On Nov 30, 2018, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai wrote to various Members of Congress regarding rural broadband. Many lawmakers expressed cocncernt hat budget limitations in the Universal Service FUnd's high cost program for legacy rate-of-return providers could result in undue reductionsin support for broadband deployment in rural communities. After noting that USF cuts were the legacy of the last Administration's 2016 Rate-of-Return Reform Order (in which Pai dissented), Chairman Pai wrote, "We started to address this problem in March, when the Commission dedicated an additional $500 million to support small, rural carriers deploying broadband to the farthest reaches of America. And I expect that we will finish our work in December. I have now circulated to my colleagues a proposed order that would reform our high-cost program for small carriers to increase its efficiency, its sufficiency, and its predictability, all while ensuring rural Americans get the high-quality services they need and deserve."

Chairman Pai then detailed the USF plan: "First, we’re promoting efficiency by offering rate-of-return carriers opportunity to opt in to model-based support, which would give them a guaranteed revenue stream for a decade in exchange for meeting specified buildout requirements. Second, we’re ensuring support is sufficient by offering additional funding to carriers that currently receive model-based support and who agree to meet increased buildout requirements. We’re also increasing funding for carriers who do not receive model-based support. Third, we’re making the program more predictable by setting a new long-term budget for rate-of-return carriers who choose not to opt in to model-based support and ending arbitrary funding cuts. And fourth, we’re increasing the target speeds for subsidized deployments from 10/1 Mbps to 25/3 Mbps. Long story short, we’re making the Universal Service Fund a more effective means of closing the digital divide."

New census data confirms what many in the city have long suspected: Big swaths of Philadelphia (PA) are nearly off the grid, with minimal access to fast internet services in their homes. Across the US in 2017, the national broadband penetration rate by household was 83.5 percent in 2017. In Philadelphia, the rate was 71.6 percent, the second-lowest among the 25 largest cities. The city’s internet penetration rate actually fell 2.7 percentage points between 2016 and 2017 for both wired services like Comcast and wireless data plans, the only large city to record a decline in internet access.

To help close the digital divide in its franchise areas, Comcast, whose hometown in Philadelphia, launched its discounted Internet Essentials in 2012, selling $10-a-month high-speed internet service to low-income parents with school-age children, and expanding the program to other groups, among them low-income veterans and senior citizens. In Aug, Comcast reported that 49,000 low-income households in Philadelphia have enrolled in the Internet Essentials program over the life of the program. Angela Siefer, executive director of the nonprofit National Digital Inclusion Alliance, said that nationally “it’s hard to say there’s been progress” in closing the digital divide. "There has been no big push to fix this. So why would we see big changes?” she said.

On Nov 26, 2018, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai responded to an Aug 31 letter from Sen Ed Markey (D-MA) and Rep Anna Eshoo (D-CA) and to a Sept 6 letter from Sens Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Kamala Harris (D-CA) regarding the problems the Santa Clara County Fire Department had using Verizon's network as they battled the Mendocino Complex Fire. The lawmakers were concerend about Verizon's throtttling of the first responders' communication. Chairman Pai wrote, "As you know, Verizon’s actions here did not apparently violate the Commission’s Title II Order or the 2015 net neutrality rules—as Santa Clara County acknowledged in a recent court filing. Indeed, the Title II Order referred to the type of data plan Santa Clara purchased from Verizon (i.e., one where speeds are slowed after a subscriber uses a specified amount of data) as the industry norm. So I was glad to hear that Verizon offer a new plan with no speed restrictions on public safety customers in a declared emergency, even though this would mean treating some users differently from others."

Remember when Sinclair Broadcasting Group tried to buy Tribune Media? That merger would have allowed Sinclair to reach 72 percent of US households -- far, far above the Federal Communications Commission’s 39 percent audience cap. Fortunately for consumers, Tribune backed out of the deal after the FCC signaled it was unwilling to approve the transaction as structured. Now another giant broadcaster is trying to buy Tribune Media. It’s the second largest local television owner in the country (after Sinclair): Nexstar Media. Chances are, despite Nexstar’s size and importance in the broadcasting world, you’ve never heard of them. Even though Nexstar keeps a lower profile than Sinclair, this merger poses a lot of the same problems as the abandoned Sinclair-Tribune pairing.

Even if the FCC won’t end the UHF discount loophole, it could still block the merger on public interest grounds because of the importance of diversity, competition, and local control to television broadcasting in particular. It could also block the merger on pure antitrust grounds, if it finds that the merger would substantially lessen competition. Public Knowledge will continue to monitor the proposed merger between Nexstar and Tribune as more information becomes available. The FCC has not yet opened a docket for this merger, but when they do, you can help by submitting comments explaining your concerns. Continue to follow us for updates.

California sent shockwaves through corporate America with a sweeping data privacy law earlier in 2018, but the business community is preparing to push back as CA’s expanded Democratic majority descends on Sacramento. Consumer advocates welcomed a new class of California legislators recently with a warning: The landmark privacy law is already in peril. "Instead of recognizing the need to further protect Americans and their data, some in industry seem intent on pushing California backward. They are asking you to take away rights and protections for Californians that are already enshrined in law," warned a letter privacy and consumer groups sent to every incoming legislator. As Big Tech continues to face pressure over how companies safeguard privacy, Sacramento is set to host the second round of an unfinished fight over which rights customers have to their data — and what compliance looks like for companies that rely on reams of such information. Efforts to alter the data privacy law will be a central focus for both the tech industry and big business writ large. A follow-up bill has already been filed, and lobbyists expect as many as a dozen more to emerge.

Public access stations such as Vermont's Greater Northshire Access Television (GNAT-TV) are facing an uncertain future following a proposal by the Federal Communications Commission that would change the way subscriber fees are collected to fund programming and broadcast services. On Sept 25, the FCC issued proposed rulemaking — Docket 05-311 — which, if adopted, could allow cable operators to reclassify certain in-kind services and subtract their monetary value from the 5 percent that cable companies are required to pay to fund public access stations. 

In-kind costs can include the value of the cable channels themselves as well as any other services provided. However, the FCC ruling fails to set any guidelines or limitations to the values that cable companies can assess. That would likely leave GNAT, an independent non-profit, without about 92 percent of the funding that fuels its annual operating budget of about $434,000, station executive director Tammie Reilly said. "The important point to note is we are not funded by Comcast. We are funded by subscribers of the cable system," Reilly said. Comcast merely collects those funds from customer bills and passes them along to the public access stations, she said.  "The concern is it's a unilateral thing [the cable companies] can do without much oversight," Reilly explained of the potential impact. "If we have no operating revenue, it would make it very difficult for us to provide services to the community and provide the access to the community that's required."