Daily Digest 12/15/2017 (News From the FCC Meeting)

In a Declartory Ruling and two Orders, the Federal Communications Commission reversed its 2015 Open Internet rules.

Declaratory Ruling

• Restores the classification of broadband Internet access service as an “information service” under Title I of the Communications Act.
• Reinstates the classification of mobile broadband Internet access service as a private mobile service.
• Finds that the regulatory uncertainty created by utility-style Title II regulation has reduced Internet service provider (ISP) investment in networks, as well as hampered innovation, particularly among small ISPs serving rural consumers.
• Finds that public policy, in addition to legal analysis, supports the information service classification, because it is more likely to encourage broadband investment and innovation, thereby furthering the goal of closing the digital divide and benefitting the entire Internet ecosystem.
• Restores broadband consumer protection authority to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), enabling it to apply its extensive expertise to provide uniform online protections against unfair, deceptive, and anticompetitive practices.

Report and Order

• Requires that ISPs disclose information about their practices to consumers, entrepreneurs, and the Commission, including any blocking, throttling, paid prioritization, or affiliated prioritization.
• Finds that transparency, combined with market forces as well as antitrust and consumer protection laws, achieve benefits comparable to those of the 2015 “bright line” rules at lower cost.
• Eliminates the vague and expansive Internet Conduct Standard, under which the FCC could micromanage innovative business models.

Order

• Finds that the public interest is not served by adding to the already-voluminous record in this proceeding additional materials, including confidential materials submitted in other proceedings.

The Federal Communications Commission adopted a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking initiating a comprehensive review of the national television audience reach cap, including the so-called UHF discount used by broadcasters to determine compliance with the cap. The national cap limits entities from owning or controlling television stations that, together, reach more than 39 percent of the television households in the country. The Commission’s last review of this rule occurred when the video marketplace looked very different and most Americans had fewer options for watching video programming. This Notice makes no tentative conclusions about whether the rule should be modified, retained, or eliminated. It asks questions about whether a cap is still needed and what public interest goals it would promote, where the cap should be set if still needed, and how compliance with the cap should be calculated, including the question of whether the UHF discount should be eliminated. The Notice also invites comment on the Commission’s legal authority to take such actions. Finally, the Notice seeks information, including data and empirical analysis, on the benefits and costs of modifying, retaining, or eliminating the national cap.

The Federal Communications Commission added a new alert option—called a “Blue Alert”—to the nation’s emergency alerting systems. Blue Alerts can be used by state and local authorities to notify the public of threats to law enforcement and to help apprehend dangerous suspects. Blue Alerts warn the public when there is actionable information related to a law enforcement officer who is missing, seriously injured or killed in the line of duty, or when there is an imminent credible threat to an officer. A Blue Alert could quickly warn you if a violent suspect may be in your community, along with providing instructions on what to do if you spot the suspect and how to stay safe. The FCC created a dedicated Blue Alert event code in the Emergency Alert System so that state and local agencies have the option to send these warnings to the public through broadcast, cable, satellite, and wireline video providers.

The Federal Communications Commission issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that explores ways to enable pay-tv providers (multichannel video programming distributors in regulatoryspeak), such as cable and satellite providers, to communicate with their subscribers in more efficient and less costly ways. Specifically, the Notice proposes to allow cable operators to send general written notices to subscribers by email, as long as they use a verified email address and comply with other consumer safeguards. The NPRM also proposes to allow cable operators, satellite carriers, and open video systems to deliver certain subscriber privacy notifications by email, subject to certain consumer safeguards, and to permit cable operators to respond to consumer requests or complaints by email in certain situations.

On February 26, 2015, the Federal Communications Commission acted decisively to protect the rights of internet users to employ any legal applications, content, devices, and services of their choosing on the broadband networks they rely on. Today, the FCC’s Republican majority abandons those protections. Their action ignores bipartisan public support for the 2015 rules, displays a flawed and factually inaccurate understanding of Internet technology, and misinterpret U.S. communications law– a trifecta of governmental malfeasance. The Orwellian-named, so-called Restoring Internet Freedom Order is a blow to competition and innovation, to diversity and our most-vulnerable communities, to equity and our democracy. But the darkest hour is just before the dawn. And Benton joins millions in fighting for the dawn. We lost a battle today, but more will come. In the courts. And at the ballot box. We hold on to hope that true internet freedom will prevail.

[Commentary] As the US continues to debate whether to embrace internet freedom, the world is doing so already, with many countries imposing even stronger rules than the ones the Federal Communications Commission did away with. Other countries are facing similar dilemmas about how to deal with today’s digital realities, and are slowly and individually contributing to a patchwork of laws that differ from country to country. But many highly industrialized and rapidly developing countries share a general consensus that regulations ensuring an open internet are good for consumers and for civil society. Legally speaking, policy and regulatory decisions made in the US don’t hold any direct power in other countries. However, domestic rules about the internet will indeed affect the global conversation around net neutrality. What the US decides, through the FCC, the courts and potentially even through Congress, will determine whether US leadership on the internet remains strong, or whether it will cede ground to other countries willing to protect their citizens. [Sascha Meinrath is the Director of X-Lab and Palmer Chair in Telecommunications at Pennsylvania State University. Nathalia Foditsch is a Ph.D. Student in Law and Communications at American University]

Now that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) under chairman Ajit Pai has officially repealed net neutrality rules that have been in effect since 2015, the question becomes: Will the web really change?  Experts say that, if net neutrality norms do start to erode, it will probably happen incrementally, in ways that may be hard to recognize at first.  Here's what consumers should watch for. 

1. More Zero-Rating Plans
2. Price Hikes for Internet Access
3. Tiered Internet Plans Could Be a Thing
4. Consumers Could See Fewer Startups
5. Some Content Might Get Blocked

President Donald Trump called to congratulate 21st Century Fox owner Rupert Murdoch on Dec 14 following the announcement that Disney will buy most of Fox for more than $50 billion. White House spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders said that the president is hopeful about the deal's effects on job creation.  "The president spoke with Rupert Murdoch earlier today, congratulated him on the deal and thinks that, to use one of the president's favorite words, that this could be a great thing for jobs," she said.  "And he certainly looks forward to and is hoping to see a lot more of those created."

Sen Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) is calling on the Justice Department to investigate whether the 2011 Comcast-NBC merger has hurt market competition. Sen Blumenthal sent a letter to the Trump administration's top antitrust prosecutor, Makan Delrahim, on Dec 13, asking him to revisit the deal and to try to keep in place behavioral conditions that are set to expire next year. "Given your responsibilities as head of the Antitrust Division to enforce our nation’s antitrust laws, it is incumbent on you to continue to ensure that Comcast’s acquisition of NBCU does not undermine free and fair competition," Sen Blumenthal wrote. The Connecticut Democrat asked Delrahim to consider splitting up the two companies if he finds that their merger has dampened competition.

[Commentary]  It is time to discard the perception of “good journalism” as being enough. Whether newsrooms want to acknowledge it or not, there’s a substantial disconnect between them and the public on the role of journalism in our communities and for our democracy. Ignoring that disconnect will not make it go away. Instead, let 2018 be the year that journalism starts by listening and believing that people do actually, deeply care about quality news and information. May this be the year journalism lifts up the voices of people of color, women, and those on the margins, embraces trust-building practices, takes a stand for press freedom, and teaches us how power works. [Molly de Aguiar is the managing director for the News Integrity Initiative at the CUNY Graduate School of Journalism.]