Daily Digest 5/23/2018 (North Carolina Broadband)

[Editorial] Lt. Gov. Dan Forest (R-NC) hosted a made-for-a-campaign-commercial media event with Federal Communications Chairman Ajit Pai and a bevy of Republican state legislators at Graham High School in Alamance County to boast about North Carolina being the first state to connect every classroom to high-speed broadband. It is no small achievement. However, it’s not quite his to brag about. If Forest’s fellow Republicans had their way, there would be nothing to celebrate. In 2007 only one Republican, former state Sen. Fletcher Hartsell, voted for the state budget that included the school connectivity initiative. FCC Chairman Pai noted that in the last 11 years North Carolina has received about $700 million of federal e-rate funding. The result is students, no matter their background or schoolroom in the state, have high-speed connectivity. It’s ironic that while Pai celebrates North Carolina’s spread of high speed internet access, he’s been working in Washington to do just the opposite, adopting policies that sharply cut access to high-speed connectivity. Given the lieutenant governor’s vocal praise and commitment to open and free broadband access it would be an abdication of his responsibility if he didn’t tell his political ally, Chairman Pai, that equal access must extend beyond the public school classroom.

Using its deployment of FirstNet to provide a dedicated, nationwide network to first responders, AT&T can reach deeper into rural consumer markets that typically fall to chief competitor Verizon, according to AT&T Communications CEO John Donovan. “T-Mobile much more urban, Verizon much more rural,” Donovan said. “FirstNet gives us a great opportunity to go into the rural markets because not only will we be building the network for first responders, it dawned us that we should also be putting up stores and going after the consumers. I think Verizon’s going to have its hands full with our strategy going forward in the more rural areas.” He said network investment hit around $140 million in the first quarter of 2018 and will reach around $2 billion by the end of the year. “We’re really getting into a ramp on the build,” Donovan said. “We’re going out and touching the towers, at the same time we’re deploying all our spectrum. It’s one touch for all the bands. The footprint is beginning to grow.”

Sens Jeff Merkley (D-OR) and Pat Toomey (R-PA) issued a strong call to Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai to identify and address fraudulent behavior that has led to potentially two million fake comments being filed under stolen identities on public rulemakings. Though they come from different sides of the aisle, Sens Merkley and Toomey share a personal connection to this issue: Both had their identities stolen to file false comments on the FCC’s net neutrality proposals. “Late last year, the identities of as many as two million Americans were stolen and used to file fake comments during the Federal Communications Commission’s comment period for the net neutrality rule,” the Sens wrote. “We were among those whose identities were misused to express viewpoints we do not hold. We are writing to express our concerns about these fake comments and the need to identify and address fraudulent behavior in the rulemaking process.” The Senators specifically encouraged the agency to consider using CAPTCHA technology to help weed out comments posted by bots.

The Senate Banking Committee rebuked President Donald Trump's efforts to ease sanctions on the Chinese telecom firm ZTE, which the intelligence community and trade regulators have warned poses a national security risk for the U.S.  The committee approved an amendment in an overwhelming and bipartisan 23-2 vote that would block President Trump from easing sanctions on ZTE without first certifying to Congress that the company is complying with US law. The move comes the same day it was reported that the Trump administration and China are closing in on a deal to ease off ZTE in exchange for trade concessions. That report raised concerns among lawmakers of both parties who have advocated for a crackdown on Chinese technology companies.  “If the president and his team won’t follow through on tough sanctions against ZTE, it’s up to Congress to ensure that it happens," Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-NY) said. 

Since the early years of the internet boom, American and European rules and regulations have deemed social media companies to be neutral “platforms” or “hosts,” and thus immune from the liabilities faced by traditional publishers. But a series of scandals over their content has put the companies under a new assault — and the broad question of whether they should be seen as publishers rather than agnostic platforms has sweeping legal ramifications. “I say to Facebook, ‘What is the difference between you and a national newspaper being responsible for the letters they publish on their letters page? Why do you have to be treated differently?” said Paul Tweed who made his name suing news organizations like CNN, Forbes and The National Enquirer on behalf of Hollywood movie stars. “Facebook can’t say, ‘We are not a publisher; we are just a platform.’ I have been hearing that from them for years, and I never believed it.” “We are going to look back at the mid-2010s as the high-water mark of free speech online, and it is only downhill from here,” said Eric Goldman, a law professor at Santa Clara University.

European lawmakers pilloried Mark Zuckerberg at a hearing for Facebook’s recent privacy and misinformation mishaps and raised the possibility of new regulation, a more realistic threat than what the social media giant faces in the United States. Opening a hearing with key leaders of the European Parliament, the body's president, Antonio Tajani, described it as an "alarming scandal" that Cambridge Analytica, a political consultancy, could access the names, "likes" and other personal information of 87 million Facebook users. "The price paid by the users is in many cases data in exchange for free services," Tajani said. "However, democracy should never become a marketing operation where anyone who buys that data buys a political advantage." In response, Zuckerberg apologized to European lawmakers, much as he did during his testimony to the US Congress in April. "We didn't take a broad enough view of our responsibility, and that was a mistake. And I'm sorry for it," he said. But some European policymakers did not appear to be swayed by Zuckerberg's entreaties. One member of Parliament, Guy Verhofstadt, lamented that Facebook already had apologized for its missteps "fifteen or sixteen times the last decade." "Mr. Zuckerberg's apologies are not enough," Tajani said at a later press conference. "We are looking for further commitments… and we will be looking forward to getting his written answers on Cambridge Analytica. It’s obvious that kind of thing should not happen again."