Photo: acroll

Do you want content you are interested in blocked by your ISP because it is queer, atheist, liberal, feminist, or otherwise objectionable to a Republican corporate suit?

Do you want your ISP blocking content that competes with their websites or the cable channels they own?

Do you want to be forced to pay extra charges for downloads from websites your cable conglomerate or phone/FIOS company doesn't own?

Avoiding this is what Net Neutrality is about. Net Neutrality is the concept that Internet Access Providers must treat all content the same, regardless of origin. The cable and phone companies hate it, and don't want you to be able to control what you can get to when you use their services.

Credo has an Action Alert calling for the FCC to enforce Net Neutrality, and the deadline for comment is this Thursday, January 14. Here's what they have to say about it?

If you support net neutrality, now's the time to speak out.

The Federal Communications Commission has proposed net neutrality rules that will ensure that the Internet is free from blocking, censorship and discrimination by powerful telecom companies. And the FCC has opened up a public comment period to get feedback on the proposed rules -- but only until this Thursday (January 14)!

We need you to speak up because the telecoms are fighting these rules tooth-and-nail. Their pushback began even before the rules were announced. Eighteen Senators (all Republicans) sent a letter to the FCC opposing net neutrality. One Republican senator even announced an effort to prevent the FCC from spending funds to enforce the new rules once they go into effect. Separately, 72 House Democrats sent their own letter to the FCC opposing net neutrality rules.

This type of pressure from Congress hasn't go unnoticed at the FCC, so now's the time for citizens like you to speak out and fight back.

Without strong net neutrality rules, we might have to rely upon the good will of large telecoms to protect our access to the diversity of political perspectives. We might have to trust companies like Comcast, which actively and secretly interfered with users' ability to access popular video, photo and music sharing applications; AT&T, which censored anti-Bush comments made by Pearl Jam's lead singer during a concert; and Verizon Wireless, interfered with NARAL Pro-Choice America's ability to send messages to its members.

We can't let the corporate lobbyists win. What good is free speech if powerful corporations have the power to stifle communications they find objectionable?

Tell the FCC: Save net neutrality. Sign here to submit your comment before the comment period closes on January 14.

Sign the petition

The petition reads:

Net neutrality is the cornerstone of innovation, free speech and democracy on the Internet. Please propose and enact strong net neutrality rules to ensure that the Internet is free from blocking, censorship and discrimination.

Please Support Net Neutrality Now!

Photo: acroll

President Obama has nominated an Internet industry backer of Net Neutrality to be the next Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman. (From CNET 3/3/09 - Hat Tip to From the Left)

President Obama on Tuesday nominated Julius Genachowski as the nation's top telecommunications regulator, picking a campaign advisor who has divided his career between Washington, D.C., political jobs and working as an Internet executive.

Genachowski had been mentioned as a likely candidate for the Federal Communications Commission post, in part because he participated in the Obama campaign's Internet efforts and previously worked as chief counsel to Democratic FCC Chairman Reed Hundt.

"He will bring to the job diverse and unparalleled experience in communications and technology, with two decades of accomplishment in the private sector and public service," Obama said in a statement.

Genachowski is likely to continue the Democratic push for more Net neutrality regulations, which are opposed by some conservatives and telecommunications providers. He was a top Obama technology advisor and aided in crafting a technology platform that supported Net neutrality rules.

This is good news from an administration whose overall performance has been all over the map so far. It doesn't make up for President Obama's Clintonian discrimination against queers in Cabinet level appointments. It certainly won't absolve him from potential war crimes prosecution if he really does carry out his threat to drag out the war of aggression against Iraq until 2011. But, it is good news.

One word of caution on Genachowski. He works in the Internet industry. His industry is experiencing consolidation; companies in his industry will go bankrupt as in other industries; and many potential employers after his government service will be the same people who will be lobbying him against Net Neutrality. This is no time to declare victory. People who want a free Internet will have to keep fighting.

Note on the Budget: As usual, corporate media coverage of the Obama budget is mostly on the politics, not the policy. The actual policies embedded in that budget appear to be just as all over the map as everything else this administration has done so far. It invites further study, and selective activism to try to improve it in Congress. Liberals and progressives need to be very careful not to reflexively support or oppose this administration. At this time, it's a matter of putting pressure on the White House and Congress to improve.

 

 

OK, "Net Neutrality" has to be the most boring catch phrase since the dawn of political slogans. The geeks who invented this term think in terms of Network Administration.

Until now, the Internet has worked so that you get to go to any web site, and your ISP will accept the data you download the same way, regardless of who the data comes from. This is called "Net Neutrality," meaning that your ISP is neutral in terms of where on the Internet the data comes from.

Unfortunately, the phone and cable companies have been doing a good job lobbying Congress and the FCC to get rid of this, while pro-Internet lobbyists are trying to get it put back into effect. The broadband providers have two goals with this.

1) They want to charge premium prices to data providers, even though all the costs already are covered in your monthly service charge.

2) Some cable providers are owned by Time Warner, a leading media conglomerate. Other broadband providers would like to make deals with other media conglomerates. In both cases, the idea is to push people away from content that they don't control.

If you want to go to WBAI's web site, you eventually will get slower access or none at all. (Substitute your favorite non-profit web site for WBAI.) Listener funded radio can't afford to pay for faster access, even if the cable and phone companies would be willing to allow access to a media outlet that often criticizes them and other corporate interests.

In this faux Internet world, most broadband customers would have access to a limited number of viewpoints in a manner similar to that of cable TV. That mean, it would be harder to keep up with news and views from:

- Queers
- Atheists and Humanists
- Liberals

Some of the activists trying to defend the Internet experience for Americans are referring to it as "Save the Internet." In a sense, this slogan is not overblown. Also, it's a lot more interesting than "Net Neutrality."