"... and that the real story is that edge providers ..."
Just how stubbornly clueless is this Chairman, anyway? THAT'S NOT HIS BUSINESS.
The FCC is supposed to worry about the telecoms, not the users of the telecoms.
He has no business trying this distraction tactic, only so he can do the
bidding of three or four special interests.
If Apple is proud to work for Chinese Internet censorship, that's hardly the
FCC's business either. Apple is not under FCC jurisdiction, unless they begin
offering a telecom service, nor are the Chinese telecoms. Plus, we have long
known that Apple likes walled gardens. So do the special interests he is so
busy trying to please.
"Pai has long argued that ISPs were unfairly singled out as gatekeepers in an
internet ecosystem that included massively powerful edge players."
That's obvious. A monopolistic broadband provider has no problem behaving like
a gatekeeper, given half a chance. A user of the Internet cannot do that. Duh.
It's astonishing how he can be so in bed with this tiny number of broadband
companies, and blind to the technical realities. His job is only to make damned
sure that the handful of service providers NOT behave like gatekeepers, which
has been their MVPD role and culture for decades past.
"He reiterated his theory of why edge providers like Google and Amazon
generally support net neutrality regs. 'Saddling internet service providers
with tougher regulations than apply to themselves helps them cement their
dominance over the internet economy.'"
That borders on plain stupidity. Funny how extremist yahoos end up sounding
dumber and dumber and dumber still, as they dig in. Any business which uses the
telecoms DEPENDS on telecom neutrality. No one has to use Google or Amazon, if
they don't want to. So tell me this, Chairman. Would you prefer to allow my
only broadband company to block Google or to block Amazon, just to "show them"?
He needs to step down, sooner rather than later. Like other stubborn, clueless
people, the more he digs in, the more he is becoming incoherent.
Courts, do the right thing.
Dec 06, 2017 10:58 AM ET
Pai: Apple Promoting Online Censorship
Takes aim at edge in op ed; says they need more disinfecting 'sunlight'
By John Eggerton
FCC chairman Ajit Pai suggests the parade of horribles whipped up by foes of
his network neutrality rule rollback order are just meant to feed into a false
narrative, and that the real story is that edge providers are a bigger threat
to an open net than ISPs and could use some of the transparency the FCC will be
requiring of ISPs.
He got specific in an op ed in conservative newspaper, The Washington Times.
Pai suggested that Apple was sending coded messages to China about censoring
"[J]ust this weekend, Apple's chief executive gave a keynote address at the
World internet Conference in China," he wrote. "That gathering promotes China's
vision of government censorship of the internet. What did he say there? Among
other things: 'We are proud to have worked alongside many of our partners in
China to help build a community that will join a common future in cyberspace.'
That is code for a censored internet. And it should alarm anyone who believes
in internet freedom.'
Pai's plan to remove most net neutrality regs on ISPs is scheduled to be voted
Dec. 14: "'Some have tried to whip Americans into a frenzy by making outlandish
claims. Feeding the hysteria are silly accusations that the plan will 'end the
internet as we know it'or threaten American democracy itself," he said.
"These claims obscure a pretty mundane truth: This plan would simply restore
the successful, light-touch regulatory framework that governed the internet
from 1996 to 2015. And importantly, it would get the government out of the
business of micromanaging the internet."
Pai has been on something of a "light touch" tour in speeches and appearances
to counter that net neutrality activist narrative, as well as raising a heavier
hand in the direction of Silicon Valley.
Pai has long argued that ISPs were unfairly singled out as gatekeepers in an
internet ecosystem that included massively powerful edge players.
He says it is false to suggest that Title II-based regs, which he labeled the
Obama FCC rules, are necessary.
He reiterated his theory of why edge providers like Google and Amazon generally
support net neutrality regs. "Saddling internet service providers with tougher
regulations than apply to themselves helps them cement their dominance over the
He called that regulatory arbitrage that was not in the public interest., and
reiterated his attack on the edge from last week that "large Silicon Valley
platforms today pose a far greater threat to a free and open internet than do
internet service provider."
His other illustrations of that point included that Twitter did not allow House
Communications Subcommittee chair Marsha Blackburn (R-Ten.), to promote her
Senate campign video because of a pro-life message and YouTube restricted
access to video from some conservative commentators.
There is a growing tension in Washington between the pressure not to censor
online content, and for social media to better police their content for
inappropriate content like hate speech, terrorist recruitment or sexual
"If these companies are truly committed to an open internet where Americans can
freely access the content of their choice, like I am, it's curious that they
focus on unnecessary and harmful regulation of other parts of the internet
ecosystem with little history of engaging in this kind of behavior," he said.
The centerpiece of Pai's new regulatory proposal is removing regs, boosting ISP
transparency about what they are doing--paid prioritization, or blocking or
throttling, though ISPs say they won't do the last two--then have the Federal
Trade Commission hold them to those promises, and the Justice Department
backstop any anticompetitive conduct.
He said Silicon Valley could use some similarly disinfecting sunlight.
"Right now, consumers are largely left in the dark when it comes to how these
companies determine what American consumers see in their newsfeeds or search
results," he said. "For example, these platforms could be using algorithms that
favor content with certain viewpoints, and their users would have no way of
knowing that they were being manipulated in this way. Is this a problem that
needs to be addressed, and if so, how? I don't claim to have all of the
answers, but I do think these are questions worth raising.
"So as we think about internet policy, we should look at the entire internet
economy - not single out one part of it."
An Apple spokesperson was not available for comment at press time.
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.