This decision puts at risk how Congress intended independent agencies to function in American democracy. When Congress established the Federal Communications Commission, it made a deliberate choice to create a multi-member, multi-party, independent body insulated from political pressure precisely because the decisions this agency makes about who can speak over the public airwaves, how spectrum is allocated, and how communications markets are regulated, are too consequential to be made on the basis of political loyalty. We are already seeing what political control of this agency looks like in practice, through investigations targeting broadcasters and government critics for coverage this administration finds unfavorable.

As the Federal Communications Commission considers adopting its Nineteenth Section 706 Report, the Fiber Broadband Association submitted  updated market statistics to facilitate a data-driven assessment:

• For fixed broadband supply, as of year-end 2025, ~84.6 million US homes (~60% of total homes) were passed by fiber, an annual growth rate of ~11%; ~39.3 million homes were connected; as of September 2025, ~13.8 million homes (~16% of total homes) had access to multiple fiber providers, an annual growth rate of ~16%.
• For fixed broadband demand, as of Q1 2026, ~95% of fiber subscribers and ~89% of subscribers on DOCSIS networks were provisioned for 200 Mbps or faster service; ~37% of fiber and DOCSIS subscribers were provisioned for service between 500-900 Mbps; and ~22% of fiber and DOCSIS subscribers were provisioned for gigabit service. Fiber subscribers used an average of 837.0 GB per month downstream and 106.68 GB upstream.

The age of Artificial Intelligence is upon us. What should the policy response be? The Biden Administration advocated for an “all of government” regulatory approach to AI in the hopes of somehow controlling the technology. In contrast, the Trump Administration has embraced AI and wants to encourage its natural growth with a de-regulatory approach. Regardless of which policy approach one may prefer, given the vast economic impact that AI will have on the U.S. economy, common sense nonetheless dictates that if AI is to be regulated, then there should be a single, cohesive national framework rather than a patchwork of state laws that would subject AI to the proverbial “Death by Fifty State Cuts.” But because common sense is scarce in policy debates these days, efforts to regulate AI at the state level are proliferating like mushrooms after it rains. According to the website Multistate.ai, in 2025 over 1200 AI-related bills were introduced in the states, with nearly 145 enacted into law. By definition, this metastasizing patchwork of state AI laws raises compliance costs and slows innovation across the entire U.S. economy. Unfortunately, given the lack of a clear statement by Congress that the federal government can preempt such state AI laws, current legal options to stop the proliferation of state AI laws are shaky at best.

There’s been a lot of concern over what AI chatbots communicate to users—from conversations that may encourage unhealthy emotional attachments, to advice on committing crimes. Much of the debate over regulatory proposals and lawsuits concerning chatbots has focused on speech rights. There are open questions over whether outputs can be considered a form of legally protected speech. Yet an overlooked aspect of these issues is the potential right of users to access chatbot outputs. The First Amendment protects not only the right to speak, but also the right to listen. Courts have found, for instance, that people have a right to receive mail from foreign propagandists and religious leaflets from proselytizers. Some legal scholars say that figuring out how or whether to apply listeners’ rights to AI will be increasingly important to solve in the coming years, and may even become more significant than the speech issues in litigation.

Republican and Democratic candidates and strategists who were once wary of A.I. tools or overwhelmed by them are now rushing to give their campaigns an A.I. upgrade. Those who do so could reap the rewards in the midterm elections in November and, ultimately, in the 2028 presidential campaign. Those who don’t could fall far behind. But this seismic shift in how politicians run for office is also being met by pushback on multiple fronts, including from voters and campaign staffers who feel distrustful of A.I. and fearful about its potential to wipe out jobs, devour energy and harm the planet. Polls show that Democrats are more leery of A.I. tools than Republicans, and progressive strategists have wrestled with how to deploy the tools in their campaigns without rattling volunteers or unionized staffers who are worried about losing their jobs. Republican strategists have said they get fewer complaints from staffers, though conservative voters still tend to feel concerned about A.I. Political candidates are caught in the middle, more eager than ever to reap the benefits of A.I. while staying out of the political muck over its many costs.

Jose Flores was driving with his family to see “Toy Story 5” in Caracas, Venezuela, when a loud earthquake alert went off on his wife’s Google Android phone. Six seconds later, he felt the earth starting to shake. Venezuela does not have a national early warning system of its own, but people with Android phones received alerts from Google’s Earthquake Alerts system, which can pull data from more than two billion phones equipped with built-in accelerometers. The same sensor that detects rotation on the screen can also sense vibrations from seismic waves. Google said the system, which is available in nearly 100 countries, sent warnings that reached 11.4 million people before the earthquakes, giving users seconds or up to two minutes notice before back-to-back powerful earthquakes struck.

Comcast plans to separate its media and connectivity businesses, dismantling an earlier bet on combined entertainment and distribution in the face of intensifying competitive pressure. The cable and entertainment company, home to “Saturday Night Live,” “Law & Order” and Bravo, aims to complete a tax-free spinoff of NBCUniversal and Sky, establishing a pure-play media company. The stand-alone NBCUniversal will be led by Mike Cavanagh, who is currently Comcast’s co-chief executive, while former Chief Financial Officer Michael Angelakis will return to run Comcast. The deal will transform a titan of the connectivity and entertainment industries that has used its scale as a flywheel for franchises like Minions, Fast & Furious and Wicked and to help fund new business ventures. The health and size of Comcast’s core connectivity business allowed it to invest in major sports rights deals and build its streaming business, Peacock.