Net Neutrality Supporters Have First Amendment Upside Down
by Capitol ConfidentialWith the onset of the holiday season, Washington, D.C., is getting quieter by the day. However, opponents of net neutrality—which the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is considering implementing—are not taking a break from tough policy debate quite yet. With the FCC expected to reach a decision on net neutrality early next year, one major foe of the policy spoke out against it again last week in harsh terms, suggesting that if net neutrality rules were implemented, they might fall afoul of the First Amendment’s intent and purpose.
Kyle McSlarrow, President of the National Cable and Telecommunications Association, said at a lunch held last Wednesday by the Media Institute that the implementation of net neutrality rules “would ultimately decrease the overall amount of speech on the Internet, thus harming, not helping, First Amendment interests.” Furthermore, he argued, net neutrality proponents who claim the policy is needed to protect First Amendment rights have their facts “upside down.” McSlarrow went on to add, “By its plain terms and history, the First Amendment is a limitation on government power, not an empowerment of government. Making these arguments is, ironically, almost proof that First Amendment rights are being implicated…let’s not forget that the First Amendment is framed as a shield for citizens, not a sword for government.”
McSlarrow’s comments are likely to grab the attention of some groups and individuals sympathetic to civil liberties worries but to date unengaged in the net neutrality debate.
However, his comments will also be seen as a full-throated rejoinder to left-leaning groups who have sought to paint net neutrality as a policy that would protect or extend individual rights rather than curtail them. Such groups have traditionally sought to discredit Internet Service Providers like NCTA’s members by dubbing them major foes of consumer interests who want to limit speech.
Observers say debate is likely to remain heated as the capital brings in the New Year, and as the FCC gets closer to a decision.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
43 Comments
something eerie about the guy in the Norman Rockwell painting, he looks naive and crazy staring into outer space. We are all at the mercy of Obama and Peloci's mental issues, our political czars are nuts
That pesky constitution keeps getting in the way of the do-gooders of the Obama administration
What a load, neutrality, Political Correctness squared + taxes and fines, it's Progressive Christmas present.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by johnnyA99, Big Tweeting. Big Tweeting said: BigGovt: Net Neutrality Supporters Have First Amendment Upside Down: With the onset of the ho.. http://bit.ly/4A315L #BigTweet [...]
R E V O L U T I O N.
http://www.cafepress.com/rightwingstuff
I'm afraid that the original concept of net neutrality is being perverted and will lead to government intrusion where none is needed.
My understanding of the original net neutrality debate was to prevent ISPs from "managing their networks" by either filtering/throttling access to specific websites and services unless those businesses pay for premium, or preferred, access.
For example, under this scenario I as a subscriber of Time Warner Cable internet access may not be able to access (or have extremely sluggish access) to website I choose to view. For example, unless BigGovernment.com/FoxNews.com/DrudgeReport.com were to pay TWC, I may or may not be able to access them even though I would be paying TWC a fee to access the internet. This filtering/throttling would be done in the name of "network management."
Now, multiply this fee times the number of different ISPs and this could easily put businesses out of business – not to mention the increased barriers to enter a market.
If the net neutrality issue being discussed were this simple, I would be a supporter. However, I rarely hear the issue being framed in these terms. Until it is, I cannot advocate for any policy, legislation, dictate that addresses this topic.
The appalling verve of this administration is getting to be really scary! If something isn't done NOW, we will loose ALL of our freedoms and there will be no recourse!!!
Obama Convention Delegates to Administer "Net Neutrality" Rules http://optoons.blogspot.com/2009/10/obama-convent...
I totally agree – if i want to build an exclusive pipe from point A to point B, and severely limit traffic to point C, i should be able to do this. If people want a different model, a market will exist for this different model. And if it's worth investment to get a return, someone will build that model – that's how freedom works. What I hate is those who have substantially profited from net neutrality (any online service like Google, Amazon etc.) being able to build their own databases and routing systems in addition to what ISP providers do and not expect to pay the ISPs anything more!!!
I've heard that the prime time access rule had unexpected consequences as well, back in the 70's
It was a catalyst for the "rural purge" at CBS, when they killed every show 'that had a tree in it.'
Net Neutrality is an issue more paramount to our freedom than even health care reform. If the government jams this through, it leaves us open to huge power grabs by the government on their whim under the guise of 'freedom' and 'protection'. Be afraid of this
Net Neutrality 'should be' as simple as the term itself; meaning that neither providers nor government should interfere with the open and unfettered access to web and the information/data available therein.
This should not be a political issue… but neither should it be left to those with special interests to decide. While the government should indeed be the public's watchdog against corporate tyranny, it should be limited in scope to provide only that service. As much as we don't need the big network providers telling us what we can and cannot do, we don't need an overbearing bureaucracy creating useless regulations based on political agenda.
Moderation and balance are what is required. But considering the current condition of both the corporate and the government in the areas of trustworthiness and efficiency, this will be a tough row to hoe. The public should beware now less they be damned in the end.
Net Neutrality is another ia a vile plan the the Obama is supporting to fundimentaly transform the FCC into the White House Propaganda Ministry. Check out the comments of two key players in the FCC, the infamous Mark Lloyd, and former FCC Chairman, now Commissioner Michael Copps, there are the foxes in the hen house for sure. If they succeed in this we are all doomed.
http://www.casttv.com/video/7sntqk/obama-s-fcc-di...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDNqK34mwdM
We are being assaulted on every level. It is insanity and I never dreamed we would be facing such an onslaught of fascism. I feel like a frog in a kettle of water heating up…I want to jump out but have no idea what to do to stop the insanity. I feel like we can't wait until the next election to stop the water from boiling…it may already be to late…
Leave the internet alone. The citizens of this country may very well be sheeples, afraid to speak out and take action against the incessant onslaught of the left. I have a feeling however that hardcore hackers may not be. I believe that they may revolt against this in ways that we haven't even imagined yet. The net is the only thing left in this country that govt has yet to suffocate with it's influence. It is the one thing that still feels truly free, and it should remain so.
It's never framed in those terms because of arguments like McSlarrow's. Net Neutrality isn't a First Amendment issue, it's a monopoly issue. It's all about incentives (http://eaourl.net/k/2). The problem is that service providers are also content providers.
The current Internet service markets are *not* free markets (and given the barriers to entry likely never will be). Net Neutrality regulation—done properly—would ensure that the content markets remain free markets, and that the major telcos cannot abuse their monopolistic positions on the ISP side in the content side.
Hack Them Before They Hack You.
FCC Chairman Genachowski, Commissioner Michael Copps, Diversity Czar Mark Lloyd, former Internet Czar Susan Crawford, Science and Technology Czar John Holdren, along with BO have all played key roles in promoting this Net Neutrality campaign of Government control of the internet. If you trust the government to run this information superhighway more then you do the free market forces that built it and so far has kept things running ok, then so be it. But it would be very smart to utillize the free acces to information you still have to at least check these people out and their associations very closely to see if they are indeed honest brokers and stewards of the 1st ammendment and for the the promotion of a free and open cyber society. I have, you can form your own conclusions…
[...] by Capitol Confidential With the onset of the holiday season, Washington, DC, is getting quieter by the day. However, opponents of net neutrality—which the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is considering implementing—are not taking a break from …Read Original Story: Net Neutrality Supporters Have First Amendment Upside Down – Big Governme… [...]
I agree citizen, but the question is, what is to be done?
We can discuss all day but they ignore us.
They will only listen when they are forced to do so.
Who is John Galt?
I guess you've never been to a Town hall meeting.
The man is looking up at the stage, where the leader/s of the meeting are and speaking out. He sort of looks like a young Abe Lincoln, but was someone Rockwell knew. All of Rockwell's paintings are inhabited by people in his town, friends, and family.
Superior point! Let the free market work it out and it will.
Ahh…but, there's the rub..This administration HATES the 'free market' system, which is why they are trying to tighten the noose around our necks!
INGSOC
War Is Peace
Freedom Is Slavery
Ignorance Is Strength
Welcome….
gee thanks for the help, youre a mnaster of the obvious.
i think he looks nuts, and my interpretation of the painting is how powerless we are to the will of the lunatics we have elected to represent us
Best analysis of the philosophy behind the net neutrality movement that I've come across: http://www.heartland.org/publications/policy%20st...
Net neutrality is just the wedge that starts the drive to manipulation. Politicians get paid off by Google to support a change to rules that is the only way Google's desired delivery model will succeed for services they wish to grow. Cable co's put in copper/fiber to neighborhoods to profit on high-bandwidth television. Now Google and others want to deliver TV on those same wires but not pay for the bandwidth, and net neutrality is their goodspeak to make that happen. This is not kindness and fairness … this is typical political special interest manipulation.
And government rides the bus gladly, because then it puts copper/fiber-based delivery into federal hands just like broadcast and the FCC. What a great way to finally get back at Fox News, eh?
I agree wholeheartedly with you.
NET NEUTRALITY as explained by those in the know, i.e. Leo Laporte on his excellent radio show, is simple:
BITS ARE BITS.
You can charge people for the amount / volume of bits they use but it is wrong to restrict access to certain types of bits as you laid out in your example.
But like all things leftist the meanings of words are twisted and distorted by this administration. What does Net Neutrality mean in ObamaSpeak? F**k, who knows.
It's like in Orwell's 1984 where the innocuously named Room 101 was where they strapped the rat cage to your head and allowed the animals to eat your face.
I want to credit Lincoln for freeing the slaves, what a great thing to give People FREEDOM, but he specifically stated that he didnt want to free the slaves and he also said disparaging things about african americans. I dislike him because of the federal power he abused when he suspended habeas corpus and threw his political opponents in jail, guess you didnt know that. And i dont like the lincoln monument in washington dc, to me it seems like hes sitting on a throne like a king, king of the federal govt. ready to shove down your throat anything these political clowns can come up with.
And regarding the civil war, i agree with jefferson davis that the constitution gave states the right to secede from the union
I am the last person you should make those claims about ! I don't believe that government can solve everyone's problems, nor should they even try !
I stand by my comment about typical New England Town Hall meetings. They are always about local "problems" and have always been a way for people to have a say in what the local government should and shouldn't do. Though they used to work better than they do now, they sure work better than trying to convince one's Senator or Representative to do what you think the Fed government should or shouldn't be doing.
If you have ever seen a picture of the young Abe Lincoln, that is what he looked like; though that fact was probably unintentional.
Southerner are you; one who is still mentally fighting the Civil War ? Yes, I know many Southerners still don't call it that, but that IS what it is called.
This is a pretty useless article. It doesn't even state, in a basic format, what net neutrality is or how it will take away our freedoms.
Net neutrality = no data provider can throttle connection speed based on preferential IP numbers.
How can this be bad?
The administration is overwhelming the people with all of these horrible bills hoping to have people overlook them or throw their hand up in the air and give up. We will not give up and we will stay informed no matter if it is the Christmas season. We the people know this is a toxic bunch in the White House. They need the taxes from the healthcare debacle to spread to acorn, seiu and this program, if enacted, will be broke in 4 yrs when it is implemented. Nothing is going to stop the American people from knowing what is going on and using our voices. There will be a fight in 2010, as they will pull every dirty trick to keep their majority, we have to be prepared.
the press is in bootlicker mode, the legislature is in bootlicker mode, now if we could just shut up the talk radio troublemakers – oh yeah, don`t forget the internet – can`t have any people causing problems there … don`t want common sense to be allowed to rear it`s ugly head, that might lead to something terrible – like the truth. or a place for the non believers to communicate………….that lil voice in our heads is right – it is all about control. don`t watch the shiny thing, the other hand is stealing the country.
Lincoln wanted to send all of the slaves back to Africa, but he did FREE them with the Emancipation Proclamation.
You're irrational LDS is palpable; not to mention and ridiculous. And none of it has anything to do with Rockwell's painting, which you don't understand at all.
If you aren't a Southerner, then you are a copperhead. Time to get with it and join the 21rst century!
Psssssssssssssssssssst……………..please don't act as though you are the only one who knows simple historical facts. I bet everyone here knows all about Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus,etc. I probably knew all about it long before you were out of diapers.
Since you are incapable of discussing the topic of this thread and even Rockwell's painting, I suggest that you just go post on some other thread.
there is always recourse – it`s almost always ugly.
the camel stuck his nose under the tent for a sniff, everybody laughed at the silly camel. then they woke up one day to find the tent filled with camel turds.
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ, you probaly wear diapers
If that's the best you can do, which I guess it is, then you need to just stop posting. You've thoroughly discredited and shamed yourself.
does your govt. check pay for your depends? from the muck a lotus flower grows
Norman Rockwell's FOUR FREEDOMS were published in The Saturday Evening Post in 1943. The above posted picture, called FREEDOM OF SPEECH, is relevant to this thread, because "Net Neutrality" threatens our FREEDOM OF SPEECH even more, NOW and from our own government, than forgein enemies, past and present, has ever done.
These painting are part of our American culture and the very themes of each one, but especially FREEDOM OF SPEECH and FREEDOM OF WORSHIP ( what our very nation was partly founded upon ) should resonate within each and every American! That, from the highest office of this land and its administration, it doesn't, makes another of these four paintings, FREEDOM FROM FEAR ( OURS TO FIGHT FOR ), which shows parents tucking their two small children into bed, as WW II was raging, makes what is going on in D.C., now, even more frightening. We should never be faced with an American government led by people who hate America and who want to and are trying to silence the populace; or the part of it, which has grown to a majority, who disagree with it's far left positions.
The very misnomer of Net NEUTRALITY, is the dead give-away. We must fight for our freedom of speech !
upon reading what is in the net neutrality i was so shock about what is in it, so that why there is an increasing number of opposition for this bill. according to some i interview and opinion heard, they call this bill "Horrible Bills"
Ca Homes For Sale
Ca Foreclosures
Ca Mortgage
Thank you for your great post, I’ve never really posted here before so i wanted to say thanks and keep up the good work.
You must be logged in to post a comment.