Both in the running of your own operations and to adequately serve the consumers you are committed to. First and foremost, like all companies and had to protect its own employees and particularly for a set of companies that run large call centers with large collections of people that technicians are sent into homes to repair and Provision Service and all of those processes had to be rapidly transformed. Now we have 90 of call centers employees working at home. Most companies have accelerated plans so they can send avoid sending technicians to the home and these are probably worth five, seven years worth of work accelerated into three months. Obviously, the country did something unheard of and it lost [inaudible] and eventually ordered people to stay home and i think one of the reasons they could safely assume that was an Effective Response to the pandemic as there was competence there wasnt infrastructure at home to allow people to continue to work and continue to get information. That network was largely hours. We anticipated a pretty substantial surge in Network Capacity which we did see and im happy to talk more about that but all in all, i think we employed some micro monitoring and response actions that kept the network performing at a pretty high level throughout the last couple of months. Host we will get into some of those issues with mr. Powell, you chaired the fcc and have driven tanks. In iraq have you ever seen anything like this . Guest i havent. You know, i spent time on healthcare in the last few years and im in on the board of the mayo clinic, a leading hospital. Ive watched this thing from the ground up and it is truly humbling, peter, its a reminder that nature is extraordinarily bigger than we are. Its a moral, insensitive to the terms of [inaudible] and i think one of the greatest concerns ive had all along is whether we as human beings would process properly the danger and seriousness of the virus and the threat it poses to mankind. No, i have not seen anything like it because unfortunately it is a thing and does not respond as easily to typical Human Solutions or responses and i dont think that it is temporary as things we have come to be used to. Host lets bring john hendel into our conversation and he caused technology for political. John hendel, go ahead. Thank you, peter bread thank you chairman powell. To keep with the coronavirus pandemic a little bit i also wanted to turn to the fcc to keep american connected pledge and this is something that chairman pai put forward back in march and essentially asked isps do not cut off consumers who might be suffering Financial Hardship due to the pandemic and there are a couple different pieces to that. He has extended that now a bit through the end of june and that is coming up relatively soon. I am wondering how is your membership be doing that and is there concern about extending beyond june and does congress have funding for that . What are you hearing right now and consume helping consumers and the cost to do it . I know most dont want to cut off when one might have a rough time right now but, you know, what about the past, is it feasible to keep going and if so, how long . Guest real commendation to chairman piper he jumped on this quickly. As were all the companies were rapidly going to in acceleration to deal with these changes and he got us all together and said that at least if there was a Common Collective response were more was unknown than the known i think it was very smart to extend it through june 30 and i argued in favor of that as did our industry because we believed it was critical to get school age families through the school year and then hopefully with foresight we were hoping for some improvement in the situation and healthcare around the community which we have seen marginal increase. So, you know, i dont know what term implies personal preferences are at the end of the month and i dont want to speak for him but the pledge is no longer that government insistence and i think that that wont really fundamentally change what we are doing which is however you cut it you have to have a program of being gracious and compassionate with consumers and dealing with the stresses. We dont want to lose any customer for nonpayment or any other reason. I think our comedies have been as steadily, if quietly, develop programs and responses and payment plans and message for trying to do everything that is possible to keep consumers connected and their Broadband Services working so we will see what the chairman says by the end of the year but it is natural to assume as the country goes into new phases, subsequent phases, new normalcy and return to a more active economy and we would expect that we would return to that as well to some degree but the sober recognition that we are dealing with is a populace of thunder and economic stress and we want to do everything we can. One thing i would add is one of the programs that is we are super proud of is we have very farreaching affordability programs. We have a low income programs that allow people to get on the internet for less than ten dollars. You know, we have expanded those programs and those eligibility child times for free and we have seen huge uptick in those programs so those will continue, pledge or no pledge and i think we will work really hard to keep consumers online. To what degree does Congress Need to step in with additional money . Whether it is to help companies extend the pledge or to help other programs that might be set up at the fcc or otherwise, that is something lawmakers have talked about and you clearly see these monies and may be more than a little and 200 million for telehealth and things like that but you send [inaudible] how are you living at that and what are you hoping to see that the congress drilled down and produce a bill which is always hovering for a couple of months . Guest great question but i think the first part of the question implies something weaker than it state at the outset. This is not an cost free to providers. They really have had to take pretty substantial economic hit in order to have a no disconnect policy and no usage based limitations and other extraordinary measures they have taken to try to facilitate keeping consumers on so yes, like Many Industries different kinds of isps are burdened with the economic stress of those efforts and that said, ive been proud of the ceos of our industry who come together in turn and say the country will spend a fortune on all kinds of critical needs throughout society so we are not interested in standing in line for that handout unless it becomes absolutely necessary. At least an hour little segment of the world we have not been a proponent of going to seek substantial financial bailout from the industry and we been cautious about that. We really have done our best to try to see how we can manage that relationship with our consumers without a congressional infusion. That said there are really important questions that the Congress Continues to grapple with like what about the people who have no interest structure at all. Weve always been big proponents of rural researchers served areas getting assistance and if that program was designed right and is effective and a scaled correctly bread we tend to refer those programs to be honey in the pocket of consumers as opposed to be producers and we have a whole lot of other cautions we often argue about and i know those programs. I think congress will rightly debate this and there will be other isps under more stress that will probably leave more forward leaning in that relief but we are trying to be judicious about where that money is spent and for one of those to be a funny bailout. Host chairman powell there is talk of a new infrastructure plan in congress, trillion dollar infrastructure plan, would you personally Lobby Congress to have monies included for broadband expansion . Guest yeah, im one of the citizens talking about the need for infusion and i have to say i support doing something. I drive these roads and i use these electric grids and i use these systems and i think for a country of our economic capacity and significance in the Global Economy that our infrastructure is a poor substitute for what a nation like ours should have and there are too many bridges on the verge of collapse et cetera so you know look, i think that is long overdue and the current build that expires september 30 congress is looking at it and you are mentioning the chilean Dollar Program and at the news out of that the white house is entertaining a packet like that but we been here before. We will see what surfaces but the question first is should broadband included to . I think we think broadband is an important infrastructure that certainly has one meaningful aspect to it that could use Government Support in infusion and that is the underserved parts of the country that are under most private markets can isms to serve and so we would expect it to be included and i think people think broadband has reached its status where it should be part of the equation and i dont think thats necessarily the most important part of the equation. We certainly would be engaged on those programs and we probably would lobby and support of a well tailored, thoughtful and money for broadband infrastructure but, you know, peter ive been around 30 years and have seen these programs and there was a 2008 crisis and ive seen it before that in the 4. 5 billion annually the fcc spends. We do make progress. We should not believe that rural doesnt get better but if you want to major acceleration than youre talking a pretty serious program. Host do you have a fear that in our Current Crisis broadband may be treated as a utility or become a utility . Guest yeah, i think we have that fear. I dont think we should make the mistake that to make it a utility. We are a little too [inaudible] in assuming those are the same things. I dont think its a luxury. I think its an essential service for most americans but i do think a lot of americans elect not to take it and im not interested in being paternalistic about telling people you dont know what is good for you if you dont want it and youve seen studies in the past where there are people in the population who say its not important. Right . Putting that aside i do think in the pandemic there is no avoiding its very, very important infrastructure. Im tired of that that people act like we are somehow resisting the idea that we wanted to be a Luxury Service. Its not a Luxury Service but pretty Core Infrastructure and we acknowledge and recognize that. I would say peter, go study utilities, go study regulation and tell me what about that world you can think is attractive for putting broadband into bread that is infrastructure that is doing very, very poorly in the United States and america for society has engineered ranks all those infrastructure d or worse on a grading scale and do you think the grid is in shape . Do you think the interstate highways are in great shape . What about the infrastructure system . None of them seem to me to a porn formed as well as broadband under a more market centered regulatory approach. You think prices should be regulated . Prices in electric utility have increased on average at a higher rate than broadband prices have. I think the country should access ask itself if weve done and experience in one of most critical infrastructures was regulated differently and produced more spectacular results. I am waiting for someone to persuade me why the utility model and im offers some nirvana or improvement over what we are able to accomplish with the model we have. If you can persuade me, im happy to listen but ive never heard that argument. I think we made it religion. Like if you are [inaudible] and believe in Big Governments and somehow broadband should be utility as a kind of virtue signaling label and if you are conservative and hates Big Government that is evil but i dont think any of those should be the case. Go look at the data and tell me why our country will be better served by converting private infrastructure to utility infrastructure because ive worked in this field a long time and i have not seen any infrastructures that are using that model. Host john hendel. Chairman powell, to switch gears, lets talk about president toms recent executive order about social media pretty he issued this end of last month and this was following some of his concerns after twitter tried to back to check some of his tweets. This order does a few Different Things but one thing it does is it looks at section 230 of the Communications Decency act and this would be related to the Liability Protections that the Big Tech Companies enjoy for the content posted on their platforms there has been debate about, first of all, section 230 generally but then which agency should really be looking at this and youve seen fcc commissioners come out in great support others mulling through those questions right now. Commissioner said [inaudible] you also saw former commissioner mcdonalds and he, i think, his word was unconstitutional and then the other commissioner has not seen the role for you are a former chairman of the agency so how have you looked at this . Is the sec the right agency and what was your general reaction to seen it . Guest i could go on a jersed lets transport us back 15 years ago and walk the halls and i know what we would would be worried about. The first is we always forget there is a massive feeling here on anything you can do. That massive ceiling is constitutionally mandated in the First Amendment is a major restriction on the range of actions the government can take, whether congress or the fcc so sometimes the rhetoric no matter what political end of the spectrum you bring in from is not tempered by that silver recognition as a barrier and parameters that live around it. Quietly or openly in commissioner mcdowells voicing i will take your word for it and i have not seen him or you knowt not intended to be cognizant of the genuine practical limitations . Number one, the commission had will struggle with this because it knows the practical limitations are and we have watched the history of them struggling with the decency statute or smoking advertisements in the 70s but the minute you Start Talking about content centered speech regulation you are in a thicket that many not regulators relish trying to navigate number one. That will be part of difficulty and hesitation. The other is the inter agency is nominally independent and does not like the being drawn into political fights between electoral politicians who, for their own interest, will often try to use an issue or the agency to serve its political ends. That is all this time and by the way, the commission has been a poll in that direction. Go back to president johnson who is beating up broadcast stations or nixon who was obsessed with coverage. We have seen it for as long as the sec has existed but i think most commissioners are quite sensitized and worried when they are being called in the middle of what is essentially a electoral and ideological struggle because who will you please . Nobody. That is what the problem is and they will voice at all kinds of ways in the may have different motivations for their public but the practical work of what they can do here is probably within a much more controlled and then anyone wants to knowledge and that is just true. What the statute does exist in the communication act i suppose the commission has or had the authority as long as that provision has existed to offer some interpretation, whether that interpretation is binding in the courts but i think its questionable to be perfectly honest. But they can offer their opinion of what it means but even if they can i dont quite know how effective they could begin changing what we see facebook or twitter do. That is one thing. The white house scattered this work around a lot of places and living at the attorney general looking at it and of course, Congress Looking at it. Both conservatives looking at it and liberals are looking at it. This is a funny issue where there is a democrat version of life they dont like 230 and there is a republican reason why they dont like 230 and the reasons are in some way diametrically opposed even if their outcomes are similar but putting all that aside is it time as a sober policy person to look at 230 . I think so. But not for these reasons. Not because someone is mad and they do this to me or dont do that but for them i think it is like go back and look at the original purpose of that statute and the nature of what those tech platforms were and i think they are a long way from being the Bulletin Board in the chat rooms that they were when these questions first arose. I do think they exercise a lot of power in the speech realm, in the country and i think they often exercise what are acts of a publisher and an editor and it is not saying they would have no protections. Cbs news has protections in the New York Times has protection but they dont have 230. They have a responsibility to the content but they also have massive First Amendment protections so i think it is less scary in the tech platforms act like. You know, they did not even enjoy those protections but i dont think they need the subsidy. I think it was a subsidy to turbocharge their growth and they are not the Biggest Companies in the world and they have profound economic and moral response abilities to what happens on their platform, whether it is the russians or accusations of conservative bias or Bad Information in a healthcare pandemic or politically corrosive speech grid they will have to struggle with that the rest of their existence and i think whether you think that should be entitled to a blanket protections is a legitimate policy. Should Congress Review that rather than the fcc . You mentioned limitations about what they should do what comes to who is doing this rethinking, im curious what you think that should be legislation and you mentioned having opened it [inaudible] they will have to be petitioned [inaudible] what should the fcc to do once petitioned . Should they proceed with a rulemaking and what that would look like and, you know, if you are recommending the fcc what would that be . What would you suggest . Guest the first part of your question and i think we often had to think about institutional confidence in what the nature of the questions are, at 230 currently exists and is what it is great fcc cant do anything to change the fundamental legislative statute. Neither can any executive Branch Agency. If you are talking about the heart of way it works, particularly with the, you know significant veil of protection they enjoy that as a congressional question and that is not going to be changed or meaningfully and that curve is meaningfully bent by the executive Branch Agency but they just dont have that authority. Lets be honest, they could nibble on it and bias it a little bit but they cant fundamentally change it. If youre talking about bigger changes yet its a congressional question. I always believe questions that involve making difficult judgments about the constitutional value like speech should be made by the peoples representatives not an unelected regular tour agency. Think that question should be subject to the accommodation in the public in a way that only elected representatives good so i think yes, its largely a congressional issue. Yes, fcc has got to do something. Im not going to try to tell them what to do. They know their options but their options are do nothing they sit on rulemaking sometimes for years and nothing happens. We have sometimes been frustrated by the petitions for rulemaking to sit for a year. Two, they could put it out for comments and then that process could take months or years depending on what their motivations are. I suspect they would put something out for comment and initiate some action so they could say they answered the mail in some formal way but i think what happens after that is a really long vague question but look, the political years is wrapping up and there is an election. This commission may not even be the fcc a year from now and im not sure how hungry they will be to raise to an answer here but im just guessing and they have not told me anything but i know if it were me i would be very, very hesitant to do a whole lot between now and the november election. I would not want to anyone regulators who would find themselves following into that mess. But who knows . Chairman pai is his own person and the other commissioners had their own objectives so we will see what they do. I can tell you are not exactly sitting around expecting an expeditious or bombshell decision out of the fcc on 230. Maybe i will be proved wrong. Host chairman powell, given all the tragedy that we have been through as a nation in the last couple of weeks, particularly with the George Floyd Murder in minneapolis. How is this changing tv . One example is the Reality Police shows are being canceled and in your view as president and ceo of the ncta and maybe your personal view as well, has television done a good job covering this issue . Guest well, let me first say as myself a black american and a black male i probably never have been so torn and anguished and sad and angry as i have been on this latest incident, not because i have not seen these before because they are so unprecedented. I am exhausted. At 57 years old i have seen rodney king, i have seen michael brown, i have seen eric garner and all these things and im tired. Im hurt that our country i have deep love for cant quite exorcise the demons and the ghosts with its relatively heinous past and i think its deeper and more profound than those people continued to accept and i think this is another awakening. Media shapes our views of the world but they impact us with their stories. Stories are powerful. Just like john talked about the role of platforms you know, we can pretend that everybody is an independent free will thinker and with a lot of Digital Literacy training we can have an income cap but its not true because if you are a student of the human mind and the brain you know we are filled with errors and biases and filled with, you know, errors in judgment and we are easily manipulated by stories and easily manipulated by behavioral response. We just are. Thats what it means to be a human being. I do think that storytellers should accept that reality and have a lot more moral obligation to be sensitive about what they have produced. Right . Both on the new side peter and how we covered the stories and what we show, you know, how many times do we show the choking before it is just being salacious and hurtful to make a buck . When does information become, be honest, these are tough questions for journalism. Theres a new side of this, are we covering it adequately . I think the news did a good job covering this incident. We have learned that absent cameras, absent coverage as antiseptic. This get brushed aside and so they play or are the eye of societys moral conscience and i hope they work that way. Scripted or more or reality television, to be honest, i was a little surprised to see that the cop stories were taken down but at the same time i look up and i said it makes sense, nobody thought to think about that before. We do glorify in this country too much about the militarism of law enforcement. America loves a good war story. We are a warrior nation, born in a revolution, social identity was formed in a civil war, superpower status was achieved in several great global contexts. We are warriors. We tend to gravitate to those stories of heroism and i think we have in an on which really turn the police into a military story, story of good versus evil, bad, weaponry, warriors, heroism, danger and i think the media has done that too. We dont approach policing in a different kind of storytelling narrative. I think a lot of that searching is rightfully going on even in the [inaudible] of the world and im proud because ive talked to those ceos and they are struggling with this. They want to do a better job. Look, its more than hate when i turn on xfinity its got a collection of really important black movies for me to watch. Right . Is in the editorial decisions they make every day about what to emphasize in american life. I do hope it gets better and i do hope they face that responsibility. Host Michael Powell is president and ceo of the ncta, internet and television association. John hendel covers technology for politico, gentlemen, thank you for being on the communicators. Thank you, peter. Thank you, peter. Cspan has unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the sipping court and publicpolicy events. You can watch all of cspans Public Affairs programming on television, online or listen on our free radio app. Be a part of the National Conversation through cspans daily Washington Journal Program or through our social media feeds. Cspan, created by americas Cable Television companies as a Public Service and brought to you today by your television provider. Live tuesday on the cspan networks the house energy and Commerce Committee hears from doctor Anthony Fauci with cdc Robert Redfield and fda commissioner doctor steven hahn on the federal response to the pandemic. That is at 11 00 a. M. On cspan. At 230 a hearing on the foreign sovereign immunities act and state lawsuits against china seeking damages for the spread of covid19. On cspan2 at 10 00 a. M. The Senate Returns to continue work on the nomination of cory wilson to the fifth circuit court. Washington post interviews former National Security adviser john bolton at 1 00 p. M. Talking about his new book the room where it happened. On cspan3 the Senate Committee meets at 10 00 a. M. To examine Lessons Learned from covid19 to prepare for the next pandemic. At 2 00 p. M. The house ways and means subcommittee hearing on worker access to childcare during the pandemic