GREED FILES - Big Telecoms Buy States to Fight Cities

"How States Are Fighting to Keep Towns From Offering Their Own Broadband" by Leticia Miranda, ProPublica 6/26/2015

North Carolina and Tennessee are the latest states to side with telecoms, which have long lobbied against allowing cities to become Internet providers.

Earlier this year, the Federal Communications Commission voted to ease the way for cities to become Internet service providers.  So-called municipal broadband is already a reality in a few towns, often providing Internet access and faster service to rural communities that cable companies don’t serve.

The cable and telecommunications industry have long lobbied against city-run broadband, arguing that taxpayer money should not fund potential competitors to private companies.

The telecom companies have what may seem like an unlikely ally: states.  Roughly 20 states have restrictions against municipal broadband.

And the attorneys general in North Carolina and Tennessee have recently filed lawsuits in an attempt to overrule the FCC and block towns in these states from expanding publicly funded Internet service.

North Carolina’s attorney general argued in a suit filed last month that the “FCC unlawfully inserted itself between the State and the State’s political subdivisions.”  Tennessee’s attorney general filed a similar suit in March.

Tennessee has hired one of the country’s largest telecom lobbying and law firms, Wiley Rein, to represent the state in its suit.  The firm, founded by a former FCC chairman, has represented AT&T, Verizon and Qwest, among others.

James Tierney, director of the National State Attorneys General Program at Columbia Law School, said it is not unusual for attorneys general to seek outside counsel for specialized cases that they view as a priority.

Asked about the suit, the Tennessee attorney general’s office told ProPublica, “This is a question of the state’s sovereign ability to define the role of its local governmental units.”  North Carolina Attorney General’s office said in a statement that the “legal defense of state laws by the Attorney General’s office is a statutory requirement.”

As the New York Times detailed last year, state attorneys general have become a major target of corporate lobbyists and contributors including AT&T, Comcast and T-Mobile.

North Carolina is no exception.  The state’s Attorney General Roy Cooper received roughly $35,000 from the telecommunications industry in his 2012 run for office.  Only the state’s retail industry gave more.

The donations are just a small part of contributions the industry has made in the states.  In North Carolina’s 2014 elections, the telecommunications industry gave a combined $870,000 to candidates in both parties, which made it one of the top industries to contribute that year.  Candidates in Tennessee received nearly $921,000 from AT&T and other industry players in 2014.

The FCC’s decision came after two towns – City of Wilson in North Carolina and Chattanooga in Tennessee – appealed to the agency to be able to expand their networks.

The vote has rattled some companies.  In a government filing earlier this year, Comcast cited the FCC’s decision as a risk to the company’s business:  “Any changes to the regulatory framework applicable to any of our services or businesses could have a negative impact on our businesses and results of operations.”

If the court upholds the FCC’s authority to preempt restrictions in North Carolina and Tennessee, it may embolden other cities to file petitions with the agency, according to lawyer Jim Baller, who represents Wilson and the Chattanooga Electric Power Board.  “A victory by the FCC would be a very welcome result for many communities across America,” said Baller.

For some residents in and outside of Chattanooga, clearing the way to city-run broadband would mean the sort of faster Internet access that others might take for granted.

For 12 years, Eva VanHook, 39, of Georgetown, Tennessee, lived with a satellite broadband connection so slow that she’d read a book while waiting for a web page to load.  In order for her son to access online materials for his school assignments, she’d drive him 12 miles to their church parking lot, where he could access faster WiFi.

Charter, the local Internet service provider, declined several requests by her husband to build lines out to her home.  Only last month did Charter connect her home to the Internet.  “Even the possibility to jump on [the local utility’s] gigabit network would blow our minds right now,” VanHook said.  “There is nothing faster than Chattanooga.  Just through meeting them and hearing them speak and having them understand what’s going on, that’s the kind of place I want to do business.”

INTERNET - Bringing it to Deprived Homes

"How New York is bringing Internet-deprived homes out of the digital dark" PBS NewsHour 4/25/2015

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  There are more than 730,000 homes in New York City without broadband access.  And because the Internet today is the gateway to everything from education to the economy, the city is trying to bring those families out of the digital dark.  But Internet access requires more than a connection for cash-strapped families.  It has to be affordable, too.  Hari Sreenivasan reports.

HARI SREENIVASAN (NewsHour):  Two years ago Karen been never had to walk to get someplace.  She owned a car.  She also had a corporate job in Atlanta and a house with a pool in the backyard.  But today this single mother of two boys is unemployed and on the job hunt in New York City.  They moved here for a better life but quickly ran out of money.  And the one thing she needs right now to get back on her feet is what most of us take for granted.

KAREN BEEN:  I feel that the internet will definitely be a catalyst in me getting out of the situation we are in.  If you are looking for a job they want me to go online and fill out an application.  There is no more hardcopies when it comes to resumes.

HARI SREENIVASAN:  But it’s difficult for been to go online and send out her resume.  She can’t afford the monthly internet bill, which costs around 60 dollars a month in New York City.  So after school, the three make a beeline for the library.  Been’s 11 year old son Ishan Siddiqui rushes to finish his homework before the library closes.

ISHAN SIDDIQUI:  It was kind of difficult because sometimes in class I didn’t understand something and I wanted to go on the computer but I couldn’t go on it so I couldn’t research what I wanted to.

HARI SREENIVASAN:  The Been family is one of 730 thousand households in New York that does not have internet in the home.  The city says it’s doing its part to pull New Yorkers out of the digital dark, but it takes more than just having an internet connection.  That connection has to be affordable too.

INTERNET - Non-Neutrality, FCC's Shift on WEB Traffic (UPDATED)

Consumers, bend over and spread cheeks.

"F.C.C., in a Shift, Backs Fast Lanes for Web Traffic" by EDWARD WYATT, New York Times 4/23/2014

Excerpt

The principle that all Internet content should be treated equally as it flows through cables and pipes to consumers looks all but dead.

The Federal Communications Commission said on Wednesday that it would propose new rules that allow companies like Disney, Google or Netflix to pay Internet service providers like Comcast and Verizon for special, faster lanes to send video and other content to their customers.

The proposed changes would affect what is known as net neutrality — the idea that no providers of legal Internet content should face discrimination in providing offerings to consumers, and that users should have equal access to see any legal content they choose.

The proposal comes three months after a federal appeals court struck down, for the second time, agency rules intended to guarantee a free and open Internet.

Tom Wheeler, the F.C.C. chairman, defended the agency’s plans late Wednesday, saying speculation that the F.C.C. was “gutting the open Internet rule” is “flat out wrong.”  Rather, he said, the new rules will provide for net neutrality along the lines of the appeals court’s decision.

Still, the regulations could radically reshape how Internet content is delivered to consumers.  For example, if a gaming company cannot afford the fast track to players, customers could lose interest and its product could fail.

The rules are also likely to eventually raise prices as the likes of Disney and Netflix pass on to customers whatever they pay for the speedier lanes, which are the digital equivalent of an uncongested car pool lane on a busy freeway.

Consumer groups immediately attacked the proposal, saying that not only would costs rise, but also that big, rich companies with the money to pay large fees to Internet service providers would be favored over small start-ups with innovative business models — stifling the birth of the next Facebook or Twitter.

“If it goes forward, this capitulation will represent Washington at its worst,” said Todd O’Boyle, program director of Common Cause’s Media and Democracy Reform Initiative.  “Americans were promised, and deserve, an Internet that is free of toll roads, fast lanes and censorship — corporate or governmental.”

If the new rules deliver anything less, he added, “that would be a betrayal.”

Mr. Wheeler rebuffed such criticism.  “There is no ‘turnaround in policy,’ ” he said in a statement.  “The same rules will apply to all Internet content.  As with the original open Internet rules, and consistent with the court’s decision, behavior that harms consumers or competition will not be permitted.”

Broadband companies have pushed for the right to build special lanes.  Verizon said during appeals court arguments that if it could make those kinds of deals, it would.

Under the proposal, broadband providers would have to disclose how they treat all Internet traffic and on what terms they offer more rapid lanes, and would be required to act “in a commercially reasonable manner,” agency officials said.  That standard would be fleshed out as the agency seeks public comment.

"Consumer groups warn dismantling net neutrality could stymie startup innovation" PBS NewsHour 4/24/2014

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  The Federal Communications Commission is on the brink of changing the longstanding net neutrality principle, which allows consumers unfettered access to web content, and limits the ability of Internet service providers to block or filter material.  New guidelines would allow some companies to charge more (to the content provider, like YouTube) for faster service.  Gwen Ifill talks to Cecilia Kang of The Washington Post about what’s at stake.

WALL STREET - Comcast + Time Warner = Media Giant?

"How will regulators see the Comcast-Time Warner deal?" PBS Newshour 2/13/2014

Excerpt

GWEN IFILL (Newshour):  Comcast’s deal to buy Time Warner means the media giant, which already owns NBC Universal, is about to cast an even longer shadow over the industry.  If the deal is approved, Comcast will have 30 million subscribers and control just under 30 percent of all paid cable subscribers in the country.  It also becomes an even bigger player in the world of broadband Internet and video.

Geographically, Comcast grows as well.  It will operate in 43 of the largest 50 markets, extend its heaviest concentration of subscribers north all the way to Maine, and gain access to markets in New York City, Los Angeles, and Dallas.  But the $45 billion deal is being criticized by public interest groups worried about media consolidation.

We get more on all this from Edmund Lee of Bloomberg News.