| Story Views | |
| Now: | |
| Last Hour: | |
| Last 24 Hours: | |
| Total: | |
FCC complaints data falls short of fully informing the public
The Federal Communications Commission’s release of consumer complaint data is a step in the right direction, but it falls far short of the transparency and accountability full disclosure would bring. Giving consumers more insight into what other consumers are telling the regulator about telecommunications providers is the right thing to do. Sunlight generally has celebrated when regulatory agencies disclose open data and has worked hard to play a useful role in informing the public about what’s in them. As always, however, the devil is in the details.
What the FCC is disclosing — and touting as a move towards greater transparency — is information that consumers have submitted that has not been verified. Those complaints are being published in machine-readable formats, for developers, on a website that enables consumers to map them, filter by location or create charts and graphs.
So far, so good.
As the Hill reported, however, what the FCC is not disclosing in this data is the text of complaints, the names of the people who filed them or, most disappointing, the companies that are the subject of complaints.
That’s a mistake.
What the FCC is doing here isn’t quite openwashing, but it’s something well short of full transparency, too. After all, full consumer complaints filed to the FCC are already available to anyone who files a Freedom of Information Act request for them. The FCC shouldn’t need to be nudged or sued to release these records to the public.
By publishing the subjects of complaints and pairing it with data on the status of resolution for consumers — something FCC commissioners have indicated they have interest in — the FCC could provide a much more valuable consumer resource. For instance, the data the FCC released shows that the agency has received more than 21,000 complaints from consumers about net neutrality violations. Why shouldn’t consumers know which ISPs are throttling or limiting other consumers, or which are the quickest to resolve issues?
Moving in this direction isn’t without precedent, and it’s worth noting that other federal agencies are providing a useful model. The Consumer Product Safety Commission discloses open data about recalls, including an API that enables third parties to inform and protect consumers at the point of purchasing decisions.
Last year, we hailed the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau for releasing a database of consumer complaints. While we critiqued the ways interface choices affect that data, the CFPB’s decision to publish narratives of complaints along with meta data around them has public interest value. Despite industry pushback about data quality, the regulator continues to publish them today.
The FCC should embrace its role as a clearinghouse of consumer complaints and publish the subjects of and the complaints themselves. Redacting the names of consumers, as the CFPB does, is consumer-friendly. We hope the FCC will continue to do so. Redacting the names of companies from this data shields companies from embarrassment while reducing the impact of the invisible hand of government data in the marketplace.
Consumers, governments and corporations are all already living in the age of transparency, where social media enables the users of services, owners of products and residents of cities to share their good and bad experiences with the world with the snap of a smartphone camera and tap of a screen.
Disclosing a more complete data set will provide valuable context for consumers and policy makers regarding any regulatory action the FCC takes and empower the public to make more informed decisions. We hope the agency agrees and does so.
The Sunlight Foundation is a non-profit, nonpartisan organization that uses the power of the Internet to catalyze greater government openness and transparency, and provides new tools and resources for media and citizens, alike.
Source: http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2016/05/20/fcc-complaints-data-falls-short-of-informing-the-public-of-consumer-harms/
