Forbes

[Comentary] The Federal Communications Commission GOP majority did what it was intended to do with net neutrality, which was ignore overwhelmingly positive public support across political affiliations and kill the policy anyway. Aside from hurting real sources of innovation, rather than the fake sources like finding new ways to charge more, it opens the door for people of more moderate means and the poor to be at a greater disadvantage than before.

Reducing effective Internet access has a profound impact on low- to moderate-income individuals:

[Commentary] When Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai is done, the Internet service providers will once again be free to throttle traffic from competitors, and sites or services they don’t like, or charge services like Netflix a “toll” for the privilege of being delivered to customers at the full speed the customers are paying for. It seems to me, though, that the power dynamic has shifted, and that Netflix actually holds all the cards now—at least in areas with more than one ISP to choose from.

While much the internet is in an uproar about Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai’s plan to roll back Network Neutrality, I’d like the suggest that they’re focusing on the wrong thing. The reason Pai’s decision is the wrong one is not because the lack of net neutrality is, prima facie, a bad thing. Rather, it’s because we don’t have anything close to free market conditions in the U.S. when it comes to broadband.

[Commentary]  Once again, the [open Internet] rules are being rewritten.  Once again, the pitchforks and torches are in hand.  And once again, the only real and effective solution is being ignored:  legislation from Congress, versions of which have been floating around Capitol Hill for almost a decade. 

[Commentary] The Federal Communications Commission’s outmoded structure contributes to employee dissatisfaction. The issues before the FCC contemplate a converged world, but its siloed organizational structure limits the ability of staff not only to work across bureaus, but to think intelligently and conceptually.

In any event, new FCC Chairman Ajit Pai observes that the FCC’s employees are “rare combination of dedication, expertise, and collegiality.” Imagine what they could do if they actually enjoyed their jobs. To achieve his goals to “bring the benefits of the digital age to all Americans”, Chairman Pai must overcome deeply entrenched corporate interests and pro-regulatory pessimism which resists change. But if his courageous actions and dissents are any indication, Chairman Pai is a fearless and magnanimous leader who will make the FCC a great place to work again.

[Layton was part of President Trump’s FCC transition team; she is a visiting fellow at American Enterprise Institute]

[Commentary] Media outlets across the political spectrum reporting on Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai’s promotion have focused on a single issue—the FCC’s controversial 2015 open Internet rulemaking, which transformed Internet access providers into public utilities. In doing so, they have trivialized the very real and important issues facing the agency and its new Chairman. Much worse than that, they have badly conflated and misreported Pai’s views on network neutrality itself—an almost entirely separate topic. The how and why of this serious reporting failure is the real story here.

Nowhere has Pai indicated hostility to basic net neutrality principles themselves, or disavowed his repeated pledge “to protect them going forward.” Nor has he ever proposed to “kill,” “destroy,” “gut,” “end” or “hate” those protections.

[Larry Downes is the Project Director, Georgetown Center for Business and Public Policy.]