Service providers will not be required to list information related to the Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) on their broadband labels, according to guidance issued by the FCC's Wireline Competition Bureau (WCB) on Monday. The guidance was issued in tandem with the FCC formally announcing that April will be the final month of full funding for the ACP. The untimely ending of the ACP has created a series of conundrums and unanswered questions. One of those was how broadband providers were supposed to handle a requirement to list whether they participate in the ACP on federally mandated consumer broadband labels. The ACP is set to run out of funds just as those labels debut. Both the ACP—which provides a $30/month broadband subsidy for over 23 million low-income households—and the FCC's required consumer broadband labels were established through the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) of 2021, which contained $65 billion in broadband funding and related regulations around consumer protection.

I'm interested in shifting the culture around our relationship with online consent because I recognize how pervasive dominant narratives are. In this work, a lot of folks have shifted to a mindset of powerlessness. I've learned that the more you encourage people that we still have a voice in the matter, the more folks tend to push back against systems that are unjust. And it's not a given that your data is going to be extracted and weaponized against you. We still have opportunities to mount a resistance against systems that are harmful. To me, that's the general public. That's anybody who is exposed to any type of system that's extracting our data. However, I do prioritize Black folks, because we're looking at systems that are systemically racist. Our data and information is being leveraged to target us to be consumers of systems, not producers of systems, and how agencies like law enforcement have leveraged our data in the past to create predictive policing systems or to hyper surveil communities.

[Ever Bussey is a social researcher and creative media maker. The nature of their practice brings the intricacies of human social relationships into focus through storytelling and collective world-building. Tawana Petty is a mother, social justice organizer, poet, author, and facilitator. Her work focuses on racial justice, equity, privacy, and consent. She is a 2023-2025 Just Tech Fellow with the Social Science Research Council, a 2024 National LIO Yearlong Fellow with the Rockwood Leadership Institute and she serves on the CS for Detroit Steering Committee.]

The Federal Communications Commission is poised to raise taxes through its Universal Service Fund—a regressive, hidden tax on consumers' phone bills that funds a series of unaccountable, bloated internet subsidy programs. Rather than giving the FCC carte blanche to expand its balance sheet, Congress must reform the USF's structural problems, reevaluate its component programs, and get the FCC's spending under control. Here is my plan to do that. 

• To get spending under control, Congress—not the FCC—must take charge of defining universal service and deciding where USF funds may go. Moving some or all USP programs into direct congressional appropriations would help restore political accountability over the FCC's spending decisions. 
• Stop subsidizing networks that face unsubsidized competition.
• Do not subsidize Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act-funded networks' ongoing operational costs.
• Lifeline and the Affordable Connectivity Program are duplicative and should, at the very least, be combined. If low-income broadband subsidies are to continue, limit enrollment and develop clear performance metrics.
• The E-rate program should be evaluated so policymakers can make sure it is truly benefiting pedagogical objectives; these subsidies should serve children, not the interests of tech and telecommunications lobbyists.

Best practice methods for assessing affordability developed and endorsed by academic and government affordability experts can provide much greater precision in assessing need thereby enabling more informed and more targeted digital equity interventions. However, recent experience in Washington state has revealed that few of us in the digital equity realm are yet comfortable applying these methods, or, indeed, are even aware of them. To clarify the problem with current methods and the possibility for improvement, we focus on one key component of digital equity—affordable broadband. Millions of Americans fall between the somewhat arbitrary and inconsistent guidelines for prevailing digital equity interventions. For example, the Affordable Connectivity Program has provided subsidized internet service to households at 200 percent of the Official Poverty Measure (OPM). However, affordability experts looking at Washington state in 2023 found 225,677 Washington state households were making more than 200 percent of the OPM, yet were not making enough to cover basic necessities such as food and housing. The same analysis applied across the US has similar results, with millions of households found to be falling between current program guidelines and actual self-sufficiency. 

Regional provider Fastwyre Broadband is investing more than $65 million in new and existing markets in southwest and south central Louisiana. A Fastwyre spokesperson said that “the vast majority of the $65 million investment is self-funded with small federal and state grant funding in more remote areas.” Fastwyre is a portfolio company of Madison Dearborn Partners, LLC and Catania ABC Partners. The company says that it will build or expand fiber broadband networks to support symmetrical services that eventually will reach 10 Gbps. Initially the company will offer symmetrical speeds of 2 Gbps. Monthly pricing is $44.99 per month for speeds to 100 Mbps to $69.99 for speeds as fast as 1 Gbps. Services that can be supported include e-commerce, virtual learning, agricultural technology, telehealth and entertainment, Fastwyre noted.

Now that Dish Network has said it will not be buying the 13.5 MHz chunk of nationwide 800 MHz spectrum from T-Mobile that it was entitled to for $3.59 billion, all eyes are on the upcoming auction. Technically, Dish has until April 1 to exercise its option to buy the 800 MHz spectrum. Should April 1 come and go without Dish exercising its option, T-Mobile is obligated to take the spectrum to auction with a floor price of just under $3.6 billion. “We haven't commenced that auction yet, but should they choose not to exercise it, that'll be the next step for us,” he said. The deadline for the auction is this fall, and any restrictions on who is eligible to bid on the spectrum will be up to the Federal Communications Commission. Other parties have expressed interest in the spectrum, including Burns & McDonnell Engineering Company, which could use it to deploy wireless broadband networks for electric utilities.

I focus my remarks on the satellite service sector—both what I see for its future and what the Federal Communications Commission can do today to ensure its success. Starting with direct-to-cell—I am pleased to see that the FCC is crafting a flexible framework that allows the US to take the lead on policymaking for this new service, while also ensuring that we do not constrict innovation and fledgling business models. A strong but flexible regulatory framework is the best approach for bolstering both America’s leadership and industry’s success. Turning to streamlining of application processing, I think that the most important thing the FCC can do is to ensure swift and efficient action on its part. Finally, I’d like to touch on orbital debris. I have said throughout the ongoing FCC proceeding and in several speeches before industry that we should apply the same orbital debris rules to both U.S-licensed providers and market access licensees—which are foreign licensed entities who provide service in the US. The FCC must move in this direction as a high-priority policy goal. 
 

We recently announced that Apple approved our Epic Games Sweden AB developer account. We intended to use that account to bring the Epic Games Store and Fortnite to iOS devices in Europe thanks to the Digital Markets Act (DMA). To our surprise, Apple has terminated that account and now we cannot develop the Epic Games Store for iOS. This is a serious violation of the DMA and shows Apple has no intention of allowing true competition on iOS devices. The DMA requires Apple to allow third-party app stores, like the Epic Games Store. In terminating Epic’s developer account, Apple is taking out one of the largest potential competitors to the Apple App Store. They are undermining our ability to be a viable competitor and they are showing other developers what happens when you try to compete with Apple or are critical of their unfair practices.