Op-Ed

When we say “accessibility,” many of us think about adding keyboard navigation, high color contrast, and alt text to a website. But the reality is, even with accessibility features, your website is still inaccessible to millions who don’t have internet access or training to use a computer. The digital divide remains – 15 million Americans don’t have a computer and 24 million don’t have broadband.

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai has now decided that a handful of promises, made just days ago by T-Mobile and Sprint, puts this $26 billion transaction in the public interest. But these promises are speculative, unsubstantiated, and entirely unenforceable.

There is simply no business case for investment in many rural areas without more effective public-private partnerships. That is why recent efforts in Washington to target funding and bridge broadband gaps in rural America are so important.  Rather than creating new programs out of whole cloth, we encourage Congress to look to existing federal programs with proven track records, like the Federal Communications Commission’s Universal Service Fund, as it considers how to distribute additional direct funding resources.

The Federal Communications Commission has proposed a package of fatally flawed plans that would fundamentally undercut Lifeline. May 15's FCC oversight hearing is an opportunity for Congress to hold the agency accountable for its disastrous proposals. 

“Build it and they will come.” This line has become shorthand for the idea that new infrastructure, once built, attracts customers. But with broadband — the technology that brings high-speed, reliable internet into our homes, schools, farms and workplaces—the quote may have an unhappy twist: if you don’t build it, they won’t have a chance. What’s missing is the infrastructure.

When does a company become too big or too successful to exist? Chris Hughes, a co-founder of Facebook, argues that Facebook should be dismantled because “big” poses a risk to society. In my view — and that of most people who write about technology’s impact on society — what matters is not size but rather the rights and interests of consumers, and our accountability to the governments and legislators who oversee commerce and communications.

The tussle over "network neutrality" started 20 years ago in Portland (OR). Today, Portland and its region are poised to be Ground Zero for resolving the real issues behind public concern over “net neutrality”—the stagnant, uncompetitive, hopelessly outclassed state of internet access in America. Portland is taking seriously the idea of a publicly overseen dark-fiber network over which private providers could compete to offer cheap, ubiquitous internet access.

Readers of this space may recall that I worked for many years (15) for U.S.

Sen Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ) has doubled-down on her unwillingness to support the Save the Internet Act and overturn the Federal Communications Commission’s repeal of net neutrality. In a letter to constituents, the senator brushes off concerns from citizens asking her to restore net neutrality by parroting cynical, 

As the head of the Federal Communications Commission, I’ve been working for the past two-plus years to advance a market-based strategy to promote US leadership in 5G. As part of what we call our 5G FAST Plan, the FCC finished its first 5G spectrum auction in Jan, and we’re holding a second right now that’s already generated almost $2 billion in bids. The recipe for US leadership in wireless technology is proven and simple: Free up airwaves to accommodate the increase in wireless traffic. Get rid of the red tape that slows the deployment of wireless infrastructure.