The sad reality of American political expression today...
I think that Pai was justified in cancelling his appearance at CES, especially
if it is true, as this commentary asserts, that CES officials were threatened
as well.
But there may have been a silver lining to this cloud; one could even assign a
bit of conspiracy to Pai’s decision to back out. Gary Shapiro, the CEO of CES,
was left only with Maureen K. Ohlhausen, the acting Chairman of the Federal
Trade Commission, to interview during the FCC & FTC Commissioners Roundtable.
Could it be that the FCC has no reason to be at CES anymore, now that the Title
II decision has been revoked? The FTC is once again the government watchdog for
the Internet. And the FCC just told broadcasters that if they want to implement
ATSC 3.0, its up to THEM this time:
NO NEW FCC TV STANDARD
NO NEW RECEIVER MANDATES
And with deregulation, the FCC has little if any role in the evolution of
wireless telephony and data. I guess someone will still need to perform
“emission tests” on computing devices; kinda like the role Underwriter
Laboratory plays with certification of appliances.
Maybe Bert could get what he is wishing for. If the FCC is shut down, Pai will
have to find another job...
Regards
Craig
https://www.commentarymagazine.com/american-society/torment-ajit-pai-net-neutrality-fcc/
The Torment of Ajit Pai | commentary
Jan. 5, 2018
At some point predating Donald Trump’s ascension to the presidency, political
activism evolved from a civic exercise into a lifestyle. For the initiated,
traditional forms of political organizing are too passive. In the activists’
minds, the objects of their fixations represent an existential threat, and
there aren’t many behaviors that are proscribed in a fight for survival. For
the fanatical opposition to Donald Trump, in particular, even the most mundane
aspects of governance are inflated into a struggle for our very way of life.
This is how opposition to an arcane, bureaucratic decision by the Federal
Communications Commission transformed from a liberal cause into an obsession.
This is also how the FCC’s chairman, Ajit Pai, became the subject of almost
daily persecution.
The source of great consternation on the left is the FCC’s decision to scrap an
Obama-era rule implemented in 2015 deemed “net neutrality.” This complicated
regulatory structure determines who controls broadband—as John Podhoretz
described it, the “pipe” through which online content is delivered to
individual consumers. The end of net neutrality will allow Internet service
providers to do whatever they want with their “pipe,” even privilege the
content of providers that they own or support. That is precisely what
independent content providers fear, and that’s why they oppose the repeal of
this law. Proponents of the FCC’s move believe those fears are not well
supported; the marketplace will ensure that service providers are ultimately
unable to block access to popular content or services, even if that is their
inclination. We’re about to find out who is right.
This supervisory guideline has been elevated into a “life-or-death” struggle by
those who favor net neutrality. Accordingly, Pai, a proponent of deregulating
the communications marketplace to spur innovation or to simply comply with the
law (an obstacle the Obama-era FCC regularly circumvented), has been the target
of a campaign of harassment that amounts to a national scandal.
The so-called “Resistance” latched onto the net-neutrality issue early in the
Trump presidency and went about expressing their opposition to the repeal of
this regulation in the most contemptible fashion imaginable. HBO host John
Oliver was among the first figures of mainstream cultural relevance to organize
a campaign against this regulation, which he dubbed “Go FCC Yourself.” He
encouraged his followers to bombard the FCC’s website with comments supporting
the regulation, and that is precisely what they did. Those comments were
peppered with claims that Pai was a pedophile, a “dirty, sneaky Indian” who
should self-deport, and reminders that anonymous online hordes maintain the
“power to murder Ajit Pai and his family.” Oliver was eventually compelled to
release a video urging his followers to dial back the racism and death threats.
This episode would prove to be just the beginning of Pai’s ordeal. By May of
last year, Pai’s tormentors began a campaign to ensure that the FCC chairman
could enjoy no peace—not even in his own home. “Resistance” groups began
distributing fliers and door hangers around Pai’s Arlington, Virginia
neighborhood, featuring a black-and-white photo of Pai with his vital stats
(height, weight, age, and professional background) and accusing him of selling
the Internet out to corporations. “Have you seen this man?” the fliers read.
These demonstrators didn’t stop there. They began organizing “vigils” in Pai’s
driveway—a tactic that net neutrality activists deployed in 2014 against
then-FCC chairman Tom Wheeler. They “come up to our front windows and take
photographs of the inside of the house,” Pai told the Wall Street Journal. “My
kids are 5 and 3. It’s not pleasant.”
“Is this really the world you want Annabelle and Alexander to inherit,” read a
hand-made sign affixed to a lamppost outside Pai’s residence in November,
making a point to emphasize the names of Pai’s two children. “They will come to
know the truth: Dad murdered democracy in cold blood,” read another. The Pai
family’s doorbell reportedly rang every half hour, according to National
Journal’s Brendan Bordelon, with pizza deliveries that they had not ordered.
“It was a little nerve-racking, especially for my wife who’s not involved in
this space,” Pai told Fox News Channel. “Families,” he continued, “should
remain out of it and stop harassing us at our homes.”
But it didn’t stop, and the threats to Pai’s safety have only become more
credible. In December, ahead of the commission’s vote to formally nix the
controversial 2015 regulation, a specific bomb threat forced the FCC to halt
proceedings and clear the building. This week, Pai was forced to cancel a
scheduled appearance at the Consumer Electronics Show after receiving credible
death threats. A Recode reporter confirmed that the organization that hosts the
annual gathering of business and technology experts had also been “subject to
vicious and direct attacks and threats” for even daring to associate with the
FCC chairman.
Pai’s treatment is an outrage and a disgrace. It would be a national scandal in
the press but for the fact that so many of the country’s opinion-makers and
media professionals agree with the activists’ cause, if not their methods.
Pai’s record is that of a competent steward of the FCC, and he easily won a
second term at his post in October with the support of four Democratic
senators. What’s more, he has demonstrated both independence and a commitment
to free and unfettered expression, going so far as to scold Donald Trump for
suggesting that his regulatory organ should yank the licenses of broadcasters
with which the president disagreed.
For all his autonomy, Pai and his family have nevertheless endured a campaign
of stalking and intimidation for merely serving the country in his capacity as
FCC chairman. This sorry display is unbecoming of a mature republic. The
activist left is incubating the kind of potentially violent radicalism that
they cannot control. If Democrats truly fret for the norms of civil conduct
that are supposedly being lost in the Trump era, they might devote some
attention to their own supporters.
