With less than a week to go now before the midterm elections, one of the biggest questions is whether younger voters will show up at the polls. Democrats have seized on network neutrality as an issue to get them to vote.
One thing Democrats and Republicans do agree on: The digital divide undercutting rural America needs to be fixed. But figuring out the details of achieving this goal is where the two sides diverge.
In spite of the billions of dollars in private investment and government subsidies over multiple decades, the numbers still paint a disturbing picture.
During his second day of Senate confirmation hearings, Judge Brett Kavanaugh defended his dissent in a federal court decision that upheld the Federal Communications Commission's 2015 net neutrality rules.
The Federal Communications Commission has already repealed net neutrality, but the Trump administration can't leave it there. It also wants the Supreme Court to remove a ruling that upheld the controversial Obama-era rules. Is this a big deal?
Network neutrality may be dead, but questions remain about how seriously the Federal Communications Commission considered comments from the public.
Historians may look back on this week as a turning point in the evolution of the internet. First came the end of net neutrality rules which ensured that broadband and wireless providers couldn't act as gatekeepers picking and choosing who succeeds
Mark Zuckerberg appeared on Capitol Hill to talk about data privacy. But several lawmakers from rural parts of the country used the opportunity to ask the Facebook CEO to help bring high-speed internet access to their rural constituents.
Is AT&T carving out lanes on the internet and offering the speediest service to the highest bidder, while leaving all other internet traffic relegated to "slow lanes"? Not exactly.
President Donald Trump's $200 billion infrastructure proposal released Feb 12 includes $50 billion in funding for rural communities, but nothing specific for broadband deployment.