Is the FCC Reading from the MMS Playbook?
By Jenn Ettinger, August 25, 2010
If you haven’t already, take a few minutes to read this piece that ran today in the Washington Post. Really, do it. I’ll wait. This is me waiting.
“How the Minerals Management Service’s partnership with industry led to failure” is a play-by-play of how lax government regulation and industry-written rules led to the disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, and brought a U.S. government agency to its knees. It eerily foreshadows where the Federal Communications Commission could be headed if Chairman Julius Genachowski doesn’t stand up to the industry he is in charge of overseeing.
The Chairman has been reluctant to reassert the FCC’s authority by reclassifying broadband Internet access and enacting real Net Neutrality protections. Meanwhile, the telecommunications industry has stepped up to the plate, echoing efforts by MMS in the ’90s, which spent time working with industry to develop policies that suited all parties. MMS, as a result was “not capable of navigating its dual relationship as regulator and industry partner.”
Google and Verizon partnered to establish a legislative framework that undermines openness on both the wired and wireless Internet – leaving the latter completely unprotected. And now AT&T, Microsoft and others reportedly are busily crafting their own proposal for a “legislative remedy.”
“We can handle this,” these companies are telegraphing Chairman Genachowski. And he seems all too happy to sit idly by, watch the game unfold, and hope he doesn’t get called in off the bench.
It’s this very attitude that resulted in the spill (spill seems like such an unimpressive word for what happened) in the Gulf. “As it had dozens of times before, the agency (MMS) adopted language provided by the industry’s trade group, the American Petroleum Institute, and incorporated it into the Federal Register,” according to the Post. Wait a few weeks, change a few words, and that sentence could very well speak for the FCC and the future of the Internet.
The story of how MMS ended up where it is today sounds all too familiar to FCC-watchers. “After the Clinton administration set the table for the [industry-agency] partnership, the George W. Bush administration let the industry run it.”
Over the past decade, former FCC Chairmen Michael Powell and Kevin Martin handed oversight of communications to a few large corporations – most notably by changing the way broadband was treated under the Communications Act and by setting in motion the current crisis that could leave the FCC without the ability to protect Internet users and at the mercy of a few big companies.
Chairman Genachowski should not leave the rule-writing to those expected to follow the rules. Because history shows over and over again, we can’t trust them.
While the oil and energy industries sucked the life out of MMS amid frequent warning signs, the agency remained publicly committed to its partnership. Some partnership. We can see what happens when you leave it up to the oil industry to regulate its own drilling practices. It’s the same thing that happened on Wall Street when the public’s watchdogs were defanged. Are we going to look back five, 10, 15 years from now at a closed Internet and say, “well turns out big phone and big cable couldn’t regulate themselves either”?
The answer should be no. And the solution is simple: Chairman Genachowski and the FCC must take the lessons learned from disasters of other oversight agencies and chart a different course. That means standing up to the big industries and using the votes they have to restore the agency’s authority and safeguard Net Neutrality.
That’s the FCC’s job. And it’s the RIGHT thing to do.
Free Press is a national, nonpartisan organization working to reform the media. Free Press does not support or oppose any candidate for public office. Through education, organizing and advocacy, we promote diverse and independent media ownership, strong public media and universal access to communications.
Jenn Ettinger
Media Coordinator Jenn Ettinger focuses on media relations, ensuring that Free Press maintains an effective and consistent media presence. She works closely with the communications director to draft and distribute press releases, make pitch calls to reporters, and assist with media scheduling and promotion. Read Jenn's full bio »


Comments
Defanged citizen - Not quite yet
Investigative journalism has the power to turn the focus of world attention to issues that matter. Issues that can change the course of history and possibly find a way to keep the Earth alive. To find a way past the pile of confounding issues currently piled up blocking a door too small to a world that somehow has found a sustainable way of living in sync with nature. Not the nature of colored glossies of photo buffs; the nature of the natural world that fights it out every day since time began to find a way to fit and work together. To preserve the natural world on which we depend. Chief among the tools to unravel the current situation is free and open access to unfettered information on the internet and to be able to make use of the greatest communications innovation in the Universe. The one that's able to keep hope alive. Free speech.
Wireless is the future of the internet.
Wireless is the future of the internet. What the cable cos and telcos are trying to say is that their profit makes them able to ensure the internet has now where to go, that it gets ruined with systems where they can force you to look at things and steal your time and attention at will. They can also keep you from seeing things and charge too much.
We as a society have to say that they have no stake in the matter, they are not a stake holder but an expendable middle man.
Increasing the use of ad blockers vital to saving the net.
I tried the write the nice creators of simple ad block a letter but their side was down for "bandwidth exceeded" and admin email was out of order the email being sent back. I want to ask for a strategic feature the letter went as follows:
I don't want the ad network or an Adobe being able to verify that a video or product placement was actually seen and I'd like this to hold even if the user opts to see it. Prior to cable boxes networks couldn't give assurances but their Nielsen numbers the same goal because network TV was highly canalized. Luckily that doesn't hold for the internet. As a 2nd step the word may have to be spread about them not being able to differentiate, this will help accelerate the end of internet advertising. Really companies like Adobe should never ever be able to 'prove' that they've served an ad- any certainty on their part is at the very least a violation of our privacy.
because...
A society based on advertising enables lobbying and the capture of politicians so that we lose political representation as we suffer censorship, propaganda and the loss of privacy. With the loss of privacy and anonymity in particular, any semblance of so called rights vanish, non contributing elites become certain that people are property and society becomes a pile of shit. The theft of our time and attention fuels a culture of puffing and fraud, reinforcing itself as it leads to poor investment decisions, with less real wealth and contentment but also to increasing waste and problems cycling the economy.
Lets flip it right side up.
Right now the system is backwards. Companies like Adobe, through theft of our time and attention, are part of a system that pays advertisers when people visit certain sites. I'd argue that search itself does not need ad revenues and I am not alone. It may well be that its possible to do it without ad revenues and do it better than Google, but either way, search makes the demand based ad industry (heart of advertising industry) obsolete.* In a proper world, when we pay any dumb pipe or physically or gain access through a public library we should have unlimited access to literally everything for a period of time. If we are paying a dumb pipe service it should just be one low monthly fee that gives us access everywhere to everything and that service will then pay a 1/100 of a penny or some such fee per second when a site is up and do so in a way that is always ad free, private and anonymous. Crucially we still need the right to click a button that will deny even the dumb pipe contribution to a site we visit but disapprove of. This is because we are not a commodity that the dumb pipe company gets to sell. There might also be regulations that convert such companies into cooperatives or wholly employee owned or fee for service non profit formats. It is the equivalent of public domain and that is certainly better than paying a would be Exxon for gas and to drive on public roads because Exxon has licensed the roads from sponsored government.
*high quality product info would of course still be there on the other end of a user initiated search for an actual product. And companies would still be using word of mouth and seeding market with actual product. The point is not to eliminate commercial speech but to make sure it never is allowed to compromise political speech or turn citizenship (even if we are citizens of the globe) into consumership (a fate worse even that wage slavery.)
I dont know
I don't know how about you, but I'm always using cable, it's faster and less harmful to health.
In Dash Receivers