The Left Continues to Break: More Cracks in Net Neutrality Front
by Capitol ConfidentialWith the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) set to make a decision on proposed net neutrality rules later this year, the fight between supporters of the controversial policy and its opponents continues to heat up.
Yesterday, a group of minority and women’s organizations reportedly called on the FCC to give serious consideration to the impact that net neutrality could have on what has been termed the “digital divide”—the widening of which, opponents argue, constitutes a potential unintended consequence of the policy, and one which has become a primary focal point of net neutrality critics’ concern. In a letter and a proposal to the FCC, the groups—which include minority organizations that have previously spoken out regarding the net neutrality issue such as the Asian American Justice Center—have asked for a field hearing and workshop addressing the topic.
In addition, the groups are asking the FCC to look at whether neutrality rules should apply to search engines, as well as content and application providers. As proposed, net neutrality rules would apply only to internet service providers (ISPs), though both outright opponents of net neutrality, and supporters of “open internet” policies who consider that the rules do not go far enough have raised questions as to where the proposed rules, as drafted, draw the line. Recently, Google, a major proponent of net neutrality, attracted criticism from such quarters for alleged “rent-seeking” and “hypocrisy” regarding its opposition to so-called “search neutrality,” resulting in heightened scrutiny of the net neutrality concept, as currently defined.
Furthermore, the minority and women’s groups behind the new letter have suggested potential witnesses from whom they believe the FCC should hear, including Rainbow/PUSH founder Rev. Jesse Jackson, former FCC Chairman Michael Powell, and various representatives of the cable and telecommunications industries. The groups consider that without hearing from such witnesses, the FCC may fail to appropriately understand the effect that each of six proposed net neutrality rules could have on minority investment, deployment, adoption, and participation in the broadband economy, as well as jobs.
Such concerns reflect those previously voiced by groups and individuals including the Communications Workers of America labor union, National Council of La Raza, the League of United Latin American Citizens, the National Urban League, and several high-profile African-American groups. Proponents of net neutrality have previously dismissed the voicing of such concerns, arguing that groups raising questions about the impact net neutrality would have on the digital divide constitute “Astroturf.”
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
37 Comments
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…
Well stated.
All you have to do is look at the players in wldbil's post above to determine what net neutraility will become.
All of the political backers are depending on this becoming another backdoor way to manage information, suppress dissent, generate revenue, and redistribute wealth.
everything this administration is up to has but ONE reason…
And that is to advance a far left, statist example with a small liberal 'elite' controlling every single aspect of our lives. They will not rest until one of two things happen:
1) They achieve their hidden goals
2) They are thrown out of office
The choice is clear…
As my previous statement, if people want net neutrality, they shoul purchase internet etc. through ISPs who offer this. It should not be mandated. If an ISP want to offer a different alternative where it chooses to prioritize or throttle certain types of traffic? Fine. All we should ask is that they are open about it.
Abort this attempt to muzzle conserative pushback against the Okenyan Administration FCC.
You fools can't specifically "tailor" this to hurt JUST white middle class "dissidents" so junk the whole thing.
Hey, FCC, you can't avoid collateral damage!
URGE "DIRTY HARRY" REID TO RETIRE @ http://reid.senate.gov/contact/
Abort this attempt to muzzle conserative pushback against the Okenyan Administration FCC.
You fools can't specifically "tailor" this to hurt JUST white middle class "dissidents" so junk the whole thing.
Hey, FCC, you can't avoid collateral damage!
URGE "DIRTY HARRY" REID TO RETIRE @ http://reid.senate.gov/contact/
I agree this is a muzzle.. I still don't understand what is broken.
The government in charge of the Internet, what could go wrong?
Remember that scene in First Blood when Rambo hunts the cops and tells Dennehy's character, the Sheriff, that he is the law in the wilderness. Well hackers are the "law" on the net while we have those who act as Sheriffs wanting to pass this law and that law about the net. Who do you think will win that battle if this "wilderness" the internet is messed with? Will it be the "Sheriff" (those who make the laws and push things like Net neutrality) or the internets version of "John Rambo" ?????
My money is with "Rambo".
How are those emails, phone calls, faxes and protests working out for you America? They aren't! Your playing their game… STOP and play your game through Saving the Republic
They fear the power of a belligerant motivated public.
We have tools, we will use them…everyone, force incumbent criminals out NOW!
Start with the leading criminal, Reid @ http://reid.senate.gov/contact/
Let me comment as a network engineer and a student of politics… first, the only reason net neutrality is being pushed is that you cannot get hookers, cocaine, graft and free junket vacations flowing from a domain you don't regulate. Nobody wants this regulation except the big players (which is always the way it works; in the same way the EU exists to push all small competitors out of business because they can't afford to comply with byzantine rules).
As a network engineer, you can bet that there will be an immense revolt. We can bring almost everything we do underground via PGP, i.e. everyone who wants to revolt against the tyranny can simply encrypt all their interactions with everybody. The amount of hardware and monitoring it would take to control what happens on the Web against the will of it's denizens is staggering and won't ever happen. And of course, we could all just subscribe to private networks that use portals into the public Internet and circumvent the damage. Comcast could create a separate logical network and market it as "government-free Internet."
we're at a pivot point in our country's history. ever the optimist, i believe that liberty will prevail.
and of course what they seek is unobtainable…
The only reason Europe can afford it's laissez faire socialism is because it hided behind America's might.
Or used to. The one HUGE mistake all liberals make is they think they wil lonly have to give up 'a little'.
It doesn't work that way. We have what we have because we work for it, and defend ourselves. Take that away and you don't have Eurosocialism-
You have massive economic depression…
It's a smart move, sorry to say. They can now run canidates with clean hands. The Dumbos will vote for them, and the Communist agenda will still remain intact.
Agreed. But we must also address the problem of government enforced monopolies such as are given to cable companies. Many people only have a choice between their local telco monopoly and the cable monopoly. Break these state-sancationed monopolies and then we would have real competition and we might actually see a return of customer service!
Please stop trying to argue facts with Obama and his minions! Obama's policies are all about changing America into a Socialist country, run under rules following Marxist principles. Recall Obama's famous rant in 2008 that his opponents were using: "Words, just words!" Well, now both Obama and Pelosi make their statements using words that are the opposite of what they mean. Pelosi said yesterday that the health care legislation was drafted in the most utmost transparent fashion, reducing costs, saving lives and making life safe for us all. She's using words, just words, when her meaning of those statements is offset by what she and Obama intend.
This is like a replay of 1974 when Congressional Democrats reversed the field results of the So. Vietnamese into a victory for the North in 1975.
So, continue to try and use factual arguments against Obama and Pelosi, however the only act that will count is at the ballot box, the polls, in November this year and then again in 2012. Pray that we have a chance to throw the bastards out in those two election cycles.
The only thing about comcast is, Soros and Imelt are major stockholders…there goes that dream!
The only REASON for this is more control for the government!! We have to get the traitors out of Washington!!! I don't think this country can take 3 more years of this!!!
So the left wants to control the tolls on the new toll roads? Seems fair if you are a leftist.
Why not give control of everything to the government then we all get everything free. Isn't that how it works. I want my free gas and mortgage payment now …
What you worried about reparations by internet? Why not, they plan on reparations by health care … We all know it's whities fault for all the ills of the world, just ask Rev Wright and his pupil Obama.
The internet is NOT broken.
WTF America? When do we put an end to this?
Surely many, many government officials are guilty of treason. If you suspect someone of treason and don't report them you can go to jail for 7 years. Technically, were all guilty if we don't start documenting all this and send it to our local DA. Watch your backs, they may just turn this around on you.
You so-called conservative people are delusional. Net neutrality is just that – it's the idea of treating all bits equally, passing them through your network at the same price as any other bits.
If you don't do this, you end up with situations like Fox / Time-Warner. You'll have some sites refusing to deliver content to some carriers. You'll have some carriers charging more money to some content providers. This invariably leads to bundling of content on the content side, and rent-seeking behavior on the carrier side.
Look at how much money is charged for text messages, compared to data, and compare that to the cost of voice data. They do NOT correspond to the amount and speed of the data, but on the market-determined value of the data. Consequently, they also cause specific data pathways to be used for specific, limited purposes. Carriers and make sure to put barriers to using one data pathway for other purposes — you can't send text messages through the internet (easily), and avoid the fees. They don't want you to use skype.
A neutral network encourages software developments to proceed at a maximal pace, to fill the data pipes with multiple kinds of data, for a "rich internet experience."
There are some reasonable counter-arguments, but I won't bother – you can figure them out.
BTW – the CWA hasn't come out strong for Net Neutrality. They have been mild in supporting it.
Search engines need to be included also. Search with Google and then the next largest on any controversial issue. Note which ones provide only one side of the story. Wikipedia is just as bad.
A nation built on free speech isn't going to give it up. There were two million people in DC on 9/12. A lot of the organizing was done via web sites. So, we probably better stifle that, so goes the thinking in the offices in DC. Obama got in his little helicopter and flew away that morning. He's reported to have said, "wow that's a lot of people." Shocked him. We went home that day, but he still sees us there at his front gate. Let some govt organization try to regulate free speech. First we'll go to court. Takes time that does. Pretty soon there will be some other technology and they will be regulating a very empty space. Of course the "young people" will howl if anyone touches their internet. They might even go to DC themselves. See, they think they own it…
Come on it is Obamas attempt to shut down all opposition. And if we the people let him do this without a fight we deserve to made into Marxist slaves. I am just waiting for someone anyone with the skills to step up and say "ENOUGH" and tell Odumbo we will not accept anymore leftist Communist takeovers. I would grab my weapons and join forces with any one who would help stop this. It is sad to say I have already figured if this keeps going like it is I will not live my life out. I will not see what my dad fought against in WW11 just be accepted here with a whimper from the people. Sooner or later we will need to stop it by force. No way law will do it Odumbo thinks he is above the Constitution. And that is out ultimate law.
Has Mark Lloyd released the date of the book burning?
As I've said ad nauseum Obama and Co. seek a fundemental shift to the left ala Euro-socialism..
It's a fundemental paradigm shift to the left…
Mainstream socialism becomes the norm, communism – slightly leftist, and if your a "moderate conservative" you're a raving lunatic Nazi-stormtrooper.
Of course leftist terror is ok, stiffling dissent is dandy, legislating behavior is fine ( see France -England, etc.)
Good job – thank you.
How about highway neutrality, water neutrality, gasoline neutrality, etc… too. Might as well make everything neutral since they're spreading the wealth/love around.
You know when they start talking neutrality, balance, even; you know it's anything but and usually the worst for the people.
Access capability is private property belonging to the TelCos who have spent trillions buying , installing , and maintaining it over the past 70 years. Fortunately, it is to their benefit to keep us happy by providing services that we want at prices we will pay. All TelCos share their networks freely at agreed upon prices with all of the other 1200 TelCos in the nation because they don't want to be the one that is isolated and not shared with and unable to keep their customers happy. The business model does not allow a TelCo to restrict their network. Any need for net neutrality is based on illiterate speculation and fabrication in an attempt to steal control of private property much like the Telecom Deregulation Act did by leaving the TelCos regulated to their serving areas and rates while taking their private property and forcing them to sell it at below market rates. This is government theft of private property that will cause the TelCos to be put in economic jeopardy when they are forced to invest in equipment and software just to meet government mandates.
PLEASE UNDERSTAND—WE VOTED FOR A MARXIST GOVERNMENT AND NOBODY IN POWER WILL LISTEN TO ANYBODY BUT THE GHOST OF MAO TSE TUNG!
BETTER PRAY THAT THE 2010 ELECTION IS NOT STOPPED, BECAUSE THAT IS THE ONLY CHANCE AMERICA HAS LEFT!
Maybe I missed something, but since when does the internet discriminate against racial minorities? I say we drag Al Gore in front of Congress to explain the inherent racism of his invention…
Oh, and whatever Jesse Jackson wants, I vote the opposite–sure saves me the time I'd have to spend researching something myself.
The contracts between isps are different from the contracts with individual and business customers. The contracts the isps have with each other are peering contracts: network neutrality. The contracts they have with their endpoint customers are not neutral – they are, to different degrees, designed to treat some "bits" as more or less valuable than other bits. The typical home DSL contract has different upload and download speeds, and if you look at the product line, the upload bits basically cost more than download bits — even though the cost to the provider is the same. Competition forces the price of download bits down, but they make up for that by charging a lot more for upload bandwidth.
So, no, the market doesn't lead to any kind of neutrality. It leads to differentiation of services.
Also, the initial telco networks were a government permitted monopoly by AT&T. The first internet networks were funded by the government. Telcos have rights-of-way that cross over private property. So, they are not wholly privately owned – they are a kind of private property that exists with government consent to limit other peoples' private property rights.
[...] more: » The Left Continues to Break: More Cracks in Net Neutrality Front … Share and [...]