Vox

[Commentary] As a research associate in the Office of Communications, I quickly learned some things about the nature of facts in politics. My best advice for the public is for everyone to do a little fact-checking of their own. Listen to exactly what is being said, see if it sounds right to you, and then do a Google search to see if a major piece of context has been omitted. See if you can find a primary source, like the original data source of the numbers they quote, or a transcript or video of a moment they claim happened. Compare the things President Trump says today with the things he said months ago and see where they contradict each other. See where his advisers contradict each other. Read as widely as possible, make your own conclusions, and trust your judgment. Then make sure you start telling people about it, and make sure your voice is heard.

[Meredith Bohen is a former research associate in the White House Office of Communications]

Since the election, President Trump has named only a handful of appointments to serve his administration, making it difficult to grok what a Trump presidency means for many of the complex issues that are dear to Silicon Valley — like immigration, network neutrality, self-driving cars and surveillance. Here’s what we know:

Merger-friendly appointments: AT&T’s $85 billion bid for Time Warner is currently under review by the Justice Department. And despite what Trump said on the campaign trail against the proposed merger, the individuals Trump picked to oversee the DOJ transition have a history helping large, private companies get their way with US regulatory agencies.
Skilled worker visas: One thing Trump has been clear on is his determination to tighten US borders. But when it comes to H1B visas — the program for foreign nationals working in highly skilled jobs like computer science and engineering — Trump has been less direct.
Industry-friendly regulations for self-driving cars and the gig economy: Trump announced in December that he will nominate Elaine Chao, former chief of the Department of Labor under the Bush administration, to head the Department of Transportation. Though she has little experience with self-driving cars, at a confirmation hearing earlier this month Chao hinted that she’s in favor of a light regulatory agenda that won’t get in the way of continued tech development in the nascent industry.
More digital surveillance: Trump is coming into power at a time when the Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, is stepping down. Whoever Trump picks to fill the position will likely echo the new president’s philosophy on surveillance, which many privacy advocates see as particularly onerous.
Network neutrality faces extinction: Trump’s reported pick for the FCC Chairmanship, Commissioner Ajit Pai, is expected to roll back the 2015 network neutrality rules, which were created to keep internet providers like Comcast and Verizon from charging websites like Netflix and Facebook an extra fee to reach internet users at faster speeds.

As president-elect, Donald Trump has continued to use his Android device as his primary means for both keeping in touch with associates and expressing his displeasure with news outlets and “Saturday Night Live.” But experts say that, as president, Trump really needs to use something a whole lot more secure.

We’ve asked the transition team what kind of smartphone Donald Trump intends to use when he assumes the Oval Office on Jan 20 and have yet to get a response. Trump won’t have to figure this out on his own. There’s even an agency specifically tasked with supporting the president’s telecommunications needs, the White House Communications Agency. And the Secret Service, which has to protect the president, is likely to weigh in as well. As to whether government agencies can force Trump to give up his current phone, it’s complicated. Trump may resist technical security measures imposed on him by the Secret Service. However, by law, their protection of the president is mandatory and cannot be declined.

[Commentary] One of the great surprises of [the 2016] election is that one does not need to repress the free news media when it has simply become irrelevant — because factuality has become irrelevant to how so many people choose to vote. With a flood of false news (not just spin, but disinformation about, for example, Hillary Clinton’s health), science denial, the capacity to isolate oneself in the comforting and confirming news cocoon of one’s own choosing, and a winning candidate who prefers consulting conspiracy websites to intelligence briefings, there is no agreed-upon standard of accuracy, facts, and recorded statements by which most people can measure or decide anything.

Sadly, our democracy is challenged not just by the fraying of a democratic political culture through ever-intensifying polarization and demise of traditional norms. It is also challenged by a basic collapse of two vital institutions: rule through electoral majorities and a free media.

[Christopher R. Browning is the Frank Porter Graham Professor of History Emeritus at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.]

[Commentary] In a recent piece I wrote for Fast Company, I outlined my involvement with a council of independent tech influencers that helped shape President Bush’s tech agenda. In the article, I suggested some of the types of councils I believe President Trump needs to help him understand tech and, more importantly, use them to help develop a tech agenda of his own that would benefit his economic goals and get these companies to help support an agenda that moves our industry forward. I believe working with Trump in a civil, proactive manner should be the goal of every tech company, but not kowtowing to him because he bullied them into some action. The tech industry needs the resolve to stand up against any bully pulpit, and only do what is right for them to grow their market. Anything less than that won’t have a lasting impact on them or our industry.

[Tim Bajarin is the president of Creative Strategies Inc.]

Facebook wants to show more advertisements to people who watch its videos and start making money for the people who supply it with those videos. Industry sources say the social network is going to start testing a new “mid-roll” ad format, which will give video publishers the chance to insert ads into their clips after people have watched them for at least 20 seconds. For now, Facebook will sell the ads and share the revenue with publishers, giving them 55 percent of all sales. That’s the same split offered by YouTube, which dominates the online video ad business. If the new ads take off, they could represent the first chance many video publishers have had to make real money from the stuff they’ve been running on Facebook.

[Commentary] Ensuring that the internet remains a fountain of innovation and disruption is at the heart of open internet policy. The elimination of clear rules protecting a free and open internet would put us in uncharted territory and would create uncertainty for Internet service providers, edge providers and consumers alike. In many ways, what the Federal Trade Commission and the Federal Communications Commission have accomplished these past eight years aligns with the promises of the next administration — standing up for the little guy, unleashing the power of the entrepreneur, and making sure that America continues to be the most dynamic economy in the world.

Let’s not stack the deck against consumers and innovators, or undermine the technological revolution at our fingertips. Let us instead focus on preserving a ‎free and open internet and privacy protections to the benefit of all consumers.

[Terrell McSweeny is a commissioner at the Federal Trade Commission. Mignon Clyburn is a commissioner at the Federal Communications Commission.]

Apple is indeed investing some of its cash in a SoftBank fund that has won praise from President-elect Donald Trump for promising to put $50 billion into US tech companies. “Apple is planning to invest $1 billion in SoftBank’s Vision Fund,” Apple said. “We've worked closely with SoftBank for many years and we believe their new fund will speed the development of technologies which may be strategically important to Apple.” The move could help the company get some goodwill from Trump, who has criticized the company for its privacy stance and called on the company to start making iPhones in the US, something that is unlikely to happen.

For nine years, from 2002 to 2011, a version of one of Donald Trump’s most extreme proposals was standard US government policy: requiring certain people in the US on visas from Muslim-majority countries to register with the government. President Barack Obama suspended the program in 2011 — after years of complaints by civil rights groups that the program targeted Muslims and wasn’t effective in preventing terrorism. But it had never been fully dismantled — it was still sitting around for the Trump administration to dust off. Until now.

On Dec 22, the Department of Homeland Security published a regulation that would totally get rid of the National Entry-Exit Registration System (NSEERS) — forcing the Trump administration to take the time to create something new, and giving civil rights groups an opportunity to stop them. The regulation goes into effect Friday, December 22, well before President Trump is inaugurated. So when his administration takes office — if it’s serious about finding a way to register people from Muslim-majority countries in the US — it’s going to have to find another way to do it.

After failing to strike a new deal with Apple, Nokia is suing the iPhone maker for patent infringement in both Germany and the US. The two companies had a deal in 2011 that covered some Nokia patents, but Nokia says efforts to reach a broader pact have gone nowhere. “Nokia has created or contributed to many of the fundamental technologies used in today's mobile devices, including Apple products,” Nokia patent head Ilkka Rahnasto said in a statement. “After several years of negotiations trying to reach an agreement to cover Apple's use of these patents, we are now taking action to defend our rights."

One of the big concerns in the phone industry has been just how agressive Nokia might be in pursuing large patent claims now that it is no longer in the phone-making business. (New phones are being introduced under the Nokia brand, but through a brand licensing deal, not because Nokia itself is selling phones.) Nokia’s remaining business is largely focused on making network equipment, though its smaller Nokia Technologies unit has a mission to both innovate in new areas and license the company’s brand and vast patent portfolio.