Gigi Sohn’s Full Statement On Withdrawing Her FCC Nomination

from the a-real-loss dept

Yesterday, Karl wrote about the absolutely ridiculous situation in which the person perhaps most qualified to be an FCC commissioner, Gigi Sohn, had to withdraw her nomination, which had languished over nearly two years, mostly due to a bunch of absolute ridiculous bullshit lies from telecom and media giants who hated the idea of her being in that job. As someone who has known Sohn for well over a decade, the whole situation is infuriating. Almost all of the claims about her were ridiculous lies, or at least misleading. Anyone who knows her (even those opposed to her policy goals) recognizes that she’s smart, competent, knowledgeable, and focused on actually doing what’s best for the public. She is not, as some falsely framed her, some sort of “partisan” hack.

The whole thing is incredibly frustrating.

It’s no surprise that the GOP united against her. They would do that for almost any nominee. But it’s sad that the telcos and cablecos were able to convince enough Democrats to go along with it, and that it never really seemed like there was a strategy from the administration to get her approved.

Either way, Karl posted just an excerpt of Gigi’s statement, but I think it’s worth people reading the whole thing, so we’re posting it here. Gigi has spent decades literally fighting to make the internet better for you and for me, and not for giant companies. Her withdrawing from this process is a loss for all of us.

Last night after discussions with my family and careful consideration, I made the decision to ask President Biden to withdraw my nomination to the Federal Communications Commission. When I accepted his nomination over sixteen months ago, I could not have imagined that legions of cable and media industry lobbyists, their bought-and-paid-for surrogates, and dark money political groups with bottomless pockets would distort my over 30-year history as a consumer advocate into an absurd caricature of blatant lies. The unrelenting, dishonest and cruel attacks on my character and my career as an advocate for the public interest have taken an enormous toll on me and my family.

Unfortunately, the American people are the real losers here. The FCC deadlock, now over two years long, will remain so for a long time. As someone who has advocated for my entire career for affordable, accessible broadband for every American, it is ironic that the 2-2 FCC will remain sidelined at the most consequential opportunity for broadband in our lifetimes. This means that your broadband will be more expensive for lack of competition, minority and underrepresented voices will be marginalized, and your private information will continue to be used and sold at the whim of your broadband provider. It means that the FCC will not have a majority to adopt strong rules which ensure that everyone has nondiscriminatory access to broadband, regardless of who they are or where they live, and that low income students will continue to be forced to do their school work sitting outside of Taco Bell because universal service funds can’t be used for broadband in their homes. And it means that many rural Americans will continue the long wait for broadband because the FCC can’t fix its Universal Service programs.

It is a sad day for our country and our democracy when dominant industries, with assistance from unlimited dark money, get to choose their regulators. And with the help of their friends in the Senate, the powerful cable and media companies have done just that.

I want to thank President Biden for his faith in me and for my champions in the Senate who defended me at every turn. I especially want to thank the dozens of people who volunteered their time and energy to help me through this process, as well as the over 400 organizations, companies and trade associations, and hundreds of thousands of individuals who registered their support with the Senate. I will forever be grateful for their efforts on my behalf.

I hope the President swiftly nominates an individual who puts the American people first over all other interests. The country deserves nothing less.

Filed Under: , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Gigi Sohn’s Full Statement On Withdrawing Her FCC Nomination”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
38 Comments

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Matthew M Bennett says:

This is a victory for free speech.

She is absolutely, without question, a partisan hack, damn near the definition of, taking large donations from Soros and using faux policy proposals to push leftist causes. She has bad ideas, is willing to achieve them outside the normal rule of law, and is incredibly nasty to those she disagrees with. (the last one is hypocritical of me, I’ll grant you, still not suitable in a government official) She never should have been nominated, and had she been approved the results would have been disastrous.

That you merely support her is an indictment, and here you go writing a full article simping for her and crying about her dismissal. Amazing.

You are, basically, that woman screaming at the sky the night Clinton lost.

And you with a straight face claim to be be non-partisan. Again, Amazing.

Maybe People’s World will hire you when TD goes under.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Strawb (profile) says:

Re:

She is absolutely, without question, a partisan hack, damn near the definition of, taking large donations from Soros

That’s not the definition of “partisan hack”, sport.

using faux policy proposals to push leftist causes.

Citation needed.

She has bad ideas

Name some.

is willing to achieve them outside the normal rule of law

Citation needed.

is incredibly nasty to those she disagrees with.

Citation desperately needed.

had she been approved the results would have been disastrous.

Oh sure, getting broadband to rural and low-income citizens. How horrifying.

You are, basically, that woman screaming at the sky the night Clinton lost.

That meme is from Trump’s inauguration, not the election night, and is much more representative of you every time you come in here.

Maybe People’s World will hire you when TD goes under.

If.

Matthew M Bennett says:

Re: Re:

That’s not the definition of “partisan hack”, sport.

If you’re referring to the first part, it was a hyperbolic allegory, the second, well, no, but it is definitive proof of it. Neither was attempting to provide a “definition”. Is English your first language?

That meme is from Trump’s inauguration, not the election night, and is much more representative of you every time you come in here.

….did that seem to like an important distinction to make, to you?

Citation desperately needed.

https://twitter.com/gigibsohn

Well, that was easy.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

“She has bad ideas, is willing to achieve them outside the normal rule of law, and is incredibly nasty to those she disagrees with.”

Please list her bad ideas and why you think they are bad.

Please cite a valid example of her committing a crime.

Was she mean to you? Awwww, isn’t that special.

  • (not expecting a mature rely)

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Matthew M Bennett says:

Re: Re: Re:2

I mean generally she was in favor of net neutrality and government policing of “misinformation” which would be actually unconstitutional. (NN would be merely a horrible idea) But I just don’t particular feel the need to list and then argue about all the policies she favors that would be a bad idea, her nomination is dead now, and good riddance.

Ooh, that reminds me, Puss In Boots has the cutest dog as a side character. You’re gonna love it!

Yeah, I fully intend to. I looked up the streaming schedule, which is dumb, so I might actually pirate it. But seriously, I don’t get this meme, or whatever you call it, at all.

Matthew M Bennett says:

Re: Re: Re:5

As an example, Fox News.

Actually, Fox News was one of her main targets.

Look I really give no fucks if you like Fox News or not, but if you give government (often very partisan) bureaucrats the right to decide what is “misinformation” and then punish people based on that, then the first amendment no longer exists. That is CCP/Putin kinda shit.

Matthew M Bennett says:

Re: Re: Re:4

Huh, that was easier than I thought.

That’s because you don’t even understand the discussion.

And why is it a bad idea that companies can’t, say, pay ISP’s to favour their network traffic over others?

Please remember that ISPs have the semi-monopolies and duopolies they have largely because of government intervention in the first place. It’s not not that I trust or like the ISPs at all, quite the opposite, it’s that government intervention in a market nearly always is worse.

Source?

https://twitter.com/gigibsohn/status/1321456221740847106?s=20

http://gigisohn.com/news/new-york-times-is-microsoft-sure-it-wants-to-buy-tiktok/

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:5

So given that ISPs have these monopolies, is it better to allow them to double dip companies, who already paid for their service, to not be throttled? If it’s government-caused, isn’t preventing it all the better. Like, imagine an internet where bandwidth goes to the highest bidder. How does your news website get any foothold or traffic against Facebook or NYT or Fox? They can pay so much more than you can. Should Comcast be able to decide not to deliver your gmail or yahoo email because they’re a competing service? Common sense would say no.

Net neutrality has been status quo, but that can always change because we have no framework in place to keep it that way. Perhaps you have a better system than “ISPs need to carry all service without regards to the size, contents, origin, or destination”

You could also, y’know, reverse the government-assisted monopoly policy and allow more market competition or even a competing nationwide public service provider (gasp public competition!). But that’s why Big Telecom had to keep Sohn off the commission, as she would’ve done just that if she could.

Say what you will about Sohn being a leftist or whatever, but Big Telecom hated, hated her. Would she get everything right? No one does. But she would’ve been bad news for the telecom monopoly. I suspect you’re no fan of Comcast, so I shouldn’t have to spell it out that that would’ve been a good first step out of the quagmire.

Strawb (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:5

That’s because you don’t even understand the discussion.

There’s that pesky projection again.

Please remember that ISPs have the semi-monopolies and duopolies they have largely because of government intervention in the first place.

Are you high right now? The control of US ISP’s is largely because of the lack of government intervention, since the FCC has either been too toothless or too partisan to make them live up to any of their promises.

More to the point, though, you sidestepped my question: why is it a bad idea that companies can’t pay ISPs to favour their network traffic?

https://twitter.com/gigibsohn/status/1321456221740847106?s=20

I’m proud of you, Matty! You supplied actual sources without being whiny about it!

This is difficult to parse since there’s no real context, but it seems like she’s commenting on the hypocrisy of politicians hauling social media into a hearing because of their moderation decisions, whereas doing it to a TV news network would be completely unthinkable.
She’s not arguing in favour of government policing of misinformation.

http://gigisohn.com/news/new-york-times-is-microsoft-sure-it-wants-to-buy-tiktok/

She’s saying she thinks it’s a bad idea for MS to buy Tiktok. Where’s the argument in favour of government policing of misinformation, exactly?

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

mick says:

Re:

‘Dems who “take money from Soros” (which is a lie, btw) are corrupt, but Republicans who literally worked as lobbyists for Big Telecom are NOT corrupt.’

This is literally how Republicans think.

As a real-life conservative, this is why I haven’t voted for a Republican for national office in my lifetime, and have only voted for one for state office (Sandoval, a pretty good Nevada governor).

The lack of honesty and/or ability to think among you clowns is amazing. If my 10-year-old showed illogical thinking like this, I’d have her on the short bus.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Matthew M Bennett says:

Re: Re:

‘Dems who “take money from Soros” (which is a lie, btw) are corrupt

So you’re putting words in my mouth? I didn’t say anything about “corrupt”, tho of course many of them are, but they are ALL partisan hacks. There is not a single person Soros has supported that isn’t a far leftist and most of his AGs (they’re mostly AGs) have gotten people killed.

As a real-life conservative,

So you’re just lying then. OK. Good talk.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

She needs to sue the GOP hacks that made false claims about her and the telcos directly for defamation. What they did is illegal but only if people file the lawsuits and litigate to the end.

The ruling class in this country has FAR too much freedom and protection to engage in lies and defamation freedom is not for evil or there will be tons of blood spilled in the future of US politics.

All these displays of corruption and unaccountability just tell people that violence is the only recourse left. We don’t need or want that to become the new normal.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get all our posts in your inbox with the Techdirt Daily Newsletter!

We don’t spam. Read our privacy policy for more info.

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...