White House Anonymously Throws Gigi Sohn Under The Bus After Screwing Up Her FCC Nomination

from the you're-not-helping dept

Earlier this month we noted how a sleazy telecom and media giant smear campaign successfully derailed the FCC nomination of popular reformer Gigi Sohn, keeping the agency gridlocked (quite intentionally) without the voting majority to do much of anything deemed “controversial” by industry.

While the GOP and telecom giants deserve the lion’s share of the blame for Sohn’s derailed nomination (they want a feckless FCC that can’t hold AT&T and Comcast accountable for anything), there were also plenty of screw ups on the Democratic side and in the White House, where there’s also no shortage of folks without the courage or integrity to stand up to telecom lobbyists.

Biden’s White House nominated Sohn nine months late (that there was any delay at all was a surprise to one White House communications staffer I interacted with last year).

From there, Maria Cantwell repeatedly buckled to Republican calls for unnecessary, redundant show hearings. Chuck Schumer failed to whip the votes. Senators Masto, Kelly, and Manchin all ultimately buckled to bad faith industry attacks, preventing her from getting the 51 votes needed in the Senate. Sohn’s future colleagues at the FCC, Jessica Rosenworcel and Geoffrey Starks, couldn’t be bothered to offer a single instance of meaningful support as she faced down attacks, alone.

The whole thing was an embarrassing, corrupt mess, and a clear example of why government struggles to hire game-changing reformers, especially at major regulatory agencies. Yet via an anonymous quote in the Washington Post this week, some White House staffer apparently thought it would be a good idea to throw Sohn even further under the bus:

A White House official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the nomination, said they “worked tirelessly to move Gigi’s nomination” and that at her hearings Sohn “had the chance to push back and dispel the misconceptions that dark money and influence were trafficking in.”

Except numerous sources have informed me that they did not “work tirelessly.” And it’s kind of a giant middle finger to Sohn to suggest that the onus for shaking off a massive, well-coordinated smear campaign rested entirely on her shoulders.

As Sohn notes to the Post, you’re limited as to what you can say publicly when facing such attacks, especially if you care about your personal safety as an LGBTQ+ person in the current political environment:

Sohn, who would have been the first openly gay FCC commissioner, said the implication in the articles were “clearly tied to QAnon themes about LGBTQ+ people as groomers, as perverts, as sex traffickers.” And she said she felt it put her and her loved ones at risk. 

“That was the first time I felt like ‘Oh my god, this could really rile up some crazies to come to my house … and threaten me and my family,’” Sohn said. 

Unlike the Lina Khan nomination to the FTC (which involved a prompt nomination and then shock promotion to Chair to pre-empt industry resistance), Sohn’s FCC nomination was nine months late — the biggest delay in FCC history. That provided the telecom and media industries, spooked by the Khan pick, ample runway to manufacture its ultimately successful propaganda campaign, which involved using various seedy nonprofits to falsely accuse Sohn of being a radical cop hating enemy of Hispanics and rural Americans.

The White House offered zero meaningful public messaging support of their nominee aimed at debunking any of this. Several sources have suggested to me that Sohn’s nomination could have likely succeeded if the White House had also applied more meaningful pressure on Senators Manchin, Masto, and Kelly (several of whom themselves parroted industry propaganda about Sohn). They didn’t.

That said, I also have been told that Biden personally strongly supported Sohn, prompting her to be re-nominated early this year after a contentious 2022. Even then, you never genuinely got the sense from anyone on the Democratic side that seating Sohn (or the FCC’s consumer protection authority more generally) was a meaningful priority of any kind.

That’s not just a problem for hot button issues like net neutrality. The FCC is at the heart of the White House’s plan to throw an historic $45 billion in new broadband subsidies at the nation’s digital divide. Without a functioning voting majority, the FCC can’t meaningfully hold monopolies accountable when they inevitably take subsidies for networks they fail to deliver. Or much of anything else.

Putting all of this on Sohn’s shoulders because she didn’t “push back and dispel the misconceptions” being seeded in a gullible press by telecom monopolies with unlimited budgets is a final fuck you footnote on one of the most embarrassing tech/telecom policy failures in modern history. This one will leave a mark, and sends a very clear message to popular, good faith reformers eyeing government posts.

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 “White House Anonymously Throws Gigi Sohn Under The Bus After Screwing Up Her FCC Nomination”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
38 Comments
This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
PaulT (profile) says:

“Putting all of this on Sohn’s shoulders because she didn’t “push back and dispel the misconceptions” being seeded in a gullible press by telecom monopolies with unlimited budgets is a final fuck you footnote”

This is one disturbing trend I’ve noticed in US politics over the years. If the Rs try doing something horrendous, and it’s not completely blocked, then it’s really the Ds fault. The blame isn’t on the people who do something, it’s on the opposition for not stopping them. Then, that’s a reason to not vote, or vote third party, instead of actually blocking the people doing the bad stuff. So, people actually vote the bad actors in because the “good” actors weren’t Hollywood heroes.

On a personal and professional level, I understand Sohn’s decision, but I do fear for the future of infrastructure over there. Especially if the sexuality of a person is now the primary talking point about their ability to do a job. I know I’d rather have a nice boring lesbian couple behind the rights I want to protect than some horndog straight guy on his 4th mistress.

But, that’s the same with any branch of politics. I don’t want engaging, exciting people, I want a boring person checking in every few months on how well off everyone is. A dynamic, exciting personality is great for wartime, but I’d rather have the guy who stops the war from happening.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

“This is one disturbing trend I’ve noticed in US politics over the years. If the Rs try doing something horrendous, and it’s not completely blocked, then it’s really the Ds fault. The blame isn’t on the people who do something, it’s on the opposition for not stopping them.”

If you choose to occupy 100% of the space for an opposition party, opposition is- shockingly! -your responsibility. If you can’t do that, you ought to have a pretty good reason and a plan for how to make it possible. If you’re being systemically stymied, maybe you should investigate systemic solutions.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

So, you’re prejudiced against straight people, then? And you support a group that can’t even come up with a pronounceable acronym. Can I buy a vowel?

Don’t get me wrong, she should’ve gotten the job and been treated better no matter what her orientation. You’re just not making yourself look very good, is all.

Nimrod (profile) says:

Our “elections” amount to a coin toss, with the loser being the same each time- US. How is it that we’re still stuck on BINARY bullshit when it comes to who to put in charge? Could it be that the two parties are enjoying this game of “Good Cop, Bad Cop” a bit too much?
DEFUND THE POLITICIANS. If they were made to act as the “public servants” they claim to be, all but a handful would immediately resign in protest.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re:

How is it that we’re still stuck on BINARY bullshit when it comes to who to put in charge?

Because you’re expecting the system to change from within. The only real reform will come from outside the system⁠—like, say, a large voting bloc in a given state working towards changing a first-past-the-post voting system to a ranked choice system that could improve the chances of third party candidates to win elections.

But barring any actual reform, the only real change is going to happen by a breakdown of the system. Well, that, or the power of incredible violence. Either-or, really.

PaulT (profile) says:

Re:

“How is it that we’re still stuck on BINARY bullshit when it comes to who to put in charge?”

There’s reasons – single issue voters, people who vote for party and not policy, etc. But, a large part of the reason is a two party system where one party has gone to an extreme. So, you have the far-right identity politics on one side, then every other political opinion who might not feel represented but just know they don’t want the extremist party of have power on the other.

Combine that with things like gerrymandering and the electoral college that are designed to keep a “balance” no matter how many individuals actually vote for one party over another, the answers are clear. The solutions no so much, but there’s no mystery as to why things are polarised.

David says:

Re:

“Defund the politicians”? That’s sort of the problem in the U.S.: no politician gets along with just their salary: for their campaign alone, they need the friendly support of interested lobbyists. And the lobbyists have a First Amendment right to bribe the politicians.

Now the setup with free bribes and a first-across-the-gate system very much favors betting on the favorite horses. This converges to a two-party system because in a one-party system the incentive for bribes goes away. Members of the two-party system don’t have an incentive of amending the system to a state where more parties come into play.

There is no shame in designing one of the early modern democracies in a manner where it doesn’t hold up consistently for centuries without significant upgrades. After all, you can rely on your succeeding patriots to fix what doesn’t work.

It wasn’t to be expected that the patriots end up in an ineffective minority. The U.S. has to earn its right to keep its democracy. In that respect they are worse off than (West) Germany which had it proscribed after WWII, and with more safeguards in place.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
That One Guy (profile) says:

Victim blaming at it's finest

Ah yes, with the objections to her nomination firmly based in reality I’m sure a reasonable ‘no, none of what you said about me is correct’ would have convinced her opponents to back down and change their stance rather than just caused them to bring out more accusations with only a passing familiarity at best to fact.

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

Matthew M Bennett says:

I love this bit of victimhood bait

And it’s kind of a giant middle finger to Sohn to suggest that the onus for shaking off a massive, well-coordinated smear campaign rested entirely on her shoulders.

Nearly everything I heard claimed about her was true, and yeah, that’s on her. Nothing personal about her, just that her policies sucked and she was a partisan attack dog. She could have explained her positions better (doubtful, everyone understood the, just disagreed) or been less of a nasty partisan online.

As Sohn notes to the Post, you’re limited as to what you can say publicly when facing such attacks, especially if you care about your personal safety as an LGBTQ+ person in the current political environment

Sohn, who would have been the first openly gay FCC commissioner, said the implication in the articles were “clearly tied to QAnon themes about LGBTQ+ people as groomers, as perverts, as sex traffickers.” And she said she felt it put her and her loved ones at risk.

Oh bullshit. None of the objections about her I saw were based on her personal life. And no one worrying about “groomers” is worried about lesbians. This is just standard “if you dare disagree with me you are obviously doing it because of my [insert special minority status here]”

Grow up, people opposed her because she wanted to socialize the internet and attack Fox News as if she got to choose their words for them. Whining that she only lost becasue of her sex life is further proof that she never should have been nominated.

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:

[citation needed]

That would be interesting, but not even vaguely change my point.

I know this is surprising, but I mostly read center-right and libertarian media, all of which had plenty objections to Sohn, none of which had anything to do with her personal life.

Now it’s certainly possible one of her proposed (very progressive) policies could have something to do with “groomer”/CSAM matters, much how there was actual porn in Florida school libraries. (I haven’t heard anything to that effect either tho)

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

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:3

Obviously. If women were involved they’d make an actual sane decision instead of watching a lesbian leader go under. Straight men are the cause and effect of everything that has gone wrong with the world. The sooner they all castrate themselves and identify as transwomen the better.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:4

Sorry, feminazi, the real world doesn’t work like that. And generalizations are ALWAYS wrong. Don’t maker them. Unless you’ve met and interacted with every single man in the world, you can’t say anything about them as a group with any accuracy. So don’t. Besides, if what you want happened, humanity would cease to exist. And women can be just as terrible as men, it’s not a gender-specific thing. Just as both can be as good and decent as well. Check your hate at the door and get some help, it’s destroying you.

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.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:2

2) hate was the driver for the comment rather than experience

And? No one is going to stand up for straight men. They’ve had all the overprivileged support they can choke on for millennia, at the expense of sexual and gender minorities. Of course people are going to hate them. It’s the morally responsible thing to do.

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:3

“No one is going to stand up for straight men”

They will if they’re in the right. The problem is, we’re often not, and we’ve lost the ability to pretend we always hold that position just because we held the power. It’s not that straight white men no longer claim any moral high ground, it’s that John Wayne types who abuse women and homosexuals (or, whichever minority) no longer avoid consequences for those actions.

There’s a difference between “I can’t talk to a woman without being told I’m a bad person” and “I can’t treat a woman badly without facing consequences for it”. I experience very few men who actually do the former without the latter being accused of abuse.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:4

I experience very few men who actually do the former without the latter being accused of abuse.

We’re working on that, don’t worry. The time for your penance will come. After all, the only thing it takes for evil men to triumph is for good men to do nothing, and you supposedly “good men” have done nothing for a very long time. Since you won’t police the bad apples in your midst to an acceptable degree it’s up to us women and sexual minorities to take the reins and do something about it.

Of course this will make white boys like Matthew M Bennett and Hyman Rosen insecure, but what’s the alternative? You’re not going to stand with them. So you can either pick up a pride flag or be filed together with the infantile sperm donors ranting about their fading relevance in a progressive world. No one will stand up for straight men by the time we’re done.

That Anonymous Coward (profile) says:

Well mission accomplished.
We now know the only person who will be able to be nominated will be hand picked by the industry & won’t do anything to protect citizens & just hand money hand over fist to and industry that does nothing.

I really wish they would stop pretending they care about citizens or inequality, what they all care about is corporate cash still flowing to them. And why not??
We’ve proven time & time again we’ll keep electing those who have no problem selling us out because they claim the ‘right’ views on things that don’t actually matter.

When your abuser hits you, just because he gives you a teddy bear and claims he’ll never do it again doesn’t make it true. How many shitty cheap teddy bears do you need to think perhaps its time to stop taking him back before a train derails and kills you.

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

Leave a Reply to That One Guy Cancel reply

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

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...