Page created
First version
160 words5 sources
Approved by the maintainer before it went live
Timeline timeline/2015-02-26-fcc-adopts-2015-open-internet-order-reclassifying-broadband-under-title-ii
Page history
Every change to the FCC Adopts 2015 Open Internet Order Reclassifying Broadband Under Title II page: what changed, when it went live, and how it was reviewed.
Changes across the whole site →Lifecycle
Oct 24, 2026 – today · select a mark to jump to itChanges
- AI review Review 3 of 3
Reviewed: 1 finding, all fixed
Missing entity reference 1Approved by the maintainer before it went live
Show changes Hide changes
Missing entity referenceBefore “Chairman Tom Wheeler's order passed with the votes of Commissioners Mignon Clyburn and Jessica Rosenworcel; Commissioners Ajit Pai and Michael O'Rielly dissented”
After “people: Tom Wheeler, Mignon Clyburn, Jessica Rosenworcel, Ajit Pai, Michael O'Rielly, Barack Obama”
Why:
- Fix pass Review 2 of 3
Fix pass: 1 finding, all fixed
Bias 1Approved by the maintainer before it went live
Show changes Hide changes
BiasBefore “Commissioners Ajit Pai and Michael O'Rielly dissented, and Pai said the agency acted as it did because of the President's intervention.”
After “Commissioners Ajit Pai and Michael O'Rielly dissented, arguing that the FCC was exceeding its authority to address a problem that did not exist; Pai predicted higher costs for consumers and less innovation, and said the agency acted as it did because of the President's intervention.”
Why: The entry describes the majority's position with substantive policy detail (the three bright-line rules, forbearance, the general conduct standard) and even includes a nuanced critique of the order from a supportive advocacy group (EFF calling the general conduct standard vague). By contrast, the dissenting commissioners' position is reduced to a single remark attributing the outcome to presidential pressure, with no mention of their substantive regulatory objections (e.g., concerns about Title II's effect on investment or innovation) that were part of the public record. This selective framing makes the dissent read as reactive/political rather than substantive, while the majority's rationale is presented in full policy detail.
- AI review Review 1 of 3
Reviewed: no findings
Approved by the maintainer before it went live