5 ms·

Comcast executives appear to share cozy relationships with regulators

165 points by morisy 12y ago

mcsmash 12y ago
And in other breaking news, the sky is blue, things fall down, and water is wet. Please stay tuned for further developments as these exciting stories continue to unfold.
- Zikes 12y ago
  Yes, solid evidence of inferred corruption is such old and boring news, hardly worthy of our time and attention.
jxf 12y ago
A certain level of corruption is perhaps expected in any large bureaucracy. People are, after all, only human. What really galls me, however, is the circumstances. This isn't some low-level flunky taking a bribe under the table to move things along. This is a ranking official tasked specifically with overseeing the Comcast merger work, who should have known that they'd be subjected to extra scrutiny. Also, interestingly, the FOIA response appears not to have redacted the e-mail addresses of a number of very high-ranking public officials in the FTC and FCC.
- lifeisstillgood 12y ago
  I have to agree with Alex here - I see no evidence of wrong doing and no evidence of making sure there is no evidence. I mean she asked, she said no. Regulators are there primarily to prevent abuse, not to replace either vicious competition or political oversight. So it's going to be cozy.
  - jxf 12y ago
    I agree that there's no actual wrongdoing present, looking only at the content of the e-mails. However, the tone of the e-mail suggests that this is one event in a pattern, and that the size and unusual nature of the particular gift (how many times are you going to get to go to the Olympics?) is what prompted a discussion with "the rules folks". Wouldn't you expect a good regulator with a "cozy" relationship to already know what's in and out of bounds? That seems like it would be part of their job, without needing to consult the rules people. But perhaps I'm being too uncharitable, and both sides should get the benefit of the doubt. I'm willing to concede I might be reading in between the lines too much.
JetSpiegel 12y ago
"appear"?
Alex_MJ 12y ago
As much as I hate Comcast and occasionally say prayers that a cement truck accidentally crashes into Tom Wheeler's house, and I'd love to see a massive scandal here - these emails don't seem incriminating at all. A high level official got invited to a party, and declined because "the rules folks over here tell me I can't". They know each other (makes sense, they're both working at a high level in the same industry) and they have people watching their backs to make sure they don't do anything that can legally be considered corrupt (again, makes sense, shit's a minefield and an ill-defined one at that. If I were in that position I would have people keeping an eye on that whether I was corrupt or pious as a lamb) Am I missing something? I clicked on that link salivating for the political blood of Comcast executives and all I got was a polite grownup email version of "sry bro can't come, rules n shyt, sounds bumpin tho"
- lifeisstillgood 12y ago
  Oh man - why can't he have used your phrasing. Would have been viral in an instant :-)
- revelation 12y ago
  You're missing that this person is trying to satisfy the letter of the law, instead of the intent. Basically, if your reaction to such an invitation is to ask legal "how can I go to this rad absolutely not work related party without giving the impression of impropriety?" instead of telling the other person "this is unacceptable and you know it".. you're not out for the publics best interest.
  - hsod 12y ago
    The problem with trying to satisfy the intent of the law is that you may run afoul of the letter of the law. And since high-powered corporate and government officials don't often get a pass for obeying the intent of the law if they break the letter of the law, they're essentially forced to worry primarily about the letter.
    - tsotha 12y ago
yuhong 12y ago
I wonder what would the meeting be like if there was no anti-corruption rules and this was allowed.
adventured 12y ago
The CEO of Comcast plays golf with the President. How much cozier can you get exactly? http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2013/08/obama-golfs-with-comcast-ceo-170524.html http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2013/08/obama-golfs-with...
- alexqgb 12y ago
  Believe it or not, regulators actually maintain some independence from the Executive. Were that not that case, this would be more of a scandal, as opposed to the standard sleaze that has become (ahem) par for the course in DC.
zw123456 12y ago
Regulators and industry have always had somewhat of an incestuous relationship. Often the experts in fields like telecom have to come from industry and often times they have an eye on their future career. The FCC, FAA, FDA, Defense, all are plagued with this problem. Unless we are willing to pay comparable to industry, the regulators will be a revolving door.
- tzs 12y ago
  > Regulators and industry have always had somewhat of an incestuous relationship. Often the experts in fields like telecom have to come from industry and often times they have an eye on their future career. It's kind of hard to see how it could work any other way. Suppose, for example, we want someone to head the FAA. It seems obvious you want someone with a vast knowledge of the aviation industry. Are there really many people who have that vast knowledge and are NOT working in the aviation industry? We're basically supposed to look for someone whose career has nothing to do with aviation, but has somehow, perhaps as a hobby, become one of the country's top aviation industry experts?
  - zw123456 12y ago
    Yes, it is kind of a conundrum in a way, in a lot of ways you really need the real world experience of the industry people but that implies a little bit of a conflict of interest. I guess if there was a way to have someone have a career as a regulator, but again, perhaps that limits their experience and knowledge....
- rayiner 12y ago
  It's not just money. Modern regulatory agencies are highly technical. People outside the industry simply lack the necessary experience to be effective. The intersection of people who have the relevant technical experience, who don't come from industry, and who want to work at the FCC or FDA is very small. Usually when regulatory positions aren't filled with industry people, they're filled with career bureaucrats. Would you want an agency full of career bureaucrats to oversee say the software industry?
wickedlogic 12y ago
Cozy? Hardly, do you know how much that relationship cost comcast?

165 points by morisy 12y ago

And in other breaking news, the sky is blue, things fall down, and water is wet. Please stay tuned for further developments as these exciting stories continue to unfold.

Zikes 12y ago
Yes, solid evidence of inferred corruption is such old and boring news, hardly worthy of our time and attention.

jxf 12y ago

A certain level of corruption is perhaps expected in any large bureaucracy. People are, after all, only human. What really galls me, however, is the circumstances. This isn't some low-level flunky taking a bribe under the table to move things along. This is a ranking official tasked specifically with overseeing the Comcast merger work, who should have known that they'd be subjected to extra scrutiny. Also, interestingly, the FOIA response appears not to have redacted the e-mail addresses of a number of very high-ranking public officials in the FTC and FCC.

lifeisstillgood 12y ago
I have to agree with Alex here - I see no evidence of wrong doing and no evidence of making sure there is no evidence. I mean she asked, she said no. Regulators are there primarily to prevent abuse, not to replace either vicious competition or political oversight. So it's going to be cozy.
- jxf 12y ago
  I agree that there's no actual wrongdoing present, looking only at the content of the e-mails. However, the tone of the e-mail suggests that this is one event in a pattern, and that the size and unusual nature of the particular gift (how many times are you going to get to go to the Olympics?) is what prompted a discussion with "the rules folks". Wouldn't you expect a good regulator with a "cozy" relationship to already know what's in and out of bounds? That seems like it would be part of their job, without needing to consult the rules people. But perhaps I'm being too uncharitable, and both sides should get the benefit of the doubt. I'm willing to concede I might be reading in between the lines too much.

JetSpiegel 12y ago

"appear"?

Alex_MJ 12y ago

As much as I hate Comcast and occasionally say prayers that a cement truck accidentally crashes into Tom Wheeler's house, and I'd love to see a massive scandal here - these emails don't seem incriminating at all. A high level official got invited to a party, and declined because "the rules folks over here tell me I can't". They know each other (makes sense, they're both working at a high level in the same industry) and they have people watching their backs to make sure they don't do anything that can legally be considered corrupt (again, makes sense, shit's a minefield and an ill-defined one at that. If I were in that position I would have people keeping an eye on that whether I was corrupt or pious as a lamb) Am I missing something? I clicked on that link salivating for the political blood of Comcast executives and all I got was a polite grownup email version of "sry bro can't come, rules n shyt, sounds bumpin tho"

lifeisstillgood 12y ago
Oh man - why can't he have used your phrasing. Would have been viral in an instant :-)
revelation 12y ago
You're missing that this person is trying to satisfy the letter of the law, instead of the intent. Basically, if your reaction to such an invitation is to ask legal "how can I go to this rad absolutely not work related party without giving the impression of impropriety?" instead of telling the other person "this is unacceptable and you know it".. you're not out for the publics best interest.
- hsod 12y ago
  The problem with trying to satisfy the intent of the law is that you may run afoul of the letter of the law. And since high-powered corporate and government officials don't often get a pass for obeying the intent of the law if they break the letter of the law, they're essentially forced to worry primarily about the letter.
  - tsotha 12y ago

yuhong 12y ago

I wonder what would the meeting be like if there was no anti-corruption rules and this was allowed.

adventured 12y ago

The CEO of Comcast plays golf with the President. How much cozier can you get exactly? http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2013/08/obama-golfs-with-comcast-ceo-170524.html http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2013/08/obama-golfs-with...

alexqgb 12y ago
Believe it or not, regulators actually maintain some independence from the Executive. Were that not that case, this would be more of a scandal, as opposed to the standard sleaze that has become (ahem) par for the course in DC.

zw123456 12y ago

Regulators and industry have always had somewhat of an incestuous relationship. Often the experts in fields like telecom have to come from industry and often times they have an eye on their future career. The FCC, FAA, FDA, Defense, all are plagued with this problem. Unless we are willing to pay comparable to industry, the regulators will be a revolving door.

tzs 12y ago
> Regulators and industry have always had somewhat of an incestuous relationship. Often the experts in fields like telecom have to come from industry and often times they have an eye on their future career. It's kind of hard to see how it could work any other way. Suppose, for example, we want someone to head the FAA. It seems obvious you want someone with a vast knowledge of the aviation industry. Are there really many people who have that vast knowledge and are NOT working in the aviation industry? We're basically supposed to look for someone whose career has nothing to do with aviation, but has somehow, perhaps as a hobby, become one of the country's top aviation industry experts?
- zw123456 12y ago
  Yes, it is kind of a conundrum in a way, in a lot of ways you really need the real world experience of the industry people but that implies a little bit of a conflict of interest. I guess if there was a way to have someone have a career as a regulator, but again, perhaps that limits their experience and knowledge....
rayiner 12y ago
It's not just money. Modern regulatory agencies are highly technical. People outside the industry simply lack the necessary experience to be effective. The intersection of people who have the relevant technical experience, who don't come from industry, and who want to work at the FCC or FDA is very small. Usually when regulatory positions aren't filled with industry people, they're filled with career bureaucrats. Would you want an agency full of career bureaucrats to oversee say the software industry?

wickedlogic 12y ago

Cozy? Hardly, do you know how much that relationship cost comcast?