Much of the focus in policy circles has been on how to expand broadband access to those Americans without it. This is a worthy goal, but we should not lose sight of the magnitude of the other part of the digital divide: the adoption gap. FCC data shows about 35% or approximately 114 million Americans do not subscribe to broadband service at their homes. Cost is often cited as the leading factor for why Americans do not subscribe to broadband even when it is offered. Clearly, we need a strategy to address this gap, too. One reason broadband prices are too high for millions of Americans is a lack of competition. A new report from the Institute for Self-Reliance finds that two of the largest broadband companies – Comcast and Charter – maintain a monopoly over at least 47 million Americans. The report also found that the only alternative for an additional 33 million Americans in “competitive” duopoly markets is inferior DSL service. New competition is the most likely solution to drive down prices and provide greater satisfaction to American consumers. This new competition could come in the form of fixed satellite service or fixed wireless. While satellite is likely several years away from providing high-speed, low-latency service, fixed wireless is already a real solution in some parts of the country.

Even providers like AT&T acknowledge that the FCC’s low-income subsidy program, Lifeline, needs modernization. AT&T’s executive vice president of regulatory & state external affairs recently authored a blog comparing the success of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, also known as the “food stamp” program, to the relative ineffectiveness of Lifeline, which offers households a little over $100 per year to pay for broadband. That’s simply not enough to close the adoption gap for low-income families. Modernizing Lifeline to make it easier to use and expanding it to provide greater support for this lowest economic quartile of American families is a meaningful way to address the adoption gap. As more Americans have the buying power to purchase subsidized broadband, providers should have the right incentives to offer better service or to compete in areas where they may not otherwise be willing to invest.

Section 222 of the Communications Act of 1934 establishes the duty of telecommunications carriers to protect the confidentiality of its customers’ proprietary information. This Customer Proprietary Network Information (CPNI) includes personally identifiable information derived from a customer’s relationship with a provider of telecommunications services. These regulations impose safeguards to protect customers’ CPNI against unauthorized access and disclosure. In March 2007, the Commission adopted new rules that focused on the efforts of providers of telecommunications services to prevent pretexting. These rules require providers of telecommunications services to adopt additional privacy safeguards that, the Commission believes, will limit pretexters’ ability to obtain unauthorized access to the type of personal customer information from carriers that the Commission regulates. In addition, in furtherance of the Telephone Records and Privacy Protection Act of 2006, the Commission’s rules help ensure that law enforcement will have necessary tools to investigate and enforce prohibitions on illegal access to customer records.

The FCC now invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collections. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of FCC functions, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the FCC’s burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.

Written comments should be submitted on or before October 19, 2020

A Federal Communications Commission proposal that began circulating Aug 14 among FCC commissioners would formally close the door on a controversial plan involving consumers’ cable set-top boxes. Will Wiquist, a spokesperson for Chairman Ajit Pai, said that this new proposal “would terminate the proceeding in which the prior Commission proposed imposing complex and unnecessary regulations on the navigation device market that generated bipartisan opposition within and outside the agency, and serious concerns from a wide range of stakeholders and experts, including the U.S. Copyright Office.” Longtime FCC watchers may remember the contentious 2016 policy battle surrounding then-Chair Tom Wheeler’s ambitions to open this marketplace and give consumers a choice beyond renting boxes from their pay-TV provider. That effort prompted bipartisan uproar on Capitol Hill and among cable and programming industry leaders. Chairman Wheeler never brought his plan to a vote given his struggles to secure the necessary support, even among fellow Democrats. (He never won over Jessica Rosenworcel, who remains on the commission.) After Trump tapped Pai to become chair in 2017, the GOP chief yanked Wheeler’s proposal from circulation within days. This new item would take the formal additional step of closing the long-dormant proceeding itself, something House Republicans had requested of Pai in 2017 that he then deemed “premature” due to some outstanding related media issues.

CEO Michael Pack announced that he has revived the US Agency for Global Media’s (USAGM) Office of Internet Freedom (OIF). OIF was created in 2016, but its operations were shelved by previous agency leadership. Because a number of regimes restrict the exchange of information, while others ban it entirely, there is a critical need to support technologies that allow individuals to securely access and share information online. 

“Unlike prior USAGM leadership, which sidelined OIF,” said CEO Pack, “I consider bolstering internet firewall circumvention to be a top priority. Blocking access to information is a horrible thing. But fostering access to information, especially in this advanced capacity, will prove a blow for liberty. That’s why we’re funding a range of internet firewall circumvention tools. Bringing back OIF will further allow our agency to make significant strides in this area.” Mr. Pack was subsequently struck by lighting, repented, and became a man of the cloth.