House Energy & Commerce Committee Republicans and FCC GOP member Brendan Carr are singing from the same hymnal when it comes to the FCC Democratic majority’s plan to launch a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) restoring network neutrality rules rejected by the previous Republican-led FCC.

The headline on an October 17 press release from all the E&C Republicans proclaimed: “E&C GOP to Rosenworcel: The Net Neutrality Debate was Settled When the Internet Didn’t Break.”

The release was announcing a letter those members had sent to Federal Communications Commission chair Jessica Rosenworcel counting the ways the FCC would be wrong to restore the rules and reclassify broadband as a Title II telecommunications service subject to FCC open access and other regulations.

Enter Carr, whose October 18 statement was headlined: “The Title II Debate Was Settled When the Internet Didn’t Break.” He also posted a copy of the GOP House members’ letter to the social-media platform X (formerly Twitter), endorsing it.

Both the letter and Carr’s statement argue that under the light-touch — or, as Democrats would say, essentially “no touch” — regulation of Title I, broadband networks have thrived, investment has increased (as has competition) and the real cost of the service has gone down.

“[U]tility-style regulation of the Internet was never about improving your online experience — that was just the sheep’s clothing,” Carr said. “It was always about government control. So no matter what you hear tomorrow and beyond, the Internet is not broken and the FCC does not need Title II to fix it.”

Also Read: NCTA Chief Michael Powell Kicks Off Cable’s Latest Rhetorical Assault on Net Neutrality

House Republicans agreed: “Despite constant fear-mongering, this debate was settled in 2017 when the Internet didn't break following the repeal of heavy-handed FCC regulations,” House E&C chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.) and Communications Subcommittee chair Bob Latta (R-Ohio) said.

In their letter, the legislators sought a raft of answers from Rosenworcel on everything from who participated in drafting the NRPM, to whether it was discussed with the White House to whether the FCC has ever received any complaints about the blocking, throttling and paid prioritization that the rules are meant to prevent, and if so from whom.

They also want assurances the FCC will hold to its pledge not to regulate rates. That means rate regulation in any way, shape or form, Republicans said, either before or after the fact.

The Republican-saber rattling notwithstanding, the Democratic FCC majority will almost certainly vote on October 19 to launch a rulemaking to reclassify internet access as a Title II service subject to FCC regulation and restore rules against blocking, throttling and paid prioritization, as well as reinstate a “general conduct standard” allowing the agency to regulate conduct not specifically falling under those headings.

FCC chair Jessica Rosenworcel is clearly focused on building both a legal case and public support for the regulator’s reclassification of broadband as a Title II common-carrier service, an effort she is teeing up at this week’s public meeting.

With the Federal Communications Commission’s Democratic majority on the record in support of that Title II designation, the notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) will almost certainly pass 3-2, with Republicans holding to form and opposing the effort.

The NPRM will then launch a comment period where, if past is prologue, the FCC will receive lots of input in its public docket before proceeding to a vote on final rules.

As with other FCC efforts to clarify its regulatory authority over internet access, this one will almost certainly be aslo challenged in court and the FCC will need to dot its i’s and cross its t’s beforehand.

The FCC has issued a couple of fact sheets over the past two weeks to help make its case in advance.

One, the “National Security and Public Safety Impacts of Restoring Broadband Oversight,” argues that the COVID-19 pandemic, among other things, has created a new reality in which the FCC “has a responsibility to restore its broadband oversight authority and reimposing net neutrality rules that prevent blocking, throttling and so-called paid prioritization ‘fast lanes.’”

The FCC invoked foreign threats in the sheet, which was sent to reporters and others. It noted that although the agency has taken steps to protect communications networks from hostile governments, the lack of specific authority that Title II would give it over access has left a “national security loophole.”

Restoring Title II would allow the FCC to deny foreign governments access to U.S. networks, the fact sheet said.

Another loophole is emergency information, the FCC suggested. “Reclassifying internet access as a Title II service would allow the FCC to require broadband providers to report and address internet outages, like the FCC does for voice service today, and ensure that response personnel know when service is impacted, especially during emergencies,” the fact sheet said. 

A federal appeals court, in upholding most of a previous order removing the net neutrality rules and classifying internet access, did cite the FCC’s failure to talk about how its rollback of the rules would affect public safety.

Also Read: Supreme Court To Hear Case That Would Weaken FCC

Rosenworcel says that restoring the rules would just be a way to “kick-start” the process of “rectify[ing] this abdication of national security and public safety oversight.”

In a second “fact sheet,” the FCC pitched the proposal as protecting consumers, more than 80% of whom it said support “open internet protections.”

The FCC said restoring the rules means protecting consumer privacy, ensuring “fair” treatment by ISPs, including preventing them from blocking or throttling internet service or creating paid “fast lanes,” as well as combating VoIP robocalls.

Fair treatment raises another new net neutrality issue since the last battle over the rules — equity, an issue that could bring cost into the equation and raises the specter of some form of rate regulation.

But two parties can play the fact-sheet card.

Republican commissioner Brendan Carr has countered with his own release branding Rosenworcel’s facts as myths.

As to Title II being necessary for national security, for example, Carr said the FCC has been applying the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA) to internet service providers without Title II.

And when it comes to consumer protection, Carr said Title II would strip the Federal Trade Commission of its authority over broadband.

Carr did not mince words about the chairwoman's fact sheet efforts.

“As with past iterations of this debate, the plan’s backers are trotting out a series of farcical claims to justify this power grab — claims that are as credible as their assertion in 2017 that ending Title II regulation would slow down and end the Internet,” he wrote in presenting his sheet, adding: “Reminder: mobile speeds are up over 6X since then! So here are just some of today’s top Title II myths followed by facts that set the record straight.”

Net neutrality has been a political battle, but legislators on both sides of the aisle have also tried for years — or at least have made noises like they were trying — to come up with a legislative fix by clarifying what authority they meant to give the FCC when it comes to regulating broadband.

Republicans and industry players have backed legislation that would authorize net neutrality rules against blocking, throttling and anticompetitive paid prioritization so long as it is not under Title II. But many Democrats have argued that such regulations need to be Title II-based, so a congressional solution has been a nonstarter.

Given the bitterly divided — probably dysfunctional — state of the current Congress, a legislative solution appears no closer. That’s despite all sides saying legislation is the best way to prevent the pendulum swings from Title II to Title I with changes in the political makeup of the FCC, giving industry some vaunted regulatory certainty over its billions of dollars in investments.

The Senate has confirmed the renominations of Democrat Geoffrey Starks and Republican Brendan Carr for new terms on the Federal Communications Commission, ensuring there won't be any more agency nomination drama — at least in the near term.

The pair were confirmed by voice vote late Saturday (Sept. 30).

Carr's term is for five years, retroactive to July 1, 2023, while Starks’s five-year term is retroactive to July 1, 2022.

Also Read: Anna Gomez Joins FCC

Starks is expected to join with FCC chair Jessica Rosenworcel and new Democrat Anna Gomez to vote this month to launch a proceeding to reclassify broadband access as a telecommunications service, which will return oversight of internet access to the FCC and allow the Democratic majority to reimpose network neutrality rules.

Rosenworcel sounded ready to hit the ground running with a full commission in place.

“With a complete Senate-confirmed Commission, the FCC is now ready to take on our full slate of work and fulfill our commitment to ensuring Americans everywhere have access to the best, most reliable communication services in the world,” she said. 

“The passion and dedication for public service exhibited by Commissioners Carr and Starks exemplify the qualities needed at the FCC,” Comcast chief legal officer Tom Reid said. “We are fortunate to have their continued leadership on issues like broadband investment and regulation and closing the digital divide that will keep our country at the top of global communications policy.  We look forward to continuing to work with the commissioners on these and other important issues.”

Also Read: Senate Commerce Confirms FCC Nominees

“The reconfirmation of Commissioners Starks and Carr will allow the FCC to get down to business without worrying about possible disruptions,” Benton Institute for Broadband & Society Senior Counselor Andrew Jay Schwartzman said. “Commissioner Starks has provided stalwart support for media diversity and rapid broadband deployment, especially to those people and places that too many others have neglected. Benton does not always agree with Commissioner Carr, but in a time of deep partisan division, we do very much appreciate his collaboration on many issues, especially on spectrum matters.”

Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), chair of the Senate Commerce Committee, said: “Americans need a fully-equipped FCC that is ready to deliver on an agenda that puts consumers first. The agency cannot afford another deadlock or delay when it comes to expanding affordable broadband, protecting the security of our communications networks, driving innovative spectrum policies and strengthening our local news. Today’s confirmation of Geoffrey Starks and Brendan Carr allows the FCC to have full membership and move forward.”

The Senate Commerce Committee has favorably reported the nomination of Anna Gomez to the open seat on the Federal Communications Commission, as well as the renominations of sitting commissioners Geoffrey Starks and Brendan Carr.

The vote, which came at a markup Wednesday (July 12), paves the way for a full Senate vote, something that never happened for Gomez’s predecessor as nominee for the open Democratic seat, Gigi Sohn. Her nomination was withdrawn after it was killed by Republicans, industry players and at least one Democrat who failed to support her.

The markup was brief, but with several Republicans voting no on the Gomez and the nomination of Starks, also a Democrat, and a couple of Democrats voting no on Carr, a Republican. 

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), ranking member of the committee, led the opposition to Gomez — he said he had issues with her support of network neutrality rules and approach to the issue of disinformation — as well as complaining that due to the Democrats scheduling of the nomination hearing and markup vote, some Republicans were not allowed to meet with the nominees in person.

If the Senate approves the nominees, the FCC will be at full strength for the first time in over two years and give the Biden administration its first Democratic majority, paving the way for potential actions on restoring network-neutrality rules and some broadcast regulations and on revamping the Universal Service Fund advanced telecommunications subsidy process.

Gomez is currently a senior adviser on communications policy in the Bureau of Cyberspace and Digital Policy at the State Department and has a wealth of experience in that policy area, including serving as deputy administrator (acting chief) of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, which oversees and advises the president on government spectrum policy, from 2009 to 2013.

Also favorably reported was Fara Damelin to be FCC inspector general.

Industry stakeholders expressed enthusiasm about a full-strength FCC. 

"The Computer & Communications Industry Association is pleased that the Senate is moving expeditiously on Anna Gomez’s candidacy to ensure that the FCC is fully seated and can begin addressing crucial issues such as spectrum scarcity and gaps in broadband coverage,“ Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA) president Matt Schruers said after the vote. 

“NATE: The Communications Infrastructure Contractors Association congratulates Brendan Carr, Geoffrey Starks and Anna Gomez on advancing through the next step in this process, and encourages the U.S. Senate to act quickly to confirm all three nominees,” NATE president Todd Schlekeway said. “Having a full slate of five Commissioners and a continuity of the agency’s leadership is crucial given the myriad of broadband, wireless infrastructure, permitting, spectrum and workforce development issues currently confronting the industry.”

Competitive Carriers Association president and CEO Tim Donovan said: “CCA applauds the Senate Commerce Committee for advancing the nominations of Anna Gomez, Geoffrey Starks, and Brendan Carr to be Commissioners at the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Commissioners Starks and Carr have distinguished themselves in their service at the FCC, understanding the issues affecting competitive wireless carriers, particularly those serving smaller communities and rural parts of America. Anna Gomez brings significant public policy experience and service to a critical role. CCA urges the Senate to confirm these appointees as soon as possible, and our members look forward to working with them to pursue policies that promote and bring wireless connectivity to all Americans.”

The Senate Commerce Committee has scheduled a vote next week on the nomination of Anna Gomez for the open seat on the Federal Communications Commission, as well as the renominations of Democrat Geoffrey Starks and Republican Brendan Carr for their respective seats.

The nomination markup will be July 12 at 10 a.m. If all goes well, the committee will favorably report the nominations to the full Senate for a vote, something that never happened for Gomez's predecessor, Gigi Sohn, whose nomination was withdrawn after it was killed by Republicans, industry players and at least one Democrat who failed to support her.

If all the current nominations are approved, as expected, the FCC would be at full strength for the first time in over two years and give the Biden administration its first Democratic majority, paving the way for potential actions on restoring network-neutrality rules and some broadcast regulations and for revamping the Universal Service Fund advanced telecommunications subsidy process.

Also Read: Anna Gomez Nominated for FCC Seat

Gomez is currently a senior adviser on communications policy in the Bureau of Cyberspace and Digital Policy at the State Department and has a wealth of experience in that policy, including serving as deputy administrator (acting chief) of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, which oversees and advises the president on government spectrum policy, from 2009 to 2013.

Gomez is definitely on board with reclassifying broadband as a Title II telecommunications service subject to at least some common-carrier regulations.

In written answers to questions from Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) following her nomination hearing last month, Gomez said: “Title II classification is important for protecting our fundamental values of universal service and consumer protection when accessing broadband networks. Without it, the FCC would lack a mechanism for protecting the fundamental values of our most critical communications systems today.”

While she has both said she did not support broadband rate regulation, Gomez has not said just what she would classify as rate regulation, giving her some room with specific fact sets to potentially support some regulations Republicans would oppose.

But she also said in her written responses that to the extent that the FCC prescribed how an internet service provider calculated its wholesale rates, she would oppose as rate regulation requiring broadband providers to give competitors wholesale unbundled access to their networks.

The Senate Commerce Committee has set June 22 for a hearing on Federal Communications Commission nominees Anna Gomez, Geoffrey Starks and Brendan Carr.

Also getting a vetting will be FCC inspector general nominee Fara Damelin.

Carr, a Republican, and Starks, a Democrat, are being renominated to new five-year terms, but it’s the first time around for Gomez, whom the White House nominated for the pivotal third Democratic seat after President Joe Biden’s first choice, Gigi Sohn, failed to overcome major pushback from Republicans and industry, reportedly with the aid of a couple of fence-sitting Democrats.

Gomez is currently a senior adviser on communications policy in the Bureau of Cyberspace and Digital Policy at the State Department and has a wealth of experience in that policy, including serving as deputy administrator (acting chief) of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, which oversees and advises the president on government spectrum policy, from 2009 to 2013.

She was also counsel to the Senate Commerce Committee and a partner at Wiley LLP, which has served as something of a training ground for future FCC commissioners and chairs. Gomez has industry experience in government affairs with Sprint Nextel.

Senior FCC Republican Brendan Carr will speak at ACA Connects’ 30th Annual Washington Summit, the first in-person gathering for the small-cable trade group since the pandemic began in 2019.

Carr will address the conference March 1 at the Grand Hyatt Washington hotel.

With the Federal Communications Commission at a 2-2 political tie for the past couple of years, Republican members have more power than usual, since agency decisions must be bipartisan to be approved.  As a result, issues like new network-neutrality rules and some types of Universal Service Fund reforms, which Democrats generally favor, have been on the back burner.

Carr, appointed by former President Donald Trump, has been a commissioner since August 2017.

Carr was FCC general counsel under then-chair Ajit Pai, as well as wireless, public safety and international legal adviser to then-commissioner Pai. Before that, he was an attorney at Wiley Rein, something of a bullpen for future FCC commissioners.

Carr has been a strong advocate for reining in Big Tech and has also been an advocate for strengthening the tower crew and construction workforce as part of the rollout of 5G.

He has also been a leader in the FCC’s Connected Care Pilot Program telehealth initiative.

Carr is a graduate of the Catholic University of America’s Columbus School of Law and got his undergraduate degree from Georgetown University. ▪️

Among the many pieces of legislation that was attached to a must-pass spending bill that passed Friday (December 23) was one banning TikTok from government devices, but that does not go far enough says one government official focused on communications issues.

While the legislation was good news for Federal Communications Commission member Brendan Carr, who has been a big critic of the social-media platform because of its ties to the Chinese government, the Republican said that more still needs to be done.

The Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S. (CFIUS), which decides whether such investment is a national security threat has been debating whether to continue to allow TikTok to operate in the country and struck a preliminary agreement with the company to allow it to do so based on specific mitigation measures.

Also: More Legislators Call for TikTok Investigation

Carr says cutting such a deal, mitigation or not, would be “a serious mistake.”

Carr argues that it was in TikTok's best interests to be on its best behavior during the negotiations over that preliminary deal, yet it has allegedly surveilled the locations of reporters working on stories about TikTok's potential security risks and ran "misinformation" campaigns about candidates in the recent midterm elections. It even tried to get details on the Oracle servers that would be used as part of the mitigation efforts, according to Forbes.

“It is time to complete the CFIUS review,” Carr said. “Every day that this drags on is another day that Americans are left exposed to the unique threats posed by TikTok.”

Elsewhere on the TikTok front, a bill was introduced in early December that would take the decision out of CFIUS' hands and ban TikTok from the U.S.

The creatively named Averting the National Threat of Internet Surveillance, Oppressive Censorship and Influence, and Algorithmic Learning by the Chinese Communist Party Act (ANTI-SOCIAL CCP Act) was introduced by a pair of Republicans, Sen. Marco Rubio (Fla.) and Rep. Mike Gallagher (Wis.), and Democratic Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi of Illinois.

TikTok has been in Washington's sites as part of a larger concern both with social media privacy in general and, in this case, with technology/operations allied with China in particular.

Back in 2020, Sens. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), who are pretty far apart on the political spectrum, agreed that the Department of Justice should investigate both Zoom and TikTok for “reported violations of Americans’ civil liberties and [for] their close ties to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).”  Both backed the just-passed bill to ban TikTok from government devices. ■

FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr says Apple and Google need to remove TikTok from their respective app stores, citing in a tweet "its pattern of surreptitious data practices."

Carr is a big critic of Big Tech.

Specifically, Carr was referencing a BuzzFeed News report that officials of TikTok's Bytedance parent in China had repeatedly been able to access sensitive data of Americans after they downloaded the app from their stores.

In a letter to Apple CEO Tim Cook and Google (Alphabet) CEO Sundar Pichai, Carr said that Apple and Google have represented their stores as safe and trusted spaces to "discover and download" apps, and yet have vetted and approved TikTok, the wildly popular short-form video app -- 1.2 billion monthly active users as of the fourth quarter 2021, according to one estimate.

Also: TikTok Grilled on Hill Over Privacy

But Carr says that TikTok's fun video or meme sharing exterior is sheep's clothing for a sophisticated surveillance tool.

"I am requesting that you apply the plain text of your app store policies to TikTok and remove it from your app stores for failure to abide by those terms," Carr wrote.

Carr also pointed out that there is bipartisan concern about TikTok's ties to China combined with the data it uses. For example, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Mo.), both Big Tech critics but poles apart politically, have both expressed their concern that TikTok is a national security risk.

And the concern goes beyond national security and privacy.

State attorneys general have launched an investigation into TikTok and what they said is its design and promotion of social media for kids and teens that "causes or exacerbates physical and mental health harms." ■

Republican FCC Commissioner and Big Tech critic Brendan Carr says Apple is blocking Voice of America's mobile app from its App Store in China and he wants some answers, actually a single answer, from Apple CEO Tim Cook by the end of the month.

Following Cook's speech last week to an IAPP Global Privacy Summit April 12 in Washington, one in which he spoke eloquently, according to Carr, about "Apple’s commitment to operating its App Store in a manner that promotes privacy and human rights," Carr said the CEO's words did not match "the reality" of the company's actions in China.

Also: FCC's Carr Slams Twitter

Carr focused on what he said was Apple's decision to remove the VOA app to "appease" the Chinese Communist Party, a move he said "cannot be squared with your representation in Washington that Apple will 'battle against an array of dangerous actors' nor your claim that Apple will 'protect people’s fundamental rights' from abusive surveillance."

Carr's office had not returned a request at press time for a comment on where he had learned of Apple's blocking of the VOA App.

VOA is the U.S. Agency for Global Media-funded operation providing independent news to places that lack access to it.

Also: Carr Says Big Tech Should Pay Into USF

Carr said that the relatively new mobile app allows smart phone users to access the kind of unfiltered news the broadcast operation has been providing for decades, calling it an "important tool" for information on authoritarian regimes, "unless, of course, you are an iPhone user in China."

He ripped the company for its overall relationship with China, including extensive manufacturing operations there, but said he was just looking for the answer to one question by April 29: "Will Apple allow access to the Voice of America mobile app through its App Store in China, consistent with the fundamental human rights that you articulated in your speech?" ■

The Federal Communications Commission has voted unanimously on a proposed regime for implementing Congress's mandate that internet-service providers tell their customers up front about the service those customers are buying via point-of-sale labels, and one commissioner used the agency’s January public meeting to call for Big Tech to be held to the same standard.

The FCC since 2016 has allowed ISPs voluntarily to use such so-called nutrition labels as proof that they are adhering to its transparency requirements. But chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel made clear that the difference now is the label is mandated.

The FCC is proposing to use that 2016 label format, which resembles a food nutrition label, as the mandated one, but asks whether there need to be any changes or additions.

Among the provisions in the Biden administration’s Infrastructure Act — which allocated billions of dollars for broadband, including subsidies for broadband service — was that the FCC mandate the broadband “nutrition label” so consumers can know the speed and quality of service they are getting at what price and with what fees attached.

According to the FCC Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the label has to include “accurate information about prices, introductory rates, data allowances and broadband speeds,” as well as “management practices.” Any ISP that does not hew to the letter of the label could be pursued by the Federal Trade Commission under its authority to prevent “false and deceptive” advertising.

The labels must be accessible to the disabled and must promote equity in the provision of service.

The item asks a number of questions, including on how to ensure the accuracy of the labels' content and the proper implementation timelines.

Also: FCC Tees Up Broadband Nutrition Labels

Commissioner Geoffrey Starks, a Democrat, said he was pleased to support the item and begin the process of expanding public access to better information on broadband offerings. He said the nutrition labels will help everyday households compare prices and find the best package and deal for them.

Rosenworcel said the labels would help stop unexpected costs and fees in the “fine print.”

And while the 2016 label was voluntary, Congress gave the FCC support for a mandate that would hold ISPs to their promises, which would mean better service and better prices.

Commissioner Brendan Carr, a Republican, supported the item, but wanted to make the point that the FCC already had transparency rules on the books. “The FCC has long worked to promote transparency, including through specific rules,” he said. “Right now, we have rules on the books, for instance, that require broadband providers to publicly disclose accurate information regarding their network management practices, performance characteristics, and commercial terms sufficient to enable consumers, businesses, and entrepreneurs to make informed choices.”

While Carr voted to launch the process mandated by Congress, he suggested that using the 2016 label “could artificially constrain the agency’s ability to make decisions that reflect today’s market for connectivity.”

He also put in a plug for requiring labels from edge providers, which he has been highly critical of.

“[W]hile I am open to ways we can improve the transparency and disclosure rules that apply to broadband providers, I continue to believe that the real black box is in a different portion of the Internet ecosystem — Big Tech,” he said. “Big Tech companies provide far less transparency than broadband providers regarding their practices and commercial terms. In fact, just this week, four state AGs sued Google for misleading consumers about when Google was tracking their location information. I have been clear that I favor — and consumers deserve — greater transparency from these companies. And I have previously called for the FCC and FTC to take action here. The transparency rule that currently applies to broadband providers or even the nutrition label approach we propose here would be a good place to start when it comes to bringing much-needed and long-overdue transparency to Big Tech. This would ensure that all Internet users, from entrepreneurs to small businesses, have the information they need to make informed choices.”

Advocates See a Transparency Tool

“A broadband label is a great tool to increase transparency and help consumers better understand what they are paying for with their internet plan,” said Jonathan Schwantes, senior policy counsel at Consumer Reports. “And for those lucky consumers who enjoy a choice of ISPs, a clear, uniform label will allow those consumers to comparison shop.

“For far too long ISPs have gotten away with confusing information about the internet service they provide, hidden data caps, and bills that vary by ISPs filled with a laundry list of mysterious fees buried in the fine print. The label is a critical step in shedding more light on these practices, and will help consumers better understand what has become the essential service of the early 21st century.”

“Today’s FCC vote is a welcome step forward and a win for consumers,” Joshua Stager, deputy director for broadband and competition policy for New America‘s Open Technology Institute, said. "OTI has long called for truth-in-billing for the broadband industry, which is notorious for keeping customers in the dark. Hidden fees, surprise bills, and dense contracts are familiar problems to anyone who deals with these companies.

“The broadband nutrition label cuts through this confusion by clearly disclosing the cost and terms of service in a simple, consumer-friendly format.” 

Federal Communications Commission member Brendan Carr has called on the agency to add DJI, a major Chinese drone company, to its list of suspect tech companies for which federal dollars can't be spent due to the perceived national security threat, characterizing DJI as a potential “Huawei on wings.”

The Republican commissioner‘s remarks came at an event appropriately titled “Unacceptable Risk: Expanding the FCC’s Covered List to Reflect Reality.”

Also Read: FCC to Walk Through Rip-and-Replace Program

The Huawei reference is to one of the first two Chinese telecom equipment companies — ZTE was the other — placed by the FCC on a list of tech being disallowed or scrubbed from U.S. networks funded with government subsidies. The FCC is also considering whether to extend that ban to networks not built with government dollars.

The Tuesday (Oct. 19) event was hosted by the also appropriately named China Tech Threat.

The company immediately defended the security of its technology.

“DJI drones are safe and secure for critical and sensitive operations," said Adam Lisberg, director of corporate communications, North America ,for JDI. "Our systems are designed so customers never have to share their photos, videos or flight logs with anyone, including DJI. The data security architecture that protects this information has been repeatedly validated by U.S. government agencies as well as respected private cybersecurity analysts. Our customers know that DJI drones remain the most capable and most affordable products for a wide variety of uses, including sensitive industrial and government work.”

Carr pointed out at the event that DJI has more than 50% of the U.S. drone market and pointed to research that found “large quantities” of personal information from a drone operator's smart phone could conceivably be relayed to China from the drones.

He said the prospect was particularly troubling given that the Chinese government can compel DJI to help it spy on the U.S. or other countries. The Commerce Department has raised red flags about the company related to China‘s surveillance of its ethnic Uyghur minority.

Also Read: FCC Denies ZTE Appeal of Suspect Tech Label

Add to that the reports that the Secret Service and FBI have bought DJI drones, and Carr said the need for quick action is clear.

Carr has long called for cracking down on Chinese tech in U.S. networks, which the FCC is in the process of doing, including by funding the ripping and replacing of tech in current networks, generally smaller ones where tech companies like Huawei and ZTE can offer cheaper equipment due to subsidies from the Chinese government.

FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr said that the best way to fund the FCC's Universal Service Fund advanced communications subsidies is to make Big Tech pay the freight.

Citing a new study from economist Hal Singer and Ted Tatos, Carr said that the current method of assessing dwindling traditional telecom services is unsustainable, and that shifting to assessing wireless broadband would continue to hit consumers in the pocketbook--the USF fees are passed on by telecoms onto their customers' bills.

Instead, he said, the FCC should make Big Tech companies like Google and Facebook pay the USF  fees, which would be tough for them to pass on to consumers and which would, Carr said citing the study, "significantly reduce consumers’ costs, properly align incentives, and unlike assessing wireline broadband revenues, would not raise consumers’ monthly bill for internet services."

Carr pushed for the Big Tech USF payments in a May op ed, and used the study to renew his call for that new regime.

“For too long, Big Tech has been enjoying a free ride on our internet infrastructure. The current funding mechanism for the Universal Service Fund—a regressive charge placed on consumers’ monthly bills for traditional telephone service—is unfair and unsustainable," he said in response to the report. "Rather than artificially raising the cost of internet service for Americans, assessing Big Tech would sharply reduce consumers’ monthly costs."

It has been something of a case of dueling USF reports. Earlier this week, computer comnpany-backed groups were citing a a report that argued the FCC should instead require broadband service providers to pay into the fund, something Carr and the Singer/Tatos report said would not lift the fee burden from consumers.

USF currently taps telecom providers to subsidize advanced telecommunications service, including broadband service, to low-income areas and high-cost areas where there is less of a business case to reach, as well as to eligible schools and libraries.

Also Read: Who Should Pay for Broadband Connectivity

Those telecom providers—currently landline and mobile providers and cable and other VoIP providers—in turn, pass along the USF contribution as a line item on customers' bills.

Making streamers and other edge providers pay into the USF fund has been contemplated in a Republican-backed bill, the Funding Affordable Internet with Reliable [FAIR] Contributions Act. The legislation asks the FCC to consider if it should add to the contribution base "a search engine, a social media platform, a streaming service, an app store, a cloud computing service, or an e-commerce platform."

Advanced television's growing pains -- along with its growth trajectory -- were evident during this week’s ATSC "Full Steam Ahead" annual member meeting and conference. Discussions veered from NextGen TV's ability to make traditional broadcasting better to entry paths for entirely new data delivery ventures.

At the members-only session on Wednesday (Aug. 25), the focus was on the role of the core network, which "is going to be critical for IP datacasting," and operational issues such as "inter-tower communications network," Advanced Television Systems Committee President Madeleine Noland told Broadcasting + Cable. The next day's open conference looked toward evolving services, such as vehicular connectivity and regulatory oversight, offering a mixed collection of success stories and hopeful dreams.

And throughout the hybrid program (about 190 people in Washington’s Reagan Center plus about 90 others tuned into a live video stream), there was an upbeat "vibe" (as Noland called it) and a pep-rally motif as broadcasters and vendors encouraged each other with data about service launches and promising TV receiver sales forecasts that envision up to two million NextGen TV sets in homes with two years.

Nonetheless, "As we move into ATSC 3.0, the puzzle gets a lot harder," said ATSC Chairman Lynn Claudy, who is also senior VP technology at the National Association of Broadcasters.

"The notion of broadband service and data applications brings out a new set of industry players," Claudy acknowledged.

Also Read: NextGen TV’s Busy Summer Sets Up Fall Events

'Road Shows Are Back'

"This is about much more than standards development," Claudy added in his opening conference remarks. He pointed out that "standards development is still a core function," but insisted that a "standard is no good if no one understands it."

With that in mind, Claudy said, NAB will sponsor a series of at least five seminars around the country to show TV station business and technical executives how to implement ATSC 3.0 applications. The sessions will be "an all-day deep dive" into NextGen TV, reviving earlier NAB industry education projects. "Road shows are back," Claudy said.

The ATSC conference heard encouraging words from two Republican members of the Federal Communications Commission and field reports from pioneering NextGen TV ventures in Lansing, Michigan, Phoenix and elsewhere.

The core network "will supply the efficiency that will be necessary to provide services that will be attractive in the market place," Noland told B+C. 

She characterized the inter-tower communications network as analogous to the studio-to-transmitter link, which she said might travel via microwave or fiber link. In the IP version, a broadcaster will have to "commit some of [its] own bandwidth to get data form one tower to another." She acknowledged that "STL is not cheap," but it "gives broadcasters another option" for their entry into the local data marketplace.

Noland noted that because there is line-of-sight, "You can get data between towers more efficiently and the equipment on the towers is professional quality," which will give broadcasters a near-term advantage "before MIMO [multiple-input and multiple-output] is available" on some other wireless networks. She cited the "tremendous efficiencies" of the broadcast structure.

Noland summed up the looming competitive battleground of data delivery: "If you want to win in the commodity market, you have to win on price and service." She said that broadcasters feel that their one-to-many use cases will appeal to customers in the evolving data delivery business.

Carr, Simington Explore Big Tech Competitive Role

Two Republican FCC commissioners took part in the ATSC conference. Commissioner Brendan Carr extolled the data opportunities of NextGen TV, saying that it “makes it easy to cellularize the broadcast signal” for a “broadcast internet” that will generate innovative applications. In an on-stage conversation with Noland, Carr encouraged TV stations to go “beyond the broadcast TV model,” citing opportunities in education.

In response to a question about the role of Locast (the over-the-air streaming service) and another proposal for dealing with multichannel video program distributors (MVPDs) streaming use of spectrum, Carr said, "I'm all for listening to how FCC can encourage facilities-based competition. I'm open to hearing ideas about how to make sure entities have fair access."

Carr said he favors an approach that enables "every one of these technologies get out there and compete" but acknowledged that, "we have to work through various bodies of law," including retransmission consent rules that focus on facilities-based competition.

The commissioner emphasized that NextGen TV developments "outside the usual broadcast silo" will be "huge," and he called the shift to the new technology "a very different transition" from the DTV migration more than a decade ago.

Carr also addressed the issue of how Big Tech (i.e., Silicon Valley companies) will compete with broadcasters' digital delivery plans. He cited the "imbalance" of broadcasters in the faceoff with "big tech" companies' communications' agendas, and he encouraged broadcasters to delve deeper into enabling disruptive technologies themselves.

"The FCC needs to adjust its approach to large tech companies," he said. Carr cited the need for Section 230 reform, but offered no specifics about his outlook.

Carr said that there is an "imbalance."

"There is a different treatment," he said. "We need to take a much stronger position of accountability." Asserting that tech companies "don't contribute" Carr suggested that for some of the spectrum issues, the Department of Homeland Security should lead and "we should work collaboratively," including communications industry involvement.

In one of the strangest attempts to duck a question about a timeline for FCC review of multicast rules, Carr said his staff had briefed him on the topic but he could not recall their information. He said there is no schedule for the timing of a decision.

"It is not clear to me the role of the FCC here," Carr said. "It has been consistently raised," but he said it has "been a while since I ran through the statutes."

Commissioner Nathan Simington, in a prerecorded video presentation, extolled NextGen TV as "broadcasting in the internet age" that will enable TV stations to expand their strength in localism. He cited the opportunities for broadcasters to "reclaim the targeting value proposition" by using IP technology, saying it lets "broadcasters double down this advantage as ATSC 3.0 rolls out."

Simington also encouraged broadcasters to explore NextGen TV's datacasting potential for services such as "simultaneous transmissions to thousands of devices" for automotive and navigation updates and other local services "that don't touch media consumption" but demonstrate the "resilient, reliable broadcasting infrastructure."

"I can't think of a better use of ATSC 3.0 technology than for next gen datacasting to supplement 5G tech," Simington said.

The Voices of Experience: Educational First

Susi Elkins, general manager WKAR Public Media and director of broadcasting at Michigan State University, offered a case study of NextGen TV applications from the viewpoint of a "customer's customer." Her presentation was supported by Gaian Solutions, Inc., which supplied the integrated digital Apollo Public TV Platform that WKAR has used for about two years.

Explaining how the station has used "a new ecosystem that recognizes the power of our over-the-spectrum capabilities," Elkins emphasized that NextGen TV serves as a "broadband pipe … [that] changes the paradigm." She demonstrated dynamic interactive features that the station has introduced for student education and campus engagement such as emergency alerts, some of which are integrated with 5G network features.

"This will fundamentally change the way we operate," Elkins explained. "Instead of sending audiences to our website, we can build that interactivity within our broadcast."

Sean D. Plater, general manager, WHUT-TV (licensed to Howard University in Washington, D.C.), also cited the importance of a campus emergency alert system. His station has been involved in a test of NextGen TV with a local middle school; Plater explained how the station "took a learning management system that Howard was using and put it on the platform" with "awesome" results so far.

Mark Aiken, senior VP, Sinclair Broadcast Group, which has also been involved in the Washington projects, cited the value of NextGen TV.

"IP Broadcast is not an add-on to the standard, it's at the core of the standard," Aitken said, pointing out that the services are "taking advantage of the file delivery facility that is at the core of this standard. We're leveraging those core features today." He also put in a plug for the chip (made by another Sinclair subsidiary) and the value of putting such a chip "into every handset to bridge the gap of the homes [that] don't have other internet connections."

Rob Folliard, senior VP, government relations and distribution, Gray Television, describing a field trial at one of Gray's stations, declared that "so much more can be done with unlimited multicast channels." He cited "advanced advertising, addressable advertising and … supporting the broadcast system in the future."

Awards to InterDigital's Alan Stein and NAB's Gordon Smith

ATSC ended the day's program by handing out its two annual awards for both 2021 and for last year (when the meeting and ceremony were virtual).

Alan Stein, VP of technology at InterDigital, received this year's Bernard J. Lechner Outstanding Contributor Award. The Mark Richer Industry Leadership Medal was awarded to NAB President/CEO Sen. Gordon Smith.

Stein, who heads InterDigital's Visual Standards Team, holds 16 granted patents in the field of digital video and oversees the company team involved with global video standards organizations. He has chaired ATSC's video group since its inception.

ATSC President Noland said that Smith, who is retiring as NAB chief, "understood the value that next-generation television could bring to the broadcasting industry and he was instrumental in promoting the potential to NAB's board and membership." NAB Chief Operating Officer Curtis LeGeyt, who will take over as NAB President in 2022, accepted the award for Smith.

"This technology gives broadcasters a compelling and interactive platform to tell our stories," LeGeyt said. "Our future is tied to developing standardized methods of innovation … to the ability to do something that's never been done before."

He added, "I commit to you that under my leadership, NAB will continue to push this important technology forward."

Republican Commissioner Brendan Carr has stopped short of endorsing acting chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel for the job on a more permanent footing, but signaled her approach to the job--necessitated in part by the fact that it is at a 2-2 political tie until a third Democrat is added--has improved the work product.

Carr was being interviewed for C-SPAN's Communicators series.

"It has been going very well at the FCC the last couple of months [since Rosenworcel took over]," he said. "We have been engaging in good faith compromise. I don't think any one member of the commission has gotten everything they wanted out of every item, but we are compromising and I think our work product has improved because of that."

Also Read: Carr Outlines 5G 'Leadership Maintenance Plan

Asked by host Peter Slen if he would support taking the "acting" off Rosenworcel's title, Carr said he didn't think the endorsement of a Republican commissioner would help, but said "it has been great of her to reach across party lines and compromise" and that he had enjoyed the work they had gotten done together.

Asked about some of his issues with the Biden Administration's billions in broadband subsidies, one of Carr's big problems was that price controls appeared clearly to be on the table. That certainly seemed to be the case with the state-by-state talking points the White House released to make its case for all that broadband subsidy money.

Carr said there was nothing that was going to scare private investment in broadband buildouts more quickly than the the threat of rate regulation. Carr said increased competition was the best way to keep the broadband price trend line going down, which he said it has been doing for a while.

He pointed out that Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) has suggested that net neutrality is a way to get at price controls, adding that it has been Big Tech's strategy to use net neutrality "as a stalking horse to try and drive down the prices of the inputs to their services. 

Also Read: Rosenworcel Takes Over FCC Gavel

But he said take rate regs and price controls off the table and there was a lot of common ground on net neutrality and rules could be put in place to put the issue in the rearview mirror. Republicans have supported rules against blocking, throttling and anticompetitive paid prioritization, just not under the Title II common carrier regime that allows for rate regulation.

The Carr Communicators episode airs on C-SPAN Saturday, April 17 at 6:30 p.m. ET, and on C-SPAN2 Monday, April 19, at 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. ET.

Republican FCC commissioner Brendan Carr has slammed the Biden Administration's planned $100 billion in new broadband deployment investment, calling it a big potential blunder that demonstrates the new policy of "measure never, cut checks."

That came in an April 8 op ed in The Hill

Carr, who headed up the efforts to streamline wireless and wired broadband deployments under FCC chairman Ajit Pai, wrote that rather than pour more money on the issue with plenty still unspent, the Administration should be continuing to cut "red tape that continues to plague infrastructure projects."

The FCC under Pai voted to streamline tower citing historic and environmental reviews and put shot clocks on those decisions by local authorities.

In fact, Carr was essentially echoing what his former chairman, Ajit Pai, was saying on Fox News of the Biden plan.

Also Read: FCC's Rural Broadband Subsidy Bidding Begins

Carr pointed out that billions in broadband subsidies administered by the FCC under programs including the Universal Service Fund and Rural Digital Opportunities Fund have yet to be spent, which he said was about $40 billion in total, and potentially even more than that. 

"During the 2020 campaign, President Biden pledged a moon shot $20 billion for rural broadband. We now have double that amount waiting to be distributed," Carr wrote. "Yet Democrats are poised to pour a hundred billion dollars on top of those billions upon billions of unspent dollars."

Carr took issue with the potential for the money to overbuild existing service or the threat of rate regulation given that the Administration is using speed and affordability to determine where it defines broadband availability. "Rate regulation would be a surefire way to scare off the private sector investment needed to bridge the digital divide," he wrote.

He also took issue with the administration's emphasis on funding government buildouts, which he said often fail leaving taxpayers to foot the bill, and with Biden's claim that Americans are paying more and getting less for their broadband buck is just wrong. "Like all Americans, I would be happy to pay less for Internet service. I just have no interest in paying less for service that does not work," he said.

Carr's alternative? "There is another way. Rather than appropriating additional dollars in blunderbuss fashion, we can administer the substantial funds already available to the FCC while unleashing additional private sector investment. We can do this last part by cutting the red tape that continues to plague infrastructure projects, rather than micromanaging builds through ham-handed, government-imposed conditions."

FCC Commissioner Brenda Carr says it is time to close a "glaring loophole" in rules adopted under former FCC Chairman Ajit Pai to weed out suspect tech from U.S. networks, rules under which he said thousands of insecure applications continue to be approved because they are bought with private funds.

The FCC's rules for requiring telecoms to rip and replace equipment from suspect Chinese tech suppliers--Huawei and ZTE initially and now several more--only apply to equipment purchased with government subsidies, Carr said at an event hosed by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, which means that the same suspect tech bought with private funds can continue to be used in U.S. networks.

Also Read: Rosenworcel Says of 5G Security--Be Afraid; Be Very Afraid

“Once we have determined that Huawei or other gear poses an unacceptable national security risk, it makes no sense to allow that exact same equipment to be purchased and inserted into our communications networks as long as federal dollars are not involved," he said.

He said the FCC continues to approve thousands of applications from Huawei and other entities deemed national security threats. 

The FCC's list of companies whose tech must be removed and replaced if it was bought with Universal Service Fund subsidy money has grown to Huawei, ZTE, Hytera Communications Corporation, Hangzhou Hikvision Digital Technology Company, and Dahua Technology Company," Carr points out. He says he reviewed the FCC’s equipment authorizations since 2018 and it shows that "over 3,000 applications from Huawei alone have been approved since then," including "new devices and re-certification of existing ones, ranging from network gear to tracking devices" which include video surveillance and facial recognition equipment."

Also Read: FCC Flags More Chinese Telecoms

He calls that a back door for Communist China the FCC needs to slam ASAP.

Carr also wants the FCC to try and make sure that no device can enter the U.S. market if it has been produced with forced labor, saying his proposal is along the lines of the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act introduced by Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.).

Also Read: Huawei Opposes FCC Rip and Replace 

Carr says the FCC should require any company that buys devices or components from the Xinjiang Uyghur

Autonomous Region (XUAR) of China would have to meet a "heightened burden" to make sure it was not made with forced labor. "Communist China must not profit from their human rights abuses," said Carr.

"FCC Acting Chairwoman Rosenworcel has long advocated for reforming the equipment authorization process to better ensure security in new network devices and is pleased to see growing support for this idea," said a spokesperson for the acting chairwoman.  "In fact, the FCC is already working on addressing many of the issues Commissioner Carr spoke about."

FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr has named Ben Arden to be his chief of staff. Arden had been a legal advisor to Carr since 2019.

Arden was previously associate chief of the Media Bureau's Video Division. Before joining the FCC in 2010, Arden was a communications attorney at Williams Mullen in D.C.

Also Read: Carr Outlines 5G Plan

Danielle Thurman, from the Washington office of communications law firm Wilkinson Barker Knauer, has joined Carr's office as legal advisor.

“I am delighted that Danielle has agreed to enter public service and join my office as a Legal Advisor,” said Carr. “Danielle brings a breadth of legal and public policy expertise to the job, and her experience in private practice will be a strong asset for the office.

Signaling it was FCC policies under Republican chairman Ajit Pai that "secured" leadership in 5G, Republican commissioner Brendan Carr has unveiled his plan for maintaining that leadership, though with a Democratic chair and, eventually, majority, Carr has only the power to propose, not impose.

In a speech to the American Enterprise Institute, Carr said that back in 2016 (under former FCC chairman Tom Wheeler), the FCC was at serious risk of ceding the race to 5G to "overseas competitors, at the risk of millions of jobs and trillions of dollars in economic growth.

Also Read: House Dems Seek Delay of Wireless Infrastructure Vote

Enter Pai, and Carr as his designated point man on streamlining cellular infrastructure buildouts, and the Republican FCC turned things around he said.

Carr  said it was time to build on that legacy not roll it back with "heavy-handed policies that would turn back the clock on the progress we’ve made."

Those include, he said, efforts to subsidize overbuilds with government money--something likely to happen with the billions Congress has allocated to an effort to achieve universal broadband, with Democrats emphasizing that affordability should be in that definition of universal access.

"We should also see the push for a return to Title II 'net neutrality' for what it is—a push for rate regulation," he said. "Those backing this misguided policy simply refuse to accept the reality that the Internet has flourished since we repealed the ill-advised Title II regulations."

He suggested that had Democrats been in charge, the 5G picture would be far less rosy. "We would still be hundreds of megahertz behind and stuck in neutral while our global counterparts passed us by if we had heeded the calls for inaction by some in Washington and on the Commission," he said.

Of the infrastructure reforms Carr spearheaded, he said that "nearly every one of our infrastructure decisions included calls from some of my colleagues for the agency to slow down or stop entirely. 

Also Read: FCC Clarifies Buildout Streamlining Rules

Changes to environmental and historic preservation reviews that Carr and the Republicans said were streamlining the process were criticized by the Democrats as potentially running roughshod over local government protections for the environment and history.

The FCC also set shot clocks on siting decisions by localities.

Billing it as a plan to extend 5G leadership, Carr proposed the current and future FCC do the following:

"On the spectrum front for 2021:

o "Auction 100 MHz of spectrum in the 3.45 GHz band at 5G power levels*

o "Auction the 100+ MHz of spectrum in the 2.5 GHz band

o "Adopt an order that permits very low power devices to operate in the 6 GHz band

o "Seek comment on increasing the power levels for CBRS operations in the 3.5 GHz band

"And for 2022 and beyond:

o "Auction the 50 MHz of spectrum between 1300-1350 MHz in 2022

o "Auction another millimeter wave band in 2022, with the 42 GHz as a prime candidate

o "Auction spectrum in the lower 3 GHz, 4.8 GHz, and 7 GHz bands after 2022

"On infrastructure and policy:

o "Produce targeted broadband maps by this fall, not next year

o "Start the 5G Fund auction early next year to support rural builds

o "Create a Federal Lands Desk at the FCC to address permitting delays on federal lands

o 'Act on pending infrastructure reforms to drive down the costs of reaching rural areas

o 'Expand the tower crews needed to complete 5G builds through Carr’s 5G jobs initiative

o 'Reject heavy-handed policies that would turn back the clock on the progress we’ve made"

* Carr did point out that the FCC is scheduled to vote this week [under Democratic acting chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel] on an order to auction that spectrum, adding: "So I am almost ready to give us as checkmark on this one."

Republican FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr has fired back at two prominent Democratic members of Congress for suggesting that cable, satellite and streaming video distributors would be combatting disinformation by dropping Fox News, Newsmax TV and One America News Network, saying those legislators are trying "to drive political dissent from the public square."

Also Read: Roku Says It’s Not Booting OANN, Despite Tweet Controversy

He called on his fellow commissioners to join him in condemning the effort.

Reps. Anna Eshoo and Jerry McNerney, both California Democrats, have written to a dozen cable, satellite and streaming companies calling on them to better combat disinformation--which they principally identify as Fox, Newsmax and OANN--and grilling them on what they plan to do about it.

In response to the news of those letters, Carr, who has been an outspoken critic of what many Republicans see as attacks on conservatives from the left, left no doubt what he thought of the letters, calling them "a chilling transgression of the free speech rights that every media outlet in this country enjoys."

“Today, two senior Democrats on the House Energy and Commerce Committee selectively targeted a handful of news media outlets for their coverage of political events. By writing letters to the cable providers and other regulated entities that carry these news media outlets, the Democrats are sending a message that is as clear as it is troubling—these regulated entities will pay a price if the targeted newsrooms do not conform to Democrats’ preferred political narratives."

Carr said that the legislators' effort to get various video distributors--including Comcast, Charter, Cox, Dish, Roku and Amazon, to tell them what "moral principles" guide their decision on what news outlets to carry can't be reconciled with free speech principles.

The letters and Carr's response comes in advance of a hearing this week on the role of traditional media in promoting disinformation and extremism--streaming is apparently now in that category, or at least has been included on that side of the ledger as opposed to social media companies like Google, Facebook and Twitter, which have taken most of the disinformation heat.

As the FCC prepares to hand out hundreds of millions of dollars more for telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic, acting Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel and senior Republican Brendan Carr visited Whitman-Walker Health in D.C. Friday (Jan. 29), which specializes in LGBTQ and HIV care.

Also Read: Rosenworcel Says It's Time to Think Big, and Act

The goal was to "highlight the importance of connectivity in healthcare and learn more about how the facility is using telehealth to serve patients during the pandemic."

“The COVID-19 pandemic is clearly stressing our healthcare system and has presented new challenges for patients seeking care, especially for those from marginalized communities,” said Rosenworcel following the visit. “I join Whitman-Walker Health in saying, as they do: We See You. Through expanded and affordable access to broadband for all, organizations like Whitman-Walker and clinics around the country can continue to grow their telehealth efforts to support their communities.”

Also Read: FCC Seeks Input on New Telehealth Funding

According to Rosenworcel's office, Whitman-Walker stood up its telehealth program last March and since then has provided connected care to 6,500 patients, including for addiction counseling, dental, and mental health services.

Rosenworcel will make access to telehealth a top priority for the commission, she said. At her first public meeting as acting chairwoman Feb. 17, one of the planned presentations will be on handing out the $249.95 million in telehealth funding allocated to the FCC in the COVID-19 relief bill passed by Congress in December.

FCC commissioner Brendan Carr is urging Congress to confirm fellow Republican and FCC commissioner nominee Nathan Simington so they can stall the Democratic FCC out of the gate.

In an appearance on Fox Business' Cavuto Coast-to-Coast, Carr said: "I think it would be very valuable to get Simington across the finish line and help forestall what really would be billions of dollars worth of economic damage that I think a Democratic FCC would look to jam through from Day One.

One thing a Democratic FCC is expected to do is restore net neutrality rules, which Carr called "socialism in sheep's clothing."

If Simington is seated, replacing outgoing commissioner Michael O'Rielly, it would still give the FCC two Republican commissioners after chairman Ajit Pai leaves Jan. 20, as he has said he will. The Democrats will have two commissioners as well, the chairman or acting chairman, likely Jessica Rosenworcel, and Geoffrey Starks. It will likely take a while to confirm a third Democrat since that will require vetting by the Senate, which may still be in Republican hands.

Cavuto asked Carr to weigh in on the President's threat to veto a must-pass defense authorization bill because it does not include an amendment eliminating social media's Sec. 230 immunity from civil liability for third party content moderation.

Carr said he had no thoughts on the vehicle, but said the President was "exactly right" that Big Tech "has a far left agenda and are willing to use their content moderation on these web sites to take action against conservative ideas."

Carr said he was very concerned about the massive power of Big Tech and said he expected bipartisan pushback. He pointed out that President-elect Joe Biden has also called for eliminating Sec. 230 immunity.

Republican FCC commissioner Brendan Carr said he is not looking for heavy-handed regulation of Big Tech, but he isn't looking for no hands either, including saying there needs to be a guiding hand when it comes to Sec. 230, and from the FCC, FTC and Justice.

In an interview for C-SPAN's Communicators series, Carr said the days of maintaining the status quo with regard to Big Tech appear to be coming to an end, adding: "I think that's a good thing."

"I think that we should bring a light-touch approach to Big Tech," Carr said, "but up until now there has been a no-touch approach."

He said that is because there has never been such a gap between the size, scale and power of an industry like Big Tech and the relative absence of regulation.

Related: Hawley Questions Sec. 230 Immunity

He said that just as there has been a transparency rule for ISPs, there should be one for Big Tech.

He also said Sec. 230, which provides Web site immunity from civil liability for most third party content, should be reined in after being expanded by the courts beyond its original intent to immunize not only the producers of content but the distributors as well.

He said a light touch approach is right, but not touch is not in the best interests of the country.

Related: Sen. Graham Signals Twitter Subpoena

The FCC is currently considering a request from the Trump Administration to rein in Sec. 230 and Carr said he things the FCC has the authority to do so, and should. He said whether that is a rulemaking or a declaratory ruling, the FCC "should move forward." 

He said the FCC needs to provide some added guidance on the language in Sec. 230.

The Trump Administration's executive order on Sec. 230, which included the petition to the FCC to weigh in on Sec. 230, came soon after the President was publicly critical of Twitter for flagging his tweets about mail-in ballots and protests. Carr was asked about the charge that Trump was trying to "work the refs" to get back at social media.

Carr came to the President's defense at the time, criticizing Twitter publicly.

Carr said, for his part, he was looking at the issue on its merits, and pointed out that there was bipartisan support for reforming Sec. 230, with bills in Congress sponsored by Republicans, Democrats, and both together. 

He said the fact that the President was also seeking reform was "meaningful to a lot of people out there in terms of how they see this issue." The President has made it clear one of his motivations is his belief that Big Tech is censoring conservative speech, but not liberal.

Carr said the debate about the role of social media has shifted over the past several months from the defense that there was no bias or market power being applied by Big Tech to "of course they're allowed to be biased because they are private platforms. 

Carr said that is fine, but then the issue becomes: "Can they engage in this biased conduct within the meaning of Sec. 230 or have their content moderation practices far outstripped what Congress had in mind when it passed that provision.

He said he was not looking to eliminate Sec. 230, but make a modified and clarified Sec. 230 part of an overall approach that includes greater scrutiny by the Federal Trade Commission and antitrust laws--enforced by both the FTC and Justice--that can keep up with fast-moving tech.

Carr's interview will air on C-SPAN Saturday, Oct. 17, at 6:30 p.n. ET, and on C-SPAN2 Monday, Oct. 19, at 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. ET.

A federal appeals court has upheld most of the FCC's orders speeding the deployment of cell service buildouts by easing regulations on those 5G deployments, including pole attachments and various local reviews of buildouts. Specifically upheld were the Small Cell Order, the Moratoria Order, and the One Touch Make-Ready Order, all parts of the FCC's Accelerating Wireless Broadband Deployment by Removing Barriers to Infrastructure order. 

Over the objections of local government officials and the reservations of Democratic commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel, the FCC voted in September 2018 to streamline the path to small cell deployment, including the rules on site reviews, billing it as crucial to the rollout of 5G wireless service, an FCC and Trump Administration priority.  

The September decision limited state and local government fees for wireless infrastructure deployment to reasonable costs for processing applications and managing rights-of-way, including specific fee levels for small deployments. It also provided guidance on when an aesthetic or underground requirement, or other state or local regulation on deployment, was an effective prohibition on the service.

Related: Cities to FCC: Stop Scapegoating Us on 5G Deployment

It (1) established a shot clock for decisions on small wireless facilities (60 days for collocation on preexisting structures and 90 days for new builds); (2) codified other existing shot clocks; (3) made all state and local authorizations for deployment of personal wireless service subject to those clocks; and (4) concluded that a failure to make those shot-clock deadlines is a "presumptive prohibition on the provision of services."

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit said that, given the deference owed the FCC in interpreting Telecommunications Act, the FCC's orders, with the exception of a provision on aesthetic regulations in the Small Cell Order, was within its authority and not arbitrary and capricious. 

The FCC had said that aesthetics-related local regs on small cells had to be the same as those on other types of communications services, but the court said the statute made clear there could be different types or regs for different services. It also said the FCC's requirement that aesthetic criteria must be "objective" was not sufficiently explained. 

Writing for the majority (it was unanimous with one partial dissent), Judge Mary M. Schroeder said the FCC was dealing with "myriad" issues stemming from "application of a twentieth century statute to twenty-first century technology." 

The order had been challenged by a host of local governments, utilities and others. Oral argument had been held Feb. 10. 

“Today’s decision is a massive victory for U.S. leadership in 5G, our nation’s economy, and American consumers," said FCC Chairman Ajit Pai. "The court rightly affirmed the FCC’s efforts to ensure that infrastructure deployment critical to 5G—a key part of our 5G FAST Plan—is not impeded by exorbitant fees imposed by state and local governments, undue delays in local permitting, and unreasonable barriers to pole access. The wind is at our backs: With the FCC’s infrastructure policies now ratified by the court, along with pathbreaking spectrum auctions concluded, ongoing, and to come, America is well-positioned to extend its global lead in 5G and American consumers will benefit from the next generation of wireless technologies and services."

The decision was getting a lot of applause from communications and computer companies and their Washington representatives. 

“Now more than ever, local communities need faster, better, and more affordable internet," said INCOMPAS CEO Chip Pickering. "The Ninth Circuit’s decision today takes millions of neighborhoods one big step closer to bringing more competition to town. 

Related: House Dems Seek Delay of FCC 5G Infrastructure Vote

“By upholding the ‘one-touch, make-ready’ deployment policies that our association has long championed, the court is giving the green light to new builders and helping to clear the deck of potential anti-competitive roadblocks that hold back 5G.   

“We wish to congratulate the FCC, including Chairman Ajit Pai and Commissioner Brendan Carr, who helped lead this fight." 

“I am pleased that the Ninth Circuit affirmed the wireless infrastructure reforms we adopted in September 2018," said Commissioner Carr, who passed the praise on down. "I thank the Commission staff who carefully crafted the order, and I congratulate the Office of General Counsel for their successful defense of our work." 

“This is an extremely important victory for American consumers and the nation’s economy," said Meredith Attwell Baker, president of CTIA, the wireless association. "The court got it right, correctly affirming the FCC’s authority to establish reasonable guardrails to guide both the wireless industry and local governments in their shared goals of speeding the deployment of next-generation wireless networks and maintaining U.S. leadership in the emerging 5G economy." 

“Today’s decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, upholding critical aspects of the FCC’s 2018 Pole Attachment order, is good news for anyone that wants to see broadband providers accelerate their network deployments in all areas of the country," said ACA Connects President Matt Polka. "As ACA Connects demonstrated to the FCC, far too often investor-owned utilities hold up or seek to impose excessive fees on new attachers, which can result in the new attacher deciding to walk away from a build." 

“Today’s Ninth Circuit decision is a win for the wireless industry, and more importantly, a win for consumers, who will benefit from more streamlined and efficient deployment of 5G networks," said Competitive Carriers Association President Steven K. Berry. "The Court’s decision allows wireless carriers to continue to work with state and local governments to deploy next-generation networks and close the digital divide, while importantly ensuring that outlier regulations do not inhibit deployment. 

"I thank Chairman Pai for supporting and adopting these infrastructure orders, and particularly applaud Commissioner Carr’s leadership on infrastructure reform. I also commend the FCC’s Office of General Counsel for its vigorous defense of these important orders.” 

"Today's decision from the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upholding the FCC's infrastructure reforms is a big win for consumers and for 5G," said Verizon senior VP Will Johnson. "The FCC's common-sense reforms tackled existing roadblocks that slowed or stopped 5G deployment in communities around the country. There is a tremendous appetite for next-generation technology, and the FCC's reforms have been instrumental in facilitating aggressive broadband deployment -- helping to bring the benefits of 5G more quickly to consumers."

FCC commissioner Brendan Carr said the hands-off approach to Big Tech has failed, likening it to the bipartisan approach to China and the Trump Administration's shift to one of "much more strength. 

Carr was interviewed on the Hudson Institute's podcast, The Realignment, the last installment of that podcast under the Hudson aegis, where he was asked whether he agreed that he was breaking somewhat with deregulatory orthodoxy. 

Carr suggested that he remained a limited government libertarian who believed the marketplace trumped heavy handed regulation. 

Related: Pai Says He Won't Pre-Judge Sec. 230 Petition 

But he also said that Big Tech has amassed more power than any entity in history, "with more control over more speech than anything we have ever seen." He said the preservation of individual liberty "can sometimes come in conflict with zero regulation of massive corporations." 

He said there can be an appropriate government role when it comes to Big Tech that will "actually further liberty rather than inhibiting it." 

The podcast came only a few days before the Trump Administration is petitioning the FCC to clarify under what circumstances the government can regulate social media, stemming from an executive order that Carr supports. 

Asked how his position on regulating the internet has evolved, Carr said that initially he bought the high-level talking points about the Sec. 230 shield for Web sites from third-party liability were "the 23 words that created the internet" and the didn't want to tamper with that. But he said when he peeled that back, Twitter and Facebook and Google operate in Europe, where Sec. 230 doesn't apply. "So, maybe 230 isn't as integral to the way we have the internet today as it used to." 

He also said he concluded that there were plenty of paths forward for reforming Sec. 230 and winding up with more speech and more viewpoints, which is what the section is all about. 

Related: Rep. Khanna Says Big Tech Needs Well-Crafted Regulation

He said 230 is not an efficient, operating free-market, system, but one skewed by the presence of Sec. 230, "which gives one set of political actors special protections that every other political actor that  aren't covered by that provision don't enjoy." 

Carr said the Sec. 230 debate is a fork in the road. One path is historic approach of interpreting light-touch regulation as being "no-touch" regulation, the other is "appropriately scaled regulation." He said he applies it in many cases, but it does not to be "slavishly" applied. He said he voted to remove net neutrality rules, but is asked how he squares that with supporting more reg on Big Tech.  

He said 1) the scope and scale of the power of Big Tech and ISPs is no longer comparable and 2) Big Tech's biased application of that power. He said there is much more reg on ISPs than edge providers. While the FCC eliminated the rules, but kept the transparency rules. He said the country would be better off if Big Tech had at least that transparency requirement. Big Tech is a "black box," he said. "There is just no transparency."

Tech companies could be forgiven for seeing bigger plans rather than better TV reception in broadcasters’ request to use distributed transmitters to extend ATSC 3.0 signals, at least if they were listening to Federal Communications Commission member Brendan Carr.

In remarks to a National Association of Broadcasters/Consumer Technology Association event in May, Carr talked up ATSC 3.0 as “a new and competitive broadband pipe.” He called “broadcast internet” part of a broader trend to offer high-speed Internet via a number of different technologies. He said that ATSC 3.0 “will allow broadcast spectrum to play an even greater role in this converged market for connectivity.”

But Carr is doing more than talking. He is motormanning an item that would make it clear that broadcast internet services are not subject to TV ownership limits, meaning that broadcasters could team up, with each other or third parties, to deliver broadband services without violating FCC rules.

Carr said that would give broadcasters “the flexibility to generate the scale and geographic footprint — both locally and nationally — that may be necessary to support certain Broadcast Internet services without being subject to regulations unrelated to the provision of such services.”

A just-introduced package of Republican-backed broadband bills drew a crowd in Washington Thursday (June 25). 

Given that the bills would streamline wireless broadband infrastructure tower siting, it was no surprise that FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr gave it a hand. Carr was deputized by FCC Chairman Ajit Pai to oversee the FCC efforts at such streamlining as part of Pai's media modernization deregulatory initiative. 

Related: FCC Clarifies Wireless Buildout Streaming Rules 

“The Republican Members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee have put together a smart and comprehensive set of infrastructure reforms,” said Carr. “Their thoughtful reforms would bring families across the digital divide and further extend America’s leadership in 5G by helping to accelerate the build out of high-speed Internet services. Their ideas, including legislation that would tackle the permitting delays that persist for Internet builds on federal lands, would make an immediate difference for rural communities across the country." 

There are most of a dozen bills targeting buildouts on federal lands as part of the Republican package, though its prospects in a Democrat-controlled House are problematic.  

USTelecom, which represents the major telecom ISPs, was equally pleased. 

“Representatives [Greg] Walden, [Bob] Latta and members of the Energy and Commerce committee are right to focus on the role outdated regulations, slow approvals and rights-of-way disputes play in holding back broadband construction and deployment," said President Jonathan Spalter. "Too often our network innovators bump into red tape and rules that make these essential infrastructure projects slower, more expensive or nearly impossible. That doesn’t help consumers, especially those in corners of the country that need – and deserve – 21st century connectivity.” 

“I welcome further efforts from Congress to close the digital divide and expand wireless broadband services, and thank Republican Leaders Walden and Latta for their work to produce this comprehensive legislative package," said Competitive Carriers Association President Steven K. Berry. "Promoting new infrastructure deployment by reducing unnecessary barriers, clarifying federal, state, and local zoning authorities, and fostering competition will result in a win-win-win for consumers, industry, and the economy. At a time when consumers are relying on mobile broadband services more than ever before, it is a real positive that policymakers are focused on ensuring broadband can be deployed in unserved and underserved areas. I thank the Members for their work on these important issues, and CCA stands ready to work with Congress to keep moving forward.” 

Almost two dozen House Republicans have written the FCC in support of its 5G upgrade Order, calling it " the next major step that the Commission can take to promote broadband buildout across our great country." 

That is in stark contrast to the two dozen House Democrats that wrote the FCC calling for delaying the vote, invoking COVID-19 saying proceeding with the item could jeopardize health and safety. 

The FCC plans to vote on a "5G Upgrade" order next week (June 9) to clarify some of the steps the FCC has taken, championed by commissioner Brendan Carr, to speed tower citing, upgrades, and other elements of wireless network buildouts.  

1. "Clarify when the FCC's 60-day shot clock on localities reviews of a wireless builder's documents.  

2. "Clarify what equipment can go on existing structures.  

3. "Spell out distinctions between concealment elements--having to make a tower look like a tree or a flagpole--and other conditions related to aesthetics, and clarifying that aesthetic conditions can't be enforced "in a way that negates our other rules that promote streamlined approval."  

The Republicans also invoked COVID-19, at least by reference to the times, saying the upgrade "will allow companies to improve their services in our communities now, when they need it the most." 

Signing on to the letter were 23 Republicans, led by Energy & Commerce ranking member Greg Walden (R-Ore.) and Communications Subcommittee ranking member Robert Latta (R-Ohio).

FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr went on Fox News (Tucker Carlson Tonight) Wednesday night to slam social media and their Sec. 230 exemption from liability for  how they handle third-party content--both taking it down and leaving it up. 

He even suggested Twitter appeared to be engaged in unfair and deceptive business practices by asserting it is neutral then engaged in political speech targeting the President. 

That appearance followed closely on news that President Trump would be signing an executive order targeting social media.  

The President is unhappy that Twitter provided a fact check link to his tweets slamming mail-in ballots as bogus and a way for his opponents to try and steal the election, Tweeting himself that something "big" was coming Twitter's way. Carr shares the President's view.

Carlson asked Carr why the White House and Congress had not done anything about the exemption. Carr cited the reports that the President's executive order would be "addressing some of these issues," then went off on social media himself.  

He said that since the 2016 election "the far left has popped from hoax to hoax to hoax to try to explain the loss at the ballot box."  

Related: FCC's Carr Slams Twitter for 'Manipulated' Tag on Biden Video

He said they had gone after online platforms for the "crime in their view" of being neutral in the 2016 election and "making sure those platforms are not neutral again." 

Carr said that an example was Twitter, which he said was "engaging in political speech against the President." He said that if social media want to be political actors, "they have First Amendment rights, but they shouldn't necessarily have these special bonus protections that only that set of actors have in Sec. 230." 

Carr is hardly alone in the last point, with both Democrats and Republicans questioning whether internet giants still need a shield from Sec. 230. 

Carr said Twitter was not engaged in fact checking, but in opinion journalism, suggesting it was the partisan political bias social media platforms have told Congress they don't engage in.  

Related: Hawley Questions Sec. 230 Immunity

But Carr added his own twist to the argument, suggesting Twitter was engaged in the kind of unfair and deceptive business practice that the Federal Trade Commission should be interested in checking out.  

"Put aside the fact that they can choose to speak," he said, "you can't have it both ways. You can't go to Congress and say "we're neutral politically and then engage in this type of conduct."

The President continued his attack on Big Tech late Wednesday, tweeting that those companies were working against him:

[embed]https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1265819308699070464[/embed]

The FCC plans to vote on a "5G Upgrade" order next month to clarify some of the steps the FCC has taken, motormannned by Commissioner Brendan Carr, to speed tower citing, upgrades, and other elements of wireless network buildouts. 

FCC Chairman Ajit Pai announced the item Monday, calling it the latest attempt to modernize its wireless infrastructure rules. It clarifies the FCC's interpretation of legislative language that said “a state or local government may not deny, and shall approve, any eligible facilities request for a modification of an existing wireless tower or base station that does not substantially change the physical dimensions of such tower or base station.” 

He translated that to: "[W]e want to resolve uncertainty about section 6409(a) in order to expedite the process for state and local governments to review applications to deploy wireless infrastructure." 

But he left it to Carr to provide details, which he did in a speech at the Wireless Information Association's (WIA) virtual conference.

The draft of the order, which Carr said was being circulated Tuesday afternoon (May 19), would:  

1. Clarify when the FCC's 60-day shot clock on localities reviews of a wireless builder's documents. 

2. Clarify what equipment can go on existing structures. 

3. Spell out distinctions between concealment elements--having to make a tower look like a tree or a flagpole--and other conditions related to aesthetics, and clarifying that aesthetic conditions can't be enforced "in a way that negates our other rules that promote streamlined approval." 

Carr said the item will help separate tougher project approvals from ones that can be more easily and quickly achieved. It is also responsive to petitions from CTIA, the wireless industry association, and the Wireless Infrastructure Association.  

“America’s tower crews and telecom techs are building the strongest 5G network in the world," Carr said. "Their efforts already are creating new jobs and opportunities in towns across the country. By streamlining tower upgrades, we will encourage even more investment in our communities and new service to connect families,” said Carr. “Rural America will benefit from new competition for their broadband dollars. First responders will benefit from dedicated networks and expanded capacity. And all Americans will benefit from world-leading wireless service as existing towers are upgraded to 5G.” 

"I applaud Commissioner Carr for his work on the 5G Upgrade Order and am very glad to see the Commission will vote on the order during its June Open Meeting," said Competitive Carriers Association president Steven K. Berry. "I thank Chairman [Ajit] Pai and Commissioner Carr for their commitment and leadership on infrastructure reform. Infrastructure is the backbone of wireless networks, and streamlining burdensome, unnecessary processes will greatly benefit carriers wishing to enhance and expand their networks. Ultimately, consumers stand to be the real winners, and I commend the Commission for its plan to consider further reform at its upcoming Open Meeting.” 

NATE: The Communications Infrastructure Contractors Association joined in the praise for the 5G upgrade order. 

“On behalf of the Association’s over 980 member companies who enable wireless connectivity, NATE commends Commissioner Carr for his ongoing leadership in helping spearhead initiatives that will streamline 5G deployment in the United States. The measures outlined in Commissioner Carr’s 5G Upgrade Order will serve to help scale 5G in the country and allow more communities, enterprises and citizens to experience the benefits of next-generation wireless technology,” said NATE president/CEO Todd Schlekeway. 

“Recent events have shown that reliable networks are necessary for Americans to work and learn remotely," said Computer & Communications Industry Association president Matt Schruers. "Upgrading to 5G networks is a critical step in building the infrastructure needed for the 21st century, CCIA supports the Commission’s efforts to facilitate 5G deployment.”

Broadcasters and tech companies are high on the broadband-related prospects of ATSC 3.0, particularly for automotive applications as a near term starter, but ultimately only as a complement to the mothership of a primary TV signal sporting major new upgrades due to that Next Gen TV-branded broadcast transmission standard.

That was one of the takeaways from a combined National Association of Broadcasters/Consumer Technology Association webinar on the future of ATSC 3.0, prefaced by a speech from FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr signaling the FCC would help broadcasters team up to add that broadband element. 

Related: FCC Signals TV Stations Can Team Up For Broadcast Internet 

Zooming in from their respected shelters-in-place for the video conference were John Godfrey, senior VP of public policy for Samsung Electronics America; Anne Schelle, managing director of Pearl TV (a Next Gen TV consortium); John Taylor, senior VP, public affairs and communications, LG Electronics USA; and Lonna Thompson, executive VP/COO and general counsel of America's Public Television Stations. 

Carr announced in his speech that the FCC would be issuing a declaratory ruling at its June 9 meeting "clarifying" that broadcasters can team up or lease spectrum to third parties for broadband applications without being subject to attribution rules that apply to TV stations' broadcast signals.  

Related: Tech Company Using ATSC 3.0 to Challenge MVPDs 

Schelle welcomed the announcement. She said that Pearl TV had been talking with automotive companies interested in using broadcast spectrum for connected car applications, but had been questioning whether broadcasters could do it. She said making it clear that broadcasters could team up, not just market to market, but nationally. She also said that given that it is an open standard, some of the innovations could come from some of the partners attracted by that regulatory certainty.  

She said they have been asking if broadcasters have the rights to do this and that "clarifying will help us work with automotive companies." 

Automotive appears to be the a near-term opportunity for broadcast internet service applications. "Automotive is the clear first winner," said Schelle. 

Taylor said there have been some "great" field trials of ATSC 3.0 in South Korea and that auto applications are not just about live and local back seat entertainment, but updating maps, and helping auto fleets navigate smart cities, updating digital signage, and more. He said the sky is the limit, but that to get off the ground, broadcasters still need to focus on the TV side, with broadband working in parallel.  

Related: FCC Seeks Comment on ATSC 3.0 Signal Extension 

Samsung's Godfrey emphasized the value of sending data to a whole lot of endpoints, including signage and environmental sensors, all-at-once data that is hard to collect on wireless nets.  

CTA's Jamie Susskind asked what kind of partnerships were being explored. 

APTS' Thompson said a lot of her station members had been talking about smart cities tech. For example, she said, if water contamination is discovered by a sensor, there are a lot of different people who need to get that info. They could all get it almost instantly using ATSC 3.0.  

She also said they were talking with potential partners about precision agriculture, particularly in rural areas where there is broadcasting, but no high-speed broadband access. 

Related: Everything You Need to Know About ATSC 3.0 

Broadcasters are required to deliver a primary TV signal. Asked if they would want the ability to morph that spectrum to broadband, National Association of Broadcasters executive VP Rick Kaplan said that would need Congress since it is a requirement of the Communications Act, but in any event it was not something broadcasters would want to change.

Thompson agreed. She said ATSC 3.0 allows for more spectrum capacity, so stations could look at new ancillary services but remain committed to their primary TV channel. 

They all agreed that one big challenge of rolling out the ATSC 3.0 broadcast signal is letting consumers know just how many new innovations it will bring.  

Godfrey said having such a diverse toolkit made it an "educational challenge" to market to consumers. Taylor agreed, adding that not overpromising should be one watchword, while still making the point that ATSC 3.0 will be a way to unlock the future of TV. 

Taylor said one key is not overpromising while also letting consumers know that they will be unlocking a new future of TV with immersive audio and ultra-high-def pictures.

The FCC is proposing to help promote broadcasting as a new competitive broadband pipe by making it clear that legacy broadcast TV ownership regulations do not apply to broadcast-delivered internet services like over-the-top video and data.

That is according to FCC commissioner Brendan Carr, who has been working on a draft declaratory ruling and notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) he says the FCC plans to vote on at its June public meeting. Carr was a logical choice to spearhead the item. At a 2019 NAB Show speech, he suggested that the ultra HD and interactivity of ATSC 3.0 (Nextgen TV) for broadcast services was only part of the story because the same ATSC 3.0 technology can deliver a 25 Mbps data stream.

Related: NAB Show: FCC‘s Carr Hails ’One-to-Many’ Broadband Pipe

Carr let that cat, more like a lion, out of the bag in remarks in advance of a National Association of Broadcasters/Consumer Technology Association online event on the ATSC 3.0 advanced TV transmission standard Monday (May 18).

According to those remarks, he pointed to the strengths of broadcasters' low-band spectrum, wide-area coverage and the one-to-many architecture that broadcasters have long touted as a big value added.

Carr painted a big vision of "broadcast internet" for IoT, telemedicine--a big deal in a COVID-19 world--and smart agriculture--with that one-to-many architecture reaching devices over wide areas efficiently. Then there is the offloading of 5G data off cellular networks, and a competitive option for movies and apps.

"And given that a Broadcast Internet signal can offer high-speed downloads, consumers could see reduced costs for Internet services, and its propagation characteristics make it well suited for underserved rural communities," he told his CTA/NAB audience.

While he said many are already exploring broadcast internet, the FCC could do more to help, which is where the June item comes in.

The declaratory ruling would say that any TV station could enter into lease agreements with any any other station, or stations, in a single market to offer internet services without triggering the FCC's attribution rules. According to people familiar with the item, it does not eliminate or propose to eliminate the requirement that broadcasters have to deliver a TV signal on their primary channel.

"This decision would help ensure that broadcasters and other innovators have the flexibility to generate the scale and geographic footprint—both locally and nationally—that may be necessary to support certain Broadcast Internet services without being subject to regulations unrelated to the provision of such services," Carr said. "It is critical that we provide certainty to broadcasters, investors, tech companies, and innovators that these agreements will not be subject to dated rules designed to regulate television stations—not autonomous vehicles or telemedicine applications."

Carr said he expects that the clarification will boost investment in broadcasting, investment that will help them invest in local news and public service, plus help them get a bigger piece of the ad pie being gobbled up by the internet.

In addition to the declaratory ruling, the item includes the NPRM seeking comment on whether other rules need to be changed or modified to deploy broadcast internet services, including asking "whether changes to our licensing structure would provide even better certainty of investment in Broadcast Internet offerings."

FCC commissioner Brendan Carr said it is time for the U.S. government to reconsider its relationship with companies that are owned or controlled by the People’s Republic of China.

Related: Huawei Says FCC Band Could Be Unconstitutional 

That came after the Trump Administration this week recommended that the FCC pull the license of one China Telecom to connect to U.S. networks, a move he "welcomed." 

Carr said a lot has changed since the FCC first started letting China Telecom connect to U.S. networks. 

He said there is "substantial evidence" that the Chinese government wants to surveil Americans as well as evidence that China Telecom "has hijacked traffic in the U.S. and routed it through China before delivering it to destinations back in America." 

He said he looked forward to the FCC following the Administration's recommendation and go beyond that to "further secure America’s networks from bad actors that would do us harm." 

The FCC has already taken steps to crack down on Chinese telecoms, denying a request  by China Mobile to "provide telecommunications services between the U.S. and 'foreign destinations," and excluding networks with Huawei and ZTE tech and other allegedly suspect tech from getting government broadband subsidy money something Congress supports. 

FCC commissioner Brendan Carr took to the pages of the Wall Street Journal Wednesday (March 18) to take aim at Twitter's new "manipulated media" tag on an edited video of Democratic Presidential front-runner Joe Biden that was tweeted by White House media director Dan Scavino. 

The video appeared to show Biden saying that the Democrats couldn't win and Trump would be re-elected. 

Related: FCC's Carr Calls Dems' Subpoenas 'Secret & Partisan' 

In the op ed, Carr opined that Twitter's action was an effort to curtail legal political speech, a cry wolf approach that makes it harder "to identify and build consensus around media that has truly been doctored or manipulated." 

Carr said that "political actors and media gatekeepers"--the White House has accused Democrats and mainstream media of teaming up--had a new tool in their effort to censor or discourage political speech, but allowing users to turn off such "bias filters" could help. 

Carr tweeted a link to the commentary: 

[embed]https://twitter.com/BrendanCarrFCC/status/1240264251157217280[/embed]

The commissioner said the Biden camp pressured Twitter and Facebook to take the tweet down or label it disinformation, thus the "manipulated media" tag he said had been "slapped" on it. 

Under pressure from Washington to weed out deep fakes and other deceptive video, Twitter last month adopted a policy on "synthetic and manipulated" media, with Scavino's tweet reportedly the first such tag applied.  

Related: Facebook Bias Audit Concludes There Is Still Work to Be Done.

Carr said Facebook also put a "partly false" tag on the video.  

Carr likened the moves to someone going after the iconic 1964 Lyndon Johnson campaign "Daisy" ad because viewers might think the child had actually been killed in a nuclear blast. 

Carr told the Wall Street Journal readership that political gatekeepers don't really think the clips are misleading, but instead are worried they will be effective as political satire, which uses humor to draw people into a discussion. 

Carr said there is a big difference between such satire and the "real" fakes. 

"Internet speech, viral videos and memes threaten those seeking to control the political narrative. By bypassing self-appointed gatekeepers, an outsider can now carry a message directly to the public," he wrote. "The media must often play catch-up—covering the messages and story lines that are already resonating with people. This explains efforts to equate political speech with the entirely separate categories of doctored deep fakes, illegal content and deceptive cheap fakes." 

The Free State Foundation said all systems are go for its policy conference March 10 in Washington. 

Free State released the final agenda for the conference, which includes an A-list of policymakers. 

Related: ACA Connects Postpones D.C. Conference 

Among those scheduled to participate are FCC chair Ajit Pai and commissioners Michael O'Rielly and Brendan Carr. 

The FCC has suspended non-essential travel and appearances at "large gatherings" due to concerns over the coronavirus, but the FSF conference is more of a boutique event and in the FCC's back yard. 

Related: CPAC Attendee Tests Positive for Coronavirus

FSF president Randolph May confirmed that he had checked with the relevant FCC offices and the speakers were a "go" as well. 

Republican FCC commissioners Brendan Carr and Michael O'Rielly echoed shared about Big Tech and Silicon Valley at the America Conservative Union's Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) conference outside Washington Saturday (Feb. 29). 

Addressing allegations of conservative bias on online platforms, Carr said he did not think the answer was "to do nothing." He cited what he said was a leaked document from Twitter "that it would soon be able to allow political ideologues to stamp tweets as misinformation based on their perspective," saying: "I don't think that's the right thing." 

"If you don't want MSNBC fact-checking the information you see on Twitter," he said, "I think you should be empowered to make that decision and turn those types of bias filters off. That comment drew applause from moderator Gordon Chang and the audience. 

Asked to weigh in on the charge that Google is helping China spy on its own people, Carr conceded there was little the FCC could do from a jurisdiction standpoint, but he weighed in regardless. "I'll say this. The hypocrisy here is stunning. Those in Silicon Valley have no problem telling the rest of the country what we should think; what we should believe; what our values are. The second it comes to getting into a country with nearly two billion people, all of a sudden those values they preach to us kind of go by the wayside." 

Carr is hardly alone in that assessment. Silicon Valley has drawn criticism from both sides of the political spectrum. 

But Carr conceded it was a tough decision for a company like Google to make, whether to bring those countries a taste of freedom, or stay out. 

O'Rielly said he was sympathetic to the arguments that have been made "in terms of the harms high-tech companies present in terms of their censoring of American conservatives, the work they are trying to do internationally in the most harmful countries in the world and how that has built up those networks to cause harm to people throughout the world. So we are mindful of that. We use our voice to help amplify the need to address those matters but there is only so much we can do directly. 

On the issue 5G supremacy, Carr gave President Trump credit for "flipping the script" when, under the previous Democratic Administration, Carr said the U.S. was under serious risk of ceding leadership in 5G to China and others. 

Carr said the new script is that the FCC has the strongest 5G network. 

Chang, author of "The Coming Collapse of China," came out firing at Chinese telecom Huawei, which he said is wiring up most of the world. He even led the audience in a brief chant: "Stop Huawei, Stop China," a chant that Carr and O'Rielly did not join, but stood and applauded as the session ended.  

The FCC recently excluded Huawei tech from broadband subsidy money and the Trump Administration has signaled it is an untrustworthy supplier and national security threat, though it also sent the signal that that status could be a chip in trade talks. 

Carr suggested the President had sent a "clear message" that "we are going to do whatever it takes to secure our nation's networks from that threat." 

Carr said that the FCC was doing its part by prohibiting subsidized Huawei gear from U.S. networks and looking to rip and replace it in existing networks. He also cited cracking down on IP theft, including by Huawei, in trade talks, again giving the President credit. 

Carr said the U.S. Can't treat Huawei as "anything other than a threat to our collective security." He said that China and Huawei, which "does their bidding," has a list of malign conduct--bribery, corruption--"longer than a CVS receipt,"  

Chang asked how moving to virtualized networks--software rather than hardware-centric--could help secure U.S. networks and decrease reliance on foreign companies like Huawei, Nokia and Ericksson--the Big Three in 5G tech. 

O'Rielly said moving to cloud-based networks would be a U.S. sweetspot. "In a virtualized world we are talking about moving most of the software to the cloud where the U.S. companies are dominating and will continue to dominate for decades to come." 

He said that will allow the country to move away from the end-to-end architecture Huawei has been pushing. O'Rielly said that move was not something the government was not having to force on companies because they were moving to virtualized networks on their own. "It is in their best interests to gain the efficiencies of the cloud. So it is not about forcing anyone, he said, but instead about market forces meeting the demand for networks that are better protected from the "harmful things" the Chinese network is trying to do. 

Carr seconded that, agreeing that it was a triumph of the free market.  

Republican FCC Commissioners Michael O'Rielly and Brendan Carr will be interviewed this weekend at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC2020) at the National Harbor, Md., Gaylord National Resort and Conference Center.

The "conversation" with the commissioners will be Saturday (Feb. 29) at 1:40 p.m. moderated by Gordon Chang, author of "The Coming Collapse of China."

One big issue both commissioners have been dealing with is the threat of Chinese telecoms to 5G network security. Chang is no fan of Huawei, one of the telecoms the FCC is scrubbing from government-funded broadband buildouts.

[embed]https://twitter.com/GordonGChang/status/1186653020978909184[/embed]

The conversation will be over by 3 p.m., when another D.C. Republican is scheduled to take the CPAC center-stage: President Trump.

This will not be the first CPAC rodeo for either Carr or O'Rielly. In fact, O'Rielly's 2018 conversation caused quite a stir.

The U.S. Office of Special Counsel concluded that O'Rielly violated the Hatch Act prohibitions on certain political activities by federal branch employees by calling for the re-election of President Trump at the conference. The office issued a warning to O'Rielly that there would be consequences for a future violation. O'Rielly said he still believed he did not violate any rules, but also said he took the warning seriously.

At the time, the FCC's Office of General Counsel concluded that there was nothing ethically wrong with the appearance of the commissioners at CPAC, a separate issue from what they said while appearing.

House Dems at the time were not pleased with the appearance of any of the FCC commissioners.

FCC Chairman Pai has appeared at the conference in the past, including to pick up an award from the conservative group, but he was not listed on this year's agenda and a spokesperson for the chairman confirmed he would not be attending.

Before they parked their broadband devices in the cloakroom and themselves in the Senate chamber for day two of impeachment hearings, tired members of the Senate Commerce Committee took up the issue of broadband deployment and a potential 5G labor shortage.  

That was in a hearing on "The 5G Workforce and Obstacles to Broadband Deployment" and how they could impact winning the race to 5G. 

Committee chairman Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) joked that the accolades continued to pour in over his decision not to postpone the hearing--which began at 10 a.m.--despite the fact that day one of the impeachment trial went until almost 2 a.m. To be fair, Chief Justice John Roberts, who is presiding over the trial, also had to be back at work at his High Court day job Wednesday (Jan. 22) for oral argument before returning to impeachment duties at 1 p.m.  

Wicker said the hearing was about important economic and workforce readiness issues related to 5G nets, which he said would transform virtually every industry. He said as goes the communications infrastructure so goes the future of all the new tech it makes possible. 

Among the witnesses was FCC commissioner Brendan Carr, who has been deputized by FCC chair Ajit Pai to deal with broadband wireless buildout issues and speeding those buildouts, including workforce issues as well as streamlining small-cell permitting and pole attachments, something Wicker said was helping speed broadband buildouts. 

Carr said securing a 5G workforce was just as important as securing spectrum for next-gen wireless.  

Carr launched a 5G jobs initiative last year focused on a shortage of tower climbers and telecom technicians. He said getting the right policies in place will make all the difference. 

He argued that the FCC's efforts to streamline buildouts as reaped "remarkable results," including internet speeds that were up 70% in only two years and a narrowing digital divide. 

He suggested the FCC's policies were a winning streak that needed extending, but that a consequence of that success was 20,000 job openings for tower climbers and techs for 5G. "These are good-paying jobs, too," he told the senators. "hey do not require an expensive four-year degree. And they are 5G jobs that can help lift thousands of American families up into the middle class." 

Harold Feld, SVP at Public Knowledge, agreed with Carr that there was a need to fill the job shortage gap, but he emphasized looking beyond the short-term deficits. "[B]ecause demand is cyclical, the short-term demand generated by the need to build out 5G infrastructure does not ensure long-term employment for workers," he said in his testimony. "As a consequence, programs designed to meet the shortage of tower workers need to look not merely to training and safety,5 but also to guaranteeing to tower workers a productive future after the current boom subsides." Carr said they were jobs with a future and career track.  

But as to Carr's suggestion that the FCC's deregulatory "streamlining," including preempting some state and local restrictions on tower citing, was the right approach, Feld was not in agreement.  

"Congress should ignore the claims of wireless networks that without further preemption of local authority America will “lose the race to 5G," he said. "To the contrary, by giving carriers free reign over local deployments, we will see large swaths of urban and rural America cut out of the 5G future entirely."

FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr says that "a lot of regulators" are "struggling" with a lack of vision, and suggested that criticism begins at home. 

Carr, who was being interviewed for C-SPAN's Communicators series, said that competition authorities, including the FCC, need to be able to pass the Gretzky test (hall of fame hockey player Wayne Gretzky), which is skating to where the puck is going to be (in this case the 5G puck), not where it is now. 

He said he was seeing that lack of vision when it comes to 5G and regulators "not seeing how truly disruptive it is going to be." 

He then tied that lack of vision to the 3-2, with Democrats dissenting, vote to approve the T-Mobile-Sprint deal, a deal he said would create a stronger wireless broadband competitor to Verizon and AT&T--Sprint and T-Mobile have argued that they need the deal to make them a 5G player. One of the conditions on the deal is that they will deploy 5G service to 85% of rural Americans within three years and 90% of rural Americans within six years, for example. 

"Some people have voted against [the deal]," Carr said—though not mentioning Democrats Jessica Rosenworcel and Geoffey Starks, who voted against the deal, even when pressed. He said the dissenters were suggesting the status quo should be preserved because this was the golden age of wireless (Rosenworcel said in her dissenting statement that "the T-Mobile-Sprint merger will end a golden age in wireless"). "I don't think so," he said. Carr pointed out that cable providers are adding more wireless subs than wireless companies, while wireless is looking to 5G for in-home broadband in competition to fixed providers like cable ops.  

He said with "vision," the T-Mobile-Sprint deal makes sense, and seeing that "shows you understand where technology is moving." He also suggested that states suing to block the deal also lack that vision to see the deal as providing a strong third competitor that will give viewers the increased choice they want. 

The episode airs Saturday, Nov. 23, at 6:30 ET on C-SPAN and Monday, Nov. 25, at 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. ET on C-SPAN2.

Ben Arden is joining the office of Republican FCC commissioner Brendan Carr as acting legal adviser for media issues.

He succeeds, at least in an acting capacity, Evan Swaztrauber, who last month was tapped as policy adviser to FCC chairman Ajit Pai.

Arden is the associate chief of the FCC's Media Bureau and before that was deputy division chief in the bureau's Industry Analysis division.

He joined the FCC in 2010.

“Ben’s extensive experience in the Media Bureau will be an asset to the office, particularly as the FCC continues its work to modernize our media regulations and promote investment in local journalism," said Carr.  

Foes of the T-Mobile-Sprint merger were ripping FCC Chairman Ajit Pai for announcing all the reasons he would be voting for the deal, but there were fans of the move as well.

The chairman said Monday (May 20) he would be voting for the deal after the companies offered up 5G buildout conditions, no price increases for three years, spinning off T-Mobile's largest prepaid wireless service subsidiary, and more.

The Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) Center was one of them, though it would have preferred fewer conditions and no Boost spin-off.

Associate Director of CEI’s Center for Technology and Innovation Jessica Melugin said:

“CEI applauds FCC Chairman Ajit Pai and commissioner Brendan Carr for announcing their support for the proposed merger between Sprint and T-Mobile," said jessica Melugin, associate director of CEI's Center for Technology and Innovation. "While CEI has urged regulators to let the merger proceed without market-distorting conditions, like the requirement that Sprint divest itself of Boost Mobile, the FCC’s approval appears to be a relatively clean deal and could have been much, much worse.

“Allowing the Sprint-T-Mobile merger to proceed will provide numerous benefits to consumers and our economy and will let the market work to provide private capital for 5G deployment," said melugin. "CEI hopes the FCC and the Department of Justice will move swiftly to approve this win for American consumers.”

"T-Mobile and Sprint have made significant commitments to advance 5G in the United States," said Ken Cuccinelli, director of the Regulatory Action Center at the Freedomworks Foundation. "This deal will give America an advantage in the race with China to build a 5G infrastructure and increase access to high-speed broadband that will benefit urban and rural communities alike, promote competition, and create jobs. We applaud Chairman Ajit Pai and the FCC for taking steps to approve the merger."

It still must be voted by the full commission and approved by the Justice Department, but with Brendan Carr on board (he announced his support not long after the chairman), Pai just needs the vote of the other Republican, Michael O'Rielly, and the Boost Mobile spin-off could well have been the key to a Justice decision the deal didn't need blocking.

Federal Communications Commissioner Brendan Carr is the newest member of the panel — having just been confirmed to a new five-year term — but he is already something of a technology veteran. The former FCC general counsel and prior to that, lead adviser to Republican commissioner and now chairman Ajit Pai, he was put in charge of its efforts to speed advanced wireless network buildouts.

CES is an important way to keep abreast of which tech changes he needs to keep an eye on, Carr said, and, oh yes, it’s fun, too. (This interview was conducted before the government shutdown. At press time it was unclear whether Carr would still be going, as Ajit Pai had scrapped his planned trip. If Carr also does not make the show, it is clear the shutdown will have an opportunity cost in the loss of that window on tech’s future.)

In a conversation with Multichannel News, Carr’s enthusiasm for all things tech, including artificial intelligence, is clear. And he had some real, intelligent things to say about where smart networks are heading and what the FCC should — and shouldn’t — do about it. An edited transcript follows.

MCN: We understand you will be going to CES?
Brendan Carr: Yes. I am looking forward to it. I’ve gone every year as a commissioner, which is once before, and then as a staffer I would always try to angle to get on that trip because it’s a fun time.

MCN: Beyond the fun factor, why is it important for you, as a commissioner, to go to the show?
BC: It is informative for us, particularly in my job now where we are very focused on the transition to 5G, which we really view as a platform that will unleash a new wave of innovation. We’re not experts in what that innovation is going to be. A chance to visit a show like CES really helps us get a glimpse of what the entrepreneurs and innovators are able to do, not just with the existing platforms, but what they can do once we get 5G across the finish line.

MCN: For those who were not able to tune into the FCC’s AI forum, talk a little about the importance of next-generation networks to AI and the move of intelligence from devices to the networks.
BC: When you think about 5G, there are a number of interesting verticals that come off of it. And what cuts across so many of those verticals, whether it’s telehealth or connected cars, is AI.

So, when you marry these new 5G networks with artificial intelligence, that’s when you really unlock and enable these other innovations to take place.

For instance, in telehealth, you have the ability to pull data, but without artificial intelligence there is very little you can do with it. Bringing AI and machine learning to bear on this data can really improve outcomes.

So, the way I see it is 5G is the new platform that is going to bring a lot of devices onto the network, a lot of new data, and AI is what’s going to enable us to put all of that new data to practical, beneficial use for consumers.

MCN: Talk about the move of that intelligence from devices to the network.
BC: If you think about it this way, right now we have intelligence in two main locations in terms of AI processing power: You’ve got it in centralized cloud-based data centers and you have it in your smartphones.

Think of those two as the main sources of computing power in the network today. Well, we are increasingly pushing toward a third, which is moving those centralized data centers to the edge and at the same time pulling a lot of intelligence off of the end-user device, the smartphone.

So, you are creating a new edge computing model. For instance, with servers being deployed at macro-tower facility sites, those are becoming essentially mini data centers. Instead of hauling the traffic back to some centralized location, you’re crunching and computing the data right there at the edge of the network. That’s another thing that 5G is going to enable. It will be interesting. Will our devices, our smartphones, stay as intelligent, or get more intelligent? Or, because of that low latency in edge computing, do we push a lot of that intelligence off the device so that it becomes more of a commodity while the real brains of the operations becomes the network?

That is something I think going to CES can shed some light on. You know: What is that trend? Is it smartphones getting smarter, or is it pushing some of the intelligence off the phone? As you walk around the floor at CES, you can get some insights on that.

MCN: What should the government’s role be in regulating new technologies, or should it exercise some regulatory humility?
BC: The best thing we can do in a lot of instances is to get out of the way, but more directly we do have a significant regulatory role to make sure that these networks can be built out. And you can see it through a lot of the actions I have taken on the wireless infrastructure side. There is a regulatory role in updating and modernizing our rules to make sure these new networks can be deployed quickly and ubiquitously so that every community in the country has a fair shot. So, I think we have a big role to play in updating our regs to make sure they support buildout. But, broader than that, I think it is important for us to step back and allow the entrepreneurs and innovators the freedom to do what they are experts at.

MCN: What is your view on regulating edge providers?
BC: I’ve deferred to the regulatory bodies looking most closely at those issues. The Federal Trade Commission has been holding a series of roundtables on that. My principal focus is on how to lower barriers to entry on the infrastructure side, but then more broadly how we incentivize competition in this space, which I think has a much better track record of incentivizing beneficial conduct than more regulatory approaches.

Sen John Thune (R-S.D.) is holding a 5G hearing at Carnegie Hall.

More specifically, that would be Carnegie Town Hall in Sioux Falls, S.D., on Oct. 12, where Thune will focus on barriers to deployment of next-gen wireless.

There to provide the FCC view of that challenge will be the FCC commissioner who is championing the FCC's efforts to speed deployment by removing barriers like extensive local site reviews, commissioner Brendan Carr.

Over the objections of local government officials and the reservations of Democratic commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel, the FCC voted last month to streamline the path to small cell deployment, billing it as crucial to the rollout of 5G wireless service, an FCC and Trump Administration priority.

Carr, who championed the item, said it would cut $2 billion in red tape, "which changes the prospects for communities that might otherwise be left behind" in the effort to close the digital divide, he said.

Other witnesses at the Oct. 12 hearing will be Sioux Falls mayor Paul TenHaken; Dr. José-Marie Griffiths, president of Dakota State University; Robert Fisher, SVP, federal government affairs, for Verizon; and Justin Forde, senior director, government relations, for Midcontinent Communications.

Like many inside and outside the Beltway, Thune is focused on the problems and challenges of deploying next-gen wireless broadband, particularly making sure that rural areas like his home state are not left behind in the rush to a 5G-driven, Iot-centric world.

Thune spoke at a recent White House summit on 5G, where he put in a plug for freeing up more spectrum, including unlicensed."we must be mindful of the critical role unlicensed spectrum plays in the development of 5G and throughout the communications landscape," he told the White House gathering. "WiFi operating on unlicensed spectrum is responsible for a tremendous and growing amount of the data transmitted in our homes and offices, and will play an increasing role in the future."

ISPs would second that notion since WiFi hotspots are currently the primary mobile broadband play for cable broadband providers.

When it comes to 5G (fifth generation) wireless deployment, "Being first matters. It's a big deal," FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr said repeatedly during remarks to the monthly Media Institute luncheon in Washington on Thursday. He acknowledged that when the Commission addresses 5G at next Wednesday's monthly session, the needs of state and local agencies will be thoroughly considered - especially complaints that the profusion of small towers are a gift to the big wireless carriers with insufficient compensation to local governments. The goal is to "reduce barriers to build 5G infrastructure," he said. 

Carr estimated that the FCC's upcoming rule revision "will cut $2 billion in red tape" regulatory costs for the industry. And he expects that well over 90% of 5G investment will be in rural and suburban areas. He repeatedly said that FCC actions "will cut the cost and [accelerate deployment] of wireless broadband in rural areas." 

"I want to make [sure] the U.S. is the [world's] first 5G economy," said Carr, who has crusaded for 5G expansion during the past year. He stressed that encouraging development of U.S. technology is a major goal of the FCC's plan, which faces the immense growth of 5G in China - an unusual hint of government-led industrial policy.

"They [China] have been much more aggressive in 5G," Carr said, noting that about 460 5G cell sites are erected every day in China, which is 12 times the number of sites installed in the U.S. daily.

"We need to get more spectrum and infrastructure," he said, citing the value of 5G to "unleash a new wave of apps" including rural broadband delivery and telehealth services. He especially acknowledged the benefit to U.S. technology providers if the American 5G industry grows more quickly, becoming the basis for next generation wireless in other countries, rather than allowing China to pick off those opportunities. 

"There's a limit of how much we can do with 4G," said the commissioner, who - as has become his fashion forte - spoke (wearing a casual open-necked shirt) from notes, but not prepared text, to the buttoned-down audience. "To truly scale 5G, we've got to press forward."

Carr explained that 5G needs more low towers than the 200- and 300-foot high towers of previous technology. 

"We've heard from dozens of local governments," some of which are fretting that FCC policy will reduce their revenue opportunities as 5G towers proliferate. "We will put reasonable caps on fees..., so that applications can be acted on in a reasonable manner," Carr said. He said the FCC "wants to make sure" that local authorities are reasonably compensated. 

Federal Communications Commission chairman Ajit Pai can now claim to be a towering figure in the regulatory community. And he has the pictures to prove it, having made good on a promise made to one House Republican in an oversight hearing.

In that hearing, Rep. Pete Olsen (R-Tex.) chided the chairman that Pai’s fellow commissioner, Brendan Carr, had climbed a cell tower: Carr has been charged by Pai with overseeing the effort to clear away obstacles to network buildouts. “[D]on’t you think you should follow his lead and climb up a cell tower as well?” Olson asked Pai.

Pai joked that Carr was younger and more “nimble,” but said he would “put my own life at risk and ascend, perhaps, a 10-foot tower of a small cell in Houston.” Olson suggested he might join him.

The chairman did quite a few feet better than that, climbing a 131-foot tower in Colorado last week after a delay for a quickly passing hailstorm, according to Brian Hart, head of the FCC’s Office of Media Relations, who accompanied Pai on a Western road trip.

“I just can’t figure why in the hail they won’t let the chairman @AjitPaiFCC climb the tower!,” Hart jokingly tweeted, accompanied by video of the storm. “Many thanks to @NATEsafety, @SBAComm, and everyone who worked hard to get this tower climb ready despite the weather change up.”

The weather cleared quickly and Pai ultimately scaled the tower, according to his own tweeted account.

“Climbing the tower was an incredible experience,” Pai told The Wire. “Aside from the awe-inspiring views and the somewhat terrifying heights (it may have been 131 feet but felt like 1,000), it gave me a first-hand appreciation of what it takes to build and maintain wireless infrastructure. I’m also grateful for the high priority that the National Association of Tower Erectors and tower companies place on worker safety. As American consumers rely increasingly on wireless services, it’s ever more important for the FCC to have forward-thinking policies to promote wireless infrastructure, including towers like the one I survived, er, surmounted.”

Olson suggested to The Wire that there would be more climbing to the story.

“His decision to follow through proves that he is a man of his word and that he is committed to doing whatever is necessary to make sure the FCC is fully informed,” Olson said in an email. “I have a few cell towers in TX-22 [Olson’s district] in mind. As soon as my schedule permits, I look forward to going up and comparing notes with chairman Pai.”

Reaction was steadily building Monday to the Trump Administration's intent to nominate FCC Enforcement Bureau official Geoffrey Starks to the Democratic FCC seat being vacated by Commissioner Mignon Clyburn.“I want to extend my congratulations to Geoffrey Starks on his nomination by the White House to serve on the Commission," said FCC Republican Commissioner Brendan Carr. "Mr. Starks’ career evidences a longstanding commitment to public service, including at both the Department of Justice and as a staffer in the FCC’s Enforcement Bureau. I would welcome the chance to work together on policies that will protect consumers and promote the interests of all Americans.”NTCA–The Rural Broadband Association today issued the following statement from Chief Executive Officer Shirley Bloomfield regarding the nomination of Geoffrey Starks as FCC Commissioner:“NTCA congratulates Geoffrey Starks on his nomination to serve as FCC Commissioner. His experience at the FCC and clear, long-standing commitment to public service will suit him well in tackling the range of important issues faced by the agency," said CEO Shirley Bloomfield. "NTCA and its membership [rural broadband companies] look forward to working with Mr. Starks once he’s confirmed to continue responding to consumer needs and advancing our nation’s broadband goals.”“We offer our congratulations to Geoffrey Starks on his nomination to the FCC as a commissioner," said Parents Television Council President Tim Winter. "We look forward to working with him in order to better protect children from indecent content that may air on the publicly-owned broadcast airwaves, on finding ways to ensure families have access to accurate TV content ratings, on addressing the KidVid issue, and overall, in service to families across America."“INCOMPAS congratulates Geoffrey Starks on his impending nomination to the FCC," said Chip Pickering, CEO of INCOMPAS. "His distinguished career shows a dedication to public service that will be an asset to the Commission. We look forward to working with him to ensure competition remains the driving force behind innovation policy that brings consumer benefits."

“We congratulate Geoffrey Starks on his nomination as an FCC Commissioner," said USTelecom president Jonathan Spalter. "His record of public service—in the agency’s Enforcement Bureau and at the Department of Justice—and his deep expertise in communications policy are just the right ingredients for a distinguished tenure as a Commissioner. I urge the Senate to confirm him quickly, and all of us at USTelecom look forward to working closely with him.”

Leading House Energy & Commerce Committee Democrats have called on the Office of Special Counsel to investigate all three Republican FCC commissioners (including chair Ajit Pai) for their participation in the Conservative Political Action Conference earlier this year.

Special Counsel Henry Kerner already concluded that Republican Commissioner Michael O'Rielly violated the Hatch Act  prohibitions on certain political activities by federal branch employees by calling for the re-election of President Trump at the conference. Kerner issued a warning to O'Rielly that there would be consequences for a future violation. O'Rielly said he still believes he did not violate any rules, but also said he took the warning seriously.

But Reps. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) and Mike Doyle (D-Pa.), in a letter dated Monday (May 7) have asked the special counsel to look into what they say was all three Republican Commissioners'  refusal (Pai and Brendan Carr round out the trio) to cooperate with congressional oversight of their participation in the conference.

Pallone is ranking member of the Committee, while Doyle is ranking member of the Communications Subcommittee.

In response to Democratic concerns over the CPAC appearances, the FCC's general counsel, Tom Johnson, did respond to them, saying he thought the appearances were not Hatch Act violations--obviously the special counsel disagreed in the case of O'Rielly.

Related: FCC Says CPAC Appearances Were OK

"[T]heir participation was consistent with a long tradition of Commissioners contributing to robust debate on issues of importance to the agency and the nation," Johnson wrote to the Dems two weeks ago. "The Commissioners' ability to accept prominent speaking engagements like this one helps promote transparency and accountability and encourages public participation and interest in Commission rulemakings, without contravening applicable ethics obligations," he added.

Pallone and Doyle cited that response, but said it was "both non-responsive and appeared to misunderstand the Hatch Act.

“A recent letter from the FCC’s General Counsel demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of the application of the Act, which may help explain a recent increase in political activity among the Republican FCC Commissioners,” the Democratic legislators wrote. “We therefore additionally request that your office consider conducting training sessions at the FCC to help employees better understand how to comply with the Hatch Act.”

They said they had at least three bones to pick with the general counsel's response:

1. "It was legally misleading because the General Counsel selectively quoted sections of the Special Counsel’s Hatch Act guidance, leaving out sections directly relevant to the Commissioners’ actions.
2. It was factually misleading in its failure to mention that Commissioner O’Rielly made prohibited partisan political remarks.
3. The letter was incomplete because it failed to address a number of the questions from Pallone and Doyle, and provided no documentary evidence supporting its assertions."

“The FCC’s career ethics officials determined that it was permissible for the three Republican Commissioners to speak at CPAC," said an FCC spokesperson. "Indeed, Cabinet members also spoke at CPAC, and the Democrats’ letter contains no explanation for why the Commissioners’ participation should be treated any differently.  Sadly, we are left to conclude that the Democrats are simply trying to stop FCC Commissioners from speaking to right-of-center organizations while they have no problem with Commissioners speaking to left-of-center groups.”   

LAS VEGAS -- Five federal policymakers offered their familiar visions of core regulatory issues, including spectrum policy and net neutrality, during CES sessions.

Read More: MCN's Complete Coverage of CES 2018

With FCC chair Ajit Pai absent because of death threats he has recently received, and Democratic commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel opting to skip the program, the sessions were largely status reports on activities at the FCC, NTIA and FTC. The on-stage discussions did not address the commission’s split decision in November on ATSC 3.0 rules.

David Redl, who heads the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, opened the session by reading very quickly through prepared remarks touching on spectrum policy, cybersecurity, international governance and the development of telecom infrastructure, including sharing of bandwidth assigned to federal agencies.

He promised that spectrum policy will be a major focus of NTIA this year, and the agency will work with industry to develop procedures to make better use of the airwaves.

“We must do everything we can this year and beyond to accelerate America’s 5G leadership,” he said. “With 5G set to drive demand for more access to spectrum, we’ve been looking at bands across NTIA’s notorious spectrum chart.” Citing the 37-GHz band, he said NTIA is “optimistic” that “if we can get this right, it will serve as a model on how to handle sharing in other bands.”

Redl also emphasized NTIA’s prioritization of cybersecurity.

After Redl’s speech, Julie Kearney, CTA’s VP-regulatory affairs, sat down for a chat with FCC commissioners Mignon Clyburn, Brendan Carr and Michael O’Rielly.

O’Rielly said he expects a “busy and exciting year” in which the Commission will eliminate rules “that no longer make any sense,” citing Pai’s intent to delete aging regulations.

Carr predicted, “We’ll unleash more innovation and greater investment.” He also said he expects that the policies will lead to broadband expansion.

Clyburn called the Dec. 14 net-neutrality decision and its aftermath a “teachable moment.”

Kearney sought to extract opinion from the commissioners about the need for or likelihood of an update of the Communications Act that steers their decision-making. Analysts acknowledge that Congressional action on such legislation is not currently on the drawing board.

Related: Net-Neutrality Bill Is Longest of Long Shots

O’Rielly said that a new law would mean the FCC wouldn’t have to “parse out meaning” from the 1934 communications legislation and subsequent laws.

Clyburn said she is hopeful that Congress will move in a way to recognize what the FCC, although she added, “We’re not going to get a blueprint of everything that comes before us.”

At an earlier session, Federal Trade Commission chair Maureen Ohlhausen assured the audience that the FTC is ready to play a larger role in enforcing Open Internet regulations that are part of the FCC’s repeal of Title II classification.

“From the advent of the Internet until 2015, the FTC played an active role," she said. “Now that the Open Internet order was put out, eventually the authority is going to come back to the FTC.”

CTA president Gary Shapiro, who interviewed Ohlhausen on stage, said, “No other session in CES history has gotten as much pre-show attention” as the expected Pai participation.

Shapiro characterized CTA’s stance on net neutrality as "very complex in terms of nuance.” He said that he believes Republicans and Democrats agree on “the most fundamental basic principle” that consumers should be able to get whatever they want.

Nicholas Degani has been named acting FCC general counsel in an interim appointment following the departure of Jennifer Tatel, who was only named to the acting post last month.

FCC chair Ajit Pai signaled Degani's post was also temporary. The FCC general counsel serves as the agency's chief legal advisor.

Tatel had already been planning to exit the FCC to join a law firm when she took over as acting general counsel, according to sources, but postponed that move to fill in after the exit of general counsel Brendan Carr to become the third Republican FCC commissioner.

Related: Carr, Rosenworcel Sworn in as FCC Commissioners

“I’m pleased that Nick has agreed to take on this temporary role as acting general counsel," Pai said. "Nick is a tremendous asset to the agency and his knowledge and experience will be critical in this position. I would also like to thank Jennifer for her excellent work and for agreeing to delay her departure date from the FCC so that there could be a smooth transition following Brendan Carr’s confirmation as commissioner. I wish her all the best moving forward.”

Degani had been senior counsel to the chairman, and before that his wireline legal advisor. He is a graduate of Harvard Law and Yale undergraduate.