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: corruption, fcc, gigi sohn, public interest


Comments on “Gigi Sohn’s Full Statement On Withdrawing Her FCC Nomination”
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
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.
Re:
That’s not the definition of “partisan hack”, sport.
Citation needed.
Name some.
Citation needed.
Citation desperately needed.
Oh sure, getting broadband to rural and low-income citizens. How horrifying.
That meme is from Trump’s inauguration, not the election night, and is much more representative of you every time you come in here.
If.
Re: Re:
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?
….did that seem to like an important distinction to make, to you?
https://twitter.com/gigibsohn
Well, that was easy.
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.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re:
Nah.
Re: Re: Re:
Matty B: All bark, no bite.
Ooh, that reminds me, Puss In Boots has the cutest dog as a side character. You’re gonna love it!
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
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.
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.
Re: Re: Re:3
Prove this one. Because as far as I can tell, it’s not even remotely true.
Re: Re: Re:4
” it’s not even remotely true.”
As an example, Fox News.
Re: Re: Re:5
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.
Re: Re: Re:3
Huh, that was easier than I thought.
And why is it a bad idea that companies can’t, say, pay ISP’s to favour their network traffic over others?
Source?
Re: Re: Re:4
That’s because you don’t even understand the discussion.
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.
https://twitter.com/gigibsohn/status/1321456221740847106?s=20
http://gigisohn.com/news/new-york-times-is-microsoft-sure-it-wants-to-buy-tiktok/
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.
Re: Re: Re:5
There’s that pesky projection again.
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?
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.
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?
Re: Re: Re:2
“All bark, no bite.”
Yep – all hat, no cattle.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re:
I think it’s slightly funny this got posted a full….17 hrs? after I originally posted it? Versus my post from this morning was posted immediately.
Your website is super shitty, Masnick.
Re: Re:
If you don’t like it…. the door is over there –>
Don’t let it hit you in the ass on your way out!
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.
Re: Re:
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.
So you’re just lying then. OK. Good talk.
There are exactly zero non-corrupt motives for opposing Sohn’s nomination.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re:
There are exactly zero non-corrupt motives for supporting Sohn’s nomination.
Oh, look, we’re just saying things now.
Re: Re:
What do you mean ‘now’? Just saying things is your while bit.
Re: Re:
Bratty Matty proves that the concept of “context” is one of many far beyond his feeble grasp example #5318008
Re: Re: Re:
You give him too much credit. Matt knows perfectly well what the context is, he just likes to argue in bad faith whenever Republicans get called out for their bs. Ook ook blue team bad and all that.
But hey, he’s good engagement for the site!
Re: Re:
Why do you sound surprised? That’s your modus operandi.
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.
Only problem Iv seen
Is Who said what about Who.
And you cant Sue anyone without knowing or blaming the correct persons/groups.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Political. Blog.
Good riddance she’s an awful woman with awful policies and an enemy of free speech. Hateful and dramatically partisan.
And you just wrote a love letter to her. Amazing.
Re:
Details are just too much work and mostly disprove the allegations, but certainly make the poster feel better.
Re:
No, you’re thinking of yourself again.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re:
You realize “I know you are but what am I’ isn’t interesting to anyone, right?
Re: Re: Re:
Your complete lack of self-insight is actually very interesting, albeit fairly cringe-inducing.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:2
that’s just a non sequitur
Re: Re: Re:3
Oh look, yet another phrase you don’t understand the definition of enough to use correctly.
Re:
Here you are, shitting up the comments again.
Funny, Mike tells you to jump, and sure enough, your first response is “How high?”
He has you whipped like well trained dog.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re:
funnily enough, you can’t actually taunt me into not making fun of Masnick’s shitty opinion.
Re:
…said nobody mentally competent, ever.
Thanks for sharing such an informative and Fantastic post,I bookmarked this page and will get through all your posts.Keep sharing such nice posts
https://www.cosimosgrill.com/