SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the like-coughing-up-a-hairball dept.
"We write to request information that will help both us and the public better understand how the Federal Communications Commission managed the record in its recent net neutrality proceeding," begins a letter sent today by all the Democratic representatives on the House Energy and Commerce committee.
The missive notes that the comment period was "notoriously replete with fake comments" and argues that as a result it "raises novel questions about how an agency can properly handle and interpret the public's feedback to make sound policy decisions."
The seven-page memo [PDF] contains no less than 16 pointed questions over how the FCC handled abuse of its comment system, while noting that its subsequent decision to approve the controversial repeal of the nation's net neutrality rules provided "scant detail" on that aspect.
The letter also makes it plain that the lawmakers believe that the legitimacy of the FCC's decision is in doubt. "While we may not support the outcome of this proceeding, we hope you agree with us that transparency in the process is crucial," it reads. "In order to restore public confidence in the integrity of the process and give the American people a better understanding of how the FCC analyzed the comments filed in this proceeding, we request that you provide us information on how the agency reviewed the public comments."
[...] While the letter is unlikely to provide a smoking gun, it does keep up political pressure on the FCC over how it handled the public comment process.
[...] So far, the FCC has demonstrated no intention of investigating what went wrong or how it can be mitigated in future. In fact, in an increasingly partisan atmosphere, even mentioning that the comment process was entirely undermined has become a political statement.
(Score: 3, Informative) by WizardFusion on Thursday February 15 2018, @04:08PM (5 children)
There was a lot of comments made by people that were long dead. There are twitter posts asking the FCC how someones parent or grand-parent, who had been dead for several years, had logged several comments in favour of NN.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 15 2018, @04:48PM (4 children)
Why is that even an issue? Can anyone explain why can't the FCC just summarize the points?
Why do people believe repeating the same point over and over makes it magically stronger? Don't you have proper authentication than to claim "my great grand mother hates NN"?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by tangomargarine on Thursday February 15 2018, @04:55PM (3 children)
It's this thing we have called "democracy."
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 15 2018, @05:09PM (2 children)
The FCC chair is not an elected position, it is not a democracy.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Thursday February 15 2018, @06:09PM (1 child)
I'm not saying the FCC itself is; it's just the concept of asking for the input of the population before making a decision.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: -1, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 15 2018, @08:14PM
Last I checked, they are asking for input, not for a public vote. Asking the public for permission is for Congress, not the FCC.