Connect with us

Technology

Regulators Approve Tougher Rules for Internet Providers

Published

on

Federal Communication Commission (FCC) Chairman Tom Wheeler, center, joins hands with FCC Commissioners Mignon Clyburn, left, and Jessica Rosenworcel, before the start of their open hearing in Washington, Thursday, Feb. 26, 2015. Internet service providers like Comcast, Verizon, AT&T, Sprint and T-Mobile would have to act in the "public interest" when providing a mobile connection to your home or phone, under new rules being considered by the Federal Communications Commission. The rules would put the Internet in the same regulatory camp as the telephone, banning providers from "unjust or unreasonable" business practices. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

Federal Communication Commission (FCC) Chairman Tom Wheeler, center, joins hands with FCC Commissioners Mignon Clyburn, left, and Jessica Rosenworcel, before the start of their open hearing in Washington, Thursday, Feb. 26, 2015. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

ANNE FLAHERTY, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — Internet activists declared victory over the nation’s big cable companies Thursday, after the Federal Communications Commission voted to impose the toughest rules yet on broadband service to prevent companies like Comcast, Verizon and AT&T from creating paid fast lanes and slowing or blocking web traffic.

The 3-2 vote ushered in a new era of government oversight for an industry that has seen relatively little. It represents the biggest regulatory shake-up to telecommunications providers in almost two decades.

The new rules require that any company providing a broadband connection to your home or phone must act in the “public interest” and refrain from using “unjust or unreasonable” business practices. The goal is to prevent providers from striking deals with content providers like Google, Netflix or Twitter to move their data faster.

“Today is a red-letter day for Internet freedom,” said FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler, whose remarks at Thursday’s meeting frequently prompted applause by Internet activists in the audience.

President Barack Obama, who had come out in favor of net neutrality in the fall, portrayed the decision as a victory for democracy in the digital age. In an online letter, he thanked the millions who wrote to the FCC and spoke out on social media in support of the change.

“Today’s FCC decision will protect innovation and create a level playing field for the next generation of entrepreneurs — and it wouldn’t have happened without Americans like you,” he wrote.

Verizon saw it differently, using the Twitter hashtag #ThrowbackThursday to draw attention to the FCC’s reliance on 1934 legislation to regulate the Internet. Likewise, AT&T suggested the FCC had damaged its reputation as an independent federal regulator by embracing such a liberal policy.

“Does anyone really think Washington needs yet another partisan fight? Particularly a fight around the Internet, one of the greatest engines of economic growth, investment and innovation in history?” said Jim Cicconi, AT&T’s senior executive vice president for external and legislative affairs.

Net neutrality is the idea that websites or videos load at about the same speed. That means you won’t be more inclined to watch a particular show on Amazon Prime instead of on Netflix because Amazon has struck a deal with your service provider to load its data faster.

For years, providers mostly agreed not to pick winners and losers among Web traffic because they didn’t want to encourage regulators to step in and because they said consumers demanded it. But that started to change around 2005, when YouTube came online and Netflix became increasingly popular. On-demand video began hogging bandwidth, and evidence surfaced that some providers were manipulating traffic without telling consumers.

By 2010, the FCC enacted open Internet rules, but the agency’s legal approach was eventually struck down in the courts. The vote Thursday was intended by Wheeler to erase any legal ambiguity by no longer classifying the Internet as an “information service” but a “telecommunications service” subject to Title II of the 1934 Communications Act.

That would dramatically expand regulators’ power over the industry and hold broadband providers to the higher standard of operating in the public interest.

The FCC says it won’t apply some sections of Title II, including price controls. That means rates charged to customers for Internet access won’t be subject to preapproval. But the law allows the government to investigate if consumers complain that costs are unfair.

Industry officials and congressional Republicans fought bitterly to stave off the new regulations, which they said constitutes dangerous overreach and would eventually raise costs for consumers. The broadband industry was expected to sue.

“With years of uncertainty and unintended consequences ahead of us, it falls to Congress to step in,” said Michael Powell, head of the National Cable and Telecommunications Association.

GOP lawmakers said they would push for legislation, although it was unlikely Obama would sign such a bill.

“Only action by Congress can fix the damage and uncertainty this FCC order has inflicted on the Internet,” Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, said in a statement.

Also at stake Thursday was Obama’s goal of helping local governments build their own fast, cheap broadband. The FCC approved petitions by Chattanooga, Tennessee, and Wilson, North Carolina, to override state laws that restrict them from expanding their broadband service to neighboring towns.

___

Follow Anne Flaherty on Twitter at https://twitter.com/annekflaherty.

Copyright 2015 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Commentary

Doctors Seeing More Cases of Preventable Childhood Illnesses

OAKLAND POST — Physicians have said vaccine skepticism has expanded beyond childhood immunizations. Doctors also reported growing resistance to other preventive treatments.

Published

on

iStock

By Stacy M. Brown

Doctors across the United States say they are treating children for illnesses that routine vaccinations once made increasingly uncommon, raising concerns that years of declining immunization rates are beginning to reverse decades of public health progress.

Pediatricians have described seeing more cases of whooping cough, rotavirus infections, bacterial pneumonia and other potentially life-threatening illnesses that vaccines have long helped suppress. Some physicians reported treating conditions they had rarely encountered during their careers, while others said that growing vaccine hesitancy is changing how emergency rooms and hospitals care for children.

The reports come as measles outbreaks continue to spread across multiple states and vaccination coverage remains below federal public health targets.

Johns Hopkins University’s International Vaccine Access Center reported 2,077 confirmed measles cases nationwide as of May 29. Researchers warned that outbreaks reported across the country have raised concerns about continued transmission, additional hospitalizations and deaths, and the possible loss of the nation’s measles elimination status.

Public health experts have long viewed measles as a warning sign because of its ability to spread rapidly through communities with lower vaccination coverage. The New York Times reported that physicians increasingly fear the resurgence of measles may be followed by the return of other vaccine-preventable diseases.

Doctors say that is already happening.

Dr. Meghan Hofto, a pediatric hospitalist at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, said she has already treated roughly as many children with rotavirus this year as she saw during the previous decade. Rotavirus once caused tens of thousands of hospitalizations annually before vaccines sharply reduced its spread. None of the children she treated this year had been vaccinated.

Hofto also described caring for infants with pertussis, commonly known as whooping cough.

“It’s hard to know when they’re safe to go home,” Hofto told The Times.

The rise in whooping cough cases has been particularly striking. More than 28,000 cases were reported nationwide last year, compared with approximately 7,000 in 2023, according to figures cited by The Times. Many of the affected infants were too young to receive vaccinations themselves and relied on broader community protection to reduce their exposure.

Other doctors described similarly troubling cases.

Dr. Jessica Kirk, a pediatric hospitalist in Alabama, recently treated an unvaccinated toddler hospitalized with pneumonia caused by simultaneous infections of Haemophilus influenzae and Streptococcus pneumoniae. Vaccines exist to protect against both illnesses. The child required oxygen and antibiotics to recover.

Researchers at Johns Hopkins have been tracking vaccination trends nationwide and found continuing signs of vulnerability.

At the same time, vaccine policy has become increasingly contentious in state legislatures.

Johns Hopkins researchers reported that lawmakers across the country continue to introduce bills affecting childhood vaccination requirements, vaccine access and non-medical exemptions. Researchers also noted that state policies governing exemptions remain a significant factor in vaccination coverage and disease transmission risks.

Physicians have said vaccine skepticism has expanded beyond childhood immunizations. Doctors also reported growing resistance to other preventive treatments.

For doctors confronting the return of illnesses that vaccines once pushed to the margins of American medicine, the challenge is becoming increasingly personal.

“It just feels like you’re a tiny little boat with a giant tidal wave coming at you,” Dr. Erin Charles, a regional pediatric hospitalist at Seattle Children’s Hospital, told reporters. “And you might convince one family here and there.”

Continue Reading

Bay Area

How Is AI Affecting California? The State Wants You to Share Your Story

The program marks the first time the state has opened the platform to all Californians. State officials said the effort is designed to give residents a direct role in discussions about how AI should be regulated and used as the technology rapidly expands across industries.

Published

on

iStock
iStock

By Bo Tefu, California Black Media  

Gov. Gavin Newsom announced May 7 that California is expanding its Engaged California digital democracy initiative statewide, inviting residents to help shape future state policies on artificial intelligence (AI) and its impact on jobs and the economy.

The program marks the first time the state has opened the platform to all Californians. State officials said the effort is designed to give residents a direct role in discussions about how AI should be regulated and used as the technology rapidly expands across industries.

“We’ve got to be clear-eyed about this moment: AI is moving fast, bringing enormous opportunity, but also real risks,” Newsom said in a statement. “Californians deserve a seat at the table as we shape what’s to come.”

The initiative will roll out in two phases. Beginning immediately, Californians can sign up online to share how AI is affecting their work and communities and provide ideas for possible government action. Later this summer, a smaller group reflecting the state’s workforce demographics will participate in live discussions focused on developing policy recommendations.

State officials said the goal is to identify areas of agreement among Californians and provide policymakers with public feedback as the state develops future AI regulations and workforce strategies.

Engaged California is modeled after digital democracy programs used in Taiwan and is intended to encourage structured public discussion rather than social media-style debate. Officials described the effort as a form of “deliberative democracy” aimed at helping residents engage directly in state decision-making.

“The more Californians are engaged in the democratic process, the better able we’ll be to confront the challenges we face together,” said Nick Maduros, California Secretary of Government Operations, in a statement.

The statewide launch builds on two earlier pilot programs. One pilot gathered public input following the Los Angeles firestorms to help guide recovery efforts, while another collected ideas from state employees about improving government operations.

California has positioned itself as a national leader in AI policy and development. Since 2023, the Newsom administration has introduced initiatives focused on responsible AI use in government, cybersecurity protections, workforce training and regulations targeting risks such as deepfakes and AI-generated robocalls.

The state has also partnered with companies in Silicon Valley — including NVIDIA, Google, Adobe, IBM and Microsoft — to expand AI education and workforce training programs across California schools and universities.

Continue Reading

Activism

OP-ED: AB 1349 Puts Corporate Power Over Community

Since Ticketmaster and Live Nation merged in 2010, ticket prices have jumped more than 150 percent. Activities that once fit a family’s budget now take significant disposable income that most working families simply don’t have. The problem is compounded by a system that has tilted access toward the wealthy and white-collar workers. If you have a fancy credit card, you get “presale access,” and if you work in an office instead of a warehouse, you might be able to wait in an online queue to buy a ticket. Access now means privilege.

Published

on

Bishop Joseph Simmons, Senior Pastor, Greater St. Paul Baptist Church, Oakland
Bishop Joseph Simmons, Senior Pastor, Greater St. Paul Baptist Church, Oakland

By Bishop Joseph Simmons, Senior Pastor, Greater St. Paul Baptist Church, Oakland

As a pastor, I believe in the power that a sense of community can have on improving people’s lives. Live events are one of the few places where people from different backgrounds and ages can share the same space and experience – where construction workers sit next to lawyers at a concert, and teenagers enjoy a basketball game with their grandparents. Yet, over the past decade, I’ve witnessed these experiences – the concerts, games, and cultural events where we gather – become increasingly unaffordable, and it is a shame.

These moments of connection matter as they form part of the fabric that holds communities together. But that fabric is fraying because of Ticketmaster/Live Nation’s unchecked control over access to live events. Unfortunately, AB 1349 would only further entrench their corporate power over our spaces.

Since Ticketmaster and Live Nation merged in 2010, ticket prices have jumped more than 150 percent. Activities that once fit a family’s budget now take significant disposable income that most working families simply don’t have. The problem is compounded by a system that has tilted access toward the wealthy and white-collar workers. If you have a fancy credit card, you get “presale access,” and if you work in an office instead of a warehouse, you might be able to wait in an online queue to buy a ticket. Access now means privilege.

Power over live events is concentrated in a single corporate entity, and this regime operates without transparency or accountability – much like a dictator. Ticketmaster controls 80 percent of first-sale tickets and nearly a third of resale tickets, but they still want more. More power, more control for Ticketmaster means higher prices and less access for consumers. It’s the agenda they are pushing nationally, with the help of former Trump political operatives, who are quietly trying to undo the antitrust lawsuit launched against Ticketmaster/Live Nation under President Biden’s DOJ.

That’s why I’m deeply concerned about AB 1349 in its current form. Rather than reining in Ticketmaster’s power, the bill risks strengthening it, aligning with Trump. AB 1349 gives Ticketmaster the ability to control a consumer’s ticket forever by granting Ticketmaster’s regime new powers in state law to prevent consumers from reselling or giving away their tickets. It also creates new pathways for Ticketmaster to discriminate and retaliate against consumers who choose to shop around for the best service and fees on resale platforms that aren’t yet controlled by Ticketmaster. These provisions are anti-consumer and anti-democratic.

California has an opportunity to stand with consumers, to demand transparency, and to restore genuine competition in this industry. But that requires legislation developed with input from the community and faith leaders, not proposals backed by the very company causing the harm.

Will our laws reflect fairness, inclusion, and accountability? Or will we let corporate interests tighten their grip on spaces that should belong to everyone? I, for one, support the former and encourage the California Legislature to reject AB 1349 outright or amend it to remove any provisions that expand Ticketmaster’s control. I also urge community members to contact their representatives and advocate for accessible, inclusive live events for all Californians. Let’s work together to ensure these gathering spaces remain open and welcoming to everyone, regardless of income or background.

Continue Reading

Subscribe to receive news and updates from the Oakland Post

* indicates required

CHECK OUT THE LATEST ISSUE OF THE OAKLAND POST

ADVERTISEMENT

WORK FROM HOME

Home-based business with potential monthly income of $10K+ per month. A proven training system and website provided to maximize business effectiveness. Perfect job to earn side and primary income. Contact Lynne for more details: Lynne4npusa@gmail.com 800-334-0540

Facebook

Trending

Copyright ©2021 Post News Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.