The Democratic National Convention was the most-Tweeted TV show Monday night (July 25) with 3.3 million Tweets sent by 693,000 people, according to Nielsen Social. It obviously benefitted from being roadblocked on multiple networks.

That Tweet total was almost exactly double that of the Republicans' first day, which drew 1.645 million tweets from 449,000 people, still the most-Tweeted show by a mile on that night (July 18).

The Dems had an all-star lineup on their first day, including Michelle Obama and the much-anticipated reconciliation speech from Bernie Sanders, which might explain the particularly heavy Tweet load versus the GOP's less star-studded initial outing.

The Democratic convention's Twitter activity spiked at 10:31--when broadcast nets as well as cable were covering the proceedings--following the speech by First Lady Michelle Obama, when 30,400 Tweets were sent in a single minute.

Rounding out the top five Tweeted-about TV shows of the night were The Bachelorette at 270,000 Tweets by 112,000 people; WWE Monday Night Raw on USA with 266,000 by 47,000 people; Love & Hip Hop; Atlanta on VH1 with 111,000/33,000; and Are you the One? on MTV at 19,000/6,000.

The National Cable & Telecommunications Association is pushing the President to make opening up the 5.9 GHz band for more Wi-Fi a priority in his remaining days in office, saying the need is urgent and the spectrum deficit dangerous.

It signed on to a joint letter to the White House from a group of tech and Internet companies, schools and libraries.

While NCTA is sparring with Google in the set-top sphere, and has butted heads with Free Press over consolidation, they are all together in their support of opening up the band.

Cable operators have been pushing for more 5 GHz spectrum to fuel their Wi-Fi hotspots, the industry's primary mobile broadband play.

"While Americans’ dependence on unlicensed technologies for Internet access continues to skyrocket," they told the President, "the spectrum resources that power our devices are perilously insufficient. As a result, our Wi-Fi bands are becoming dangerously congested. The problem has become so severe that Cisco and Apple have recently warned customers that the core 2.4 GHz unlicensed band has become so overtaxed that it “is not considered suitable for use for any business and/or mission critical enterprise applications.” We must act now to find more unlicensed spectrum."

The President has not been shy about wanting to free up more spectrum for broadband--it has been a tech centerpiece of his Administration--and The FCC has been looking to do so in the 5.9 GHZ band, but there remain issues of possible interference with connected car technology that it is still working through.

The FCC has an open inquiry into using the band for unlicensed, and Department of Transportation have agreed on testing the co-existence of vehicle-to-vehicle communications (intelligent transportation system [ITS] devices) and Wi-Fi, but the groups say the President needs to prioritize finding a solution, which it suggests is out there.

They say the President needs to implement "one of the promising coexistence options that would reconfigure the band to permit Wi-Fi to share the band safely with . . . crash-avoidance applications.”

They also take aim at ITS, saying it has yet to make meaningful use of that band and that other technologies are overtaking it. "Fortunately, there is still time for both Wi-Fi and ITS to design their wireless operations with sharing built in so the band can enable ITS and benefit Wi-Fi consumers. Thus, the ideal moment to put sharing criteria in place for the 5.9 GHz band is now."

They say the 5.9 GHz band is 1) "uniquely large enough to support wireless innovation and investment, and occupies a low enough frequency range to support widespread consumer operations; 2) "is immediately adjacent to the existing 5.8 GHz unlicensed band, which already uses Wi-Fi to support millions of consumer devices and automotive functions for drivers today," 3) and will "allow the United States to deploy next-generation 160-MHz-wide gigabit Wi-Fi technologies, greatly increasing throughput and performance.

Finally, they say the band is unutilized in the vast majority of the country, with far fewer government operations than other potential Wi-Fi bands and widespread use of ITS systems still 15-20 years away.

Other strange-bedfellow groups NCTA is in league with on the issue include the American Library Association, Consumer Federation of America and Next Century Cities.

The Obama Administration's new 2017 budget, unviled Tuesday (Feb. 9), includes investment in a new Cybersecurity National Action Plan and the creation of a commission to recommend ways of "enhancing cybersecurity awareness and protections inside and outside of Government, protecting privacy and empowering Americans to take better control of their digital security."

The budget allocates $19 billion for in federal resources for cybersecurity, an increase of more than a third (35%) over 2016, and it creates for the first time a chief information security officer.

"With this Budget, a pivotal moment is reached in the approach to the cybersecurity challenges facing the Nation," the administration said.

The budget also creates a Federal Privacy Council as "the principal interagency forum to improve the Government privacy practices of agencies and entities acting on their behalf."

It will comprise senior privacy officials from government agencies--though initially not including independent agencies like the FCC and FTC. But the White House did say that the committee may invite participation from officials at independent agencies.

The president said in a message accompanying the budget that the action plan includes "retiring outdated federal information technology (IT) systems that were designed in a different age and increasingly are vulnerable to attack, reforming the way that the federal government manages and responds to cyber threats, and recruiting the best cyber talent."

He said those moves will strengthen cybersecurity in the private as well as public sectors, and that both companies and consumers need those tools to protect themselves.

The budget also spends $62 million on cybersecurity education programs.

"We applaud the White House's new national action plan to strengthen our country's defenses against cybersecurity attacks that threaten our online privacy and our economy," said AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson in a statement. "The security of our digital economy and individual privacy requires end-to-end protection at every level and device connected to the Internet. We look forward to working with the Administration, Congress and others in the private sector to implement the most advanced cybersecurity protections and practices, and raise awareness of how individuals can best protect themselves online."

Jan. 13 marks the third year in a row that the White House will be making top officials, including the President, Vice President and first Lady, available during a daylong (10 a.m. to 6:30 p.m.) social media opportunity to ask questions via Twitter, Facebook, Instagram and Tumblr and ex-West Wing and current Transparent actor Bradley Whitford was trying to help the White House drive Web traffic.

The day has been dubbed the virtual Big Block of Cheese Day, a reference to both an 1837 Andrew Jackson public open house featuring a 1,400-pound block of cheese, and to NBC's West wing, which referred the event and whose cast has been helping promote the event (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ex_jJlv5HKk).

In an e-mail from the White House account Whitford, who played Josh Lyman in West Wing, pointed out that "in my gig on the show we hosted our very own day like this, so I've been around the cheese block a few times." He and urged those with questions about Tuesday night's State of the Union address to log on and weigh in at hashtag #BigBlockOfCheeseDay.

Whitford said he would be online for the event (@WhitfordBradley) as would the real-life version, White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough (@Denis44), of his boss on the show.

While President Obama urged the FCC to push back on laws limiting municipal broadband buildouts, the Department of Justice did not have his back when it came to challenges by Tennessee and North Carolina to the FCC's decision earlier this year to do just that by preempting state laws limiting muni buildouts.

The antitrust division at DOJ weighed in at the Sixth Circuit on the challenge Friday (Nov. 6) and it was hardly a ringing endorsement. "Respondent United States of America takes no position in these cases," said DOJ attorney Robert B. Nicholson in a court filing Friday (Nov. 6).

In a 3-2, party-line vote (supported by its Democratic majority), the FCC on Feb. 26 pre-empted state laws in Tennessee and North Carolina that limited cities’ ability to get into the broadband business. The agency cited its authority under Section 706 of the 1996 Telecommunications Act to ensure that advanced telecom services are deployed in a reasonable and timely manner.

The order pre-empts geographic limitations on the expansion of municipal broadband systems in Chattanooga, Tenn., and Wilson, N.C., though it does not compel any action in either case. The decision does not affect laws in other states, but signals how the FCC might act on similar petitions.

The FCC said it can't pre-empt laws preventing municipalities from building broadband networks, but can preempt ones that limit it where it has already been authorized.

In a speech in Cedar Falls, Iowa, Feb. 26, where a community broadband network, with the help of government funding, delivers 1 gigabit speed service at about the same price as the cable bundle, President Obama told a crowd of sometimes cheering Iowans that there was not enough competition to ISPs that continued to "jack up" 

rates, and that the government should try to encourage municipal competitors to fill that breach.

(http://www.multichannel.com/news/technology/president-fcc-should-push-ba...)

He said in many places big companies are "doing everything they can to keep out new competitors" and "stamp out" competition. "Enough is enough," he said, and called on the FCC to do whatever it could to push back on those laws.

But there had been signs that was not the last word from the Administration. In a letter to FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler after that speech, the head of the National Telecommunications & Information Administration, the President's chief telecom adviser, said that muni broadband is not always, or even "typically," the best way to meet a community's broadband needs, "particularly where existing service providers are willing and able to meet a communities evolving needs."

"The Department of Justice's curt statement advising the court that it takes no position in the appeal of the FCC's preemption of state laws restricting local government broadband networks is very curious," said Randolph May, president of the Free State Foundation, who is no fan of the FCC's preemption action. "As someone who served as FCC associate general counsel, I can tell you this is a very rare occurrence. And it is especially curious in this case because President Obama urged the FCC to do exactly what FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler then did. We don't know for sure, but my best guess is that the DOJ, quite rightly, is concerned about the lawfulness of the FCC's preemption action. If so, the concern is justified."

FCC chairman Tom Wheeler says the White House did not give him "secret instructions" to reclassify Internet access under Title II, and that he felt no obligation to follow the President's lead.

But Wheeler says that, "or course" the President's statement had an impact on the decision -- it prompted more public input into the collective record, which Wheeler took into account in the "evolution" of his position. Then, there was the fact that the capital markets did not tank on the President's announcement.

That is according to his written testimony for a hearing today in the House Oversight & Government Reform Committee's on the commission's relationship with the White House in the run-up to the Feb. 26 vote on Title II. The President last fall came out strongly and publicly for Title II and the chairman appeared to follow that lead.

Wheeler says his initial proposal not to reclassify Internet access as a telecommunications service under Title II regulations was a specific, but tentative, proposal, that was meant to focus the debate, not foreclose it.

"There were no secret instructions from the White House," Wheeler says. "I did not, as CEO of an independent agency, feel obligated to follow the President’s recommendation.  But I did feel obligated to treat it with respect just as I have with the input I received – both pro and con - from 140 Senators and Representatives."

As to initially proposing using Sec. 706 authority, the same authority it uses to justify regulations on broadband deployment and access, Wheeler says: "While historically, some NPRMs just asked questions, during my chairmanship I have made it a policy to present draft NPRMs to my colleagues that contain specific proposals as a means to flag key concepts for commenters’ attention. I believe this is an important part of an open and transparent rulemaking process. But let’s be clear, the proposal is tentative, not a final conclusion, and the purpose of the comment period is to fully test the concept. In this instance, as in others, it worked as desired to focus the debate."

"A key consideration throughout this deliberation was the potential impact of any regulation on the capital formation necessary for the construction of broadband infrastructure," Wheeler says, which was where the President's position did have an impact on the outcome, he said. "An interesting result of the President’s statement was the absence of a reaction from the capital markets. When you talk about the impact of the President’s statement, this was an important data point, resulting, I believe, from the President’s position against rate regulation."

Wheeler has consistently said the FCC would not exercise its Title II rate regulation authority, but critics point to language in the order that suggests it could change that tune down the line, or that case-by-case analysis of business plans could result in de facto rate regulation.

Wheeler invokes the over-4 million comments the FCC got in the network neutrality docket, who he said had overwhelmingly spoken in favor of "preserving and open Internet," though to be fair most of those who opposed Title II also said they supported a free and open Internet, just not the way Title II reclassification attempted to achieve it.

Wheeler suggests that Title II is the result of a process in which the FCC listened, learned and "adjusted" its proposal along the way.

 Rep. Greg Walden (R-Ore.) has said that adjustment came fairly late in the game, with the chairman still signaling it was going to be Sec. 706 in November. The White House posted a video Nov. 10 urging the FCC to adopt Title II-based regs. Wheeler said Tuesday he has checked his notes on the meeting with Walden and they tell a different story.

Wheeler says that other "data points" that helped point him toward Title II included "the recognition of interconnection as an important issue," a topic he notes was not part of the Administration's position. He also says the AWS-3 bidding signaled that mobile investment continued to "flourish" in the fact of the commission's likely inclusion of mobile broadband under the rules for the first time--which the FCC did vote to do.

The President's draft legislation on enforcing the 2012 privacy bill of rights continued to get mixed reviews on Capitol Hill.

The administration released the draft Feb. 27; it focuses on promoting voluntary codes of conduct that would give companies a safe harbor.

Rep. Joe Barton (R-Tex.) praised the bill as a good start. “This is a positive first step and I want to applaud the Administration for their efforts in protecting consumers," he said. "Privacy is an issue that is near and dear to me, and I consider myself a strong privacy advocate and champion of consumer protection. However, like with most first drafts, after reviewing this summary I do have questions. If the Administration is serious about trying to legislate privacy protections, I will try to work with them in a bipartisan fashion.”

Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.), another strong privacy advocate, saw the glass as more empty than full, at least when it came to enforcing real privacy protections on companies.

“I think all Americans have a fundamental right to privacy — and it's especially important in light of advancing technologies that continually threaten to outpace our laws,” said Franken, who is the ranking member on the Judiciary Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology, and the Law. “I commend the President’s renewed interest in data privacy, because it’s important that we establish new measures to protect consumers. But I have concerns that his proposal lacks the necessary teeth to hold companies accountable for their privacy policies and to ensure robust protections for consumers’ information. The American people deserve more meaningful control of their personal information, and they should be able to make informed decisions about who is getting their information and who it’s being shared with. The President’s proposal, unfortunately, doesn’t do that. It takes control away from consumers and puts it back in the hands of companies.”

The Obama administration has been trying to enforce privacy principles on facial recognition and mobile apps through voluntary stakeholder initiatives, to mixed reviews.

A national survey released last week revealed that most Americans don’t have a clue what “net neutrality” means.

If true (and it is, even among TV executives) that doesn’t bode well for smooth assimilation into the regulatory construct of new FCC rules governing the Internet.

The phone survey by Hart Research Associates, with 800 adults 18 and over, echoes what I’ve gleaned talking to TV executives: Nearly three out of four (74%) Americans are unfamiliar with the term “net neutrality” and what it actually means.

In its simplest form, “net neutrality” means that cable and phone companies, which own the main plumbing of the Internet, should not block content or discriminate and should manage their networks transparently.

Beyond that, anyone trying to describe it to a lay person will see listeners zone out within seconds, typically accompanied by a nictitating membrane covering the eyes and slow, polite nods.

Now, the debate has evolved into a such a confusing cacophony of strident free-speech declarations and network- management business-speak that it’s little wonder most consumers are stumped. The term itself has been intentionally co-opted by giant corporations on both sides of the debate to the point where it means whatever its supporters want it to mean — which would require a mind reader with a law degree to divine, and maybe not even then.

That explains, in part, why 73% of Americans want greater disclosure of the details of the FCC’s proposal to regulate the Internet. FCC chairman Tom Wheeler has proposed regulating the Internet like a utility under Title II of the Communications Act to ensure his — and President Obama’s — vision of net neutrality.

But only one in three Americans, the survey found, thinks that regulating the Internet like telephone service will be helpful. It’s a fact that belies the confusion: Big free-speech fans — some of the very “Save the Internet!” viewers roused by comedian John Oliver’s acerbically funny dissection of Big Cable on his HBO series Last Week Tonight — really don’t trust big government to do the job either.

Is broadband so essential that the government should be more active in regulating a flourishing, privately capitalized Internet?

Wheeler seems to think that is just the role the FCC needs, given his view of ISPs as the potentially competition-crushing link in the virtuous cycle of edge to net to consumer.

He may not feel it is appropriate to make details of the new rules public before the coming vote, but he should do so afterward, and ASAP.

President Obama during his State of the Union address Tuesday night did not spend much time on broadband to which he had already devoted a speech last week, and the White House had already outlined his ambitious high-speed broadband plans, as well as actions to protect privacy and push cybersecurity.

The speech was mostly a valedictory vision of a better America through Democratic policies, or what CNN's John King called a left of center speech to a right of center Congress.

But the speech did include a number of communications-related issues, including network neutrality and at least a couple of mentions of high-speed broadband.

"I intend to protect a free and open internet, extend its reach to every classroom, and every community, and help folks build the fastest networks," the President said, "so that the next generation of digital innovators and entrepreneurs have the platform to keep reshaping our world."

He also talked about building infrastructure including "the fastest Internet."

On cybersecurity, he said: "No foreign nation, no hacker, should be able to shut down our networks, steal our trade secrets, or invade the privacy of American families, especially our kids.  We are making sure our government integrates intelligence to combat cyber threats, just as we have done to combat terrorism.  And tonight, I urge this Congress to finally pass the legislation we need to better meet the evolving threat of cyber-attacks, combat identity theft, and protect our children’s information." He went off speech to emphasize that that should be a bipartisan effort. "If we don’t act, we’ll leave our nation and our economy vulnerable. If we do, we can continue to protect the technologies that have unleashed untold opportunities for people around the globe."

On government data collection: "As Americans, we cherish our civil liberties – and we need to uphold that commitment if we want maximum cooperation from other countries and industry in our fight against terrorist networks.  So while some have moved on from the debates over our surveillance programs, I haven’t.  As promised, our intelligence agencies have worked hard, with the recommendations of privacy advocates, to increase transparency and build more safeguards against potential abuse.  And next month, we’ll issue a report on how we’re keeping our promise to keep our country safe while strengthening privacy."

He took a shot at the flood of political ads post Citizens United. "A better politics is one where we spend less time drowning in dark money for ads that pull us into the gutter, and spend more time lifting young people up..."

WASHINGTON — The president of the United States has thrown his weight into passing strict new laws that will fundamentally alter the business model for the nation’s cable operators, regulating them like utilities and requiring faster minimum speeds for Internet delivery.

Last week, President Obama asserted that stance in a speech delivered at the municipal utility in Cedar Falls, Iowa — also that community’s cable provider — vowing to pass the law as he builds a last-term broadband legacy in concert with Federal Communications Commission chairman Tom Wheeler.

Should the nation’s broadband pipes, paid for by private capital and entrepreneurial companies, be allowed to flourish as they have since inception without government intervention? Or should those pipes now be governed by federal regulations because the Internet is just as critical as electricity, the means by which we communicate, educate, buy goods, receive health care and even decide who we meet and marry?

The signal from the Obama administration and an army of regulators appears to be that it almost doesn’t matter how ISPs gained the power they have — that the power to connect people to the Internet is now so great, and the Web so central to daily life and commerce, that it is in the public interest for government to step in.

In the call for new rules, the Obama Administration has made the speed of delivery an issue to be highlighted. Its message: ISPs aren’t delivering broadband that’s fast enough to meet all of those needs, and they aren’t facing enough competition for service to lower prices and boost those speeds. Moreover, they need common-carrier rules to keep them from blocking and discriminating and prioritizing that Internet traffic.

The president pulled no punches last week, defending his support for FCC pre-emption of state laws that limit municipal broadband by saying consumers were at the whim of Internet-service provider monopolies that “jacked up” rates while trying to squash competition.

ISPs are pushing back, but they are on the defensive. National Cable & Telecommunications Association president and CEO Michael Powell warned the FCC about “chas[ing] false solutions.” Walter McCormick, president of telco trade group USTelecom, said the president’s plans for regulations based on Title II of the Telecommunications Act and FCC pre-emption sound like a “call for the federal government to regulate the Internet, and for municipal governments to own the Internet.”

Cable operators continue to call for light-touch regulations and point to hundreds of billions of dollars of private- enterprise investment at stake, but the hand of government is beginning to weigh heavily on their collective shoulders.

Over on Capitol Hill, top Republicans on the FCC oversight committees were trying to help cable operators on the Title II front, announcing they were working on legislation that would prevent discrimination, blocking and even paid prioritization, but under existing authority clarified by Congress.

But the larger issue is the administration’s apparent view that broadband is so ubiquitous and important that unusual measures are justified.

NEW DEAL PARALLEL

Last week, the White House drew a direct parallel between government efforts in the 1930s to get electricity to rural areas and the high-speed broadband initiatives that the administration and the FCC are backing to ensure that broadband reaches those same rural areas.

“In the 1930s, many argued that electricity was a luxury, something too costly to bring to rural communities and to every American and too modern for them to take advantage of,” Jeff Zients, director of the President’s National Economic Council, said in in a White House-arranged call with reporters. “We are at a similar moment today. Broadband is no longer a luxury, it’s a necessity.”

Punctuating that comparison, Obama is now defining broadband by speeds several times higher than current FCC definitions.

The White House has already told Wheeler it thinks the agency needs to reclassify Internet access under Title II common-carrier regulations to ensure that cable and phone companies don’t become gatekeepers.

The push for high-speed Internet penetration is going to be one of the themes of Obama’s State of the Union address Tuesday night (Jan. 20), but the White House is taking a different tack this time around, previewing those themes, as it did with broadband and cybersecurity last week.

The White House even sent out an email with a link to a video of the president plugging his midweek broadband speech from the Oval Office.

The Obama administration and Wheeler appear to be on the same page when it comes to viewing the rollout of broadband service, which they are defining at higher speeds — 10 Megabits per second, then 25 Mbps and now perhaps as fast as 1 Gigabit per second — as a seminal moment in the nation’s relatively brief digital history.

In Cedar Falls last week, the White House was talking up 1-Gbps services as a good mark to aim for — not just for watching videos and playing games, but for helping small businesses be more competitive.

Defining competition in a market, or determining whether a market is “underserved” and even “unserved,” may eventually be measured not by whether an incumbent is offering service, but at what speed and price the service is offered.

Wheeler is even teeing up some action items the president could reference in his speech to show the FCC’s foot was on the broadband accelerator, including scheduling a vote this month on raising minimum broadband speeds to 25 Mbps, and next month on a pair of petitions to pre-empt state broadband laws.

Affordability may also become the table stakes for the definition of “available” broadband. Zients said the president wanted to remove roadblocks to competitors entering local markets — which would include state laws limiting municipal broadband. Pre-empting state broadband regs is just one of several initiatives Obama is backing to boost high-speed broadband (see sidebar).

The White House said 19 states had broadband-limiting laws, though the Coalition for Local Internet Choice put that number at 21 and potentially 22 if a newly introduced Missouri law is passed.

CALL FOR MORE MUNIS

The White House initiatives on speed and ISP reclassification also mirrors calls by Susan Crawford, a former tech adviser to Obama — as was Tom Wheeler — for municipal buildouts, an approach to broadband similar to the Roosevelt-era rural electrification program, and for regulating broadband like a utility, all on the president’s list. Crawford is a Cardozo School of Law professor and author of Captive Audience: The Telecom Industry and Monopoly Power in the New Gilded Age.

Wheeler has already signaled that he thinks the FCC should use its preemption powers to reverse what he characterizes as incumbent ISPs trying to prevent competition. ISPs counter that municipal broadband networks sometimes fail, leaving taxpayers holding the bag. Others said cities sometimes overbuild existing service from private companies that have a hard time competing on price with government-subsidized networks.

The FCC currently has two petitions in front of it asking for state law pre-emption — from the cities of Chattanooga, Tenn., and Wilson, N.C. A spokesperson said the FCC was still vetting them at press time, but a highly placed source said the chairman wanted a vote in February, and he is likely to get a Democratic majority to support pre-emption. Democratic commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel said last week she supported the president’s initiatives. Republican commissioners Ajit Pai and Michael O’Rielly signaled they were not on board, saying the FCC did not have that pre-emption authority.

The White House stopped short of endorsing those petitions, but it might as well have, saying Obama wanted to “end laws that harm broadband competition. Chattanooga Mayor Andy Berke joined Zients on the call outlining the president’s high-speed initiative, and the fact sheet cited three cities that had taken aggressive steps to improve broadband: Chattanooga, Wilson, and Kansas City, Kan. (The latter struck a deal with Google Fiber.)

Promoting municipal broadband could have a side benefit for an FCC and administration concerned about ISPs favoring their own content.

Because city-owned cable systems don’t own content or networks, they don’t “have the same incentives as cable- or telco-owned networks to play favorites with Internet content,” Robert Cooper, a partner at Boies, Schiller & Flexner LLP in Washington, said.

Cable operators were already on the defensive after Wheeler pivoted toward Title II, and he has since signaled that he is likely to follow the president’s lead. That has led to a new round of pushback from cable operators who argue that reclassification will mean billions in new taxes and fees, decreased investment and innovation, and certainly more legal challenges.

Not that cable operators have been resting on their laurels. There seems to be an announcement almost daily of a speed upgrade in cities across the country, but going forward, those upgrades would be needed not just to keep up with Google Fiber and others but to keep pace with the policy imperatives.

In a blog post rebutting the presidential announcement that had already been telegraphed via online videos and press calls and fact sheets, the NCTA pointed to the $230-billion cable providers had invested to extend and upgrade broadband to communities “urban and rural,” and speeds that had increased by 3200% in the last decade.

NCTA FIRES BACK

The NCTA talked about declining permegabit prices and even faster speeds via DOCSIS 3.1 and the new Broadcom Gigasphere chips on display earlier this month at the International CES in Las Vegas.

While the president was touting the Cedar Falls, Iowa, municipal system’s speeds as rivaling those in Paris and other high-speed cities, the NCTA talked about cable operator Mediacom Communications bringing state-of-the-art speeds to the entire state of Iowa.

The NCTA conceded that there are two “discrete” areas where government “may” play a targeted role. That is in “very rural” areas where there is no service and no business case for it, and in adoption education.

The White House signaled the administration did not think Title II would put a damper on investment of innovation, as cable operators have argued, and that price and availability of high speeds, rather than not wanting broadband, were the key roadblocks to ubiquitous broadband.

Among those pushing back in Congress last week was Sen. Deb Fischer (R-Neb.), who likened the president’s broadband speech to announcing he was nationalizing the Internet. “This afternoon, we will see the president parachute into Iowa and tout a new federal takeover of state laws governing broadband and the Internet,” she said.

Obama’s Broadband Initiatives

The White House last week announced some new executive actions to promote high-speed broadband, building, it said, on President Obama’s network-neutrality proposal to have the FCC reclassify Internet access under Title II:

► Calling to End Laws that Harm Broadband Service Competition: “Laws in 19 states — some specifically written by special interests trying to stifle new competitors — have held back broadband access and, with it, economic opportunity. Today, President Obama is announcing a new effort to support local choice in broadband, formally opposing measures that limit the range of options available to communities to spur expanded local broadband infrastructure, including ownership of networks. As a first step, the Administration is filing a letter with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) urging it to join this effort by addressing barriers inhibiting local communities from responding to the broadband needs of their citizens.”

► Expanding the National Movement of Local Leaders for Better Broadband: “As of today, 50 cities representing over 20 million Americans have joined the Next Century Cities coalition, a nonpartisan network pledging to bring fast, community-supported broadband to their towns and cities. They join 37 research universities around the country that formed the Gig.U partnership to bring fast broadband to communities around their campuses. To recognize these remarkable individuals and the partnerships they have built, in June 2015 the White House will host a Community Broadband Summit of mayors and county commissioners from around the nation who are joining this movement for broadband solutions and economic revitalization. These efforts will also build on the US Ignite partnership, launched by the White House in 2012, and which has grown to include more than 65 research universities and 35 cities in developing new next-generation gigabit applications.”

► Announcing a New Initiative to Support Community Broadband Projects: “To advance this important work, the Department of Commerce is launching a new initiative, BroadbandUSA, to promote broadband deployment and adoption. Building on expertise gained from overseeing the $4.7 billion Broadband Technology Opportunities Program funded through the Recovery Act, BroadbandUSA will offer online and in-person technical assistance to communities; host a series of regional workshops around the country; and publish guides and tools that provide communities with proven solutions to address problems in broadband infrastructure planning, financing, construction, and operations across many types of business models.”

► Unveiling New Grant and Loan Opportunities for Rural Providers: “The Department of Agriculture is accepting applications to its Community Connect broadband grant program and will reopen a revamped broadband loan program, which offers financing to eligible rural carriers that invest in bringing high-speed broadband to unserved and underserved rural areas.”

► Removing Regulatory Barriers and Improving Investment Incentives: “The president is calling for the Federal Government to remove all unnecessary regulatory and policy barriers to broadband build-out and competition, and is establishing a new Broadband Opportunity Council of over a dozen government agencies with the singular goal of speeding up broadband deployment and promoting adoptions for our citizens. The Council will also solicit public comment on unnecessary regulatory barriers and opportunities to promote greater coordination with the aim of addressing those within its scope.”

— John Eggerton

House Energy and Commerce Committee chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) and Communications chairman Greg Walden (R-Ore.) gave a shout out to private industry in the wake of the President's speech touting municipal broadband and federal preemption of state laws limiting it.

“With precious dollars already stretched thin, state and local officials know better than beltway bureaucrats what’s best for their communities. We should applaud and encourage private investment to develop state-of-the-art broadband networks,” they said in a statement.

“The Internet is a great American success story that gets better by the day because of the billions of dollars that are invested every year to expand and improve broadband access and speeds, and because of limited federal government interference. That private investment is the engine that drives Internet innovation and brings high-speed Internet access to every corner of our country – a goal we all share.”

The President traveled to Cedar Falls, Iowa, to promote high-speed broadband and the Cedar Falls Utilities municipal system's 1 gig service. FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler has also signaled that he wants a February vote on a couple of petitions my municipalities to preempt state laws, a vote that will likely be in support of those petitions.

“Cedar Falls is a success story," the legislators said, "but not all communities have seen the same results. The history of municipal Internet access is littered with many costly failures that no one wants to repeat. We urge the commission to work with Congress through our CommActUpdate process to improve our laws, promote continued investment in Internet infrastructure, and spur competition."

Industry players and policymakers were quick to react to the President's speech in Iowa promoting municipal broadband and slamming other ISPs over price and service.

The American Cable Association praised the President, but one of its high-profile members saw it quite differently.

This from Rocco Commisso, the CEO of Mediacom:  “I think it is fair to say that the only reason the vast majority of Iowans are able to enjoy broadband speeds that are significantly faster than dial-up, DSL or cellular 3G and 4G service, for that matter, is because Mediacom has honored its commitment made 15 years ago. At a time when no one else was willing to spend the money, we promised to take the necessary risks to ensure that the citizens of Iowa were not mere bystanders in the digital revolution, but active participants in the broadband economy.  Mediacom has enriched the lives of Iowans and provided fertile ground for businesses, large and small, to prosper and grow.

“I mean no disrespect to the President,” Commisso continued, “but traveling to Iowa in order to be a cheerleader for government-owned and taxpayer-funded broadband networks while ignoring the far more significant contributions of Mediacom is an insult to our 1,600 dedicated employees who live and work in Iowa.”

ACA praised the President for highlighting 1 gig offering of Cedar Falls municipal provider Cedar Falls Utilities. also an ACA member, and other municipal systems. "What ties Cedar Falls Utilities, Mediacom and all of these providers together is a drive to give American consumers broadband service that enables them to access entertainment content, exchange social information, and engage in civic debate," said ACA. "Consumers consider this connectivity critical, and ACA members, whether public or private, are responding by investing in innovative services and new infrastructure to make even higher speed service a reality."

ACA suggested that municipal nets could work with private ones to advance the President's goals. "To further deployment of high-speed broadband infrastructure throughout the country, we should encourage communities to work to facilitate deployments by private sector providers by finding ways to lower the costs of deployment and accelerate demand, ACA president Matt Polka said.  This teamwork is essential to ensuring that all Americans have this key tool to participate fully in our economy and society.”

Mediacom did not sound in a cooperating mood. "CFU is a municipal utility that leverages its government-conferred monopoly over electric, water and gas service to unfairly compete with private enterprises for cable television and high-speed Internet customers," the company said. The President’s remarks combined with the selection of CFU as the venue for his speech clearly show that the White House wants to waste taxpayer dollars to supplant our Nation’s private sector broadband providers with government-owned utility companies."

USTelecom, which represents AT&T, Verizon and other telecoms, matched the President's strong language with some of its own.

"“The president’s Title II reclassification and state preemption proposals, taken together, call for the federal government to regulate the Internet, and for municipal governments to own the Internet.  If acted upon by the Federal Communications Commission, they would be sweeping exercises of authority – raising constitutional concerns related to separation-of-powers, the scope of an independent agency’s Congressionally delegated authority, and the role of the states in our federal system," said USTelecom president Walter McCormick.. And, how will these expanded government roles be financed? With higher costs to consumers, and new taxes and fees on local  citizens.......AT&T is the nation’s leader when it comes to expansion of gigabit networks, with current plans to cover up to 100 cities and  municipalities. CenturyLink is making gigabit service available in 16 cities. Verizon FiOS led the way on gigabit fiber deployment as the prime mover in this field. And, virtually every member of this association, large and small, urban and rural, is engaged in fiber upgrades.  These positive actions should be encouraged through pro-investment policies, not discouraged through burdensome new regulation and taxpayer  subsidies to duplicative government enterprises.”

Even before the speech, National Cable & Telecommunications Association president Michael Powell was pointing to the private industry's investments in plant and speed.

“The cable industry has invested over $230 billion to build robust broadband networks that reach 93 percent of U.S. homes, said Powell. The President said that access to broadband was not the same as access to broadband at the speeds that will be needed.

"We agree with the President that connecting all Americans to this critical technology should be a national priority," said Powell, "and that is why we have long supported the use of scarce government funding to support universal service in areas where private networks are not economically viable.

“America’s decades-long policy of promoting private investment and exercising a light regulatory touch has yielded substantial benefits for American consumers," he continued. "As evidence, cable’s top broadband speeds have increased over 3200 percent in a decade, Akamai recently reported that 12 American states are among the 20 fastest regions of the world and our markets remain the envy of the world.  While government run networks may be appropriate in rare cases, many such enterprises have ended up in failure, saddling taxpayers with significant long-term financial liabilities and diverting scarce resources from other pressing local needs.

Republican Commissioner Michael O'Rielly saw the President's broadband push as an unwarranted intrusion in the business of an independent agency.

"It is clear that this Administration doesn’t believe in the independent nature of the FCC. It is disappointing that the Commission’s leadership is without a sufficient backbone to do what is right and reject this blatant and unnecessary interference designed to further a political goal ," he said. "Substantively, this missive is completely without statutory authority and would be a good candidate for court review, if adopted. In reality, this debate is about preempting a state’s right to prevent taxpayer rip-offs. Municipal broadband has never proven to be the panacea that supporters claim and the Administration now boasts. Instead, we have seen a long track record of projects costing more than expected and delivering less than promised."

NTCA–The Rural Broadband Association gave the President mixed reviews.

"[NTCA] applauds President Obama’s focus on increasing every American’s access to robust and affordable broadband," the group said. "But it’s not clear that encouraging local governments to get into a very difficult communications business for the first time on their own is the best path to achieve that important goal."

Wednesday may have featured some kind of record for reactions to an event that has not happened yet.

The event was the President's speech later today on the need for high-speed broadband and what he and his administration planned to do about it.

The reaction was coming because, unlike in past years where the President's State of the Union address themes only trickle out an hour or two before speech time--this year on Jan. 20--the White House decided to preview those themes and initiatives to journalists, then the public, beforehand, as he also did with cybersecurity. The President plans to outline his already outlined plan in a speech in Cedar Falls, Iowa, where the public utility has built out high-speed broadband at speeds rivaling world capitals, the White House has pointed out.

FCC commissioner Ajit Pai was not enthused by the President's signal to FCC chairman Tom Wheeler that he supports preemption of state laws limiting municipal broadband, particularly given that he thinks the FCC lacks the authority to use it.

"As an independent agency, the FCC must make its decisions based on the law, not political convenience," said Pai in a statement. "And U.S. Supreme Court precedent makes clear that the Commission has no authority to preempt state restrictions on municipal broadband projects. The FCC instead should focus on removing regulatory barriers to broadband deployment by the private sector."

National Cable & Telecommunications Association president Michael Powell said of the President's upcoming but telegraphed speech: "America's decades-long policy of promoting private investment and exercising a light regulatory touch has yielded substantial benefits for American consumers.  As evidence, cable's top broadband speeds have increased over 3200 percent in a decade, Akamai recently reported that 12 American states are among the 20 fastest regions of the world and our markets remain the envy of the world.  While government run networks may be appropriate in rare cases, many such enterprises have ended up in failure, saddling taxpayers with significant long-term financial liabilities and diverting scarce resources from other pressing local needs."

Powell said broadband would clearly play a central role in the fabric of society, but, "rather than chase false solutions, government policies should be directed at overcoming barriers to adoption and extending the reach of broadband to places yet unserved. We welcome sensible government policies that will build on our successes and convince even more Americans to take advantage of the broadband opportunity."

Rep. Doris Matsui (D-Calif.), a member of the House Communications Subcommittee, was all for the President's high-speed initiative.

"I applaud the President's initiative to expand affordable, high-speed broadband to more communities across the nation," she said.  This initiative will spur competition and provide communities with more choices in the broadband economy.  It is an important step toward ensuring all Americans - whether in an urban or rural community - have the opportunity to engage in the digital economy.  I look forward to working with the Administration and the FCC, which has been active on this issue, in support of efforts to expand broadband access to every corner of our country."

Rep. Deb Fisher (R-Neb.) was not similarly feeling the broadband love, branding the President's support for municipal broadband as nationalizing the Internet. ""Each day we see more policies coming out of this White House that attempt to wield greater power and control for the federal government," she said. "This afternoon, we will see the president parachute into Iowa and tout a new federal takeover of state laws governing broadband and the Internet."

""Ubiquitous broadband deployment empowers consumers, strengthens communities and provides economic opportunity for the innovative companies that drive our ICT sector," said the Telecommunications Industry Association. "TIA has long supported this goal, and we applaud President Obama's initiative. A critical step forward is to remove regulatory barriers that prevent or discourage private sector investment in new broadband facilities. At the same time, we encourage a collaboration with local governments, and additional public efforts can and should work to supplement private sector investments. TIA believes that state and local governments should be free to identify those broadband needs that are best met through some form of governmental action or partnership with the private sector."

The stars seemed to be aligning in Washington Wednesday for the President's push for high-speed broadband, including clearing away impediments to broadband buildouts.

The Supreme Court ruled in T-Mobile v. City of Roswell Jan. 14 that the Telecommunications Act requires local governments to provide timely reasons for denying a tower-siting request, and that simply sending a letter and providing a transcript of the hearing 26 days later did not cut it.

T-Mobile had sued the city of Roswell, Ga., arguing that the city council denial was not supported by substantial evidence in a written decision stating the reasons. A district court agreed, but The Eleventh Circuit U.S. court of Appeals concluded that the denial letter and transcript were sufficient.

T-Mobile took it to the Supreme Court, which reversed and remanded the Eleventh Circuit, saying localities need to provide their reasoning essentially contemporaneously and stated clearly enough for judicial review.

"The City failed to comply with its statutory obligations under the Act. Although it issued its reason s in writing and did so in an acceptable form, it did not provide its written reasons essentially contemporaneously with its written denial when it issued detailed minutes 26 days after the date of the written denial and 4 days before expiration of petitioner’s time to seek judicial review."

“PCIA is pleased that the United States Supreme Court agrees with our assessment that the Telecommunications Act of 1996 requires localities to provide clear, written reasons when applications to build wireless facilities are denied,” said Jonathan Adelstein,  President and CEO of PCIA – The Wireless Infrastructure Association. “ Today’s decision in T-Mobile v. Roswell vindicates PCIA’s conviction that wireless providers must be informed in a clear-cut and timely manner when siting  applications are turned down.

Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) and Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.), the chairs of the Senate Commerce Committee and House Energy & Commerce Committee, respectively, say they are working on legislation that would protect against online discrimination and blocking and even paid prioritization without reclassifying Internet access under Title II.

Cable operators have argued they can live with some form of all of those rules, but not under Title II common carrier regs they say could be disastrous for innovation and investment. The White House is backing Title II and does not buy those arguments, according to an official who spoke to reporters Tuesday about the President's high-speed broadband initiatives.

"We need unambiguous rules of the road that protect Internet users and can help spur job creation and economic growth," they wrote. "The rules we propose would prohibit blocking and throttling (the selective slowing of data), and also ensure that Internet service providers could not charge a premium to prioritize content delivery."

That still leaves a chance for user-directed prioritization, which is one option for paid prioritization offered up one ISP.

But they ague that using Title II, which they brand Roosevelt-era utility regs, could result in billions in higher fees, be applied to mobile broadband, which faces unique network management challenges, and would almost certainly "perpetuate years of litigation and even more uncertainty for consumers and job creators."

In a co-bylined piece for Reuters, Thune (pictured) and Upton said they were working with both sides of the aisle on compromise rules, but any Democrats signing on would have to go against the President, who has said Title II is the way to go.

The White House Tuesday outlined President Obama's proposals to boost access to "affordable high-speed broadband for all Americans, which will include calling on the FCC to "end laws that harm broadband service competition." It was a preview of one of the President's State of the Union initiatives, and the Administration made clear that the state of broadband was not fast enough.

That is according to Jeff Zients, director of the National Economic Council, and Andy Berke, Mayor of Chattanooga, Tenn., who were on a call with reporters previewing the Presidents plans, to be outlined in a speech Wednesday and later in the Jan. 20 State of the Union.

Zients stopped short of saying the President was supporting FCC preemption of state laws limiting municipal broadband, something FCC

Chairman Tom Wheeler has suggested the FCC should do, but Chattanooga is one of a pair of cities (Wilson, N.C., is the other) that has asked the FCC to preempt state regulations limiting municipal broadband buildouts, which cities argue are one way to deliver affordable broadband. A fact sheet from the White House seemed to make clear that the President was providing Wheeler backup for preemption efforts, just as the President offered support and encouragement for Title II reclassification of broadband.

"Laws in 19 states — some specifically written by special interests trying to stifle new competitors — have held back broadband access and, with it, economic opportunity," the White House said. "President Obama is announcing a new effort to support local choice in broadband, formally opposing measures that limit the range of options available to communities to spur expanded local broadband infrastructure, including ownership of networks. As a first step, the Administration is filing a letter with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) urging it to join this effort by addressing barriers inhibiting local communities from responding to the broadband needs of their citizens."

He made clear the Administration thinks there is not enough competition for high speed broadband. "Broadband matters, but a lot of us have a commonly frustrating experience," said Zients on a call with reporters. "Even when we are unhappy with the speed and performance of our Internet service, we don't have a choice. There are no alternative providers we can switch to. Three out of four Americans live in a location that has no competition or service at the broadband speeds increasingly required for many online services."

FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler has already signaled that 25 Mbps is the new table stakes, and the White House also seemed to be signaling that underserved areas would be defined by speed, not just whether or not there was service.

Zients said the lack of broadband was rarely a lack of demand, but more often the cost of infrastructure, and "a combination of laws that rpevent communities from providing incentives." He said Americans want and need better and faster broadband.

Also part of the President's plan to get higher-speed broadband to everyone:

"Expanding the National Movement of Local Leaders for Better Broadband: As of today, 50 cities representing over 20 million Americans have joined the Next Century Cities coalition, a nonpartisan network pledging to bring fast, community-supported broadband to their towns and cities. They join 37 research universities around the country that formed the Gig.U partnership to bring fast broadband to communities around their campuses. To recognize these remarkable individuals and the partnerships they have built, in June 2015 the White House will host a Community Broadband Summit of mayors and county commissioners from around the nation who are joining this movement for broadband solutions and economic revitalization. These efforts will also build on the US Ignite partnership, launched by White House in 2012, and which has grown to include more than 65 research universities and 35 cities in developing new next-generation gigabit applications.

"Announcing a New Initiative to Support Community Broadband Projects: To advance this important work, the Department of Commerce is launching a new initiative, BroadbandUSA, to promote broadband deployment and adoption. Building on expertise gained from overseeing the $4.7 billion Broadband Technology Opportunities Program funded through the Recovery Act, BroadbandUSA will offer online and in-person technical assistance to communities; host a series of regional workshops around the country; and publish guides and tools that provide communities with proven solutions to address problems in broadband infrastructure planning, financing, construction, and operations across many types of business models.

"Unveiling New Grant and Loan Opportunities for Rural Providers: The Department of Agriculture is accepting applications to its Community Connect broadband grant program and will reopen a revamped broadband loan program, which offers financing to eligible rural carriers that invest in bringing high-speed broadband to unserved and under served rural areas.

"Removing Regulatory Barriers and Improving Investment Incentives: The President is calling for the Federal Government to remove all unnecessary regulatory and policy barriers to broadband build-out and competition, and is establishing a new Broadband Opportunity Council of over a dozen government agencies with the singular goal of speeding up broadband deployment and promoting adoptions for our citizens. The Council will also solicit public comment on unnecessary regulatory barriers and opportunities to promote greater coordination with the aim of addressing those within its scope.

The White House briefing was a preview of the President's visit to Cedar Falls, Iowa, where he will talk about his high-speed broadband agenda in advance of the State of the Union (SOTU) (http://www.broadcastingcable.com/news/washington/president-promote-broad...). Broadband deployment has been a feature of previous SOTU's

Last year, for example, the President announced that the FCC and some major telecoms and edge providers were getting together to help connect 15,000 schools to high-speed broadband (http://www.broadcastingcable.com/news/washington/president-announces-new...). In 2012, the President said one of the nation's construction challenges was an "incomplete high-speed broadband network" that prevented some small businesses from reaching world markets. (http://www.broadcastingcable.com/news/news-articles/president-cites-inco...

In the 2011 SOTU, the President announced the National Wireless Initiative and pledged that "within the next five years, we will make it possible for business to deploy the next generation of high-speed wireless coverage to 98% of all Americans. This isn't just about a faster Internet and fewer dropped calls," he said at the time. "It's about connecting every part of America to the digital age."

The National Cable & Telecommunications Association blogged about the President's anticipated initiatives before the White House call.

Saying the reports of his Iowa visit seemed "like a good opportunity for us to take stock of the current state of broadband and how we might connect more Americans to fast broadband networks. Over the last two decades, America’s cable providers have invested over $230 billion to extend and upgrade fast broadband connections to  communities large and small, urban and rural, in all corners of America. In just the last decade, the average cable broadband customer has  seen top speeds increase a whopping 3200%..."

"Cable’s pace of technological progress shows no signs of abating," NCTA said. It did identify two areas where government could help, and one where it could hurt.

"While the cable industry continues to deliver on faster broadband at declining per-Megabit prices for Americans consumers, we know that that there are two discrete areas that may warrant targeted government attention," NCTA said. "First, for some very rural areas, private economic incentives may not be sufficient to justify network investments. In such areas, government incentives can play a constructive role in promoting universal service. Second, we know that for some Americans, the availability of broadband infrastructure is insufficient to spur adoption. The cable industry is committed to closing this digital divide by educating consumers about the benefits of broadband and by offering programs to help families overcome barriers they may face, including discounted service. You can learn more about those programs on our Closing the Digital Divide page."

But where the government could hurt was in the Title II arena, NCTA said.

"Instead of building on policies that have helped spur private investment, President Obama’s call to reclassify broadband as a Title II telecommunications service threatens to raise the cost of capital associated with network investment and slow continued progress in building faster and better broadband. Given the FCC’s ability to restore net neutrality rules without taking such extreme action, Title II appears particularly misguided."

Zients was asked about the impact of Title II. He said the Administration did not think it would have an adverse impact.

“I welcome the President’s focus on deploying high-speed broadband and improving competition in communities across America, particularly in rural areas," said Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.).  "Broadband is long past the point of being a luxury – it is a necessity, and the gap between urban and rural America is not closing nearly fast enough.  The lack of adequate choices for consumers is also one of the main reasons why the FCC must act swiftly to protect an open Internet.  I stand ready to work with the President and other Members of Congress to enact policies that will ensure that all Americans, whether they live in rural or urban areas, have access to fast and affordable broadband.”

A White House official told the Des Moines Register Saturday that the President will outline new steps to increase access to high-speed broadband when he visits Cedar Falls, Iowa, Jan, 14, which has a 1-Gigabit broadband network provided by Cedar Fall Utilities.

The speech will come only a few days before the President is expected to talk once again in his State of the Union (SOTU) speech (Jann.20) about the importance of high-speed broadband deployment and adoption—it has been a theme in recent SOTU's, as well as cybersecurity and privacy online.

FCC chairman Tom Wheeler, who was a tech policy adviser to candidate Obama and President Obama, has already been doing some spadework on that effort, signaling last week that the FCC wanted to make 25 Mbps (downstream) broadband the new definition of high speed and had concluded that was not being delivered to all Americans in a timely fashion.

The FCC has also made speed a priority in the FCC administered E-rate program for underwriting high-speed broadband to schools and libraries. In last year's State of the Union, the President focused on connecting more schools to high-speed broadband.

Notable for its absence during the SOTU last year was any mention of the state of the network neutrality rules, which the President supported as both candidate and President. But the President has arguable made up for that since then by late last year coming out strongly for Title II reclassification of Internet Access under Title II, arguing that without it ISP's would be able to restrict access.

FCC chairman Tom Wheeler outlined his approach for establishing new rules for the “Open Internet” by suggesting he would use Title II, but in a relatively limited way, to ensure there would be “no blocking, no throttling and no paid prioritization.”

Wheeler made the comments at an annual Q&A with Consumer Electronics Association president and CEO Gary Shapiro during the 2015 CES convention on Jan. 7.

Wheeler also said that the FCC expects to send the proposed rules to FCC commissioners Feb. 5 and that the Commission will vote on them on Feb. 26. Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel said Wednesday she was looking forward to seeing the chairman's proposal.

Shapiro pressed Wheeler in a congenial, often humorous fashion during the 50-minute Q&A for details on the plan, but the FCC chairman stuck to broader policy issues and the philosophy behind his approach saying, “You’ll have to wait until February for the details.”

Wheeler stressed that he was involved many years ago in creating the rules for the wireless industry that regulated them under 322 section of Title II but exempted them from other sections, such as the need to get approval for rate changes. He seemed suggested a similar approach would work for the Open Internet rules. “There is a way to do Title II right that says there are many parts of Title II that are inappropriate and [wrong] for investments.”

This approach, he argued, had allowed the wireless industry to grow into a hugely successful enterprise for both companies and consumers. Opponents of Title II point out that Title II wireless regime was applied to phone service, not broadband.

Whether or not to regulate Internet under Title II has been a matter of considerable debate, with ISP's generally opposing the idea, though Wheeler said that some smaller ISPs had told him they supported it. Last year, President Obama came out strongly in favor of Title II and suggested the FCC should do so, too.

During the session, Wheeler vigorously denied reports that he and the President were at odds over the issue. “The president and I are both pulling towards the same [place]: no blocking.”

Overall, he stressed that the policy “was to ensure that innovators and consumers have open access to networks” so that there is “sufficient incentive for ISPs to build better networks.”

He did joke, however, about criticism of his net neutrality policy from comedian John Oliver and noted that he’d received a Christmas gift from his daughter related to the issue. She gave him a framed collection of pictures of him playing with his grandchildren. The caption on the frame read: “Would you let your kids play with a dingo?”

When asked about Dish’s plans to offer a package of cable channels over the internet, Wheeler replied that “it is symbolic of everything that is going on. Video used to be defined by the network that delivered it. The new technologies have changed video so it can be distributed over [any] network and device. But the rights to that product still [pose] impediments, which is why we are beginning rule making so that over-the-top can be defined as an MVPD so they can have access to programming the way satellite providers have.”

Wheeler also added that “this is why the whole open internet is so damn important because you have to have access to pathways.”

In terms of the broadcast spectrum auctions, Wheeler said that they were still on course “to have an auction in early 2016.” And as argument for why Title II reclassification would not be the investment and innovation chiller some ISP’s have told him it would be, he cited the AWS-3 auction and the record bidding for that spectrum even after the President weighed in calling for Title II.

“It is disappointing that broadcasters have brought suit to slow things down, but hopefully that will be argued in March and decided in May or June…so that we are in a position to go forward with the final rules.” He has targeted the incentive auction for early 2016.

This piece includes additional reporting by John Eggerton.

Cable News Ratings: Fox News Leads Coverage of Obama’s Immigration Speech

Univision set the pace among viewers with its coverage of President Obama's speech on immigration on Thursday night.

The U.S. Spanish-language media leader 4.8 million viewers on Nov. 20, while Fox News Channel topped the cable news networks with 4.29 million watchers during the address from 8 p.m.-8:18 p.m. Telemundo pulled in 1.98 million viewers, ahead of MSNBC's 1.76 million. CNN averaged 1.68 million.

On the demo watch, Fox News also led the cable networks with 958,000 adults 25 to 54, versus 637,000 for CNN and 320,000 for MSNBC.

.

Cable stocks took a pounding in the hours after news broke that President Obama favored Title II regulation for multichannel video programming distributors, with Comcast and Time Warner Cable taking the biggest hits.

President Obama’s message that he would prefer the Federal Communications Commission reclassify MVPDs under Title II regulation (which would treat them like common telecommunications carriers) came just days after FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler proposed a hybrid approach, which would regulate edge providers’ access to individual subscribers via Internet service providers as a one-to-one telecommunications service under Title II, but regulate subscribers’ access to all those edge providers and services via their ISP as an information service under Section 706.

MVPDs have warned that a move toward Title II would stifle investment in the broadband infrastructure.

Comcast and Time Warner Cable, currently awaiting FCC approval for their pending $69 billion merger, understandably took a big hit, with TWC shares dropping as much as 7.2% ($10.34 per share) to $133.26 each in early trading Monday. By the early afternoon, TWC had regained some of that ground and closed at $136.50, down $7.10 each or 5% per share. Comcast shares fared slightly better – they were down as much as 6.1% ($3.36 each) to $51.79 before clawing back to close at $52.95 per share (down 4% or $2.20 per share).

Charter Communications stock also fell on the news, falling as low as $145.68 (down $10.69, or 6.8% each) in early trading, but regaining ground to close at $146.62 each (down $9.75 each or 6.2%) later in the day.

Liberty Broadband, the tracking stock created by Liberty Media Nov. 4 that includes its 26%  interest in Charter, also took a beating, dropping as much as 6% ($2.95 each) to $46.57 per share, before closing at $46.73 each, down 5.6%, or $2.79 per share. 

Cablevision Systems stock was hit the least, down as much as 60 cents each (3.2%) to $18.32 per share earlier in the day. The stock closed at $18.60 per dshare down 32 cents, or  about 1.7% each.

Analyst were puzzled at the President’s stance, especially since it came so soon after Wheeler’s call for a compromise on the issue.

In a research note, Elevation Partners analysts Stephen Sweeney said that full-blown Title II has little chance of passing regulatory muster, especially in the wake of the Republican Party taking control of the U.S. Senate in the recent mid-term elections.

“The FCC has jurisdiction over Net Neutrality and Democrats do have the edge 3-2 at the FCC, but we are very skeptical that Chairman Wheeler would yield to Obama’s pressure on this,” Sweeney wrote. “First, Wheeler would not have allowed his hybrid proposal to be leaked in the press if he wasn’t serious about pushing it forward. But after the mid-terms, we are not sure how much clout Obama has at all left to influence policy outside the use of executive orders.”

Cable operators began voicing their opposition to Title II, with Charter stating that a return to "1930's-era rotary telephone" telecom regulation is not the answer to an open Internet.

"Charter Communications unambiguously supports an open Internet, which is vital for consumers and central to our continued success," Charter said in a statement. "The extraordinary growth of broadband service in the United States, which now reaches more than 70 million households, has largely been the result of the current regulatory environment. For these reasons, we strongly oppose the reclassification of broadband as a Title II service under the Telecommunications Act. Efforts to reclassify broadband ignore the fact that the current rules have encouraged billions of dollars of investment in our broadband infrastructure and Americans' access to open, fast, and reliable service has never been greater.  Applying 1930's-era, rotary telephone legislation to a 21st century computer technology comes with significant risks to consumers. It is a solution in search of a problem and threatens to undermine continued investment to improve and expand our nation's broadband infrastructure."

Suddenlink Communications chairman and CEO Jerry Kent, in the midst of its own $250 million broadband upgrade dubbbed "Operation Gigaspeed," said a return to Title II would squelch any investment in the telecom infrastructure.

"To date, the bipartisan approach to the Internet of a light regulatory touch has resulted in  billions of dollars of investments and the creation of new jobs," Kent said in a statement. "In fact, this light regulatory approach was considered in our recent decision to invest nearly a quarter of a billion dollars in Operation GigaSpeed, which will bring 1 Gigabit service to households across our footprint. If the government changes course now, abandoning its light regulatory approach, it will threaten not only our planned investments, but the investments planned by many others.  Now is not the time – with an economic recovery that is tentative, at best – to discourage private sector companies from making new investments and creating jobs."