telecom industry
Trump's FCC Ripped Away Open-Internet Protections. We're This Close to Winning Them Back
A majority of commissioners is set to return to the agency the authority it needs to act as a strong advocate for a user-powered internet.
Later this week, the Federal Communications Commission is expected to reverse a Trump-era decision that stripped away essential open-internet protections. In a Thursday vote, a majority of commissioners will return to the agency the authority it needs to act as a strong advocate for a user-powered internet.
They will do this by reclassifying broadband-access services as telecom services subject to Title II of the Communications Act. Title II authority allows the FCC to safeguard Net Neutrality and hold companies like AT&T, Comcast and Verizon accountable to internet users across the United States.
Title II authority gives the FCC the tools to make the internet work better for everyone, ensuring that internet service providers can’t block, throttle, or otherwise discriminate against the content everyone accesses online. But it also gives the FCC the regulatory means to ensure that broadband prices and practices are “just and reasonable.” The agency will be able to step in to stop price gouging, safeguard user privacy, protect public safety, eliminate junk fees, and stop other abusive behavior from providers.
During a Capitol Hill press conference last week, FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel said, “There are a lot of things in this country that divide us, but Net Neutrality is not one of them.” Rosenworcel cited poll after poll that show that people across the political spectrum overwhelmingly support the 2015 Title II Net Neutrality safeguards that the Obama FCC put in place. The same polls show majorities opposed the Trump FCC’s 2017 repeal of these protections.
“Bringing back the FCC’s authority over broadband and putting back net neutrality rules is popular, and it has been court-tested and court-approved,” she added. “[W]e have an opportunity to get this right. Because in a modern digital economy, it is time to have broadband oversight, national Net Neutrality rules, and policies that ensure the internet is fast, open, and fair.”
Back to the future
The rules up for a vote on April 25 are identical to the 2015 rules. The FCC will enforce them in the same way. And the draft order text that the agency will finalize and adopt already makes this clear — in some cases, going further than the 2015 order did — with a chance before the vote occurs for the FCC to make this language even stronger.
Losing Title II hurt people, which is why millions protested the Trump FCC’s action. Not only did its 2017 repeal gut the Net Neutrality rules, it also surrendered the agency’s power to protect communities from unjust or unreasonable practices by these internet-access goliaths.
This had troubling consequences during the early months of the Covid-19 pandemic, when Trump FCC Chairman Ajit Pai asked broadband providers to sign a
voluntary pledge to preserve people’s vital internet access (he couldn’t force providers to do this since he’d abdicated the agency’s authority to compel these companies to keep users connected). Despite Pai’s claim that the pledge was a success, reporting by Daily Dot found that many of these same companies still cut users’ connections during a national emergency, when everything from work to health care had shifted online.
A 2019 study by Northeastern University and UMass Amherst found that ISP throttling of network services happens “all the time.” Researchers analyzed data from hundreds of thousands of smartphones to determine whether wireless providers were slowing, or throttling, data speeds for specific mobile services. They found that “just about every wireless carrier is guilty of throttling video platforms and streaming services unevenly.”
In everyday terms, this means that companies like AT&T are picking winners and losers online. Allowing such throttling to continue opens the door to more content-based discrimination. This isn’t just about economic favoritism — for example, an ISP slowing down a competitor’s online app so people would use their product instead — but, potentially, the blocking of political messages that gigantic communications companies don’t like.
This isn’t a hypothetical. In 2005, the internet service provider Telus blocked access to a server that hosted a website supporting a labor strike against the company. And in 2011, the Electronic Frontier Foundation found that several ISPs were intercepting user search queries on Bing and Yahoo and directing them to “results” pages that they or their partners controlled.
The say-anything lobbyists
Lobbyists working for these large internet-access companies like to say that Title II authority offers “a solution in search of a problem” that doesn’t exist. And you can bet they’ll repeat
a lot of these lies in the aftermath of this week’s vote.
Throughout the 20 years of debate around Title II and Net Neutrality, the powerful phone and cable lobby has demonstrated a willingness to say anything and everything to avoid being held accountable. They’ll say that Title II’s open-internet standard is a heavy-handed regulation that will undermine investment in new broadband deployment; in reality, executives from these companies have said publicly that their capital expenditures
aren’t impacted in any way by Title II rules. The lobbyists will say that Net Neutrality is a hyper-partisan, politicized issue — ignoring public polling (see above) that shows internet users on the political left, right, and center overwhelmingly support the sorts of baseline protections offered under Title II.
The fight for this week’s victory predates the Trump FCC repeal of strong Title II rules in 2017. By restoring safeguards that millions fought so hard to make a reality, the FCC is recognizing the broad-based grassroots movement that coalesced in 2005 around the then-obscure principle of Net Neutrality and built a movement focused on retaining the people-powered, democratic spirit that was baked into the internet at its inception.
Without baseline open-internet protections, internet users are subject to privacy invasions, hidden junk fees, data caps, and billing rip-offs from their ISPs. In addition, without Title II oversight the FCC is severely limited in its ability to promote broadband competition and deployment, bringing this essential infrastructure within reach of people in the United States who lack access.
The FCC will change all of that later this week. It will respond to overwhelming public opinion and stand up for internet users against a handful of monopoly-minded companies that for too long have dictated media policy in Washington.
Come Thursday, I and many of the amazing advocates who’ve been fighting this fight for the past 20 years will be on hand at the FCC to witness the final vote. It will be a moment to appreciate our hard work and thank the agency for restoring to Americans their all-important online rights. Join us in celebrating!
A Dirty Campaign Defeated Gigi Sohn. We Can't Let it Happen Again.
The failure of Democratic senators to advocate for their own nominee means that companies like Comcast and Fox will likely only double-down in the future on the kinds of deceitful tactics they deployed against a nominee who would have been an incredible addition to the FCC.
On Tuesday, Gigi Sohn withdrew her nomination to the Federal Communications Commission.
This ends a two-year fight to put an accomplished public servant in the important fifth seat on the FCC. In the —after nearly 500 days, multiple confirmation hearings, and a relentless industry-orchestrated campaign against her—Sohn didn't have enough votes in the Senate to move forward.
I'm furious—and determined to make sure this doesn't happen again.
The dirty campaign to stop Gigi Sohn
They're celebrating today at Comcast and Fox, where their lobbyists deserve most of the credit for concocting lies to derail Sohn's nomination. They falsely portrayed her as radical and divisive, even though her years of experience tell a different story—about a highly regarded expert who has reached across political divides to support communications policies that help people.
Republicans who willfully spread those lies are thrilled, too. Their campaign of vile dog whistles, homophobic innuendo and false outrage worked. In fact, it was too easy.
But they're not the only ones to blame: The failure of Democratic leaders to defend their nominee cost the agency—and the nation—a true public servant. Their missteps and unforced errors were many.
From the start, infighting in the Biden administration delayed the nomination of a new FCC chair and commissioner for months—meaning Sohn wasn't nominated until late October 2021 and then got little time during debates around the infrastructure bills. Instead of moving on this nomination right away when the Biden team had the most political capital—they did it when they had the least.
While the GOP ganged up on her, most Democrats sat back, either using their time on the dais to ask questions about their home states or repeat industry-written talking points.
Then Senate leaders made Sohn endure an unprecedented three confirmation hearings, giving the right-wing noise machine numerous opportunities to badger her while extracting zero concessions from the other side. Despite her composure in the hot seat, this stage let Sohn's opponents test out numerous lines of attack. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) got endless opportunities to fulminate about her random retweets, while Sen. J.D. Vance (R-Ohio) cosplayed as a culture warrior from his new perch on the Commerce Committee.
While the GOP ganged up on her, most Democrats sat back, either using their time on the dais to ask questions about their home states or repeat industry-written talking points. (Notable and laudable exceptions who came to Sohn's defense include Sens. Ed Markey and Tammy Baldwin.)
Unfortunately, the failure of more Democratic senators to advocate for their own nominee means that companies like Comcast and Fox will likely only double-down in the future on the kinds of deceitful and dirty tactics they deployed against Sohn. What other lessons could they draw from how easily senators folded in the face of easily fact-checked lies and slanders? And what potential FCC nominee would want to subject themselves to this kind of character assassination?
A leadership failure
Neither the White House nor Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer succeeded in getting the votes Sohn needed when she got through committee and to the verge of a floor vote last year. They didn't put enough pressure on holdout senators or create any real political costs for the holdouts' refusal to back the administration's nominees. Worse still, President Biden and Vice President Harris actually feted ISP execs in the Rose Garden—even as those same companies were sabotaging Sohn.
It says a lot about who they're willing to fight for—and who they won't.
Without real pressure from the top, rank-and-file Democrats invented excuses for why they couldn't vote before the midterms—and, once those were over, immediately recycled the same rationalizations about the 2024 election. As much as I might wish the FCC were a top-tier election issue, exactly zero swing voters are going to the polls thinking about Gigi Sohn. Yet multiple senators acted like a vote for their own party's nominee could sink their reelection chances.
Politicians who should know better all of a sudden took seriously the disingenuous pay-to-slay attacks by sock-puppet front groups (including one led by former North Dakota Sen. Heidi Heitkamp, now on the corporate payroll). I'm not sure what's worse: If they just made these excuses to placate corporate donors, or if they actually believed them.
What does it say when Democratic senators—like Sens. Cortez-Masto, Kelly, Rosen, and Tester, who all failed publicly support Sohn—take the specious claims of a disreputable group like the Fraternal Order of Police more seriously than they do the support of 400 of the nation's largest civil-rights, civil-liberties, labor and public-interest groups? What does it mean when they don't just let the lies fester but actually promote them? It says a lot about who they're willing to fight for—and who they won't.
The next battle
This defeat has implications that go far beyond the FCC. The Republicans and their Democratic enablers are setting out markers for who's allowed to serve in government. They made clear that public servants will be pilloried while ex-corporate lobbyists sail through. Women and LGBTQIA+ folks—Sohn would have been the first lesbian to serve as an FCC commissioner—will be slandered. Tweeting about police violence can be disqualifying (in the Senate, retweets do equal endorsements). Questioning the propriety of Fox News—even as it's being exposed for aiding and abetting election lies and insurrection—is unacceptable. A basic understanding of U.S. history and racism may be disqualifying.
Of course, this is bad news for the FCC, too.
At a moment when media and tech are intertwined with every facet of our lives, our politics and the very state of our democracy, this vital agency cannot fully do its job. Which is just how the industry wants it.
One of the best things the Biden administration has done since 2021 is securing $65 billion for broadband expansion. FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel has been making the most of the hand she was dealt, but a deadlocked FCC makes it harder to implement and maintain those programs and spend those funds in the best way possible. Net Neutrality and the restoration of Title II will remain in limbo without a fifth vote at the agency. As Sohn herself wrote in the statement announcing her withdrawal: "It means that the FCC will not have a majority to adopt strong rules which ensure that everyone has nondiscriminatory access to broadband, regardless of who they are or where they live."
At a moment when media and tech are intertwined with every facet of our lives, our politics and the very state of our democracy, this vital agency cannot fully do its job. Which is just how the industry wants it.
The next test is already here. The Biden administration needs to come up with a new nominee to the FCC, and it may be tempted to nominate an industry-friendly choice—someone who can "get through" and avoid a larger political fight. We must oppose and reject any return to business as usual that furthers industry capture of the FCC.
Instead, we need to demand an independent candidate with public-interest bona fides and a clear commitment to racial justice and civil rights. They must show they're willing to stand up to lies. They must be unequivocal in their support for restoring the FCC's authority, and making sure that the internet is open, affordable, available, and reliable for everyone. They must demonstrate a commitment to engaging the public, not just meeting with lobbyists.
This loss stings. Gigi Sohn deserved better. But we cannot let the industry pick its own regulators ever again.