[link removed]

FAIR
View article on FAIR's website ([link removed])
The FCC Restores Its Responsibility to Oversee Corporate Control of Internet Janine Jackson ([link removed])


Listeners will know that the FCC has been ineffectual for some time, because it’s been short of full staffing. Big media players torpedoed ([link removed]) , with the most scurrilous of means, the nomination of public interest advocate Gigi Sohn ([link removed]) , but eventually Biden nominee Anna Gomez was sworn in as fifth commissioner.

In the wake of that, FCC chair Jessica Rosenworcel has now announced that the FCC is to be an active player again.
FCC chair Jessica Rosenworcel

FCC chair Jessica Rosenworcel (9/26/23 ([link removed]) ): "Repeal of net neutrality put the agency on the wrong side of history, the wrong side of the law, and the wrong side of the public."

At the National Press Club this week, Rosenworcel (9/26/23 ([link removed]) ) said that the FCC will vote ([link removed]) on a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking at its next meeting in mid-October. And they will center the role of Title II ([link removed]) , the part of federal communications law that gives the agency the power to even go about overseeing corporate control of the internet: to push against price gouging, anti-privacy moves, access-throttling—the whole range of things that makes people hate their internet service providers, and makes it a less hospitable arena for activism and organizing. That’s before you even get to whether they are allowed to shut off service ([link removed]) during crises like Covid.

The FCC, under the sway of corporations and their lobbyists, abandoned ([link removed]) that responsibility years ago, under former chair Ajit Pai ([link removed]) , appointed by Donald Trump based on his career as a lawyer for Verizon.

With Title II invigorated, the FCC can engage net neutrality rules—which prevent internet service providers from slowing access for those that don’t pony up, and speeding it along for those that do. All of which machinations we as end-users may not be aware of, but that will absolutely affect what we see and know and act on.
WSJ: Newly Empowered FCC Chair Moves to Rekindle Net-Neutrality Fight Between Tech and Telecom Giants

The Wall Street Journal (9/26/23 ([link removed]) ) framed the idea that telecom companies should be regulated as something only of concern to "tech giants."

Net neutrality has always been overwhelmingly supported ([link removed]) by the US public. Few wonder anymore whether broadband access is a fundamental right, like water or electricity—or whether you should lose access if you live in an underserved area, rural or urban.

But corporate powers and government enablers have shown they will work very hard to prevent it; remember Ajit Pai pretending ([link removed]) that the FCC couldn’t acknowledge the flood of public comments it got because, um… technical sabotage…that turned out to be a brazen lie ([link removed]) ?

Net neutrality, backed by the FCC’s Title II authorization, is nothing less than the ability to monitor and regulate hugely powerful companies’ control over an essential element of public life—the ability to inform yourself, communicate, participate socially and politically.

In other words, expect pushback, both loud and subtle. We’ve already seen headlines like the Wall Street Journal’s suggestion (9/26/23 ([link removed]) ) that a “Newly Empowered FCC Chair Moves to Rekindle Net Neutrality Fight Between Tech and Telecom Giants.”

Fighting? That’s bad. And who cares about a fight between tech and telecom giants?

There is something very important for all of us at stake here. So look out for coverage that suggests otherwise.
Read more ([link removed])

Share this post: <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="[link removed]" title="Twitter"><img border="0" height="15" width="15" src="[link removed]" title="Twitter" alt="Twitter" class="mc-share"></a>
<a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="[link removed]" title="Facebook"><img border="0" height="15" width="15" src="[link removed]" title="Facebook" alt="Facebook" class="mc-share"></a>
<a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="[link removed]" title="Pinterest"><img border="0" height="15" width="15" src="[link removed]" title="Pinterest" alt="Pinterest" class="mc-share"></a>
<a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="[link removed]" title="LinkedIn"><img border="0" height="15" width="15" src="[link removed]" title="LinkedIn" alt="LinkedIn" class="mc-share"></a>
<a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="[link removed]" title="Google Plus"><img border="0" height="15" width="15" src="[link removed]" title="Google Plus" alt="Google Plus" class="mc-share"></a>
<a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="[link removed]" title="Instapaper"><img border="0" height="15" width="15" src="[link removed]" title="Instapaper" alt="Instapaper" class="mc-share"></a>
​

© 2021 Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting. All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email because you signed up for email alerts from
Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting

Our mailing address is:
FAIRNESS & ACCURACY IN REPORTING
124 W. 30th Street, Suite 201
New York, NY 10001

FAIR's Website ([link removed])

FAIR counts on your support to do this work — please donate today ([link removed]) .

Follow us on Twitter ([link removed]) | Friend us on Facebook ([link removed])

change your preferences ([link removed])
Email Marketing Powered by Mailchimp
[link removed]
unsubscribe ([link removed]) .