A number of times I've expressed concern about the lack of concern over the looming threat that casts a long shadow over the internet. Known by the somewhat confusing and rather uninspiring title of "Net Neutrality", this legislative disaster threatens to completely reshape the internet. And not for the better - unless you're an existing giant Telecom corporation.There is a moderate outcry - but nothing like the scream I'd expect to hear from a society which is about to have the entire internet experience turned upside-down.
Is it that people don't understand the ramifications?
Is it that they don't understand the issue at all, or even which side they should be on?
Is it that they've never even heard of it?
Courtesy of Save The Internet, let's look at a few people who have heard of it...
William L. Smith, chief technology officer for Atlanta-based BellSouth Corp., told reporters and analysts that an Internet service provider such as his firm should be able, for example, to charge Yahoo Inc. for the opportunity to have its search site load faster than that of Google Inc.
(Washington Post)
Now what they would like to do is use my pipes free, but I ain't going to let them do that because we have spent this capital and we have to have a return on it. So there's going to have to be some mechanism for these people who use these pipes to pay for the portion they're using. Why should they be allowed to use my pipes?
-- Ed Whitacre of AT&T (Business Week)
Sounds like these guys have big plans for all of us internet users. Given that these big corporations always put the consumer first I'm sure it'll work out just fine for all of us. NOT!
How are things looking right now? Let's check in on how our Senators are currently positioned on this issue:
| For | Against |
Dorgan, Byron L. (D-ND) Wyden, Ron (D-OR) Akaka, Daniel K. (D-HI) Bayh, Evan (D-IN) Biden, Jr., Joseph R. (D-DE) Boxer, Barbara (D-CA) Cantwell, Maria (D-WA) Clinton, Hillary Rodham (D-NY) Dayton, Mark (D-MN) Dodd, Christopher J. (D-CT) Feingold, Russell D. (D-WI) Feinstein, Dianne (D-CA) Harkin, Tom (D-IA) Inouye, Daniel K. (D-HI) Kerry, John F. (D-MA) Lautenberg, Frank (D-NJ) Leahy, Patrick J. (D-VT) Nelson, Bill (D-FL) Nelson, Ben (D-NE) Obama, Barack (D-IL) Pryor, Mark (D-AR) Reid, Harry (D-NV) Rockefeller, IV, John D. (D-WV) Schumer, Charles (D-NY) Snowe, Olympia (R-ME) | Allen, George (R-VA) Brownback, Sam (R-KS) Burns, Conrad R. (R-MT) Craig, Larry E. (R-ID) DeMint, Jim (R-SC) Ensign, John (R-NV) Hutchison, Kay Bailey (R-TX) Lott, Trent (R-MS) McCain, John (R-AZ) Smith, Gordon (R-OR) Stevens, Ted (R-AK) Sununu, John (R-NH) Thomas, Craig (R-WY) Vitter, David (R-LA) |
Waffling
Those not listed are currently unknown.
Lieberman waffling makes me a bit nervous. Since he is now running as an Independent he is in a cash strapped position and he's going to need a lot of cash if he has any hope of winning. His primary rival (Lamont) will have a good deal of funding. Cue those big Telecom corporations with plenty of cash. I'm not saying Lieberman will be bought off, but he's certainly in a cash needy position with some very wealthy sharks circling. Ripe for the picking.
Overall, the "Save The Internet" position is leading. But there are an awful lot of unknowns in that list and so far there is an almost total breakdown by party. That would give the upper hand to the Telecoms. And I'd certainly say that Democrats not immune from the allure of big bucks and could easily fall to the dark side.
Despite the partisan display in the Senate, I'm having trouble picturing how rank-and-file Republicans (i.e. average citizens) will benefit. If there are any Republicans out there who support the loss of Net Neutrality please speak up and let us know how/why this is good for everyone. I just can't see it. And I'd expect the right-wing blogoshpere to be as upset as an Democrat about this - it will hurt them as much as it hurts us.
So please, get involved. While you're out talking up your candidate remember to throw in a good word for Net Neutrality. It is important and it will effect all of us.
The internet represents democracy in action and must be protected. More than perhaps any other medium, the internet provides an open and free marketplace of ideas and speech, as our founding fathers intended in the first amendment to our Constitution. The internet has been open and free since its inception, and it should remain open and free moving forward. Just as importantly, the blogosphere provides strong checks and balances on the corporate media and on governmental power. This is particularly crucial at at time of serious overreach by the executive branch, as we now are experiencing. Finally, there is a fundamental fairness issue at stake here. Given that the internet is increasingly indispensible to educational and career advancement in today's economy, it is essential that we keep it accessible and affordable to all Americans - not just to the wealthiest corporations and citizens. Allowing big telecom companies to provide preferential service to large content providers over the "little guy" is both wrong and undemocratic. For all these reasons, I strongly support net neutrality.
Thanks for the posting-With all the media consolidation - TV/Radio/newpaper-we need an outlet where money isn' #1.