Wednesday, September 4, 2019
Headlines Daily Digest
ITIF's Guide to Broadband Competition
Don't Miss:
Big Telecom's sweet summer of revenge
Why survey estimates of the number of Americans online don’t always agree
Broadband
Spectrum/Wireless
Education
Privacy/Security
Elections
Platforms
Television
Content
Satellites
Government & Communications
Tariffs
Policymakers
Sample Category
Competition is a crucial component of broadband policy in that it pressures providers to be efficient and innovative. Whether any given market has adequate competition is a key underpinning question for the regulatory structure of broadband networks. However, broadband competition is not always analyzed directly. How much competition is enough, and is more always better? Many seem to believe the United States needs more broadband competition. Some even see competition as a universal elixir, fixing any and all broadband woes, real or imagined—simply add more competitors and broadband service will improve. For them, any additional—and even excess—costs are borne by providers (especially their shareholders), and all benefits are reaped by consumers.
The task for policymakers is not to be swayed by advocates who see more broadband competition as the key to all broadband challenges, whether they be prices, coverage, or net neutrality, and who look to government to spur more entrants, including government providers. Instead, policy should be pragmatic and recognize the unique economics of broadband: high fixed costs, spillover effects, and modularity, along with rapid technological change. The policy goal cannot be to simply maximize the number of competitors in a market; rather, policymakers should recognize each specific geographic area’s cost structure and existing infrastructure and work incrementally to produce superior outcomes for users. In addition, policymakers should not force square pegs into round holes by relentlessly pushing for ever-more wired broadband providers into particular places. They should, however, enable the emergence of new technology competitors.
After years of frustration that Silicon Valley companies seemed to get special treatment in Washington, telecommunications giants are finally (re)gaining the upper hand. They are now starting to feel more able to compete with tech giants as they all jockey to dominate how we communicate and access information. The Federal Trade Commission, Federal Communications Commission and Department of Justice are providing less scrutiny over the telecom industry, which has historically been more heavily regulated -- and ramping up scrutiny of Big Tech. A similar pattern is happening at the state level with Republican attorneys general. The balance of power between the two sets of companies has been shifting as policymakers. This summer's events lays out just how clear of an advantage Big Telecom has gained in both politics and business.
How many US adults use the internet? There is a lot of information available from large, high response rate federal surveys as well as from surveys conducted by Pew Research Center and other organizations. However, these different sources of information measure internet use in ways that can be tricky to reconcile. Depending on the source, the estimated share of Americans who were online as of 2017 and 2018 is as low as 79% or as high as 89%. While Pew's approach has evolved over time, the current measurement consists of two questions: “Do you use the internet or email, at least occasionally?” and “Do you access the internet on a cellphone, tablet or other mobile handheld device, at least occasionally?”
Like their south side University of Chicago economists, the Editorial Board of the Tribune waxes poetic and snarky about the virtues of the marketplace and how it can solve any and all network neutrality ills. The Editorial Board dismisses a particularly egregious throttling episode as “humiliating customer service failure” for Verizon when the company’s software automatically slowed transmission speeds of California first responder handsets as they tackled life and property threatening fires. Does deliberate slowing down of transmission speed and commensurate service degradation warrant an all clear, A-OK seal of approval, because the tactic gets obliquely identified as a possible consequence of bandwidth hogging? How many service providers can get away with offering poor service as leverage for upselling? The Editorial Board is woefully naive to think that a rising tide of innovation and market driven pricing can solve quality of service problems.
[Rob Frieden, Pioneers Chair and Professor of Telecommunications and Law, Penn State University]
On October 25, 2018, President Donald J. Trump issued a Presidential Memorandum establishing a national policy for the efficient and effective use of radiofrequency spectrum “to help meet our economic, national security, science, safety, and other federal mission goals now and in the future.” Among other things, the Presidential Memorandum required the Secretary of Commerce, working through National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), and in coordination with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), to submit an annual report “on the status of existing efforts and planned near- to mid-term spectrum repurposing initiatives.” This is the initial report; it addresses activities and events during a period beginning on January 1, 2018, and running through June 30, 2019.
Over the last decade, American schools embraced technology, spending millions of dollars on devices and apps, believing its disruptive power would help many children learn faster, stay in school and be more prepared for a competitive economy. Now many parents and teachers are starting to wonder if all the disruption was a good idea. Technology has made it easier for students and teachers to communicate and collaborate. It engages many students and allows them to learn at their own pace. But early indications are that tech isn’t a panacea for education. Researchers at Rand Corp. and elsewhere say there is no clear evidence showing which new tech-related education offerings or approaches work in schools. The uncertainty is feeding alarm among some parents already worried about the amount of time their children spend attached to digital devices. Some believe technology is not doing much to help their kids learn, setting up a clash with tech advocates who say technology is the future of education.
California adopted the country’s first major consumer privacy law. Now, Silicon Valley is trying to rewrite it.
Adopted in 2018, the California Consumer Privacy Act grants Web users the right to see the personal information that companies collect about them and stop it from being sold. The law applies only to CA residents, but its backers hope it might someday spur regulators around the country to follow suit — and force the tech giants to change their practices nationwide. But powerful business organizations — representing retailers, marketers and tech giants — have responded by seeking sweeping revisions to the law before it goes into effect. So far, they haven’t been successful in a campaign that privacy advocates deride as an attempt to weaken consumers’ rights. But they haven’t relented, either, with only two weeks remaining to CA’s legislative calendar. The lobbying barrage even has involved their own websites: A page on Facebook and an account on Twitter called Keep the Internet Free began sharing videos this summer encouraging people to spare online advertisers from adhering to some of CA’s new privacy rules. The Internet Association has spent nearly $176,000 lobbying on the matter and other issues over the past three months -- the most it has ever spent in a single three-month period in Sacramento.
5G will be a physical overhaul of our essential networks that will have decades-long impact. Because 5G is the conversion to a mostly all-software network, future upgrades will be software updates much like the current upgrades to your smartphone. Because of the cyber vulnerabilities of software, the tougher part of the real 5G “race” is to retool how we secure the most important network of the 21st century and the ecosystem of devices and applications that sprout from that network.
Key #1: Companies must recognize and be held responsible for a new cyber duty of care: Traditionally, common law established that those who provide products and services have a duty of care to identify and mitigate potential harms that could result. There needs to be a new corporate culture in which cyber risk is treated as an essential corporate duty and rewarded with appropriate incentives, whether in monetary, regulatory, or other forms.
Key #2: Government must establish a new cyber regulatory paradigm to reflect the new realities: Replacing the rigid industrial-era relationship between government and business with more innovative and agile means of dealing with the shared problem.
[Tom Wheeler was Federal Communications Commission Chairman from 2013 to 2017. Rear Admiral David Simpson, USN (Ret.), was chief of the FCC’s Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau during the same period.]
President Trump's campaign and key allies plan to make allegations of bias by social media platforms a core part of their 2020 strategy. Look for ads, speeches and sustained attacks on Facebook and Twitter in particular, the sources say. The irony: The social platforms are created and staffed largely by liberals — but often used most effectively in politics by conservatives. The charges of overt bias by social media platforms are way overblown, several studies have found. But, if the exaggerated claims stick, it could increase the chances of regulatory action by Republicans.
Facebook said that the US Department of Homeland Security would be violating the company’s rules if agents create fake profiles to monitor the social media of foreigners seeking to enter the country. “Law enforcement authorities, like everyone else, are required to use their real names on Facebook and we make this policy clear,” a Facebook spokesperson said. “Operating fake accounts is not allowed, and we will act on any violating accounts.” The spokesperson said the company has communicated its concerns and its policies on the use of fake accounts to DHS. She said the company will shut down fake accounts, including those belonging to undercover law enforcement, when they are reported.
Starting with his first tweet at 7:45 a.m. August 31, President Donald Trump delivered 122 tweets about Hurricane Dorian over the weekend. He awaited landfall by assuming the role of meteorologist in chief, adding weatherman-style updates to a usual weekend routine of attacking his enemies, retweeting bits of praise and critiquing the performance of his cable news allies. With his reality-show approach to the presidency, Trump has a habit of weighing in on the day’s most-covered news stories with his own running commentary. As Dorian approached, President Trump switched into town-crier mode, updating the public on what he had learned — or, what he thought he’d learned — from government officials as Dorian threatened the coast of the state of Florida, where he has owned property for decades. But Trump’s commentary on the hurricane was not wholly accurate.
The Federal Communications Commission announced staff changes in the Office of General Counsel. David Gossett will serve as Chief of Staff, Ashley Boizelle will succeed Gossett as Deputy General Counsel for Litigation, and Michael Carlson will succeed Boizelle as Deputy General Counsel for Administrative Law.
Gossett has been at the FCC for five years, previously serving as Deputy General Counsel for Litigation in the Office of General Counsel. Before coming to the FCC, Gossett was assistant general counsel for litigation at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and a partner at Mayer Brown LLP. Boizelle previously served as Deputy General Counsel for Administrative Law at the FCC for two years. She also worked at the Washington, DC office of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher and served as a law clerk to the Honorable Sandra S. Ikuta of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Carlson previously served as Special Counsel to the General Counsel. Prior to joining the FCC, Carlson worked at Harris, Wiltshire & Grannis, a Washington, DC law firm specializing in telecommunications, and clerked for the Honorable Deborah Cook of the Sixth Circuit. Carlson also has prior experience as a senior advisor at Microsoft, where he worked for the Chief Strategy Officer, and as an attorney in the US intelligence community.
Doug Kinkoph, Deputy Assistant Secretary, NTIA (Acting), and Associate Administrator, Office of Telecommunications and Information Applications (OTIA), NTIA
Doug Kinkoph is Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information. He also serves as the Associate Administrator of NTIA’s Office of Telecommunications and Information Applications (OTIA) within the U.S. Department of Commerce, where he directs the BroadbandUSA initiative to promote broadband deployment and adoption across communities nationwide. He has been responsible for overseeing the $4 billion Broadband Technology Opportunities Program (BTOP) and State Broadband Initiative program, resulting from the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. These programs funded the deployment of broadband infrastructure, public computer centers, sustainable adoption of broadband service, and the statewide broadband planning and data collection initiative used in creating the National Broadband Map. Prior to his current role, Kinkoph managed the team responsible for overseeing the BTOP broadband infrastructure grants.
Before joining the Department of Commerce, Kinkoph held multiple executive roles in the communications industry as well as in the public and private sectors as a telecommunications policy expert. He served as Vice President of Operations at Soundpath Conferencing where he was responsible for all sales, marketing, and customer service operations. His private sector experience also includes serving in senior regulatory and policy roles at XO Communications, Nextlink, and LCI.
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