Should the FCC be DOA?

CNET is running an editorial calling for the abolishment of the FCC (Federal Comminucations Commission). The FCC was created at the beginning of the radio age to manage the public airwaves - managing the spectrum by selling the rights to certain frequencies over certain geographical areas, and has expanded itself into regulating the airwaves for such things as decency. CNET's man argues that the FCC was never a great idea, but has become more of an impediment to progress than a helper, because it is founded upon the idea of a Central Plan, something which has failed over and over again.

Consider some examples of bureaucratic malfeasance that the FCC, with the complicity of the U.S. Congress, has committed. The FCC rejected long-distance telephone service competition in 1968, banned Americans from buying their own non-Bell telephones in 1956, dragged its feet in the 1970s when considering whether video telephones would be allowed and did not grant modern cellular telephone licenses until 1981--about four decades after Bell Labs invented the technology. Along the way, the FCC has preserved monopolistic practices that would have otherwise been illegal under antitrust law.

Frankly, this is the first time I have read this argument anywhere. Generally, the public perception has been that the FCC does an okay job of managing the airwaves. But there are many examples here which suggest maybe that is a misperception rather than reality. Japan does now outstrip the USA in nearly all cellular technology, and wireless internet is having a hard time coexisting with the FCC. And the agency does seem to fluxuate from total hands-off to total dictatorship on the decency issue. What do you think? Comment below, please!