While such power can be theoretically socially beneficial when granted to truly benevolent agencies under non-corrupt democratic regimes, allow me to introduce you to the Russian Internet watchdog Roskomnadzor as an example how wrong things could get if the agency is not so benevolent.
And the issue with regimes is that they can get corrupt. Even the good ones.
So on that basis you want to close down the FCC, the FDA, FAA...
I get where you're coming from, but federal agencies in other domains have an ability to tell companies what to do. They can obligate them to do things.
You're opposed to this on principle? Or just the internet?
It's only about the media, because the such shortcut in the ability to tell companies what to do could be abused in a way harmful to free speech - and I think free speech is more important than enforcing quick scam app takedowns.
However, I thought about this, and what FCC could probably do is enforce content labeling for questionable apps (I think it's in spirit of how their safe harbor rule works) and immediately require marketplaces to mark application as potentially harmful ASAP. That would limit impact to the consumers, but won't let this be directly abused too much, e.g., against activist apps.
While such power can be theoretically socially beneficial when granted to truly benevolent agencies under non-corrupt democratic regimes, allow me to introduce you to the Russian Internet watchdog Roskomnadzor as an example how wrong things could get if the agency is not so benevolent.
And the issue with regimes is that they can get corrupt. Even the good ones.