In exchange for obtaining a valuable license to operate a broadcast station using the public airwaves, each radio and television licensee is required by law to operate its station in the “public interest, convenience and necessity.” This means that it must air programming that is responsive to the needs and problems of its local community of license. In addition, how other media facilitate community discussions.
Senate Commerce Chairman John Thune (R-SD) is eying ways to combine his STREAMLINE Small Cell Deployment Act, S.
[Commentary] Talk about a curveball. Last week, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Pai struck a potentially fatal blow to a deal that President Donald Trump favored, the proposed merger of Sinclair Broadcasting and Tribune Media. If it had gone through, the deal would have had a major adverse impact on future election cycles, making Sinclair the king of the hill with unfettered capabilities to control political advertising and messages across all of its stations.
Reports and recommendations that have been made to the Federal Communications Commission by Broadband Deployment Advisory Committee (BDAC). These final reports and recommendations, adopted by the BDAC, were submitted to the BDAC by the following working groups:
- Competitive Access to Broadband Infrastructure (adopted January 23, 2018; Addendum adopted April 25,2018)
- Removing State and Local Regulatory Barriers (adopted January 23-24, 2018)
- Streamlining Federal Siting (adopted January 23-24, 2018)
The Broadband Deployment Advisory Committee will consider and vote on reports and recommendations from its Harmonization Working Group to harmonize the Model Code for Municipalities and Model Code for States adopted by the BDAC on April 25, 2018. In addition, the Ad Hoc Committee for Rates and Fees will give a presentation. The BDAC will also discuss its next steps. This agenda may be modified at the discretion of the BDAC Chair and the DFO.
Verizon and AT&T quickly rejected a proposal by Federal Communications Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel to use San Jose’s (CA) approach to small cells as a template for similar deployments in other cities. Hovering over the issue is a continued push by the nation’s wireless network operators to get the FCC to issue guidelines for how cities and states should smooth the rollout of small cells—including how much local regulators can charge carriers for small cell deployments.
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.
Right now, policymakers across the country are focused on strengthening American infrastructure. That effort includes roads, bridges, and broadband networks that support 5G wireless services. That’s vital—because to be first to a 5G future, we need to focus as much on the ground as on the skies. But figuring out how to deploy 5G infrastructure—which puts a premium on small cells—is a big task. It means acknowledging that we have a legal tradition of local control in this country but also recognizing that more streamlined and uniform practices can help speed deployment.
The Trump Federal Communications Commission has been working diligently since its first moments in office to help Sinclair expand its political messaging. By rewriting the rules governing local broadcasting, the Trump FCC is allowing Sinclair to turn supposedly “local” television operations into a coordinated national platform for the delivery of messages. Local television stations were licensed to multiple firms to promote a diversity of viewpoints. Using the public airwaves was supposed to deliver diverse editorial content and news coverage.
Across the country, cities are straining. Housing costs are exploding, transportation systems are overwhelmed, infrastructure is crumbling, and inequality is on the rise. Yet there’s little support from federal or state authorities — “infrastructure week” is a punch line in Washington, not a policy. Efforts to raise money for local projects are under siege from conservative activists, while measures to build more housing are halted by liberal ones. Into this void march the techies, who come bearing money, jobs and promises of out-of-this-world innovation. But there’s a catch.
AT&T and San Jose (CA) have added a public-private partnership to their existing small cell agreement. The new agreement calls for San Jose to trial AT&T's smart city solutions. AT&T's digital infrastructure, which the company has described as a "smartphone for cities," is connected hardware with integrated sensors that can be attached to lamp posts to capture information about the environment. AT&T said the solutions it plans to trial with San Jose may include LED smart lighting, public Wi-Fi, digital infrastructure and structure monitoring.