If cable and broadcast executives are right, absent some government action to level the playing field, their traditional video businesses are in danger of being steamrolled out of existence by the juggernaut of online streaming, news aggregation and virtual MVPDs.

Against the backdrop of dual writers and actors strikes and union attacks on big studios as unregulated distribution monopolists, the heads of the National Association of Broadcasters and ACA Connects, which represents smaller and midsized independent cable and broadband companies, testified before the House Energy & Commerce Committee on the state of the video marketplace on Thursday (September 14).

The hearing, dubbed "Lights, Camera, Subscriptions: State of the Video Marketplace,” tacked a range of issues from retrans blackouts to the artificial intelligence-driven costs of protecting the integrity of local news and information in a world of easily manipulated misinformation, to the threat to traditional business models by new ones.

In his testimony, NAB president and CEO Curtis LeGeyt said that Big Tech’s “market power and largely unregulated practices in both the marketplace for digital advertising and as gatekeepers to digital content” have diverted ad dollars away from free, ad-supported broadcast video, which is also devalued when it is appropriated online.

LeGeyt slammed streaming services as loss leaders propped up with Big Tech money.

With ad dollars being drained away, broadcasters must increasingly depend on retransmission consent revenues from traditional, facilities-based multichannel video programming distributors to support vital local news, but those MVPDs are a dwindling revenue base themselves, a point made by ACA Connects president and CEO Grant Spellmeyer.

Spellmeyer pointed out at the hearing that some of his members have exited the traditional regulated cable video business, while other smaller operators have closed up shop altogether after cable video became unprofitable, which he ascribed in part to pay video financing the broadcast video sector (via retransmission consent payments).

LeGeyt said that, given that defection due to unregulated online video, the FCC needs to at least look at whether virtual MVPDs should have to pay retrans fees, something Spellmeyer and ACA Connects definitely don’t support.

LeGeyt agreed that a level playing field with Big Tech was a must, but through antitrust oversight. Keeping Big Tech from getting too big is definitely on Congress’s agenda.

The Federal Communications Commission may have hit on the formula for an independent agency to work cooperatively for the public good and draw praise from both sides of the aisle — the lack of a political majority.

The FCC continues to be at a political tie, but the agency drew praise from both sides of the aisle — during a three-hour-plus House FCC oversight hearing Wednesday (June 21) — for its bipartisanship and for actually getting some important things done.

It was the first oversight hearing since March 2022 and, like the FCC, was notable for its collegiality and lack of drama or angst.

Also Read: Rosenworcel Signals FCC Won’t Apply Cable Act Rules to Streamers

The caveat in that collegial FCC approach is that the commission has not been able to reimpose network-neutrality rules or re-regulate broadcast ownership, things that a Democratic majority would almost certainly have already tried to tackle in the two-plus years since President Joe Biden, a Democrat, was elected.

So, the collegiality is definitely at least partially a byproduct of the limits on what the chair can bring up for a vote without facing a deadlock.

That reality notwithstanding, at Wednesday's hearing both Democrats and Republicans praised FCC chair Jessica Rosenworcel and her colleagues for how they had been working cooperatively.

“[T]he lack of a full Commission has not stopped the FCC from tackling important issues,” said ranking member Rep. Frank Pallone Jr. (D-N.J.). “The impressive bipartisan work reflects positively on chairwoman Rosenworcel’s leadership and on the ability of all four of you to work together, compromise and, largely, put the needs of people over partisan politics.’

Rep. Bob Latta (R-Miss.), chair of the Communications Subcommittee, pointed out during his questioning that most of the votes on FCC items had been unanimous and that it was refreshing to see the FCC acting in a bipartisan way “without straying too far outside of [its] authorizing statute or exercising regulatory overreach.” (A majority Democratic FCC reinstating network neutrality rules, for example, would almost certainly fall under that “overreach” category for Latta.)

Obviously, Republicans also like the fact that the chair can generally only bring up items for a vote that would not draw Republican opposition — like net neutrality rules or broadcast regulations — since “no” votes from the commission's two Republicans would prevent such items from being approved.

Also Read: Simington: FCC Commissioners Need Role in Reviewing Delegated Authority

Pointing out that the Senate would be holding a nomination hearing on Anna Gomez for that third Democratic FCC seat, Latta asked Rosenworcel to commit that if Gomez was confirmed she would continue to seek strong bipartisan agreement and “practice regulatory restraint.”

Rosenworcel did not directly address the restraint part of the question, but did say she was proud of what had gotten done with a 2-2 commission, saying that the FCC had “turned down the noise and ramped up the work.” But the also said that Congress intended the FCC to have five members, so she looked forward to Gomez’s confirmation “sooner rather than later,” adding, “But we will continue to operate in a collegial way with every one of my colleagues no matter who they are or how many we have.”

One definite sign of the collegial tenor at the current FCC was the written testimony of Republican commissioner Nathan Simington, which sounded like it could have come from the Democratic chairwoman. “The FCC has been immensely productive, laser focused on the public interest and on faithfully implementing Congressional mandates,” he told the committee, adding, “The FCC made significant progress on efforts to promote the efficient use of spectrum, to secure our nation’s networks against cyberattacks and on making sure that Earth orbit remains as valuable a resource for future generations as it is for ours.” 

House Energy & Commerce Committee Democrats are trying to revive the Community Broadband Act, long-pushed legislation that would preempt the state laws limiting municipal broadband that service providers have worked hard to put in place.

But given that the House is controlled by Republicans generally opposed to legislation they have suggested “usurps” state authority, the prospects are not great for passage this time around either.

The House bill is backed by Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.) and in the Senate by Cory Booker (D-N.J.).

For most of two decades, Democrats in both the House and Senate for most of two decades have tried to pass legislation that would ensure states and public-private partnerships cannot be prevented from offering advanced telecommunications services in competition with private industry, with the caveat that if that the state regulates those competitors, it cannot favor its own service.

“Currently, millions of Americans lack access to high-speed broadband, and this bill will enable local communities to build affordable, reliable broadband networks in areas that have been left without connectivity,” Consumer Reports, an advocate for the bill, said. “Additionally, it will remove barriers for local governments and communities to build and operate broadband networks, promoting healthy competition.”

The bill targets the 21 states that have passed laws restricting or preventing municipal broadband.

ISPs have long argued that municipal networks — which, they say, often wind up being government-subsidized overbuilds of existing private networks — can leave taxpayers holding the bag when initial investments don’t convert to ongoing sustainability. 

Democrats say municipal networks “improve broadband options or build-out to unserved areas that private providers refuse to connect,” as Eshoo put it in announcing the latest of multiple efforts to pass the bill since at least 2007.

Democrats on the House Energy & Commerce Committee have a lot of unanswered questions about embattled short-form video site TikTok that they want the company to clear up, but they have also given the social media outlet some input on how it might save itself amid calls for an outright ban.

TikTok has been promoting its pro-social uses — helping diverse small businesspeople and veterans — in high-profile ads in the Washington, D.C., market as it attempts to avoid such a ban.

While TikTok CEO Shou Chew was grilled by those Democrats at a hearing last month, ranking member Rep. Frank Pallone Jr. (D-N.J.) and his colleagues signaled in a letter to Chew that many of their questions remained unanswered.

The letter does not attempt to cull TikTok from the social-media herd, but instead makes it part of a larger problem and, at the same time,  provides some guidance on how TikTok might avoid the absolute ban some have called for.

Pallone said that the hearing had reinforced Americans’ fears about social media platforms in general, “including TikTok,” Rather than suggesting TikTok was an outlier, the letter says TikTok “embodies” their broader concerns about online privacy abuses.

“Across the industry, platforms have leveraged this highly unregulated market to

aggregate troves of data on hundreds of millions of citizens,” Pallone said,

Pallone used the letter to plug a bill, the American Data Privacy and Protection Act, that would apply to all those platforms.

The letter asks for a lot of data from TikTok, including revenue forecasts, targeted advertising projections, content moderation strategies and information about algorithms. It also givens Shou an opportunity to make commitments related to continued operation in the United States.

For example, there are quite a number of “will they” questions, including:

1. “Will TikTok commit to ending the collection of data related to its users’ health absent their affirmative consent?”
2. “Will TikTok commit to stop utilizing data related to its users’ health from third parties for targeting advertisements or for any other purpose?”
3. “Will TikTok commit to not selling American user data to third parties, including subsidiaries or parent companies, in the future?”
4. “Will TikTok commit to ending targeted marketing to users under the age of 18?”
5. “Will TikTok commit to fixing a loophole that allows underage users to delete their accounts and set up a new one with a false, older age with the same email address?”
6. “Will TikTok commit to developing methods for parents to monitor their child’s use of the app that does not require them to download the app?”
7. “Will TikTok commit to creating an option that would allow parents to set their own screen limits for their kids?”
8. “Will TikTok commit to extending the same protections given to children in the U.K., under its age-appropriate design code, to American children?”
9. “Will TikTok commit to expanding access to its Application Programming Interface so that researchers can investigate how your algorithm is pushing content to users on their For You pages, the hashtag page, or anywhere else on the platform?”

Those are obviously a lot of asks, but the more “yes” answers the company can supply, it would appear, the more likely it would be to get support from Democrats for continuing operations in the U.S.

There have been bills introduced to restrict or ban TikTok beyond the current ban on use of the app on government phones. Expanding that legislation to target the wider echosystem is one way TikTok supporters could table those efforts, since bans on Facebook and Twitter would be nonstarters.

There is hardly consensus on what to do about TikTok. Despite those government concerns, the Biden White House has reached out to influencers on TikTok and other social media to try to reach young people.

Shou Chew, CEO of embattled short-form video streaming site TikTok, took a rhetorical beating from both sides of the aisle as the CEO ran the D.C. gauntlet of House Energy & Commerce Committee critics of the China-based company’s social media site.

But TikTok also got some credit from both sides for doing something difficult —uniting the parties on an issue, in this case the dangers of TikTok, as it is currently constituted, to U.S. citizens.  

In her opening statement for a marathon (over five and a half hours) hearing Thursday (March 23) featuring the top TikTok exec, House Energy & Commerce Committee chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.) commenced the beating by saying she did not believe the company could ever be trusted given its ties to the Chinese Communist government and should be banned.

And while Chew provided extensive testimony on why that was not the case, Rodgers had alread cut the legs out from under that testimony by saying she exepcted the company would say anything to avoid that outcome.

She pointed out that the Justice Department is currently investigating TikTok parent ByteDance for spying on American journalists' data and movements using TikTok. Shou said he disagreed with the characterization of that as “spying.

Ranking member Frank Pallone Jr. (D-N.J.) widened his criticism to Big Tech in general.

In his opening statement, Pallone said that Big Tech had tranformed the information superhighway into a “superspreader of harmful content, invasive surveillance practices, and addictive and damaging design features.”

He said his goal was to bring greater transparency to TikTok. Pallone said he recognized the site provided “a new, fun way for people to express their creativity and enjoy the videos of others,” so while he did not call for a ban, he did say he was not sure that upside “outweigh[s] the risks that it poses to Americans in its present form.”

“The combination of TikTok’s Beijing Communist-based ownership and its popularity exacerbates its dangers to our country and to our privacy,” Pallone said.

Among the legislators’ concerns are the sale of illegal drugs via the platform, its hosting of political disinformation, inappropriate sexual content, and more. But the big issue is collection of user information that could be, and many argue is being, shared with the Chinese government.

Shou said bad actors are an industrywide problem, that the company does protect user privacy via a "firewall" it is creating between U.S. data and China — TikTok has pledged to allow third-party monitors of its data “firewall,” a point Chew made at the hearing — and that drug-related information, political misinformation and inappropriate sexual content violates TikTok’s terms of service and is taken off when found.

The response from legislators was that they aren't doing a sufficient job of finding and eliminating it if that is the case.

Both Rodgers and Pallone said TikTok’s firewall project is insufficient protection and that, more broadly, privacy protection legislation is generally needed for Big Tech players.

As if to put an exclamation point on the bipartisan pushback on TikTok, Sens. Mark Warner (D-Va.) and John Thune (R-S.D.), issued a joint statement following the marathon hearing.

“Under [People’s Republic of China] law, all Chinese companies, including TikTok, whose parent company is based in Beijing, are ultimately required to do the bidding of Chinese intelligence services, should they be called upon to do so,“ the senators said. “Nothing we heard from Mr. Chew today assuaged those concerns.” ■

With House Republicans preparing to take over committee gavels as soon as Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) — or someone else — is voted in as speaker, the House Energy & Commerce Committee is signaling that holding the “destructive” force of big tech to account will be a priority.

That’s no big surprise, since reining in edge providers was a bipartisan focus in the last Congress, though how to do it and why it was necessarily divided along party lines.

The House Energy & Commerce Committee website Tuesday (January 3) featured prominently a section on the committee leadership’s “Big Tech Accountability Platform,” and it did not bury the lead. “Big Tech Is Harming Our Children” it read, followed by a quote from new committee chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers:

“You’ve broken my trust. Yes, because you’ve failed to promote the battle of ideas and free speech. Yes, because you censor political viewpoints you disagree with. Those polarizing actions matter for democracy. But do you know what has convinced me Big Tech is a destructive force? It’s how you’ve abused your power to manipulate and harm our children.”

McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.) unveiled that Big Tech Accountability Platform a year ago, but she was in the minority. Now she has the gavel, or will as soon as a speaker is chosen, and has made that platform front and center on the committee website. ■

The House Energy & Commerce Committee voted 28-23 along party lines not to recommend a Republican-backed resolution of inquiry to the full House. The resolution called out the Biden administration for alleged coordination with social media companies to censor speech and sought documents related to that alleged effort.

But while the resolution failed, it signaled what Republicans could be focusing on when they take over House chairmanships next month.

In what was likely the last committee gathering and action in this Congress, and before Republicans take over with pledges of vigorous oversight and investigation of the administration and Big Tech, committee chairman Rep. Frank Pallone Jr. (D-N.J.) called it an out-of-touch, frivolous and partisan inquiry that was in contrast to the committee’s productive work that preceded it.

The resolution was driven in part by new Twitter owner Elon Musk’s release of internal documents he claims support allegations of shadow-banning conservatives.

Committee ranking member Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.) countered that the inquiry was necessary and about “putting people before politics.” She said for years Big Tech had been flagging, suppressing and “outright banning conservatives on their platforms.”

She said Big Tech had denied accusations of such conduct, including before the committee. “Now, thanks to the recent Twitter files, we know that they were not being honest.” She said the documents showed that Twitter executives were shadow-banning conservatives despite then-Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey’s claims to the contrary.

Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.) called the effort misguided and a poor use of the committee's time. ▪️

Perhaps anticipating a potential change in House leadership next year after midterm elections, the possible incumbent future chair of the powerful House Energy & Commerce Committee signaled the FCC that it should stay within its regulatory lane, likely including any attempt to impose new net neutrality regulations, if the agency gets a third Democrat seated during the lame-duck session.

In a letter to Federal Communications Commission chair Jessica Rosenworcel, Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.), ranking member of the committee, sent this warning: “As the committee of jurisdiction overseeing the FCC, I assure you the committee and its members will exercise our robust investigative and legislative powers to not only forcefully reassert our Article I responsibilities, but to ensure the FCC under Democrat leadership does not continue to exceed Congressional authorizations.”

The Energy & Commerce Committee has primary jurisdiction over communications issues.

Rodgers did not specify which congressional authorizations she felt the FCC had exceeded, though an appeals court did recently vacate an FCC decision to toughen broadcast foreign programming identification requirements, saying the FCC had exceeded its authority.

But Rodgers made it clear she saw it as a pattern of bad regulatory behavior. The FCC's authority to regulate net neutrality has been one of the things Republicans, including Rodgers, have said the FCC under Democratic leadership has gotten wrong.

“[I]n recent years the FCC has taken it upon itself to misinterpret its authority to initiate rulemakings with ‘economic and political significance’ that fit the chair’s political leanings," she said.

Also: Supreme Court Deals Blow to Net Neutrality Rule Fans

Rodgers pointed to a recent Supreme Court decision, West Virginia vs. EPA, that she suggested the FCC should follow. In that decision, the court rejected an EPA interpretation of the agency's congressional authority.

Traditionally, applying the so-called Chevron doctrine, the courts have given much deference to agency expertise on how they interpret congressional direction and intent.

But the Biden administration’s loss in the Supreme Court ruling involving the Environmental Protection Agency’s ability to regulate power plants undercut the doctrine and was seen as a potential victory for ISP arguments that the FCC was outside its regulatory lane when it reclassified internet access as a Title II common-carrier service subject to open access and other requirements and imposed net neutrality rules.

Rodgers is clearly in that camp saying the court decision made clear that "such reliance on the administrative state undermines our system of government. Our founders provided Congress with legislative authority to ensure lawmaking is done by elected officials, not unaccountable bureaucrats," the latter which, she said, will no longer be tolerated.

Also: More Net Neutrality Billboards Go Up

“As the court explained, ‘[p]recedent teaches that there are ‘extraordinary cases’ in which the ‘history and breadth of the authority that [the agency] has asserted,’ and the ‘economic and political significance’ of that assertion, provide a ‘reason to hesitate before concluding that Congress’ meant to confer such authority,” she told Rosenworcel.

Ironically, Chevron was central to the Supreme Court’s 2005 decision in NCTA v. Brand X Internet Services, which upheld the FCC’s authority to classify broadband as an information service not subject to mandatory access common-carrier regulations. That finding has left different FCCs to define and redefine internet access and has prompted calls for Congress to step in and do its duty to clarify the statute.

Congress has yet to do so. Both sides of the aisle have said they want such clarity, but can't agree on what they would be clarifying given that Democrats generally want the authority to rest under the Title II telecommunications service common-carrier regime and Republicans under the Title I information-services regime.

Rodgers had some homework for Rosenworcel on the issue. She asked her for a list of all pending and anticipated rulemakings and what congressional authority the FCC would be asserting for each, as well as any declaratory rulings that would be issued by an FCC office or bureau on delegated authority — which, unlike rulemakings, don't require a vote by the commissioners.

Rosenworcel was quick to respond and provide the requested lists, which did not include any upcoming vote on network neutrality rules.

"I welcome the opportunity to respond and can assure you that the Federal Communications Commission takes seriously the responsibilities entrusted to it by Congress under the law," she said in a letter to Rodgers released Oct. 18, "including the efforts identified in your letter 'to expand connectivity to all Americans, regulate broadcast stations and multichannel video programming distributors (MVPDs) in the media marketplace, limit the transmission of illegal robocalls, preserve the capability for reliable 911 and emergency alerting services, and remove untrusted communications equipment and services from U.S. communications networks.'" ▪️

LAKE BUENA VISTA, Florida — With more than $40 billion in federal funding available through state agencies for rural broadband expansion, most small cable operators are hard pressed to know how to navigate the bureaucratic quagmire. But one former Congressman has a simple answer — get to know the decision-makers.

The federal government is making about $42.5 billion in rural broadband grants available to companies through the Broadband Equity, Access and Deployment (BEAD) program, which will be administered through several states. At the Independent Show Tuesday session “Uncle Sam’s Broadband Bucks, Who’s Holding the Purse Strings,” and moderated by outgoing ACA Connects CEO Matt Polka, former Rep. Greg Walden (R-Ore.) suggested that to win those funds, small operators are going to have to learn how their state government machinery works.

“[E]ach state is going to be a little different, some will be better staffed and ready for this money,” Walden said. “You’re going to have to work and get to know who makes those decisions in your state and how do you take advantage of it.”

That means not just getting to know the heads of the state agencies that distribute funding, Walden added, but local and state legislators as well, who can be supportive in dealing with the various bureaucracies involved with each application.

“The extent to which you can build partnerships when you go in, [is] probably the better,” Walden said. “Most elected officials don’t like to choose among their children, so if you can move up, you’ll have a stronger case to make and they will too to whoever is going to make the decision in the state.”

Legislators on both the federal and state side also will have to work hard to ensure that funds go to the right companies, adding that stringent oversight was not a hallmark of past federal programs. But he was encouraged by the current BEAD structure.

“This is a much better statute,” he said.

Stricter oversight could be in store for the House Energy & Commerce Committee, which Walden chaired for six years before retiring on January 3, 2021. With expectations that there will be big turnover in Congress after the 2023 midterm elections, Walden was confident that friendly ears will abound in the House.

“Watch for Congress,” Walden advised, adding that typically the party in power loses 26 seats in Congress after its first midterm election.

“If your president has more than a 50% approval rating that number changes to 14 seats, if it’s less than a 50% approval rating that’s 36 seats,” he continued. President Biden’s current approval rating is about 38%.

“So I would look for a change of control, which means Republicans will take over,” Walden said.

Walden also had some advice for operators who are considering applying for grants to build out broadband services.  

“I would find out what your state has, if they have any kind of broadband buildout plan already, so they already have an idea about what they want to do,” Walden said. “I would also watch for other unmet needs.”

Walden added that in some large rural states, governors are worried about the overall lack of communications infrastructure in their states and could use the lure of broadband money to improve that. 

“They are going to try to leverage this to improve communications overall,” Walden said. “I think, especially in the big rural states, the Montanas, the Wyomings, they are really struggling to get adequate communications one way or another.” ■ 

The House Energy & Commerce Committee is looking to advance more than half a dozen communications/tech-related bills.

Importantly, that includes the Extending America’s Spectrum Auction Leadership Act of 2022, which extends the FCC's authority to auction spectrum to March 21, 2024. That authority expires September 30 of this year unless it is reauthorized.

Also on the docket for a June 15 markup in the committee's Communications Subcommittee are 1) the Ensuring Phone and Internet Access for SNAP Recipients Act of 2021; 2) the ITS Codification Act; 3) Preventing Disruptions to Universal Service Funds Act; 4) the SMART Act; 5) the Safe Connections Act of 2022; and 6) the Spectrum Innovation Act of 2022.

A markup is an executive session in which bills are amended, if necessary, then referred to the full committee for a vote if a majority votes to do so.

The bills together will "strengthen our communications networks, help keep people safe in times of emergency and distress, and promote innovation,” said House Energy & Commerce chairman Frank Pallone (D-N.J.)and Communications Subcommittee chairman Mike Doyle (D-Pa.). ■

The House Energy & Commerce Committee has lined up Facebook whistleblower Frances Haugen as its lead-off witness for a Dec. 1 hearing--"Holding Big Tech Accountable: Targeted Reforms to Tech's Legal Immunity."--on legislation to curb social media sites' immunity from civil liability over third-party content. That's according to a just-released list of the Democratic witnesses. No Republican witnesses were listed.

Haugen created quite a stir on Capitol Hill in a testimony in which she revealed internal Facebook research showing the company knew its Instagram platform could be harmful to some teens. Facebook countered that the research also showed that most teens said it was helpful and that the information on those who said otherwise was useful feedback for potential changes to the platform to address that concern.

But legislators on both sides of the aisle were unconcerned and more hearings, like Wednesday's were lined up as they decided how to respond.

Also: Gizmodo to Publish Leaked Facebook Internal Research

Wednesday's hearing will feature two panels. Panel one leads off with Haugen, former Facebook product manager, followed by Rashad Robinson, president, Color of Change, and James Steyer, founder and CEO, Common Sense Media.

Panel two will include from the Democratic side: Karen Kornbluh, director, Digital Innovation and Democracy Initiative and senior fellow, The German Marshall Fund of the United States; attorney Carrie Goldberg; Matt Wood, VP of policy and general counsel, Free Press Action; and Dr. Mary Anne Franks, law professor at the University of Miami School of Law and president and legislative & tech policy director at the Cyber Civil Rights Initiative. 

Republican leaders did not offer up any witnesses Monday (Nov. 29), but did weigh in on the importance of the hearing

House Energy and Commerce Committee Republican Leader Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) and Communications and Technology Republican Leader Bob Latta (R-OH) released the following statement regarding the upcoming committee hearing on Big Tech accountability.  

“A conversation about reforming Section 230 is long overdue, and we look forward to having that discussion this week," said House E&C Republican Leader Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.) and Communications Subcommittee Leader Bob Latta (R-Ohio). "Big Tech continues to prioritize the censorship of speech that does not fit the liberal orthodoxy when they should be focused on encouraging robust discussion and removing illegal content. Energy and Commerce Republicans have been running a process since day one of this Congress to hold Big Tech accountable, which has been guided by our Big Tech Accountability Platform. We look forward to discussing our legislative proposals which will help ensure that free speech is preserved on these platforms.” ■

Arguing that the "infection" of Big Tech algorithms threatens Democracy, a threat from companies putting profits before people, the House Energy & Commerce Committee has scheduled two Big Tech-related legislative hearings for December, meaning Democrats are serious about passing bills to reign in social media platforms, including by tightening the Sec. 230 immunity they now have from civil liability over most of the third-party content on their platforms.

The hearings are scheduled for Dec. 1 and Dec. 8 and were announced by Energy and Commerce Committee chairman Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-N.J.), Communications Subcommittee chairman Mike Doyle (D-Pa.), and Consumer Protection Subcommittee chair Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.)

The Dec. 1 hearing--in the Communications Subcommittee--is focused on reforming Sec. 230, or what they call "recalibrating" it "in a way that better incentivizes responsible actions by tech companies." The way many in Congress are looking at is removing the liability shield entirely for certain content, COVID-19 misinformation for example.

Also: Big Tech-Targeted Senate Bill Introduced

“Social media companies continue to put profits before people by doubling down on a business model that deliberately inundates users with harmful content for the sake of ad dollars,” said Doyle of the hearings. “We can no longer allow these platforms to shirk responsibility for the real-life consequences of their actions, and I look forward to talking with experts on how to forge a path forward where platforms can be held accountable.”

The Dec. 9 hearing, in the Consumer Protection Subcommittee, will look at a number of issues including enhanced transparency, online safety and accountability in general.

"The algorithms used by Big Tech on their platforms all too often promote dangerous, divisive, and extremist content to maximize engagement and profits," said Schakowsky, adding: "These businesses are infecting our public discourse and threatening our democracy, and Congress must take up legislation that puts consumers first." ■ 

The House Energy & Commerce Committee plans to mark up two communications and technology bills this week.

Those would be H.R. 1281, the Data Mapping to Save Moms Act, and H.R. 2501, the Spectrum Coordination Act.

House E&C chairman Frank Pallone Jr. (D-N.J.) and Communications Subcommittee chairman Mike Doyle (D-Pa.) said Monday (Nov. 1) that the committee will mark up the bills — that is, consider amendments and potentially vote them out of committee — on Nov. 3.

The bipartisan Data Mapping Act “will use data mapping to identify areas of the country where poor maternal health rates overlap with a lack of broadband access in order to deploy telehealth services most effectively,” according to co-sponsor Gus Bilirakis (R-Fla.). Other co-sponsors are Reps. G. K. Butterfield (D-N.C.) and Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.).

The Spectrum Coordination Act, also from Bilirakis, “requires the National Telecommunications and Information Administration and the Federal Communications Commission to update the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) on Spectrum Coordination to (1) improve the process for resolving frequency allocation disputes in shared or adjacent spectrum bands, and (2) ensure the efficient use or sharing of spectrum.”

In the wake of the revelations by a Facebook whistleblower and allegations about the company’s internal research about the impact of its platforms on young people, House Energy & Commerce Committee leaders have proposed a bill that targets “reckless” use of algorithms by limiting Section 230.

Former Facebook staffer Frances Haugen testified about the documents before the committee at a heated hearing that prompted legislators to suggest it was Big Tech‘s Big Tobacco moment.

Section 230 is the add-on to the 1996 Communications Decency Act that provides web platforms immunity from civil liability for what appears on their platforms.

Also Read: Rep. Eshoo Pushes for Subpoena of Facebook Documents

While there has been bipartisan criticism of Facebook, the legislators unveiling the bill are all Democrats: Energy and Commerce Committee chairman Frank Pallone Jr. (D-N.J.), Communications Subcommittee chairman Mike Doyle (D-Pa.) and Consumer Protection Subcommittee chair Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.).

The bill, the Justice Against Malicious Algorithms Act, would remove absolute immunity for an edge provider that “knowingly or recklessly uses an algorithm or other technology to recommend content that materially contributes to physical or severe emotional injury.”

The bill does not apply to “small” online platforms, which are defined as fewer than five million unique monthly visitors, or to algorithms or search features that aren't based on personalization, or to infrastructure like Web hosting or data transfer or storage.

The big issue with Facebook‘s internal research was that it showed that some teens said Instagram made them feel worse about themselves and even contributed to thoughts of suicide. Facebook countered that the research found that a majority of kids did not feel that way, and that the info helped them take actions to help those who did.

But Congress has not been assuaged, arguing that Facebook has not done nearly enough, while keeping that research under wraps and downplaying the negative results.

“Social media platforms like Facebook continue to actively amplify content that endangers our families, promotes conspiracy theories, and incites extremism to generate more clicks and ad dollars,” Pallone said. “These platforms are not passive bystanders — they are knowingly choosing profits over people, and our country is paying the price. The time for self-regulation is over, and this bill holds them accountable. Designing personalized algorithms that promote extremism, disinformation, and harmful content is a conscious choice, and platforms should have to answer for it.”

Added Doyle: “We finally have proof that some social media platforms pursue profit at the expense of the public good, so it’s time to change their incentives, and that’s exactly what the Justice Against Malicious Algorithms Act would do. Under this bill, Section 230 would no longer fully protect social media platforms from all responsibility for the harm they do to our society. It’s my hope that by making it possible to hold social media platforms accountable for the harm they cause, we can help optimize the internet’s impact on our society.”

A bipartisan group of House members wants the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to review how interagency cooperation can speed broadband infrastructure buildouts and what progress agencies have made toward such productive cooperation.

The National Telecommunications & Information Administration (NTIA), the White House’s chief telecom advisory arm, has been given a prominent role in the Biden Administration's multi-billion dollar effort to subsidize universal broadband access.

Also Read: RAY BAUM‘s Act Passes House

Writing the GAO were House Energy and Commerce Committee chairman Frank Pallone Jr. (D-N.J.) and ranking member Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.); and Communications Subcommittee chairman Mike Doyle (D-Pa.) and ranking member Bob Latta (R-Ohio).

They pointed out that RAY BAUM‘s Act directed the NTIA to facilitate broadband buildouts on federal property — the NTIA issued a report in October 2020 — as well as to work with the Departments of Interior, Agriculture, Defense, and Transportation, the Office of Management and Budget, and the General Services Administration on ways to streamline siting permits.

They want the GAO to find out how those agencies plan to implement the recommendations in the 2020 report, how NTIA is overseeing federal agency coordination, what challenges they face in implementing the recommendations, and to what extent providers have been affected in areas where there has not been streamlining.

The House Energy & Commerce Committee waded into broadband as an equity issue Thursday (May 6) in a hearing "addressing disparities in access and affordability."

Committee Chairman Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) said one problem creating digital disparities has been too narrow a definition of the digital divide. 

"For too long, the term digital divide has been used to characterize the differences in quality and speed of internet networks in rural areas, compared to those in urban areas," he said in his opening statement. "There is no doubt that government must step in and invest where the marketplace doesn’t support the business case for private broadband investment in any community in our nation. But that's just the start," he said. "Studies have shown that within all sorts of different communities broadband service isn’t always available or of equal quality. Certain communities somehow always find themselves at the back of the line when it comes to upgrades to the network."

Pallone said the digital divide between races and ethnicities when it comes to access hurts students and their ability to get jobs.

Rep. Anna Eshoo, who has introduced legislation to preempt laws — backed by cable broadband operators — that limit municipal broadband buildouts said the digital divide — however it is defined — is a national embarrassment and that community broadband networks are part of the solution.

But while the hearing was premised on the assertions that lack of competition and high prices were among the impediments to broadband that exacerbated a racial digital divide, Communications Subcommittee ranking member Rep. Bob Latta (R-Ohio) suggested both were off base.

“According to the most recent Communications Marketplace Report published by the FCC, the cost of the most popular plans has decreased by 20 percent, while speeds increased by 16 percent since 2015," he said. "And, as a result of more Americans upgrading their services, the average cost of the highest speed offerings have dropped by 37 percent, while simultaneously increasing speeds by 27 percent."

As to an urban as well as a rural divide, he said that broadband subscriptions in urban areas are up 21.8% over the past five years. "And despite the claims of consolidation, the number of broadband providers has increased over 25 percent from 2014 to 2019, with urban core areas seeing an increase of 30 percent."

And while Democrats are pushing for more money for broadband — including another $6 billion to make the current Emergency Broadband Benefit permanent — in addition to the billions of dollars already allocated in COVID-19 relief packages, Republicans are billing that as more radical Big Government programs from the new Biden Administration that would "reshape" entire industries.

The infrastructure package President Biden is currently promoting would inject another $100 billion into broadband subsidies, adding to Republicans' angst about the vast sums involved.

Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.), ranking member of the full committee, also cited price decreases despite the decision by then FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler to exclude rate regulation from the Title II (common carrier reg) regime the FCC was imposing on ISPs.

But rate regulation clearly appears to be on the table for Democrats emphasizing that cost is a barrier to adoption that the government needs to address.

The majority of the witnesses agreed that cost was a big barrier.

Chris Lewis, president of Public Knowledge, said that the high cost of broadband is one of the primary reasons for the "staggering" digital divide, and said that Congress should take steps to increase competition and provide a long-term benefit.

Citing Pew Research Center data, Joi Chaney of the National Urban League said that unaffordability is the single biggest reason that Americans cite for not subscribing to broadband. "It does not help much to have lightning-fast broadband at your door if you cannot afford to subscribe to it," she said.

In a follow-up to last week's hearing with Big Tech CEOs, top Republicans on the House Energy & Commerce Committee have called on those execs to provide them with information on internal or external research on their site's effect on children's health.

Also Read: Hill Continues Big Tech Punishment

They also want any internal communications--e-mails, memoranda--related to the effect of their product on the mental health of both children and adults.

The letters went to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, Google CEO Sundar Pichai and Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey, all of whom testified at the marathon hearing and were asked about the issue.

Also Read: Mark Zuckerberg: Sec. 230 Shield Should Be Tied to Misinformation Mitigation Regime

Sending the letters were Committee Republican leader Cathy McMorris Rodgers (Wash.), Republican Communications Subcommittee leader for Communications and Technology Bob Latta (Ohio), Republican Consumer Protection Subcommittee leader Gus Bilirakis (Fla.), and Republican Oversight and Investigations leader Morgan Griffith (Va.).

The House Energy & Commerce Committee has lined up at least three witnesses for its hearing next week titled "Traditional Media’s Role in Promoting Disinformation and Extremism."

Also Read: Hearst Hosts TV Debut of Hard Truth

Confirmed to testify are Soledad O'Brien, anchor of Matter of Fact and CEO, Soledad O'Brien Productions; Emily Bell, director, Tow Center for Digital Media, Columbia University; and Kristin Urquiza, co-founder, Marked by COVID.

“The prolonged severity of the COVID-19 pandemic and the attack on our Capitol on January 6 have driven home a frightening reality: the spread of disinformation and extremism by traditional news media presents a tangible and destabilizing threat,” said House E&C Chairman Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) and Communications Subcommittee Chairman Mike Doyle 9D-PA.) in announcing the Feb. 24 hearing.

The hearing will be remote via Cisco Webex.

The House Republican Steering Committee has picked eight new Republicans to joint the House Energy & Commerce Committee, which has principal jurisdiction over communications issues and the FCC.

Also Read: McMorris Rodgers Tapped as E&C Ranking Member

One of those will fill the slot of retiring former Republican ranking member Greg Walden (R-Ore.). 

New ranking member Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.) announced the new Republican members, which are: Reps. Kelly Armstrong (R-N.D.); Dan Crenshaw (R-Texas), John Curtis (R-Utah), Neal Dunn (R-Fla.), John Joyce (R-Pa.), Debbie Lesko (R-Ariz.), Representative Gary Palmer (R-Ala.) and Greg Pence (R-Ind.), older brother of Vice President Mike Pence.

"From healthcare, to technology, to energy, they bring invaluable expertise and knowledge to lead on policies that will improve people’s lives in every region of the country,” said Rodgers in a statement. “Our Committee is at the very center of the battles for freedom to stop socialism and for hope to beat fear. People expect results, and they made that clear when they sent a significant number of Republicans this cycle to the People’s House."

Also Read: Pallone Returns as House E&C Chair

Significant, but the House remains in Democratic hands. 

House Energy & Commerce Democrats are slamming ISPs over what raising prices and imposing data caps during a pandemic, questioning their "commitment to consumers" during the pandemic.

“Over the last ten months, internet service became even more essential as many Americans were forced to transition to remote work and online school," they wrote. "Broadband networks seem to have largely withstood these massive shifts in usage. Unfortunately, what cannot be overlooked or underestimated is the extent to which families without home internet service — particularly those with school-aged children at home — have been left out and left behind.”

Also Read: Cox, Altice Extend FCC's Keep Americans Connected Pledge

Those that were doing the writing were E&C chairman Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-N.J.), Communications Subcommittee chairman Mike Doyle (D-Pa.), joined by Rep. Jerry McNerney (D-Calif.).

Getting the letters were Altice, AT&T, CenturyLink (Lumen), Charter, Comcast, Cox, Frontier, T-Mobile and Verizon.

The legislators cited the fact that the companies back in March had expanded their affordable broadband offerings, opened up wi-Fi hotspots, waived data caps and took the FCC pledge to keep customers connected during the pandemic, but that since then, and following the expiration of the FCC's voluntary pledge, some of the same companies had raised prices and expanded data caps, calling that "an egregious action at a time when households and small businesses across the country need high-speed, reliable broadband more than ever but are struggling to make ends meet."

Also Read: Comcast Expands Data Cap to Full Footprint

Saying it was part of an ongoing oversight effort, the legislators want answers to the following questions:

1. "Did the company participate in the FCC’s “Keep Americans Connected” pledge?

2. "Has the company increased prices for fixed or mobile consumer internet and fixed or phone service since the start of the pandemic, or do they plan to raise prices on such plans within the next six months? 

3. "Prior to March 2020, did any of the company’s service plans impose a maximum data consumption threshold on its subscribers?

4. "Since March 2020, has the company modified or imposed any new maximum data consumption thresholds on service plans, or do they plan to do so within the next six months? 

5. "Did the company stop disconnecting customers’ internet or telephone service due to their inability to pay during the pandemic? 

6. "Does the company offer a plan designed for low-income households, or a plan established in March or later to help students and families with connectivity during the pandemic?

7. "Beyond service offerings for low-income customers, what steps is the company currently taking to assist individuals and families facing financial hardship due to circumstances related to COVID-19?"

NCTA-The Internet & Television Association Wednesday hailed the election of Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.) to ranking member of the House Energy & Commerce Committee.

"[T]he first woman to be elected as Chair or Ranking Member in the committee’s history, Rep. McMorris Rodgers has long been a leader who recognizes the significant benefits of today’s vibrant and competitive media and communications marketplace that facilitates ongoing investment and innovation in new consumer products and services," said NCTA President Michael Powell of the election.

Current ranking member Greg Walden (R-Ore.) is retiring at the end of the current session.

"We look forward to working with her and the entire committee on America’s recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic and to ensuring that every American can benefit from our world class digital infrastructure," said Powell.

McMorris Rodgers was first elected to the House in 2004. She was chair of the House Republican Conference from 2012 to 2018.

She pulled no punches in what was effectively a partisan battle cry as she prepared to assume the loyal opposition post to the Democratic committee leadership.

"We are in a battle for the heart and soul of America," she said. "From blatant assaults on free speech, to Medicare-for-All, to the Green New Deal, Energy and Commerce is at the very center of the battles for freedom to beat socialism and hope to beat fear. My goal is to maximize Energy and Commerce so House Republicans win the majority and secure America’s future global leadership as the best place in the world to usher in a new era of innovation, cure diseases, and raise people’s standard of living. 

“Over the next two years, we will do the hard work of countering the Left’s lurch toward socialism and we’ll set our whole conference up for success to lead on healthcare, technology, closing the digital divide, and all-the-above energy solutions. At the top of the list is building on the Trump Administration’s work on Operation Warp Speed for the coronavirus vaccine so we end this pandemic and reopen our economy. On all fronts, our mission will be to rebuild, restore, and renew hope in the American Dream.

“I want to recognize former Chairmen Greg Walden and Fred Upton for their leadership on the Energy and Commerce Committee. They laid a strong foundation, and it’s my goal to build on that.

“I am thrilled Cathy will become Republican Leader of the Energy and Commerce Committee in the 117th Congress," said Walden. "This is a historic moment for the Energy and Commerce Committee, but most importantly, Cathy is a battle-tested leader who has proven her ability to message some of the most challenging issues of our time in a way that resonates with Americans all across the country. As Republicans fight to take back the Majority in the House of Representatives next Congress, I believe Cathy is uniquely qualified to take on this leadership role. I congratulate Cathy and her team, and I know this will be a seamless transition,” said Walden.

 “NAB congratulates Cathy McMorris Rodgers on her selection to be the Ranking Member of the House Energy & Commerce Committee in the 117th Congress," said National Association of Broadcasters President Gordon Smith. "Rep. Rodgers brings a wealth of leadership and policymaking experience to this position, and we look forward to continuing to work with her on important issues affecting the future of free and local broadcasting.”

“ACA Connects congratulates Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers on her historic election as the first woman to become the Republican Leader of the House Energy and Commerce Committee," said ACAC Chairman Patricia Jo Boyers. "This committee oversees a vast array of sectors of vital importance to our nation. We appreciate all her time and effort on many topics of impact and importance to our ACA Connects membership and look forward to further work on the issues of importance to the video and broadband industry.

“We have always respected her ability to work with everyone on the tough issues the committee must face. We have also appreciated her willingness to look out for small businesses and the rural communities that so many of our members serve," said Boyers. “Importantly, we are grateful that Rep. McMorris Rodgers – coming from a congressional district in eastern Washington state noted for its rural profile – will ensure that the rural voice of America remains front and center on so many policy decisions. "

Top House Energy & Commerce Committee Democrats are calling on Facebook to work with, not against, an effort to improve the accountability and transparency in political ads.

Related: Social Net CEOs Get Senate Grilling

E&C Chairman Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-N.J.), joined by Communications Subcommittee Chairman Mike Doyle (D-Pa.) and Consumer Protection Subcommittee Chair Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.), wrote Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg to make that plea.

Related: Facebook Targeted with Six-Figure Campaign

They were referring to a New York University research effort in which volunteers provide those researchers and journalists access to the political ads they are served on Facebook so they can investigate who is targeted by the ads and why. According to the legislators, Facebook contacted NYU demanding it stop the research by the end of next month, citing consumer privacy.

“The unfortunate timing of a letter from Facebook to the NYU Ad Observatory, which runs the Ad Observer tool, just weeks before the 2020 presidential election, raises concerns about Facebook’s commitment to election integrity,” they wrote.

The legislators say the NYU program has taken "concrete steps" to protect privacy and asked Facebook to work with them on any concerns, and suggested Facebook has a history of not wanting to work with researchers. Besides, they cited reports that the NYU ad project only uses data with the explicit permission of the volunteers.

Suggesting Facebook had lost the trust of the American people, they said that greater transparency about targeted political ads was the only way to get it back.

Facilitating election meddling is arguably Democrats' primary issue with Facebook, and one of the driving forces behind their support of revising social media's Section 230 immunity from civil liability for third-party content.

The House Energy & Commerce Committee has approved a number of bipartisan communication-related bills by voice vote, including a stand-alone bill to cancel the T-band auction, which almost nobody wants the FCC to have to go through with, and a bill that would require the FCC to consider "market entry barriers for socially disadvantaged individuals" in its reports to Congress on competition in the media marketplace.  

That came at a marathon (four hours) July 15 markup, where a total of 30 bipartisan bills were approved with a dearth of no votes and a wealth of agreement. It was the first fully virtual markup in the committee, and one of the most collegial such sessions in recent memory. Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.) said all the bills were "bursting with common sense." 

The virtual hearing featured the now common glitches of muted talkers, cross-talk, and some lower resolution video, but there were no major issues. 

Related: FCC's Pai Joins Call for Congress to Ax T-Band Auction 

H.R. 451, the Don’t Break Up the T-Band Act of 2019, was introduced by Reps. Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.), Lee Zeldin (R-N.Y.), Al Green (D-Tex.) and Peter King (R-N.Y.).  

The FCC is currently slated to reclaim spectrum from first responders for auction, but FCC Chairman Ajit Pai has asked Congress to reverse that decision. In the 2012 Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act, Congress required the FCC to reallocate and auction the spectrum, which has been used for decades by public safety licensees, and to fund the relocation of those users elsewhere.   

Rep. Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.) said Congress can't let the T-band auction go forward in 2021 because the move would cost more than the spectrum would bring at auction and could put emergency communications at risk in the interim. He said he did not usually agree with Pai but did when it came to the T-band. 

H.R. 5567, the Measuring the Economics Driving Investments and Access for Diversity Act of 2020 (or “MEDIA Diversity Act for short) was introduced by Reps. Billy Long (R-Mo.) and Rep. Marc Veasey (D-Tex.). It would make sure the FCC looked at what opportunities socially disadvantaged individuals have, or don't have, to be players in the communications space when it conducts its annual review of the communications marketplace. The FCC is also currently under a court order to better explain the impact of its deregulatory policies on minority and women ownership of media properties.

Rep. Veasey urged swift passage of the bill, which he said could help solve the problem of diversity and inclusion in media ownership, diversity he said was imperative." 

Rep. Greg Walden (R-Ore.), ranking member of the committee, said that as a former broadcast licensee he could not agree more that getting more diverse voices in front of and behind the camera and microphone is essential. 

Also passed along to the House for a vote were: 

H.Res. 549, a resolution "reaffirming the commitment to media diversity and pledging to work with media entities and diverse stakeholders to develop common ground solutions to eliminate barriers to media diversity." It has no force of law but expresses the sense of the Congress. 

H.R. 5918, which directs the FCC to investigate and issue reports after activation of the FCC's Disaster Information Reporting System (DIRS) and to make improvements to network outage reporting and ensuring they are reported to 911 centers, introduced by Reps. Doris Matsui, Anna Eshoo, Mike Thompson, and Jared Huffman (all D-Calif.). 

H.R. 6096, the Reliable Emergency Alert Distribution Improvement (READI) Act of 2020, introduced by Reps. Jerry McNerney (D-Calif.), Gus Bilirakis (R-Fla.), Pete Olson (R-Tex.) and Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii).  

The bill would boost FCC oversight of wireless emergency alert systems including by encouraging states to set up their own emergency communications committees and by establishing a system for collecting info on false alerts. (False alerts has been on D.C.'s plate since the false wireless alert of an impending nuclear attack in Hawaii in January 2018.) The FCC would also have to look in to updating the emergency alert system (EAS), including by potentially issuing them over the internet, including via streaming services given how many viewers have moved to those platforms. 

H.R. 6624, the Utilizing Strategic Allied Telecommunications Act of 2020 or the “USA Telecommunications Act,” introduced by Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.), chairman of the committee, Ranking Member Greg Walden (R-Ore.), and Reps. Brett Guthrie (R-Tex.) and Doris Matsui.  

The bill would provide grants--up to $750 million--to promote and support the deployment of interoperable Open RAN (radio access network) wireless network technology throughout the country. Those are networks that rely more on the software tech the U.S. dominates rather than the 5G hardware tech in the supply chain that Chinese companies dominate. It is part of a larger effort to remove Chinese telecom tech from U.S. networks as a security risk. Rep. Greg Walden (R-Ore.) said the bill would offer up "trusted and cost-effective alternatives to Huawei and ZTE."

Eshoo, a co-sponsor of the bill, said she has been pointing for a decade to the "opaque entanglements" of Huawei and ZTE and yet they have proliferated in U.S. networks. She said the bill would improve the cybersecurity of wireless networks.

H.R. 4194, the "National Suicide Hotline Designation Act of 2019." 

The bill designates 988 as the national suicide hotline number, which the FCC has identified as the best choice for an easier-to-access number for the hotline. Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.) pointed out that such access is even more important for those "in a dark place" because of the pandemic. 

H.R. 7310, the Spectrum IT Modernization Act of 2020, which was introduced by Reps. Mike Doyle (D-Pa.), Bob Latta (R-Ohio), Rick Larsen (D-Wash.) and Tim Walberg (R-Mich.).

The bill would modernize the federal spectrum IT management systems of the National Telecommunications & Information Administration, the President's chief telecom policy advisor. 

Rep. Mike Doyle (D-Pa.), a bill sponsor, said he hoped the bill would address some of the "chaos" regarding FCC decisions about federal spectrum resources.

The FCC and NTIA have had run-ins over sharing and repurposing some federal spectrum for commercial unlicensed and licensed use.

At the end of the hearing, Rep. Tony Cardenas (D-Calif.) thanked both sides of the aisle for working together, something the press does not often give it credit for, he said. He said he was going to make sure he tweeted the fact that the committee had approved 30 bipartisan bills and advised his colleagues to do likewise. "If we all do that we can get past the 10 or 12 people who actually witnessed this."

The House Energy & Commerce Committee Consumer Protection Subcommittee will hold a hearing Jan. 8 on "deception online," "Americans at Risk: Manipulation and Deception in the Digital Age." 

Among the topics for discussion will be deepfakes and disinformation campaigns. 

“As the internet has matured from a blogging platform to the engine that powers our economy, bad actors who seek to manipulate consumers have become more sophisticated," said House E&C chairman Frank Pallone (D-N.J.). 

No witnesses have been announced, but they will be asked to provide input on how to combat "harmful" deception and manipulation. 

House Energy & Commerce Committee leadership sent out an e-mail of the committee's accomplishments and they included the bill trying to undo the FCC's Restoring Internet Freedom order deregulating internet access service. 

Related: Dems Urge Vote on Save the Internet Act 

The bill, the Save the Internet Act, passed the Democrat-controlled House but was essentially DOA in the Republican-controlled Senate. But that did not prevent the legislators from claiming that effort to "reverse the disastrous repeal by Trump’s Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in late 2017 of critical net neutrality protections," as one of the session's accomplishments. 

The FCC voted 3-2 to reclassify internet access as an information service not subject to common carrier regs, as well as eliminating bright-line rules against blocking, throttling and paid prioritization and a blurry-line conduct standard that allowed the FCC to identify things it felt impeded an open internet but weren't a violation of any of the rules. 

“This year, we’ve worked to put consumers first and strengthen our economy by passing legislation through the House to restore a free and open internet," said E&C Chairman Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) and Communications Subcommittee Chairman Mike Doyle (D-Pa.). 

Other accomplishments were bills aimed at stopping illegal robocalls, improving broadband mapping, and securing networks, as well as holding hearings on edge providers' liability protections against third-party content and two hearings on oversight of the FCC.

The full House Energy & Commerce Committee has scheduled a full markup for more than a dozen bills Thursday (July 12), including two broadband related bills -- H.R. 3994, the Advancing Critical Connectivity Expands Service, Small Businesses Resources, Opportunities, Access, and Data Based on Assessed Need and Demand (ACCESS BROADBAND) Act, and H.R. 4881, the Precision Agriculture Connectivity Act of 2018.

A full committee markup is where the committee amends a bill if necessary and votes on whether to report it favorably to the full House for a vote.

The Communications Subcommittee favorably reported out the two broadband bills to the full committee last month, and the full committee is expected to follow suit Thursday, perhaps with minor modifications, said a committee source.

H.R. 3994 would create an Office of Internet Connectivity and Growth within the National Telecommunications & Information Administration, which is the White House's chief telecom policy advisor, while H.R. 4881 would direct the FCC to create a task force to "meet the connectivity and technology needs of precision agriculture in the United States." Those are broadband-enabled technologies that allow farmers to collect data in real time on cropland and ranch land.

Also on the docket for markup is H.R. 5709, the Preventing Illegal Radio Abuse Through Enforcement (PIRATE) Act. That bill boost fines and enforcement against pirate radio broadcasters, who can represent a threat to licensed broadcasters and the life-saving information they provide, bill sponsor Rep. Leonard Lance (R-N.J.), vice chairman of the subcommittee, has said. That, too, is expected to have no trouble making it to the House floor for a vote.

WASHINGTON — Edge providers are beginning to take more heat in the nation’s capital.

The bigger edge providers — companies that provide online applications, content or services, such as Google, Facebook or Yahoo — are being branded as gatekeepers of information, and getting called out as non-neutral online content arbitrators. That was once the exclusive province of internet service providers such as Comcast, AT&T and others, who have been branded as the snakes in the virtuous circle of content to network to consumer.

The doesn’t mean the pressure is off ISPs, particularly on the issue of Title II reclassification, but the vice is starting to twist more on Silicon Valley poster companies that pretty much got a pass in discussions about controlling the overall access to information.

The turning of that bitter worm was clear as one prominent House Democrat laid into edge providers, and at an Oct. 24 House hearing on political advertising saw newspaper publishers roll up their collective editions and spank Google and Facebook as peddlers of fake news for a buck.

Democrats on the House Energy & Commerce Committee have been talking among themselves about the optics of leaving edge providers out of the speech debate, particularly given the rise of fake news — i.e., the real kind, rather than the accusations of President Donald Trump against mainstream media.

Related: Some Troubled by 'Trump TV'

That came to something of a head, or at least to a signal of changing political fortunes, when Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) requested a briefing with edge providers that he accused of shaping news content.

“With a goal of ad clicks or driving page views, these companies’ policies are not neutral; they actively shape content on the web,” said Pallone, who sent a letter to Google, Facebook and Twitter seeking a briefing on their policies for “moderating content and advertising” as social media’s role in fake news and Russian election meddling swirled inside the Beltway.

Pallone was also responding to reports of vague, confusing and inconsistently applied content guidelines.

A Hill source said Democrats on the Energy & Commerce Committee are clearly trying to include tech firms in conversations about their role in net neutrality and the First Amendment going forward.

“The influence of the internet over our national dialogue and our lives has skyrocketed over the past decade,” Pallone said. “At the same time, the number of websites handling this traffic has consolidated to a handful of key platforms. The combination of these trends has led to these few companies taking on a quasi-governmental role policing content.”

Page Views vs. Page Turns
Pallone suggested that inconsistent application may be tied to the desire to boost page views and ad clicks, foreshadowing the complaints of the News Media Alliance at a hearing on political advertising last week.

Only a day after Pallone’s letter was made public, the head of the News Media Alliance, which represents almost 2,000 newspapers, pressed the issue in a hearing with House members on political advertising and a bill, the Honest Ads Act, that would require broadcast-live disclosures on online political ads.

Related: NMA Says Google, Facebook Business Models Fuel Fake News

While ISPs have gotten used to being called internet gatekeepers on Capitol Hill, NMA president David Chavern said that Google, Facebook and other edge players are news gatekeepers that have fueled fake news and “harmed the integrity of content and advertising.”

That’s because the edge business model is based on “not exercising responsibility over the integrity of content of the advertising that sustains its foundation,” Chavern told the House Oversight Committee’s Information Technology Subcommittee.

Chavern said that the public “should no longer have to suffer from unreliable information because it is profitable, while producers of content [such as his newspaper members] continue to hold ourselves to a higher standard.”

The House Energy & Commerce Committee will not be holding a network neutrality hearing Sept. 7 after all, according to Hill and industry sources familiar with the planned hearing.

Those sources had previously told Multichannel News that edge providers in particular were not jumping at the invitation, but the source said that extended to both edge providers and ISPs, who were instead offering up association heads as witnesses.

Back in July, House Energy & Commerce Committee chair Greg Walden (R-Ore.) announced the hearing, "Ground Rules for Internet Ecosystems," and invited edge providers including Facebook, Alphabet (Google), Amazon and Netflix and ISPs including Comcast, AT&T, Verizon and Charter. Walden said it was time to hear directly from them.

While the hearing was billed as being postponed for continued talks between the Hill and stakeholders about possible legislation, the source said not to look for it to be rescheduled anytime soon. "Postponed indefinitely" was how one source put it.

Related: Comcast Says Congress Should Lay Down Law on Net Neutrality

Energy & Commerce Committee Republicans have been trying to get the ISPs and edge providers together on compromise legislation to clarify the FCC's broadband regulatory authority, but a compromise bill appears a longshot given the current political climate, particularly on something as high-profile and controversial as the Open Internet debate.

Sept. 7 is still a day for network neutrality watchers to mark anyway since that is when the FCC would customarily release its tentative agenda for the Sept. 28 meeting, in case FCC chair Ajit Pai planned to schedule a vote on his proposal to to reverse Title II classification of ISPs and rethink the bright-line rules against blocking, throttling and paid prioritization.

The ranking members of the House Energy & Commerce Committee and Communications subcommittee have called on the Republican chairs to add some witnesses to a planned Sept. 7 hearing on network neutrality.

E&C Chairman Greg Walden announced the hearing Tuesday, July 25, and said invitations had been sent to Amazon, Facebook, Alphabet (Google), Netflix, Comcast, AT&T, Verizon and Charter.

In response to that announcement, ranking E&C member Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) and Communications subcommittee ranking member Mike Doyle (D-Pa.) said the hearing was light on entrepreneurs, small business, consumers and others.

They said they didn't think the committee "could have a serious discussion of this important issue without including the real people affected by the FCC’s proposals," they wrote to Walden and subcommittee chair Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.).

They pointed out that, as the Republican leadership had emphasized, the heads of eight of the largest companies in the world with a combined $2.5 trillion in market cap.

They said that was hardly representative of the entire internet ecosystem the hearing was billed as exploring.

(Photo via ibmphoto24’s Flickr. Image taken on May 5, 2011 and used per Creative Commons 2.0 license. The photo was cropped to fit a 4x3 aspect ratio.)

Reaction was coming in Wednesday (May 17) to the nomination of David Redl, currently with the House Energy & Commerce Committee, to head the National Telecommunications & Information Administration, which oversees government spectrum and acts as the President's telecom advisor.

Related: Redl Nominated to Head NTIA“David Redl is a superb choice to lead NTIA," said FCC Chairman Ajit Pai. "His extensive experience as Chief Counsel for Communications and Technology at the U.S. House of Representatives Energy & Commerce Committee makes him uniquely qualified to lead the agency charged with managing the spectrum held by the U.S. government.

“He is also a skillful expert in communications issues central to NTIA’s mission of ensuring that the Internet remains an engine for innovation and economic growth.  The FCC has long had a close partnership with NTIA, and I personally look forward to continuing that relationship with that agency under David’s leadership.”

“David Redl is an exceptional choice to serve as Assistant Secretary of Communications and Information and Administrator of NTIA, and we encourage Congress to quickly act on his nomination," said Michael Powell, president of NCTA: The Internet & Television Assocaition. "David has been immersed in telecommunications policy for years and brings significant knowledge and expertise to the important issues that NTIA will tackle in the coming years. We look forward to working with David and the Administration to continue charting a course that enables America to remain a global internet and communications leader.”

“The Commerce Department can play a vital role in expanding access to broadband networks and the vast benefits they offer to our digital economy," said USTelecom CEO Jonathan Spalter. "David Redl is the right person, at the right time, to champion leading-edge innovation and investment in our nation’s broadband infrastructure. We encourage the Senate to act swiftly in confirming him so he can begin the critical work of connecting Americans in all corners of the country to the promise and potential of broadband.”

"On the Hill, at the FCC or in the private sector, it's always been about spectrum for David Redl," said WifiForward, which congratulated him on his nomination. "With more than eight billion Wi-Fi devices in use around the globe, Americans need balanced telecommunications policies that will make more spectrum available to support emerging technologies and spur economic growth. We are thrilled at the opportunity to work with Mr. Redl on freeing up more spectrum for both licensed and unlicensed technologies."

I congratulate David Redl on his nomination as the next administrator of NTIA,” said Competitive Carriers Association  President Steven K. Berry.  “Many decisions made at NTIA, particularly regarding the use of spectrum, impact competition in the mobile ecosystem.  David’s broad knowledge and understanding of spectrum management and allocation make him an ideal candidate for the position, building upon years of service to the Energy and Commerce Committee and the wireless industry.  CCA members are an important part of this mobile ecosystem, and I look forward to our continued work with David at NTIA to ensure consumers and the economy benefit from more spectrum resources for a more competitive marketplace.”

“WTA has worked with David over the years in his position at the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and we look forward to continuing this relationship should he be confirmed to lead NTIA,” said Derrick Owens, VP of government affairs for WTA-Advocates for Rural Broadband. “David’s professionalism and knowledge of the many telecommunications issues will serve the agency well.”

“President Trump has made a great choice in tapping longtime Capitol Hill staffer David Redl to serve as the head of the NTIA," said INCOMPAS, whose members include edge providers, competitive carriers and others. "Experienced and substantive, Redl is well suited to the task of helping deploy America’s broadband networks, wired and wireless, to more American consumers and businesses. Redl’s grasp of spectrum policy will be an asset for the administration as they seek to build infrastructure and create jobs.”

The meeting between FCC chair Ajit Pai and a bipartisan group of House Energy & Commerce Committee members that had been scheduled for Friday (April 28) had to be postponed, according to a committee source.

Pai was to have provided a bipartisan briefing on his proposal to roll back Title II classification of ISPs and rethink Open Internet rules.

Turns out the House voting schedule took precedence as 11th hour work was being done on passing a stop-gap spending bill to keep the government running.

The Democratic leadership of the committee had wanted a briefing before the announcement of the plan earlier this week, but sources said Pai was unable to fit it into his schedule, reportedly due to another briefing for Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform, according to sources familiar with that meeting.

In the wake of his announcement that he would start rolling back Title II classification of ISPs at the May 18 public meeting, FCC chair Ajit Pai will be paying a visit to Capitol Hill, where he received both cheers and jeers for the proposal.

Related: FCC's Pai Lauches Effort to Repeal Title II

Pai will be providing a bipartisan member briefing to the Energy & Commerce Committee, according to Hill sources familiar with the plan, who spoke on background. E&C has principal jurisdiction over communications issues.

The chairman was said to have been asked to brief Democrats on the committee before he outlined his net-neutrality plans, but deferred.

Related: Ajit Pai's Title II Speech Draws Immediate and Passionate Reaction

Pai announced April 26 that he would was proposing rolling back Title II, eliminating the "general conduct standard" in the Open Internet order, and looking afresh at the rules against blocking, throttling and paid prioritization.

E&C Republicans praised the move, while Dems vowed to fight it vigorously on all fronts.

Related: Clyburn Vows to Fight Title II Rollback

A Pai spokesperson was not available for comment at press time.

House Energy and Commerce Committee Republicans have formally asked Federal Communications Commission chairman Ajit Pai to close the docket on the set-top box proceeding because it is no longer under active consideration, and because it “remains an unnecessary regulatory threat to the content creation and distribution industries” and casts a “shadow over investment and innovation.”

This is a wise, pro-competitive, pro-property rights and good government request from Congress to the new Pai FCC.

The FCC should efficiently utilize this decision opportunity to employ the statutory sunset provision in the law to permanently sunset and remove this unnecessary and serious regulatory threat to competition, copyrighted contractual content and its creation, investment, and innovation. It surely is among the top 75% of regulations that the Trump Administration has targeted for removal.

The FCC can justify its sunset of the Section 629 set-top box provision based upon the rich and overwhelming official FCC evidentiary record of:

• The video-related competition documented in the FCC’s Jan. 17 video competition report;

• The still-fresh 2016 FCC set-top proceeding record that provided copious evidence that video-related markets are fully competitive;

• The FCC’s June 2015 ruling “that cable operators are subject to Competing Provider Effective Competition” exempting cable from regulations; and

• The accurate and prescient competitive analysis and approach in the FCC’s 2008 approval of the XM Radio-Sirius Satellite Radio merger that correctly recognized that Internet-delivered content revolutionized how people access and consume content overall and flooded the market with new competition.

The Section 629 provision was written in 1996. when cable still was still largely a monopoly. The evidentiary record today, 21 years later, proves the markets fully competitive and the provision obsolete.

This provision of law included a total sunset provision precisely because Congress anticipated that the 1996 Telecom Act’s overall purpose of deregulation to promote competition would in fact succeed, and enable the technological innovation and competition that eventually would make Section 629 obsolete and sunset-able.

That eventuality is now. Consider this summary of the evidence that these are fully competitive markets.

In 2016 and 2017, the FCC has documented that most Americans have three-plus wireline video distributors and seven-plus choices when wireless is included. That’s far more than any country in the world. 

It spotlights a plethora of new online video distributors and competitive alternatives like Netflix, Amazon Prime, Google-YouTube, Dish Network’s Sling TV, Verizon Wireless’s Go90, AT&T’s DirecTV Now, CBS All Access, Hulu, HBO Now, Showtime and Starz, among others — comprising about 70% of downstream Internet traffic in 2015, per Sandvine.

As for competition for navigation devices, more than 200 million Americans watch their video content on smartphones and tablets, and even more do if one includes laptops and desktop computers.

In short, the markets for video distribution and navigation devices are fully competitive; deregulating will promote competition, as it has before; and that is in the public interest.

Continue reading this blog at at PrecursorBlog.com, where it was originally published.

Scott Cleland served as deputy U.S. coordinator for international communications and information policy in the George H. W. Bush administration. He is president of consultancy Precursor LLC and chairman of NetCompetition, a pro-competition e-forum supported by broadband interests.

WASHINGTON — Congratulations continued to flow in Friday (Dec. 2) for the election of Rep. Greg Walden (R-Ore.) Friday to be the new chairman of the powerful House Energy & Commerce  Committee.

Walden has been chair of the Communications Subcommittee. His successor to that post won't be picked until January, he signaled this week. He was tapped by the steering committee for the post on Thursday evening (Dec. 1), with the Republican conference following suit Friday.

"Chairman Walden is a thoughtful policymaker with extensive experience and deep knowledge of issues surrounding telecommunications, technology and other important sectors of the U.S. economy," Michael Powell, president and CEO of NCTA: The Internet & Television Association, said. “We look forward to working Chairman Walden and the full Committee on a productive agenda that encourages private capital investment, supports ongoing innovation and promotes the growth of our national economy.” 

Steven J. Berry, president of the Competitive Carriers Association, said: “The House Energy & Commerce Committee plays a key role in helping ensure competitive carriers are able to compete and thrive in the industry, and chairman Walden understands the importance of mobile broadband, especially in rural areas.” Walden represents a largely rural district.

"His understanding of the Universal Service Fund [broadband subsidy program] and role in crafting the legislation leading to the 600 MHz [broadcast] incentive auction will be an asset to the Committee and to Congress. With many important policy issues in play, it no doubt will be a busy 115th Congress, and I look forward to our continued work on these issues and more, and again congratulate Rep. Walden on the chairmanship.”

USTelecom president Walter McCormick said: “We congratulate Congressman Walden on being selected as the next chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. His vast experience and understanding of issues to come before the committee, including telecommunications and technology policies, will be a tremendous asset for the committee. USTelecom looks forward to working with him to promote policies that will encourage investment, innovation and expansion of broadband access to all Americans.”

Verizon Communications senior vice president Kathy Grillo said: “Over the years, Chairman Walden has been an engaged and consistent leader in the telecommunications and technology sectors. We believe his vast experience, strong work ethic and proactive agenda will be a true asset as our sector continues to be a driving force in innovation and economic opportunity.”

“We were pleased to present Congressman Walden with our Champion of Public Broadcasting award in 2013, and we are grateful for his continuing support of our public service missions of education, public safety and civic leadership," said America's Public Television Stations president Patrick Butler. "Chairman Walden has been a voice of reason on telecommunications issues for many years, and we are delighted that he will now hold the gavel for one of the most influential committees of the Congress.

“In addition, Congressman Walden is universally regarded as one of the finest legislators in Washington," Butler said.

WASHINGTON — With control of the Senate possibly passing to the Democrats and the House perhaps losing a dozen to two dozen seats, there could be some big changes in the principal Federal Communications Commission oversight committees.

After the Nov. 8 election, the second campaign season gets in gear as legislators angle for those plum posts in a new Congress.

Even though the House is unlikely to change hands — Republicans have the biggest majority (59 seats) in almost 100 years — most of the potential post-election action in the lame-duck Congress on the communications oversight front is in that chamber.

House Energy & Commerce Committee chairman Fred Upton (D-Mich.) and Communications Subcommittee chairman Greg Walden (R-Ore.) are term-limited and will have to give up their respective seats. Walden is looking to take over Upton’s chair, but has competition from John Shimkus (R-Ill.), who has seniority.

Walden is well-liked and, as head of the National Republican Congressional Committee, raises money and strategizes to help elect and re-elect Republicans to Congress. There were differing opinions on that race from sources both on and off the Hill, who asked not to be identified. One source believed seniority would win out and Shimkus would get the big chair. But another said Walden’s fundraising counted for a lot and predicted he would get the full committee chairmanship.

While Republicans will almost certainly lose seats, Walden reportedly has been advising them to run local races for a year now, a wise strategy given the questionable coattails of the eventual Republican presidential nominee.

If Walden does not get it, there might be a way for him to remain atop Communications despite his term limits. There have been talks about moving oversight of the Federal Trade Commission from the Commerce, Manufacturing and Trade Subcommittee to Communications, which would reconstitute Communications and allow Walden to chair that newly reconstituted committee.

That would make sense now that the FCC and FTC are having to team on overseeing online privacy.

If the FTC move doesn’t happen, vice chair Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) would be in line for the chairmanship of the Communications Subcommittee given that she is currently vice chair.

The House Energy & Commerce Committee has defeated two Democratic amendments to a Federal Trade Commission reform bill that would have given the agency authority to regulate broadband ISP consumer privacy and more authority to regulate edge provider privacy.

That came in a full committee mark-up Thursday (July 14) on HR 5510, the FTC Process and Transparency Reform Act of 2016, which would clarify what conduct the FTC can cite for unfairness under its authority to go after unfair and deceptive practices and how it determines that to be the case. The House Judiciary Committee is also considering the FTC reform bill. 

One amendment would have given the FTC authority to create rules that protect consumer privacy on websites. The Democrats on the committee said that if the Republicans want a level playing field in broadband privacy, rather than preventing the FCC from adopting new rules on broadband privacy, a better answer would be to give the FTC more FCC-like rulemaking authority. Republicans countered that was a slippery slope and that the FTC was an enforcement agency, not a rulemaking agency.

That amendment was defeated by a vote of 27 to 17.

A second amendment would have eliminated the common-carrier exemption that required the FCC to take over broadband privacy oversight when it reclassified ISPs as common carriers. Democrats argued that would be an elegant solution to boosting the FTC's ability to regulate privacy. But Republicans said the FCC would not give up its abusive, mission-creep authority just because the FTC also got oversight.

That amendment was defeated by a voice vote.

The following is an edited excerpt from Republican Federal Communications Commission member Michael O’Rielly’s March 22 testimony at a House Energy & Commerce Committee FCC oversight hearing:

When we were here a year ago, the commission had just adopted a deeply divisive item on net neutrality, likely one of the more significant decisions ever made by the FCC. One year later, consumers, providers and the commission can see some of the tangible negative effects previously anticipated from that decision.

More specifically, a major concern at the time was the decision’s impact on innovation and the ability or willingness of providers to deploy new services to meet the needs of consumers. Many of us argued at the time that the end result of that decision would be a need for providers to play an expensive game of “Mother May I?” with the commission to secure tacit or explicit approval of any new offerings going forward. With the agency tacking a maximally vague “general Internet conduct standard” onto the full range of regulatory options under Title II, it was hard to see how it could it be otherwise.

Despite protestations that the order would keep the environment safe for “permissionless innovation,” we are already seeing startling interference by the commission in providers’ decision making. For example, one provider’s new zero-rating offering was seemingly given a green light by the chairman in November, only to have the rug pulled out a month later when the chairman announced that he was “inviting” this provider, along with two others, to meet with commission staff to explain themselves before a deadline set within a few weeks.

Why the change of heart and how is this considered an invitation? According to the chairman, it was not an enforcement proceeding, not an investigation, but merely an information gathering effort.

Along with my colleague, commissioner [Ajit] Pai, I asked that representatives from each commissioner’s office be allowed to attend these meetings. After all, whatever the outcome, it was likely that each of us would receive multiple, possibly conflicting, accounts, and possibly be asked to intervene somehow. Wouldn’t it be better if everyone was at least on the same page about what was said and by whom? Our request was denied by bureau chiefs based on the argument that the chairman’s staff would not be attending either. But since they themselves report to the chairman, this is an empty distinction.

Today, more than three months after a shadow of suspicion was cast over three major broadband providers in the most public way possible, many questions remain about [the] commission[’s] internal procedures on such matters, and no answers are forthcoming.

Further, since there is no real proceeding, all of these meetings are being conducted without the benefit of ex parte filings. The targeted providers have no way of knowing who else has been questioned about the effects of their offerings or what was said. It’s not a public proceeding; it’s an inquisition. And it is showing, much more quickly and clearly than even I thought possible, that “permissionless innovation” is far from what the FCC has in mind under this new regime.

Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) has been elected ranking member of the House Energy & Commerce Committee, making him the top Democrat on the committee that shares oversight of communications.

He is succeeding Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), who is retiring at the end of the current congressional session.

Pallone had the seniority, but ranking Communications Subcommittee member Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.) had also been in the running.

The chairman of the committee is Fred Upton (R-Mich.).

Pallone will be starting his 14th term in January. He has been mostly focused on environmental and healthcare issues, rather than communications, while Eshoo has been a prominent voice in network neutrality, retrans and media consolidation issues, not to mention championing the Commercial Loudness Mitigation Act (CALM).