September 2015

Another Step Toward Fairness in Inmate Calling Services

On Sept 30, Chairman Wheeler and I circulated an Order that would establish a reasonable rate structure for all inmate calls, regardless of where they originate and terminate, and limit costly fees that drive up the price families pay to stay in touch with their loved ones. The FCC’s rate caps would fully accommodate the security requirements of inmate calling. These caps also would provide sufficient revenue for correctional institutions to recover the costs of providing calling service and a fair return for providers while delivering reasonable rates for inmates and their families. Additionally, the Order would put in place a process by which the FCC will continue to collect and monitor data on rates and fees, and consider whether to revisit and further adjust these reforms based on the evolution of the market.

This action will protect some of society’s most vulnerable people from being taken advantage of, while strengthening families. I look forward to working with my colleagues to take another major step forward in this journey which began more than a decade ago.

Fact Sheet: Ensuring Just, Reasonable, and Fair Rates for Inmate Calling Services

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler and Commissioner Mignon Clyburn ask their fellow commissioners to consider an item that will ensure that the rates for inmate calling services (ICS) are just, reasonable, and fair for all types of calls: local, long distance, and international.

Under the leadership of Commissioner Clyburn as acting chair, in 2013 the FCC capped interstate calling rates, reining in high rates for long-distance calls across state lines. Now, in partnership with Commissioner Clyburn, Chairman Wheeler is proposing to cap rates for ALL ICS calls -- local, long distance, and international -- while limiting or banning excessive fees on calls. These new caps reduce the average rates for the vasts majority of inmate calls substantially, from $2.96 to no more than $1.65 for a 15-minute intrastate call, and from $3.15 to no more than $1.65 for a 15-minute interstate call.

Breaking the Cycle of Prison Poverty One Phone Call at a Time

I want to highlight an issue on which we can work together: reducing the egregiously high cost of calls from jails and prisons -- rates so high that it puts connectivity at risk for too many, particularly our impoverished families. We should do all in our power to promote connectivity with the incarcerated, and that begins with you actively challenging the current system of rates that are so high that it actively discourages communication because families and friends cannot afford to keep in touch.

The Federal Communications Commission is poised to enact permanent reforms to reduce all rates and charges in a manner that ensures robust security features but makes rates affordable. Still, I need your help. I need your help in getting the word to lawmakers and those who elect them at the federal and state levels about the egregious nature of the cost of phone calls from jails and prisons, how these costs are further bankrupting families and communities, and why they should support the FCC's efforts to reform this regime. What we are proposing will neither compromise those security protocols that must be in place nor justify the threat of some facilities that promise to eliminate the ability for inmates to make calls all together if we lower rates.

NTIA’s Strickling on Economic and Social Benefits of an Open Internet

At the National Telecommunications & Information Administration, we are focused on ensuring that the Internet remains an open engine for economic growth, innovation, and free speech. In the United States, we have seen first-hand how the open Internet is helping our economy and society. It has created a dynamic and growing digital economy that is producing jobs across the income spectrum. It has transformed how we look for jobs, learn, and socialize. But the open Internet also presents significant challenges.

The growth of sophisticated malware and other cybersecurity threats, the need to protect the privacy of Internet users and the mounting online theft of intellectual property online have challenged governments’ ability to balance these important interests with the equally important need for openness. Governments are increasingly feeling compelled to do something they see as meaningful -- if not outright drastic -- to protect their citizens and their businesses from these threats. As such, we stand ready to assist the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development with this important work. Promoting and preserving an open Internet is a top priority for the Commerce Department, as evidenced by our broad representation at this workshop.

New Research Details Ways to Improve Voice Quality of Emergency Communications

One of the most challenging aspects of public safety communications is maintaining audio quality in the harsh noise environments in which fire fighters, police officers and other first responders operate. The National Public Safety Telecommunications Council (NPSTC), a federation of public safety organizations, has identified audio quality as a critical requirement, noting that first responders have an immediate and sometimes life-and-death need to understand exactly what is being communicated during an emergency.

On Sept 30, the Institute for Telecommunications Sciences (ITS), National Telecommunications and Information Administration’s research laboratory in Boulder (CO), has released a new report that describes an effort to identify which digital speech and audio technologies are best-suited for mission-critical voice communications over a fourth generation (4G) wireless network using cellular infrastructure. We hope that the detailed results described in this report can inform some of the design decisions required to deploy mission-critical voice applications for LTE and will eventually result in better communications for first responders.

Who's Really in Charge of Federal Cybersecurity And Is It Time For A White House CISO?

In the wake of devastating breaches of sensitive government data, is it time for the White House to appoint a high-level official whose sole responsibility is hunting down cyber intruders in federal agency networks? That’s what Richard Bejtlich, chief security strategist for FireEye, told members of the House Armed Services Committee during a hearing on Sept 30.

For more than a decade, the federal government has had a federal chief information officer, and President Barack Obama fulfilled a campaign by appointing the first US chief technology officer in 2009. But high-profile cyber incidents at the Office of Personnel Management, the Postal Service, the State Department and even the unclassified networks at the White House haven’t led to a grand rethink of the government’s cyber org chart. “This is similar to the situation of many private sector businesses before a breach, but after a breach they quickly change,” Bejtlich said. “Thus far, the government has not changed. We still don't have a US [Chief Information Security Officer].”

Adblock Plus to Allow Independent Board to Decide Which Ads Are `Acceptable’

Popular ad-blocking tool Adblock Plus plans to allow an independent review board to determine whether ads qualify as “acceptable” and are allowed to pass through its filters, parent company Eyeo GmbH said. Currently, Adblock Plus allows ads from some 700 companies to pass through its filters by default, provided those ads meet its “acceptable ads” policy and aren’t too disruptive or intrusive to users. Eyeo has accepted payment from around 70 of those companies, including Google, Microsoft and Taboola, in exchange for including them in the acceptable ads program.

Eyeo’s business model has faced criticism from some in the digital media industry. Specifically, critics suggest it’s inappropriate for Eyeo itself to help decide which ads are and aren’t “acceptable,” given the fact it’s being paid by some of the companies whose ads are allowed to pass through its Adblock Plus filters. Eyeo said it now plans to form an independent board to decide what does and does not constitute “acceptable” advertising. The board will include representatives from online publishers and media companies, marketers, advertising companies and consumers. It’s expected to be in place during the first half of 2016.