If you've ever wondered whether the FCC boss is a Big Cable stooge – well, wonder no more Fresh from being mocked by Burger King, Ajit Pai – chairman of America's broadband watchdog, the Federal Communications Commission – has further undermined his authority by attacking a key advisory committee to his own regulator. And all because he didn't like being criticized by it. A figure of hate – someone who behaves …
If you've ever wondered whether the FCC boss is a Big Cable stooge...
I'm pretty sure no-one was wondering that.
Removing or undercutting crucial voices just because they say things you don't like may work in a small business, but it only ever comes back to bite you in a larger public policy context.
Based on his work over the last year or so I am quite sure Mr. Pai has no worries about the consequences of his actions, and has an exit strategy lined up.
Might just backfire, if the earnestness to please his corporate masters brings more damnation and regulation on them than if he'd just left well enough alone. Even if he was just doing exactly what they told him, they can still leave him to twist in the wind like a good scapegoat.
I doubt he even got more than vague verbal promises of future employment from anyone. He doesn't seem like the sharpest tool in the shed.
"I'm saying this article is written specifically to attract haters, and direct their attentions to Pai. That's evil."
Not being a US citizen nor resident in the US, that's not what I take from the article.
I'd also add that this childish labelling of people who disagree as "haters" strikes me as being the last resort of those with no argument with which to win so resort to insults. What is a "hater" anyway? I've even heard Trump use it. He hates sharks, Only "haters" and "losers" are worse. Except if he hates sharks, he's just said he's also a "hater" too. Weird logic!
@Big John
I'm saying this article is written specifically to attract haters, and direct their attentions to Pai. That's evil.
Well, I don't hate him - just think that the FCC Chairman should be working for the good of the country and the people.,
As for directing attention to Pai - gives me another opportunity to refer to him as Tweety Pai
"I'm saying this article is written specifically to attract haters, and direct their attentions to Pai. That's evil."
Talk about having it backwards! In reality, putting somebody like Idjit "Tweety" Pai into a position of power is the thing that's evil. Pointing it out is responsible journalism.
No, you claim he's going against "the American people" because that's what the rest of the Unhinged Left is claiming, and then using that supposed fact to then claim he's evil.
BTW, for those that claim I'm just trolling without submitting any arguments, I direct your attention to my many posts on this subject, where I do exactly that. And I use the word "hater" specifically because I see behaviors surrounding this topic that are disgusting in the extreme. Pai is apparently not to be allowed even basic humanity, at least according to this author's lengthy string of attack articles against Pai.
Funny, but I don't see the other El Reg authors doing this. It appears just one is, and he's on a Jihad against Pai, like so much of the American Left. It's straight out of Rules for Radicals:
"Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it."
Pai is the target, and boy is it personal.
The Right is well aware of the tactics contained within that book, and we know it when we see them being used against us. That's why the Left is in complete disarray these days, in case any of you were wondering.
BTW, for those that claim I'm just trolling without submitting any arguments, I direct your attention to my many posts on this subject, where I do exactly that.
Here's the full, unabridged, complete contents of your very first post on this article:
Are we done with the two minute hate yet?
And here's a link to a definition of argument.
Or by "exactly that" you're talking about "trolling without submitting any arguments"? I'm confused.
"If the US really wanted to be great again, they need to dump their ridiculous partisan politics."
Partisanship goes to labeling and ganging up, and labeling is part of the natural human condition. Not even George Washington, who was all too aware of the risks, couldn't stop the Democratic-Republican Party from separating from the Federalists, and even Washington got labeled a Federalist, against his wishes.
IOW, if George F'n Washington couldn't stop partisanship in spite of his charisma, who's got a chance in he'll to best him?
It is an interesting world inside your head. A world where pointing out the public behavior of a public official is "two minutes of hate". Is anything in the article untrue? Nope. Given the obvious behavior is anything unkind? Perhaps, but not mindlessly so.
Just because the chickens are coming home to roost and you don't happen to like it does not make it hate. You voted for this, you defend this clod & his boss as best you can (which, admittedly is not well) and then when you get what you have coming to you you whine that the truth it hate.
I think this has nailed it though the word "slightly" doesn't need to be there. I suspect that he won't last long in the corporate world when his tenure is over. Then again, he's serving a purpose to his masters with his brown nose and self promotion. The brown nose part might get him a few years in the non-government world as a "yes man" and general lackey.
"The brown nose part might get him a few years in the non-government world as a "yes man" and general lackey."
Only until the chickens come home to roost. What he's doing now is very pro-industry, but as we know from from history, extremes in politics are usually followed by more extremes in the opposite direction. His actions may well be very pro-industry now, but it's quite likely that it will all swing wildly the other way once he returns to industry.
This is all typical political short termism used by insecure people in power who have a pathological need to be seen to be doing things and getting results before their time is up. They have no concept of long term solutions or even of being remembered long term. They need instant gratification.
Given this evening's New York Times revelation that Boss Trump ordered the special investigator Bob Mueller fired... (but the WH Counsel McGahn refused the order, with a threat to quit) the day is coming ever closer where the Republican Party will be faced with swallowing that Turd or flushing the decks clean. Either way, Pai's days as a cling-on are numbered. Shackled with his FCC track record, he'll be lucky to be considered as anything other than Toady-in Chief in the future. All of this is little more than the expected stench from the Swamp that Never Got Drained.
I've lived most of my life in isolated, US rural areas. When it comes to government actions, we're damned grateful if we're at least offered vaseline before they bend us over the barrel.
I've lived most of my life in isolated, US rural areas. When it comes to government actions, we're damned grateful if we're at least offered vaseline before they bend us over the barrel.Be grateful you're not getting all the government you're paying for.
(Tip of the hat to Will Rogers.)
When Obama nominated Tom Wheeler, who was formerly president of the National Cable and Telecommunications Association and CEO of the Cellular Telecommunications Internet Association, for chair of the FCC a lot of people (myself included) assumed he would be a cable/telco stooge.
Turns out he was not beholden to their interests, perhaps because he was retirement age and didn't plan to return through the revolving door. Ajit Pai is in his mid 40s, and obviously plans to return to the industry so he's feathering their nest now and knows he will be rewarded later with a cushy job and fat salary.
Too bad Trump was all bluster when he said he was going to drain the swamp.
he was going to drain the swamp
He will and will create a new swamp in place, with new toads, imported muck and fresh alligators. The best one! With a wall around it, and will make the peasants outside it pay for it. Trust him on that, that's true.
It's almost Presidential.
If you're talking Trump as the President of course.
And we are.
Americans can be so proud of their record on diversity here.
They have at least two people with serious personality disorders in positions of wielding substantial power and influence.
I find it interesting that the Trump Presidency just might drive home to most Americans that Government regulation is important. In fact, I think that Telecommunications infrastructure is so important that it should be a Government Department. Breaking up Media ownership should also be considered important and that the owners of the infrastructures should not be allowed to any of the broadcasters. The only problem with that is that when you can have a populace so divorced from reality that they elect a Trump and that the Electoral system is so corrupt that a Sanders is pushed out by a Clinton when the former was clearly was clearly more popular than the latter you can't be assured any Department will function as it should. Americans have a lot issues to deal with regarding the election of Trump. Perhaps the education system should be first.
The funny thing is, they worked out years ago that telecommunications monopolies were a bad thing and applied a pretty heavy legal action to break it up.
Unsurprisingly, the industry has eventually found a way around that. It's time for another cull.
It's a pity the right wing haven't worked out that the real enemy of personal freedom is no longer oppressive government but corporate wealth. I'm not talking about the right wing that _is_ that corporate wealth, but the one that stockpiles weapons and builds bunkers in backwoods. The corporate side worked out long ago that the easy way to keep government under control is to buy it.
addendum :
I didn't realise it before but having just looked it up .. AT&T was broken up under Reagan, a Republican :)
They broke up Bell in the wrong way - along regional lines, leaving smaller regional monopolies, which then grew up again, and of course don't like to overlap too much and enter into a strong competition, which would only drive down prices and profits. They are more busy in trying to extract as much profit as they can from the actual infrastructure, minimizing long term investments and costs.
They should have had separated the infrastructure from the services, and open the infrastructure itself to competition by renting it. From many perspective, it doesn't make sense to double, triple, etc. a communication infrastructure but for resilience - and for that, of course, you don't need more cables on the same poles.
Just, you need people competent in the field, not lawyers only, to devise such plans to ensure both citizen benefits, and enough company profits.
PS: both John Sherman and Benjamin Harrison were Republicans. The Lincoln-founded party became very different in the past fifty years.
@AC: "Americans have a lot issues to deal with regarding the election of Trump. "
I said back before the election that the 2016 presidential candidates were both ugly choices. I've often noted that they have limited choices in information sources (Media conglomeration), and that the delivery of media (TV/Cable/Internet/"Newspaper") has devolved to the lowest common denominator. Education has been gutted, marginalized and trimmed to become effectively propagandization of servitude.
But then again, according to youngsters of my relatives living in the US, I'm a crotchety, ugly, persnickety old fart with wildly socialist ideas that will make them pay for some strangers health care.
Let's see. The Telcos are the biggest ISPs if I'm not mistaken. At some point all internet activity is transmitted thru the air using frequencies allocated (auctioned) by the federal government. The Federal Communications Act of 1934 clearly stated the airwaves belong to the people of the United States and "For the purpose of regulating interstate and foreign commerce in communication by wire and radio so as to make available, so far as possible, to all the people of the United States, without discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, or sex, a rapid, efficient, Nation-wide, and world-wide wire and radio communication service with adequate facilities at reasonable charges, ...". So, why are the foxes guarding the chicken coop?
"At some point all internet activity is transmitted thru the air using frequencies allocated (auctioned) by the federal government."
Really? Can you prove this as, last I checked, over-the-air has tighter limits enforced by physics and most of the Internet is carried through physical cables: usually optical these days.
And WiFi actually doesn't count under your statement because 2.4GHz and 5GHz are UNlicensed spectra.
Pai is about as smart as a rock and should be replaced immediately. As far as Trump is concerned he's trying to do what is best for America but the Dems and the Dumbs are bashing him constantly because they are in deep denial as the link below demonstrates.
https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4351026/clinton-1995-immigration-sotu
Wrong.
He's as smart as a lawyer "formerly" paid by Big Cable companies to argue their effective monopolies were Good For America.
He's not stupid.
He's actively helping their interests.
The best we can hope for is his personality discorder blinds him to how widely hated he is and he (literally) won't see the hammer dropping on him. The "I thought they all loved me," self deluding BS of such people, despite their endless vicious behaviour toward others.
There is historical precedent for putting party hacks into positions of power in government and then using those hacks to further the interests of business and insiders. It didn't turn out well for both the hacks and the country. Fortunately for us this is 1930's Germany and the US's system of government isn't a dictatorship (...not for a lack of trying). If Pai's actions flout the law then organizations and states will bring lawsuits against him and the FCC. I know that the plan includes the packing of the Federal judiciary with right wing hacks (we're seeing a parade of less than competent people installed in the courts based not on their judicial experience but their party loyalties) but the system is far too complex to allow a straightforward takeover like this (and its likely to get the backs up of real judges, people who actually believe in the primacy of the Constitution).
I'm hoping this period will pass without it causing too much damage. There are also signs that the big cable companies recognize that they may have pushed things just a little bit too far and so are facing a PR problem.
If Pai's actions flout the law then organizations and states will bring lawsuits against him and the FCC.
They already are. They are also passing their own laws in favor of Net Neutrality.
The damage is already bad and will get worse. We still haven't recovered from Reagan's disasters, let alone the Bushes.
Trouble is the Feds can still fight back and challenge state laws on the grounds that communication is predominantly interstate in nature, meaning the Commerce Clause kicks in and gives the Feds overriding authority (after all, where does the FCC get its authority)?
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
