Wednesday, August 28, 2019
Headlines Daily Digest
Events in Mississippi and Oregon Today
Don't Miss:
Elizabeth Warren's Broadband Plan
Opposition to FCC’s Proposal to Cap the Universal Service Fund
DOJ’s plan to make Dish the fourth major carrier has a fatal flaw
Broadbaand
Wireless
Telecom
Content
Journalism
Privacy/Security
Kids and Media
Emergency Communications
Labor
Advertising
Lobbying
Broadband
Internet service providers (ISPs) have been able to get away with fostering pseudo-monopolies because they spend a lot of money to keep the regulatory environment and the conversation surrounding it murky. Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai, a former Verizon lawyer, has been an effective agent for ISPs. He led the charge to dismantle net neutrality in 2018, and he has done everything in his power to stop municipalities from building their own broadband infrastructure. He also attempted to gut the FCC’s Lifeline program, one of the few tools the federal government has to provide Internet to low-income consumers.
Enough is enough. As president, I would work to ensure every home in the United States has an affordable, broadband connection. I have a plan for a new public option for broadband Internet, carried out by a new Office of Broadband Access that would manage an $85 billion federal grant program. Only electricity and telephone cooperatives, nonprofit organizations, tribes, cities, counties and other state subdivisions would be eligible for grants. There is both a moral and an economic imperative to enact a public option for broadband. If we stay on our current trajectory, ISPs will continue to decide which communities succeed and which ones fail. We imperil the success of future generations, threaten our competitiveness on the global stage and risk further diaspora from towns and cities that are in dire need of economic turnaround. Providing universal, public access to broadband won’t be easy. The ISPs aren’t interested in competition and will fight to keep the status quo. But this is a worthy cause. Together we can change outcomes for forgotten towns and cities across our country.
[See also 2020 Candidates Offer Plans to Extend the Reach of Broadband]
New America’s Open Technology Institute filed reply comments with the Federal Communications Commission urging it to reject its proposal to impose restrictions on funding for programs that help low-income consumers, schools and libraries, health care providers, and rural telecommunications providers. OTI submitted the reply comments to illustrate the broad range of initial comments that, similar to OTI's initial comments, oppose the FCC’s plan to implement a spending cap for all four Universal Service Fund (USF) programs. OTI is joined in its opposition by the wireless industry; schools; school districts; libraries; public interest organizations; and groups representing rural telecommunications providers, veterans, Americans over 50, and others. Amir Nasr, policy analyst at New America’s Open Technology Institute said:
The FCC’s proposal to impose an overall cap on the Universal Service Fund is extremely dangerous, as evidenced by the broad range of oppositional comments in the record. Most commenters, including those that benefit from and participate in USF programs, agreed with our initial arguments that this proposal is unnecessary and harmful to the USF programs, the providers that participate in those programs, and the consumers who benefit from them. Instead of focusing on the USF cap sideshow, the FCC should tackle genuine problems like reforming the USF contribution scheme and strengthening participation in programs like Lifeline. Either way, the FCC should move on from this misguided proposal.
When the Department of Justice approved T-Mobile's purchase of Sprint, the DOJ's antitrust officials insisted that an unusual remedy could replace the competition lost in the merger. Sprint will no longer exist as a separate entity if the DOJ's plan is finalized, reducing the number of major nationwide mobile carriers from four to three. But the government agency is simultaneously requiring T-Mobile and Sprint to sell some of their assets to Dish Network in what amounts to a government attempt to micromanage the mobile industry. But will propping up Dish actually replace the lost competition? The answer in the short term is clearly no, because the merger remedies won't result in Dish building a nationwide network overnight. It will take at least a few years, and consumers will be stuck with three major carriers during that time. Even in the long run, Dish isn't likely to become a full-fledged nationwide competitor because Dish's plan only calls for covering 70 percent of the US population by June 2023. That could leave 100 million Americans without the option of a fourth carrier.
[Also see An Engineer’s View of the Department of Justice’s T-Mobile/Sprint/DISH Strategy]
A Q&A with Federal Communications Commissioner Michael O'Rielly.
Among many implications of 5G is a possible repurposing of the C-band in the US. That’s the 500 MHz of spectrum (3.7 to 4.2 GHz) currently used by broadcasters who receive programming via satellite downlink earth stations. The FCC has proposed giving wireless companies some portion of the spectrum for 5G wireless development. It is expected to take action on the matter before the end of 2019. When asked, "What do you see as the ideal split of the 500 MHz of C-band spectrum? What do you support?" Commissioner O’Rielly said, "Industry stakeholders have discussed different options, including the market-based approach that could repurpose 200 megahertz of spectrum relatively quickly while ensuring the incumbents will be accommodated. I hope the satellite incumbents who are willing to surrender their spectrum rights will be able to find a way to increase the amount to be reallocated to 300 or more megahertz. As for the spectrum split I say between 200 and 300 MHz, but closer to 300 for wireless right now. I’ve testified to that fact. I think we’ll end up eventually in the 300 range to repurpose. We need to tee up even more mid-bands for review. It’s critically important that we look closely at those prime bands for 5G."
Asked, "[S]ome of the wireless companies have told the commission they believe broadcasters could use fiber to replace the C-band for distribution of programming. Do you think that is in the public interest?" Commissioner O’Rielly said, "No I don’t believe we will go down that path. I don’t believe forcing anyone to using just one technology is good. Broadcasters have highlighted the fact that having different redundant technology is crucial. Some wireless companies have even suggested using redundant fiber networks, but broadcasters have made it clear that they have seen nothing to make them want to go to just fiber. I’m respectful of that."
One in five smartphone owners say they don’t see a need for 5G technology or will wait until it is proven before upgrading, according to a new 5G smartphone pricing report from Strategy Analytics. The major barrier to the upgrade is the price of 5G capable devices, which are around $1,000 or more. Seven-in-10 of those surveyed cited price as a barrier to upgrading. However, almost half of those with $1,000 phones today, who Smart Analytics classifies as premium buyers, are willing to pay more. Among the survey’s other findings:
- One-quarter of African Americans and a slightly lower percentage (23%) of Hispanics expect to buy a 5G device in next five months
- One-quarter of those surveyed see 5G as an important feature
- The top features smartphone buyers seek are reliable connectivity and guaranteed quality
“Three in four expect 5G to increase smartphone prices but an element of sticker shock is likely as one third expect prices to rise less than 10%,” said David Kerr, Strategy Analytics senior vice president. “The reality of 5G device prices in 2019 is likely to be closer to $1000. Only about 7% of buyers spend that much today.” “The industry has created a 5G problem where one in five think they have 5G already. Even among Apple fans, 27% believe their flagship device is already 5G despite the fact that Apple does not yet have such a device.”
Benton (www.benton.org) provides the only free, reliable, and non-partisan daily digest that curates and distributes news related to universal broadband, while connecting communications, democracy, and public interest issues. Posted Monday through Friday, this service provides updates on important industry developments, policy issues, and other related news events. While the summaries are factually accurate, their sometimes informal tone may not always represent the tone of the original articles. Headlines are compiled by Kevin Taglang (headlines AT benton DOT org) and Robbie McBeath (rmcbeath AT benton DOT org) — we welcome your comments.
© Benton Foundation 2019. Redistribution of this email publication — both internally and externally — is encouraged if it includes this message. For subscribe/unsubscribe info email: headlines AT benton DOT org
Kevin Taglang
Executive Editor, Communications-related Headlines
Benton Foundation
727 Chicago Avenue
Evanston, IL 60202
847-328-3049
headlines AT benton DOT org
Share this edition:
The Benton Foundation All Rights Reserved © 2019