Benton Foundation

In the wake of the government’s setback in the AT&T/Time Warner case, it’s natural enough to ask: what will be that case’s impact on the government’s ability to challenge vertical mergers in the future? I think the answer is “very little if anything.” The government could take steps to build an even stronger foundation for the review of vertical mergers in the future. Here are some suggestions. First, the current 1984 guidelines on the treatment of vertical (technically, non-horizontal) transactions should be withdrawn. Second, new vertical guidelines should be created.

The federal government is recognizing what cities and those of us here in 2013 already knew: that our policies should ensure that bandwidth never constrains economic growth or social progress. Unfortunately, one thing hasn’t changed; the federal government’s view of its own role in helping achieve that goal.  It is: 1) Make cities do all the hard work, pay all the government costs and accept all the blame for whatever happens; and 2) Let the federal government pay none of the costs, do none of the hard work, and take all the credit.

It started with a cold call from the Ad Council to the Children’s Defense Fund (CDF). In 1996, the Ad Council, with more than $2 billion a year in donated media for public service advertising (PSA), decided to make a ten-year commitment to campaigns on behalf of children as the centerpiece of its work. To launch the initiative, the Ad Council was looking for a partner who could deliver a grassroots network and reinvent fulfillment for PSA campaigns in the digital age (replacing 800 phone numbers and brochures with multimedia websites to provide information and resources for action).

On April 29, 2018, T-Mobile US and Sprint announced that the companies would merge. In the telecom world, an announcement like this always means at least one thing: a really long engagement. After the companies come to a merger agreement, regulators get a chance to review the deal.

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai (in)famously said, “We need to fire up the weed whacker and remove those rules that are holding back investment, innovation, and job creation.” On June 1, 2018, we learned a bit about how far follow-Republican FCC Commissioner Michael O’Rielly is willing to go to cut back consumer protections. In FCC Regulatory Free Arena, Commissioner O’Rielly highlights the pervasiveness of the “app economy” to argue that traditional companies regulated by the FCC should seek to be released from their regulatory obligations.

There is, of course, a digital divide among low-income Americans, but there is also what we at TechSoup call an organizational digital divide. Many nonprofits themselves are low-income and benefit greatly from low-cost, uncapped broadband. This is a groundbreaking study on how charities use this resource for both their staff and their clients. Nearly a third of nonprofit respondents report relying on Mobile Beacon service as their main Internet connection. A majority of respondents reported that unlimited data has allowed them to expand their program services.

On May 25, the European Union’s new data and privacy law takes effect. The EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDRP) changes the rules for companies that collect, store or process large amounts of information on residents of the EU, requiring more openness about what data the companies have and with whom they share it.

Let’s remember that the core notion of democracy underlying antitrust is the value of individual opportunity, free from the workings of political or economic power. Individual choice in democratic elections and individual choice in competitive markets share an intellectual legacy. These democratic roots of antitrust are best served by upholding the ability of antitrust enforcement to carry out its duties free from the jousting and scuffling of day-to-day politics.

For well over a decade, the debate on how best to ensure protections for broadband customers has bounced around Washington, DC. Although Congressional Members have often shared their opinions on network neutrality, few have ever gotten the chance to cast a vote on the issue. That changed this week when the Senate voted 52-47 to adopt Senate Joint Resolution 52. S.J. Res 52, introduced by Sen.

After the Senate's vote to restore the Federal Communications Commission's 2015 net neutrality rules, everyone seemed to have an opinion.