The filing, submitted on January 14, represents the collective views of the ASPIRA Association, the Black College Communications Association, the Hispanic Institute, the Hispanic Technology and Telecommunications Partnership, the Labor Council for Latin American Advancement, Latinos in Information Sciences and Technology Association, the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, the League of United Latin American Citizens, MANA, A National Latina Organization, the National Association of Black County Officials, the National Black Caucus of State Legislators, the National Conference of Black Mayors, the National Coalition on Black Civic Participation-Black Women’s Roundtable, the National Organization of Black Elected Legislative Women, the National Puerto Rican Coalition, and the United States Hispanic Chamber of Commerce.

Telecommunications policy experts called the filing “historic,” in view of the sheer number of civil rights organizations participating, but also hard-hitting.  The comments, written by David Honig of the Minority Media and Telecommunications Council, state that “[T]his proceeding implicates one of the most important civil rights issues of our time.”

The comments go on to note that broadband adoption among minorities remains sluggish and that as such, minorities stand to gain or lose a great deal depending on how events play out.

Net neutrality, the filing indicates, could be another example of a policy designed to be neutral, but which impacts those historically disadvantaged much more, and more adversely, than others within the population.  Writes Honig, “…even apparently universal and neutral federal programs can widen existing disparities. As we now continue the transition into a digital age, the Commission should ensure that its efforts to promote a free and open Internet for all do not end up leaving minorities and other groups lacking equal access to broadband behind.”

Some minority groups participating in the filing had previously expressed concern about the likely impact of net neutrality on their constituencies, and proponents of net neutrality have sought to portray the development as nothing new.

However, observers say the fact that so many groups are setting off the same alarm bells—and that fact is being publicized— could bring real pressure to bear upon the FCC at a critical time.

The FCC is set to issue its National Broadband Plan next month.

On one side are public interest groups including the Media Access Project, Free Press, Consumers Union and the New America Foundation.  On the other are several high-profile African-American groups including the National Black Caucus of State Legislators, the National Organization of Black Elected Legislative Women, The National Black Caucus of Local Elected Officials and the National Association of Black County Officials.

According to National Journal, the public interest groups wrote to FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski last week to express concern regarding recent statements made by an FCC official that were less than enthusiastically favorable toward net neutrality.  The groups were evidently seeking Genachowski’s assurance that the FCC was not “pre-judging” the outcome of its rulemaking process with regard to the net neutrality issue.

Meanwhile, the African-American groups are expressing open support for the Broadband Opportunity Coalition, which has raised concerns about the potentially negative impact that net neutrality could have on broadband deployment and adoption.  They are also objecting forcefully to tactics taken by some net neutrality advocates, which they consider to cross a line.  According to the heads of the groups, some net neutrality advocates have “attacked” civil rights organizations and “sought to impugn the integrity, independence and intelligence of members of the Congressional Black Caucus and leaders of the civil rights community who have made adoption and expanded network capacity their highest priorities.”

The attacks of which the groups complain seem focused on the charge that they serve as “Astroturf” designed to further not the interests of those whom they represent but rather those of the telecoms industry.  The groups conversely contend that “Many feel that these [pro-net neutrality] organizations are pushing a regulatory perspective that would regressively shift the costs of bandwidth onto middle- and low-income consumers,” and in their letter describe the net neutrality advocates in question as “elite digital organizations” who “peddle” “destructive racial rhetoric.”

Further underlining the existence of an increasingly nasty rift is that one such organization appears to be Free Press itself.  The group, which one anti-net neutrality technology expert with whom Capitol Confidential spoke, described as “actually Marxist,” operates the site Save The Internet.  Critics say the site regularly publishes the work of authors closely associated with the claims to which the African-American groups object.