Hollywood, Media, And Telecom Giants Are Clearly Terrified Gigi Sohn Will Do Her Job At The FCC

from the do-not-pass-go,-do-not-collect-$200 dept

Media and telecom giants have been desperately trying to stall the nomination of Gigi Sohn to the FCC. Both desperately want to keep the Biden FCC gridlocked at 2-2 Commissioners thanks to the rushed late 2020 Trump appointment of Nathan Simington to the Commission. Both industries most assuredly don't want the Biden FCC to do popular things like restore the FCC's consumer protection authority, net neutrality, or media consolidation rules. But because Sohn is so popular, they've had a hell of a time coming up with any criticisms that make any coherent sense.

One desperate claim being spoon fed to GOP lawmakers is that Sohn wants to "censor conservatives," despite the opposite being true: Sohn has considerable support from conservatives for protecting speech and fostering competition and diversity in media (even if she disagrees with them). Another lobbying talking point being circulated is that because Sohn briefly served on the board of the now defunct Locast, she's somehow incapable of regulating things like retransmission disputes objectively. Despite the claim being a stretch, Sohn has agreed to recuse herself from such issues for the first three years of her term.

Hoping to seize on the opportunity, former FCC boss turned top cable lobbyist Mike Powell is now trying to claim that because Sohn has experience working on consumer protection issues at both Public Knowledge and the FCC (she helped craft net neutrality rules under Tom Wheeler), she should also be recused from anything having to do with telecom companies. It's a dumb Hail Mary from a revolving door lobbyist whose only interest is in preventing competent oversight of clients like Comcast:

"He said it is not clear why those would be the only issues from which she would recuse herself, “given the breadth of issues in which Public Knowledge was involved” under Sohn. He said the recusal should ”logically extend“ to all the matters she advocated for at Public Knowledge, or none.

Second, he said: “Next, in the more recent years since her service at the Commission during the Obama administration, Ms. Sohn has been publicly involved on matters of direct interest to our membership. There is no logical basis for treating these matters differently from the retransmission and copyright issues for purposes of recusal."

Facebook, Amazon, and Google all tried similar acts of desperation to thwart FTC boss Lina Khan, suggesting that because she opined on antitrust matters as an influential academic, she was utterly incapable of regulating these companies objectively. But both have a deep understanding of the sectors they're tasked with regulating. Both are also the opposite of revolving door policymakers with financial conflicts of interest, which you'll note none of these critics have the slightest issue with.

Of course telecom and big broadcasters aren't the only industries terrified of competent, popular women in positions of authority. Hollywood (and the politicians paid to love them) are also clearly terrified of someone competent at the FCC. The Directors Guild of America is also urging the Senate Commerce Committee to kill Sohn's nomination. Their justification for their opposition? Sohn once attempted to (gasp) bring competition to the cable box:

"Hollander pointed to one of the proposals that Sohn championed when she served as counselor to FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler during Barack Obama’s second term. Wheeler and Sohn saw the proposal, introduced in 2016, as a way to free cable and satellite subscribers from having to pay monthly rental fees for their set top box. The proposal would have required that pay TV providers offer a free app to access the channels, but ran into objections from the MPAA, which said it would be akin to a “compulsory copyright license.” It’s unlikely that the proposal would come up again in that form, as it was sidelined when Jessica Rosenworcel, who now is chairwoman of the FCC, declined to support it."

You might recall the 2016 proposal in question tried to force open the cable industry's dated monopoly over cable boxes by requiring cable companies provide their existing services in app form (it wasn't "free"). You might also recall that the plan failed in part because big copyright, with the help of the Copyright Office, falsely claimed the proposal was an attack on the foundations of copyright. It wasn't. But the claims, hand in hand with all kinds of other bizarre and false claims from media and cable (including the false claim the proposal would harm minorities), killed it before it really could take its first steps.

I had my doubts about the proposal. Streaming competition will inevitably kill the cable box if we wait long enough, so it would seemingly make sense to focus the FCC's limited resources on more pressing issues: like regional broadband monopolization and the resulting dearth of competition. But the FCC's doomed cable box proposal most absolutely was not an "attack on copyright." Companies just didn't want a cash cow killed (cable boxes generate about $20 billion in fee revenue annually), and the usual suspects were just absolutely terrified of disruption, competition, and change.

Congress was supposed to vote Sohn's nomination forward on Wednesday, but that has been delayed because Senator Ben Ray Luján suffered a stroke (he's expected to make a full recovery). Industry opponents to Sohn's nomination then exploited that stroke to convince Senator Maria Cantwell to postpone the vote further so they could hold yet another hearing. Industry wanted an additional hearing so they can either try to scuttle the nomination with bogus controversies they spoon feed to select lawmakers, or simply delay the vote even further.

We're now a year into Biden's first term and his FCC still doesn't have a voting majority. If you're a telecom or shitty media giant (looking at you, Rupert), that gridlock is intentional; it prevents the agency from restoring any of the unpopular favors doled out during Trumpism, be it the neutering of the FCC's consumer protection authority, or decades old media consolidation rules crafted with bipartisan support. It's once again a shining example of how U.S. gridlock and dysfunction are a lobbyist-demanded feature, not a bug or some inherent, unavoidable part of the American DNA.

These companies, organizations, and politicians aren't trying to thwart Sohn's nomination because they have meaningful, good faith concerns. Guys like Mike Powell couldn't give any less of a shit about ethics or what's appropriate. They're trying to thwart Sohn's nomination because she knows what she's doing, values competition and consumer welfare, and threatens them with the most terrifying of possibilities if you're a monopoly or bully: competent, intelligent oversight.

Filed Under: copyright, fcc, gigi sohn, hollywood, michael powell, net neutrality, telcos

Enough Is Enough: The Senate Should Stop Playing Games And Confirm Gigi Sohn

from the the-fcc-has-work-to-do dept

Joe Biden entered office a year ago with a mandate to end corporate control of our government by establishing programs to benefit working families and by appointing qualified public servants to execute and oversee those programs.

We anticipated all along that Mitch McConnell would resort to his usual tactics and use the Senate filibuster rules to undermine President Biden's legislative agenda. Appointments should have been a different story. Nearly a decade has passed since Senate Democrats put an end to the filibuster for executive nominations, yet Republicans, on behalf of their corporate sponsors, continue to abuse the confirmation process, preventing President Biden from fulfilling his promises to the American people. Senate Democrats should recognize these games for what they are, stop enabling the obstruction, and move forward on approving President Biden's highly qualified nominees.

Take, for example, the nomination of Gigi Sohn to the Federal Communications Commission. Sohn's strong credentials include co-founding the communications policy advocacy organization Public Knowledge and serving as counselor to former FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler. She is known as a long-time, tireless advocate for the expansion of affordable internet access - one of the key issues on the Democrats' agenda. There is currently a vacant seat on the FCC, and without a full commission it will be difficult to advance the policies necessary to expand affordable broadband service to the millions of American families left on the wrong side of the digital divide.

One person - Sen. Roger Wicker, the Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation - is standing in the way.

Sen. Wicker is promoting the interests of his big corporate campaign donors by preventing a pro-consumer, pro-worker majority at the Federal Communications Commission. Ever since Gigi Sohn was nominated, he has come up with bogus reasons to delay her confirmation vote. During her confirmation hearing she answered questions for hours. She provided reams of written materials and followed up with answers to additional questions. Six weeks later, Wicker asked for yet more documents and suddenly announced that the committee needed to hold yet another confirmation hearing.

Why did he not request such documents in a timely manner? Why did he not submit written questions for the record, standard practice for the committee? Why did he not accept the conclusions of government lawyers who carefully reviewed the very documents he claims to now seek? Because it's not about getting answers. It's about standing in the way of a highly qualified nominee simply because he doesn't like the outcome of the last Presidential election. Sen. Wicker wants an FCC majority that puts corporate profits first, not one that considers what is best for consumers and workers in the industry and that listens to the majority of Americans - Republican and Democrat - who support net neutrality and universal broadband access.

Make no mistake. This is yet another Republican attempt to undermine our democratic system and the functioning of the federal government. They might not be scaling the Capitol walls, wearing face paint, threatening to hang elected officials who don't kowtow to their demands, and publicly parading confederate flags in the halls of the Capitol, but Senate Republicans are trying to undermine the 2020 election results by playing every game possible to prevent a duly elected Administration from having qualified nominees serving on federal agencies. We have seen time and time again that Republicans will use every trick in the book to prevent oversight of their powerful corporate benefactors.

Unfortunately, after the vote last week by the U.S. Senate, Republican obstructionists will continue to be able to use the legislative filibuster to block critical legislation that will improve the lives of millions of working Americans. But my union helped lead the successful effort during the Obama Administration to eliminate their ability to filibuster qualified and critical nominees so that the federal government can function on behalf of the American people.

That is why Senate Democrats must not give in to these outrageous and egregious efforts to draw out the already long confirmation process for qualified nominees like Gigi Sohn. They must recognize these games for what they are and reject the never ending requests for even more hearings when they have had ample time to ask their questions. Senate Democrats must move forward expeditiously to approve Gigi Sohn and President Biden's other highly qualified nominees.

Christopher M. Shelton is President of the Communications Workers of America (CWA)

Filed Under: congress, delay, fcc, gigi sohn, mitch mcconnell, roger wicker

Fraternal Order Of Police Opposes Biden FCC Nom Because She....Supports Encryption

from the people-against-math dept

We'd already noted how telecom and media giants eager to keep their spoils from the Trump era have been waging a not so subtle smear campaign on Biden FCC Commissioner nomination Gigi Sohn, using loyal GOP lawmakers as marionettes. Sohn is broadly popular across both sides of the aisle, but she's also a fairly fierce advocate of functional regulatory oversight, transparency, and market competition. So companies like AT&T and News Corporation have been seeding a lot of gibberish in DC and in select press outlets about how she's a "radical" who wants to "censor conservatives" and hurt puppies.

Last week the Fraternal Order of Police joined the fray with a facts-optional missive opposing Sohn's nomination, claiming it creates "serious public safety considerations." Their problem? Sohn supports (gasp!) encryption:

"the FOP and many others in the law enforcement community at large are deeply troubled by the active and enthusiastic leadership role of Ms. Sohn as a board member for Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) in their forceful advocacy of end-to-end encryption and “user-only-access”—often referred to in the law enforcement world as “going dark.” These new encryption methods for communications are causing Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies to rapidly lose the capability to obtain information necessary to protect the public from crime and violence."

As Techdirt has long noted, this position is baseless nonsense pushed by fans of hyper surveillance (and the illusion of safety that creates). Encryption is simply math. It's just another useful tool in a tool chest, used by anybody looking for heightened security and privacy in transactions. The fact this sometimes includes terrible people is not the fault of the encryption itself, yet the folks who engage in mindless opposition to the technology perpetually struggle to understand this. Worse, they fail to understand (or just don't care) that weakening encryption increases the risk of abuse, decreasing privacy and security for everyone.

Amusingly, FOP's positioning on this stuff isn't what you'd call consistent. Whereas the group claims that Sohn simply being on the board of an organization that supports end-to-end encryption (the EFF) is some kind of cardinal sin, the organization itself has fought tooth and nail against the decryption of police radios for transparency's sake. In other words, useful tools are only sacred when we use them. When others advocate for consistent and meaningful security and encryption integrity, they're unqualified for public office. Funny how that works.

That said, the encryption stuff is possibly just misdirection from the start.

Telecom lobbyists have a long, detailed history of cozying up to various interest groups and encouraging them to support certain positions, even if they have nothing really to do with the group's subject matter (or undermine their constituents' best interests). This sort of "astroturf" work often involves co-opting existing groups (from cattlemen's associations to civil rights groups), and encouraging them to support a company's position in exchange for a new event center or other perks. These sort of quid pro quo relationships are rarely put in writing, so it's easy for groups to deny there's any direct financial link. But the tactic itself is documentable, and is designed to create the illusion of broad support for bad policy (like say, scuttling the nomination of a largely popular regulatory appointment interested in reining in telecom and media giants).

That's not to say FOP couldn't have come up with its terrible argument without prodding (the organization has a long history of terrible arguments). But the fairly hollow letter does come at a time where AT&T and News Corporation are desperately trying to outsource opposition with an eye on delaying or derailing Sohn's nomination. The real goal is to keep the unpopular favors gleaned during the Trump era (the death of net neutrality, the erosion of the FCC's consumer protection authority, the dismantling of decades-old media consolidation rules with bipartisan support) and keep the agency mired in 2-2 partisan gridlock for as long as humanly possible. They can't just come out and admit that's the game, so they utilize a long line of ethically-malleable proxy organizations wielding flimsy pretexts and baseless arguments.

Again, Sohn can be confirmed by Democratic vote alone, but the longer the appointment is delayed, the less time the Biden FCC has to implement reform companies like AT&T and News Corporation won't like. And if this phony and farmed opposition gets loud enough to sway some centrist Democrats like Sinema and Manchin, all the better for media and telecom giants terrified of meaningful oversight and actual reform.

Filed Under: encryption, fcc, gigi sohn, police, police unions
Companies: eff, fraternal order of police

FCC Gets Its First Permanent Female FCC Boss Ever

from the that-took-a-while dept

The US Senate this week approved a new five-year term for Federal Communications Commission Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel, making her the first permanent FCC chair in agency history. Technically the first female chair was Mignon Clyburn, who temporarily served as interim chair before Tom Wheeler was appointed boss back in 2013. Rosenworcel's term was set to expire at the end of the year, raising some concerns that her re-nomination would stall, leaving the GOP with a 2-1 FCC majority at Biden's FCC.

While that scenario was avoided, Rosenworcel's appointment still leaves the agency gridlocked at 2-2 commissioners, and incapable of having a voting majority on any policy issue of substance. If you recall this was quite by design; the GOP rushed to appoint Trump ally Nathan Simington to the commission late last year in a quick appointment process that took less than 30 days. This was at the behest of the telecom and media sectors, which very much don't want the Biden FCC rolling back any of the Trump-era deregulatory favors, whether that's net neutrality or media consolidation rules.

To that end, telecom giants like AT&T, hand in hand with Rupert Murdoch, are now focused on blocking Biden's other FCC pick, Gigi Sohn, from being appointed to the FCC so Rosenworcel can't actually use her Democratic majority. That has involved pushing the false claim through trusted news outlets that Sohn wants to "censor conservatives," despite absolutely zero evidence that's actually true.

This being the post-truth era (especially in the GOP), that doesn't seem to matter. Saule Omarova, a Cornell Law School professor and Biden's pick for comptroller of the currency, backed out of her nomination this week because the banking industry was worried she might actually hold them lightly accountability for something. The banking industry in turn got the GOP to run a campaign accusing Omarova of being a "communist" because she was born in the Soviet Union:

"Some lobbyists, including the incoming chairman of a group representing community bankers and the chief executive of another group that focuses on big banks, also shared a Wall Street Journal editorial suggesting that Ms. Omarova’s Soviet childhood meant that she could not be trusted."

The U.S. press being generally feckless, countless outlets (especially access-obsessed beltway outlets like Politico) spilled ample ink over countless paragraphs stenographing false GOP claims, often without bothering to inform readership they weren't actually true.

Telecom giants like AT&T, hand in hand with Rupert Murdoch, are now attempting the same thing with Sohn because they're terrified of any regulator that might actually hold them accountable for anticompetitive behavior. Both telecom and media giants were spooked by the appointment of Lina Khan to the FTC, and Biden's 9 month delay in announcing his FCC picks gave them ample time to generate farmed opposition to Sohn. Sohn can still be appointed without GOP support, but not if telecom can pressure swing voters like Manchin and Sinema into balking at the pick.

That's a much steeper hill to climb, given Sinema, despite her tendency to throw wrenches in the cogs of Biden's Congressional agenda, has yet to oppose a major nomination. AT&T and Rupert Murdoch know this, but likely want to just delay Sohn's appointment, narrowing the window a Democratic FCC majority can implement any real reform. From the dismantling of FCC consumer protection oversight to the elimination of longstanding (and traditionally bipartisan) media consolidation rules, there were an endless parade of favors doled out to both companies during the Trump era they'd very much like to hold on to for as long as possible, if not permanently.

Filed Under: fcc, gigi sohn, jessica rosenworcel

GOP Claim That Biden FCC Nom Gigi Sohn Wants To 'Censor Conservatives' Is AT&T & Rupert Murdoch Backed Gibberish

from the fluff-and-nonsense dept

We'd already noted how telecom and media giants are hard at work trying to scuttle the nomination of consumer advocate Gigi Sohn to the FCC. Sohn is not only a genuine reformer, she's broadly popular on both sides of the aisle in telecom and media circles. So companies like AT&T and News Corporation, which enjoyed no limit of ass kissing during the Trump era, are working overtime to come up with some feeble talking points loyal politicians can use to oppose her nomination. It's not going well.

About the best they could come up with was the entirely false claim that Sohn wants to "censor Conservatives." Anybody who actually knows Sohn knows the claim isn't true, and she's historically gone well out of her way to embrace policies that encourage diversity in media and speech, even when she doesn't agree with the speaker. Despite being a nonsense claim, it has been broadly peppered across the right wing echo chamber, including the usual columns at Breitbart, editorials by the Wall Street Journal Editorial Board, Tucker Carlson, and elsewhere.

The claim popped up again at last week's nomination hearing before a Senate Judiciary Committee courtesy of Senators Ted Cruz and Dan Sullivan:

"Federal Communications Commission nominee Gigi Sohn faced off against Republican senators at a nomination hearing yesterday, disputing the senators' shaky claims that she would use a post at the FCC to censor conservatives. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska) repeated arguments previously made by Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and The Wall Street Journal editorial board, which mostly boil down to complaints about Sohn's tweets criticizing Fox News and her criticism of Sinclair Broadcast Group."

As we've long noted, the claims that Conservatives are being "censored" in general (either on the internet or on traditional television) aren't remotely true. In fact Conservatives have not only built a massive right wing infotainment universe with a violent disdain for factual reality (OAN, NewsMax, Fox News, Breitbart, Facebook, YouTube, Blaze), they've mastered the art of trolling for outrage engagement, which generally involves saying inflammatory gibberish, then enjoying the added exposure from left-wing outrage retweets and ad-engagement obsessed clickbait coverage. Pretty much the exact opposite of "censorship."

What's usually deemed "censorship" is usually just fairly flimsy and short-lived accountability for spewing false or bigoted nonsense. And while the Trump GOP pretends to be mad at "big tech" for "censorship," what they're actually mad about is the fact that social media belatedly and inconsistently started reining in GOP race-baiting propaganda, a cornerstone of party power in the face of an unfavorable shift in demographics and a sagging electorate. The GOP has zero interest in genuine antitrust reform (see: forty straight years of U.S. history), but the pretense that they do provides handy cover for an agenda that's exclusively self-serving.

The new Trump GOP is currently a party of performative gibberish, entirely untethered from reality, propped up largely thanks to propaganda shoveled into the brains of low-information voters, tricked into rooting against their best self interests via a massive, well-funded coalition of traditional cable and online companies (again, quite the opposite of "censorship"). And outside of perhaps reining in media consolidation and encouraging more competition, there's not a whole lot the FCC can do about it from a policy perspective, given inevitable 1A challenges and a rightward-lurching Supreme Court. Even if Sohn wanted to "censor Conservatives" (which again, she doesn't) she'd find it an impossible task within the confines of the FCC and legal reality.

The great irony in the GOP/News Corp/AT&T alliance's effort to smear Sohn as somebody looking to "censor Conservatives?" Right wing news outlets like Newsmax and AT&T-funded OAN actually support her nomination because she's historically worked to encourage diversity in media viewpoints and healthy competition in media markets. Sohn highlighted as much at the hearing:

"I would say, look at my record. Look at the conservative cable channels that I worked with for years to get them carriage on cable systems when those systems would not carry them. I have long worked with organizations and companies with whom I vigorously disagree on their point of view—fervent Republicans, fervent supporters of the previous president—and I worked with them to get their views online. I believe that I have been characterized very unfairly as being anti-conservative speech. I think my record says otherwise."

It's kind of hard to smear somebody as a fan of "conservative censorship" when outlets like OAN and Newsmax, which routinely traffic in truly repugnant garbage, say she's always been even-handed when dealing with them. Check out this statement supporting Sohn by OAN President Charles Herring:

"She believes in the First Amendment and the advantages of a strong and open media for the benefit of our democracy. She is one of the most knowledgeable persons I know on FCC issues and has the common sense and desire to work with people on both sides of the aisle."

As usual with the broader Trump GOP, this isn't about policy, it's about money and power. AT&T and News Corporation don't want Sohn appointed because she'd not only break a 2-2 partisan gridlock in voting at the FCC, she actively supports holding telecom and media giants accountable for bad behavior. That's in pretty stark contrast to the last four years of the Trump FCC, which basically involved coddling entrenched telecom and media giants at every conceivable opportunity, even if that required a whole lot of lying and legally dubious behavior.

If you're a Trump-allied GOP lawmaker you can't just come out and say you're opposing Sohn's nomination because you're lodged up AT&T and Rupert Murdoch's ass and the only thing you care about is protecting their revenues so campaign contributions keep flowing. So instead you glom on to the Trump GOP's perpetual victimization complex to not only change the subject (away from the fact you're an enabler of anti-competitive monopolists and have been for decades), but distract and agitate the base with false outrage and victimization porn. Sohn can be approved to the post without GOP support, so in the end most of this is little more than a delay tactic and empty calorie performative gibberish, much like the lion's share of the modern Trump GOP policy platform.

Filed Under: 1st amendment, anti-conservative bias, fcc, gigi sohn, grandstanding, politics, ted cruz
Companies: newsmax, oan

Senator Tillis To President Biden: How Dare You Nominate To The FCC Someone Prepared To Protect The Public

from the he-doth-protest-too-much dept

Senator Tillis penned a letter to President Biden this week that is breathtaking in its obtuseness. In it, he demanded that the President withdraw the nomination of Gigi Sohn to the FCC for having championed the longstanding ability of the public to receive over-the-air signals on public airwaves. Or, in other words, for having done exactly what we should want an FCC commissioner, tasked with the stewardship of the nation's spectrum, to do.

In his outrage at how fit for purpose her career has been for this role, Tillis betrays how badly his own office has abandoned the same public interest she has long protected. In particular, by overstating the upshot of a single court's never-reviewed decision, and making other unfounded, scurrilous accusations against her, Tillis falsely suggests it was she who has somehow done wrong in supporting Locast. And by taking the side of the plaintiffs he gladly turns a blind eye to the actual wrong that has been committed against the public by the broadcasters who, in suing Locast, have succeeded in robbing the public of the benefit of its own broadcast spectrum.

It's a serious deprivation that Senator Tillis seems all too eager to condone, because what he conveniently ignores is that spectrum licenses aren't supposed to be gifts to licensees for them to monopolize for their own self-interest. Rather, the quid-pro-quo behind the licensing of this public resource is to make sure that, by letting broadcasters use the spectrum for their programming, the public will then get the benefit of that programming. If there's no benefit to be had, then there's no point in the public ever licensing the spectrum to broadcasters in the first place.

Yet that's where we are, with much of the public now cut off from their own public airwaves and the programming they are supposed to be able to receive. Because for the many people who live in areas with poor reception, or who don't have rabbit ears (when's the last time you saw a tv sold with a set?), or who can't afford (or are not interested in affording) the hefty monthly charge needed for a cable subscription in order to get access to the over-the-air stations they should otherwise be able to watch, it was only with the antenna-renting services like Locast that they could finally enjoy the programming to which they are entitled. But now, thanks to certain broadcasters misusing copyright law and their privileged position as incumbent public spectrum licensees to shut these services down, they can't.

If these broadcasters are no longer interested in providing over-the-air programming to the public, that's a choice they can make. In finding it so offensive that services like Locast would help their over-the-air programming actually reach public audiences it would appear that's a decision they have indeed made. But then they should have to relinquish the spectrum so that it can be reallocated to someone who does want to make use of the spectrum license to provide over-the-air programming to the public. In any case they should NOT be able to cut the public off from ALL broadcast programming just because they don't want to reach the public that way anymore themselves. Yet that's what they have done, because with no more Locast, and no more Aereo, it's not just their programming that the public has lost access to but the programming of every other broadcaster, including those who depend on over-the-air reception for their stations to survive, since now the public has no way of receiving their channels either.

It's a deplorable state of affairs out of step with the spirit, if not also letter, of public spectrum licensing, as well as the constitutional purpose of copyright law to promote the progress of knowledge and culture, which has now been physically obstructed by the loss of these antenna-renting services. And it's about time we had someone in Washington ready, willing, and able to stand up for the public and do something about it. It shouldn't just be Gigi Sohn of course – Congress itself needs to be a better steward of the public interest in situations like these where it has been so conspicuously subordinated – but she's a great start.

Filed Under: copyright, fcc, gigi sohn, public spectrum, thom tillis
Companies: locast

Rupert Murdoch Spreads False Claim Biden FCC Nom Wants To 'Censor Conservatives.' NewsMax & OAN Immediately Prove Him Wrong.

from the gibberish-and-nonsense dept

We'd already noted how telecom and media giants are hard at work trying to scuttle the nomination of consumer advocate Gigi Sohn to the FCC. Sohn is broadly popular on both sides of the aisle in telecom and media circles, so companies like AT&T and News Corporation are working overtime to come up with talking points politicians can use to oppose her nomination. This week, that included prodding Lindsey Graham to frame Sohn (who has decades of telecom policy experience) as an unqualified radical extremist looking to censor conservatives:

Anybody who knows or has worked with Sohn (which is pretty much everyone in telecom policy circles, including myself) knows this is gibberish. Graham's rant was timed with the release of this clumsy missive by the Wall Street Journal editorial board that tries to claim Sohn wants to "censor conservatives." Their evidence of this? She supported holding Sinclair Broadcasting accountable after it lied to regulators to try and get its merger with Tribune Broadcasting approved:

"After Tribune Broadcasting abandoned its merger with the conservative-leaning Sinclair Broadcast Group in 2018, she declared, "Today is a good day for every American who believes that diversity of voices in the media is better for our democracy" and urged the FCC to "look at whether Sinclair is qualified to be a broadcast licensee at all."

The Journal oddly forgets to mention this important context, but Sinclair didn't just "abandon" that merger. It was blocked by the Trump FCC and then fined for using shell companies, relatives, and other shady side deals to try and pretend the Tribune merger wouldn't violate bipartisan media ownership rules. Sinclair's efforts were so legally dubious, even Trump FCC boss Ajit Pai was forced to oppose the deal. Sohn's big crime? Agreeing with Pai. This somehow gets twisted into Sohn "supporting Conservative censorship"; fairly reflective of the Journal's integrity and the quality of policy discourse in 2021.

One ironic bit that ruins AT&T's and News Corporation's lobbying efforts here: right-wing disinformation mills Newsmax and OAN (who both opposed the threat the Sinclair merger posed to smaller right wing disinformation mills) released statements in support of Sohn's nomination. Their primary justification? That she... supports conservative voices. From Newsmax commentator Bradley Blakeman:

"I know Gigi. I have worked with Gigi. And I have seen her fight for people's right to express themselves, even when she disagrees with them."

AT&T, News Corp., and Comcast very much don't want a consumer advocate at the FCC. They very much want to retain all the favors they nabbed during the Trump era, whether that is the death of net neutrality and broadband privacy rules, or the elimination of many media consolidation rules and neutered FCC consumer protection authority. Their problem is Sohn is both qualified and popular across the aisle, which is forcing them to dig a little too deeply into the nonsense bin to try and justify opposition to the nomination.

Filed Under: fcc, gigi sohn, lindsey graham, regulations, rupert murdoch

Big Telecom Is Mad Because New FCC Appointment Gigi Sohn Actually Defends Broadband Consumers

from the dysfunction-junction dept

So after the longest (and completely unexplained) delay in FCC and NTIA history, last week the Biden administration finally got around to fully staffing the nation's top telecom regulator. While the selection of fairly centrist Jessica Rosenworcel is expected to make it through the confirmation process, the same can't be said of Gigi Sohn, a popular consumer advocate:

"Republican senators largely said they can live with Rosenworcel — but GOP leaders say they’re drawing the line at Sohn and her perceived regulatory bent. "

What's the GOP's primary problem with Sohn? Apparently it's her diabolical tendency toward coalition building (gasp) and support for local community broadband (double gasp):

"Sohn has long had a reputation as a shrewd operator within telecom circles, adept at pulling together coalitions in support of causes such as fighting industry consolidation and empowering local governments to build their own internet networks."

If you're new here, the GOP's opposition to Sohn is being directly coordinated by the nation's biggest telecom monopolies. And for twenty years, the telecom industry has been terrified of having U.S. regulators actually do their jobs, promote competition, crack down on monopoly power, and protect consumers. This is almost always dressed up as other concerns, like the 25-year-old bogeyman idea that appointing a competent consumer advocate will immediately result in broadband price regulation:

"The main GOP concern about Sohn is the same one that bedeviled the final hours of this summer’s infrastructure bill negotiations: the prospect that Democrats may want to regulate the prices that broadband providers like Comcast charge customers. That possibility is one reason Republicans have spent years opposing net neutrality, which they worry would lead to the FCC assuming more regulatory power over broadband networks."

But again, U.S. broadband price regulation never happens. Even under the most progressive FCC in a generation (Tom Wheeler, whom Sohn closely advised), meaningful price regulation was always kept off the table. The net neutrality rules were carefully crafted to avoid it. It's simply a non-starter in DC. But it is useful as a GOP "slippery slope" argument bogeyman, providing useful cover for just blanket fealty to regional telecom monopolies. "We shouldn't stand up to telecom monopolies in any way because it might result in broadband price caps!" The fear-mongering has proven effective for 25 straight years.

This knee-jerk opposition to anything that would upset Comcast, AT&T and Verizon is buried under the guise of other complaints too, like the GOP's claim that Democrats are going to rush Sohn's appointment:

"Republican senators largely said they can live with Rosenworcel — but GOP leaders say they’re drawing the line at Sohn and her perceived regulatory bent. And they’re not on board with Democrats’ push to rush the confirmations through."

Politico's fecklessness strikes again in that they just "forget" to mention that the GOP rushed through the appointment of largely unqualified Trump BFF Nathan Simington late last year in under 28 days, with the obvious goal of creating 2-2 partisan gridlock at the agency. At the telecom industry's direct behest, Politico's selective GOP brunch sources want to maintain this gridlock for as long as possible.

The GOP has been a mindless rubber stamp for regional telecom monopolies for literally decades. There is literally no terrible idea AT&T or Comcast has pushed they won't support. That's not an opinion. It's not debatable. Yes, there are also corrupt Democratic senators on this front, but if you actually look at policy history on this subject, there's no comparison. By and large Democratic policymakers have at least occasionally tried (sloppily and tepidly to be sure) to foster competition, protect consumers, and occasionally thwart broadband monopolization. Sometimes.

The GOP, in contrast, has been a full-throttle ride down a rabbit hole of mindlessly pandering to AT&T and Comcast at nearly every opportunity. For forty straight years. The party will simply deny that the U.S. broadband industry isn't competitive. They'll demolish every consumer protection effort. They'll approve every competition and job-killing merger. This history speaks for itself, yet when a beltway brunch outlet like Politico covers why the GOP is opposing the appointment of a popular, consumer-focused regulator to the FCC, that entire history is just not mentioned out of fear of offending sources and advertisers.

Politico's read on the room could be a bit skewed by its sources, as Sohn has historically been well respected as a straight shooter across both sides of the aisle. Democrats could push her through without the GOP, but they'll again have to rely on the votes of Manchin and Sinema, the latter of which has actively thwarted efforts to restore net neutrality after being pressured by Comcast lobbyists.

Filed Under: fcc, gigi sohn, gop, net neutrality

Team Biden Finally Gets Around To Staffing U.S. Telecom Regulators

from the better-late-than-never dept

It was the longest delay in staffing U.S. telecom agencies in Presidential history, but a White House announcement states the administration will promote interim boss Jessica Rosenworcel to be permanent FCC boss, while appointing former Tom Wheeler advisor and consumer advocate Gigi Sohn to fill the third empty Democratic Commissioner seat. Sohn played a major role in both the crafting of net neutrality rules (since demolished by telecom sector lobbyists during the Trump era) and the FCC's broadband privacy rules (also since demolished by telecom sector lobbyists during the Trump era).

Another agency that's increasingly doing interesting work on broadband (see their recent, more accurate mapping efforts) is the NTIA, which will now be helmed by Alan Davidson. All three choices are broadly popular, understand the potential of competent regulatory oversight and the pitfalls of incompetent overreach. And while maybe not as paradigm-rattling as Lina Khan's appointment to the FTC, all three will collectively be a notable sea change from the Trump era which, with the occasional exception, involved doing pretty much whatever AT&T and Comcast wanted.

There was some initial talk about Gigi Sohn being appointed FCC boss, but that would have involved demoting Rosenworcel (whose term ends at the end of this year). Given Sohn's history of consumer and net neutrality advocacy, she likely wasn't as popular among entrenched telecom providers, making an FCC boss confirmation hearing more contentious. Still, consumer groups see Rosenworcel as somebody they can work with, and are generally positive about both picks:

"Jessica Rosenworcel, Gigi Sohn, and Alan Davidson all have years of experience in fighting for the public interest in broadband policy, whether it is in government or the nonprofit sector. If reports are confirmed by the White House, these nominations will be historic and a clear indication that the Administration is ready to move forward with bold, but experienced leadership in the key agencies dealing with broadband policy. While later than normal, these nominees are the type of skilled leadership that our country needs at this time."

Rosenworcel didn't have quite the same level of support as Sohn among progressives, who weren't entirely thrilled with Rosenworcel's decision to scuttle the Wheeler FCC's attempts to bring some added competition to the cable box (she backed the false claim, also supported by the Copyright Office, that cracking open the cable industry's hardware monopoly over the cable box would have "violated copyright"). But Rosenworcel had the support of numerous Senators and parts of the GOP, who see her as the less "radical" option. Rosenworcel is absolutely smart and competent, and she's be the first permanent female FCC boss in agency history. Sohn would be the first openly LGBTQ Commissioner in agency history. Both immensely important milestones.

The question now is whether the choice of Rosenworcel comes with some caveats. For example it's not entirely clear if Rosenworcel will be aggressive in restoring all the things stripped away during the Trump administration at AT&T and Comcast's behest, whether that was the elimination of net neutrality rules (which largely gutted the FCC's consumer protection authority), or the demolition of media consolidation rules historically crafted with bipartisan support.

There's a nasty tendency in DC policy circles to talk ambiguously about the "quest to fix the digital divide," while ignoring the reason U.S. broadband is actually spotty, expensive, and slow: regional monopolization and the state and federal corruption that protects it. Because clearly calling out the real culprit upsets politically powerful campaign contributors and kingmakers tethered to our intelligence and law enforcement systems, folks in both parties tend to just not bother, keeping the focus on less contentious, safer subjects (wireless spectrum, how much everybody hates robocalls).

But you can't fix a problem you refuse to even acknowledge, which is why U.S. broadband remains perpetually mediocre thirty years on.

Which is to say while these appointments are all solid, it's important to keep your gaze focused on what the newly forged NTIA and FCC actually do, not what they say. Hollow rhetoric about the "miracles of 5G connectivity" or the "digital divide" mean nothing if you're not willing to take on the lumbering monopolies that are actually causing most of the sector's problems in the first place. The "digital divide" (unaffordable, spotty broadband) is an active policy choice and the direct result of coddling monopolies for 30 straight years. Real telecom leadership and reform has to at least start with actually acknowledging that, something lawmakers and telecom regulators from both parties have historically been violently allergic to.

Filed Under: broadband, fcc, gigi sohn, jessica rosenworcel, ntia, policy