hearing must go forward. The character of the licensee is an important component in determining whether the party is a fit trustee for the public’s airwaves.
Would Sen. Warner’s Ambitious Plan to Regulate Social Media Giants “Ruin” the Internet—Or Save it?
Sen. Mark Warner’s proposals to regulate social media platforms are by far the most ambitious to come from Congress. Here, three experts discuss the pros and cons: 1) Beton Senior Fellow and Public Advocate Gigi Sohn. She is also a Distinguished Fellow at the Georgetown Law Institute for Technology Law & Policy. 2) Daniel Crane, an antitrust law expert and the Frederick Paul Furth Sr. Professor of Law at the University of Michigan. 3) Hal Singer, an antitrust economist and senior fellow of the George Washington Institute of Public Policy.
California Lawmakers Urged To Reject Attempts To Weaken Privacy Law
California should reject requests by industry groups to water down the state's new privacy law, a coalition of 20 advocacy groups said in a new letter to lawmakers. "The sky is not falling, as industry suggests," said the ACLU of California, Berkeley Media Studies Group, Center for Digital Democracy, Consumer Action, Electronic Frontier Foundation, Public Knowledge and other advocacy groups. "The law and its particulars do not pose a threat to the California economy," they write.