Go Home

Mr. President: Time to Take the Wheel on Net Neutrality

In 2007, President Obama campaigned on the promise that he would “take a back seat to no one” in his support of Network Neutrality, the principle that stops Internet service providers from deciding which websites load fast, slow, or not at all. But if the press reports this week are accurate, the President and Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski are preparing to exit the back seat and jump out of the car altogether.

Last month, a federal appeals court ruled that the FCC, due to some terrible decisions made during the Bush administration, no longer has the authority to regulate broadband providers. That means the FCC can’t pass Network Neutrality rules, or even implement much of its National Broadband Plan, including programs to increase Internet adoption in poorer communities.

Conservatives and broadband providers hailed this decision as the end of Network Neutrality. But the story is not quite so simple. The truth is that the FCC still has the power to reverse the rejected reasoning of the Bush years, to re-establish its legal footing, and to protect the public interest.

It can do this by “reclassifying” broadband under the law as a “telecommunications service.” This simple step would protect Internet users and give the give the agency the power it needs to close the digital divide. And whether Genachowski takes this step is not a question of legality — it’s one of political will.

Despite having broad public support, Genachowski seems unwilling to make the necessary moves to reassert the commission’s legal authority, fearing an all-out war with the big phone and cable companies like AT&T, Verizon and Comcast.

The telecom companies are fighting against Network Neutrality regulations because they can make greater profits acting as gatekeepers online. If they succeed, the Internet would become more like radio and TV: a few major corporations would control which voices are heard. It would be much more difficult for grassroots groups, individuals and small businesses to create their own online presence and compete with large corporations and well-funded special interests.

Forgoing reclassification will mean the FCC will not be able to enforce Net Neutrality protections. If Genachowski fails to re-establish his authority, companies like Comcast, AT&T and Verizon could block any website or online content, at any time and for any reason, and there’s nothing the FCC could do to prevent that from happening.

Failing to protect the open Internet would be a devastating blow to millions of Obama’s supporters, including many people of color, who for too long have been marginalized by the mainstream media but have newfound hope in an open Internet that allows them to speak for themselves and advocate on behalf of their own communities.

For the first time in history, the Internet has allowed African-Americans to communicate with a global audience — for entertainment, education or political organizing — without prohibitive costs or mediation by gatekeepers in government and industry. That’s how ColorOfChange.org became successful: because of the low cost of communicating online, we could start small and grow without spending a lot of money. The strength of our ideas, not the size of our budget, determined our success.

This is why more than 53,000 members of ColorOfChange.org called on the FCC to support Network Neutrality and urged the commission to take action to reclassify broadband and protect Internet users.

We believe the President should understand this as well. Is there anyone who doubts that an open Internet is a major reason why our nation elected its first black president?

In the last year, we have learned a lot about our President. When he decides to step up and be the leader we believed in, he is able to make transformative things happen. When he stands back and lets others drive policy, the results can be disappointing, or worse.

This is the crossroads at which President Obama now stands: he and his FCC chairman can get into the driver’s seat, and implement broadband policies that include all Americans; or he can accept the limited purview the courts are suggesting, and let a few greedy corporations decide whose messages are worth hearing.

Our question to the President is straightforward: Mr. President, are you ready to take the wheel?

Share This Post

Link To This Post


41 Comments
badpenny's picture

I'm going to go out on a limb and predict that the Obama Administration will do exactly bupkis about net neutrality. He has proven to be 1) a sellout to corporate interests, and/or 2) all to eager to appropriate conservative policies.

And the Democratic congress won't touch this any time soon. So, net neutrality is, effectively, dead.

at this site, only one person cared enough to comment on its pending death in 20 minutes.


“Why would anyone with a functioning brain believe this guy?”
Some guy with an eating disorder

... Whereas there are very long threads on slashdot about the same topic. It's a marginally political issue that has to do with free speech ...

Cat Atomic's picture

He's consistently takes the side of big business. Has done so since before the election, in fact.

I find it hard to believe that a man who was for protecting the Telecoms from the consequences of their illegal spying would be willing to crusade for net neutrality.

back off on this. Profits may be the only reason for corporations to exist, but that is not the reason for the existence of the US government. Is it? We deserve to win this one.

ricky's picture

but wasn't telecom immunity about protecting the government from the discovery of ITS illegal spying rather than protecting the Telecoms from the consequences of their resources aiding and abetting the government upon orders of said same government?


“Why would anyone with a functioning brain believe this guy?”
Some guy with an eating disorder

Rich H's picture

.

savannah43's picture

Time for them to pay the piper. They are not untouchable by real people. Regardless of what they would like us to believe, without our business, they have no reason to exist.

Vman's picture

This just in: http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/consumer/R...

The FCC did the right thing today.

Atomic-Bass-Banger's picture

The internet shall now be turned into adspace for Amazon.com and google interests(ever growing), and good luck sharing bandwidth with everyone else when you go digging for "real" news. Furthermore, the division and sorting of bandwidth priority will create a database of "undesired websources", which will subsequently go under because not enough bandwidth, means not enough ad-click traffic. This will take care of all the mom and pops on the internet and replace it with McData.
I love when old powerhungry twats try to regulate things they don't understand or care about. Wicked!

matrixbandit's picture

This post seems to stand in conflict with this article here: http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/tech...

Am I missing something?

Edit: Sorry, to be more specific, it seems that, according to the article I referenced, the FCC is moving forward to do the very thing that this post is urging the Obama admin to push them to do, hence my wondering if this post was aware of this new info. The official announcement is supposed to happen sometime today if the article is accurate.

American Populist's picture
...

I was wondering the same thing. There have been stories floating around since at least yesterday that the FCC is looking at reclassifying at least a portion of the broadband methods in order to send Comcast, Verizon, AT&T, SBC, and so many other packing. While the FCC is notorious for doing bone-headed things (even without Reichsfuror Bush at the wheel) this doesn't seem to be one of them.


Democracy is the road to socialism. ~ Karl Marx

ron's picture

I don't want to jump to conclusions.

The fight isn't over on this one, it's just going to be as public. What people don't seem to realize is that if net neutrality dies, so does the internet. People without any real understanding of computing don't seem to grasp this because it's beyond their pay grade, as it were. I was talking with someone about it a while back and her response was telling. "What do I care, I only use Facebook anyway." Such small minded, short sighted, provincial thinking is why we have so many problems as it is. Sometimes I wonder if I'm talking to people with fewer than 2 brain cells.


Democracy is the road to socialism. ~ Karl Marx

We'll have choices of CNN, CNBC, FOX, with Beck, Hannity and O'Really on our start pages - and it won't matter what page you have, it will be directed to them. News will come in from across the world and the U.S. about clean coal, offshore oil drilling, the wonders of new nuclear power plants, and of course, the housing crisis is over, time to buy a new home and new car.

Or, we could do the right thing and keep Net Neutrality.

How much faith do I have this will be handled correctly? Not much.

Hechicera's picture

Yes, the cause for concern is valid but FCC statement as of today (link goes to FCC site directly for lack of confusion) looks very promising.

He does ask for public comment. I say, lets give it.

Sticksman's picture

It's a serious issue and like Ricky said, so few people seem to give a @#$@*. I imagine corporations will take over and then all of a sudden people will be up in arms which will be too late.

Obama is too busy praying today.

ricky's picture

your life.


“Why would anyone with a functioning brain believe this guy?”
Some guy with an eating disorder

Sad and true, at the same time.

I'll protest and spend the day listening to Bad Religion.

Atomic-Bass-Banger's picture
lol

...praying to the gods of the bible-pushing corporate-liars. Obama sux. I appreciate his ability to bullshit voters shamelessly. Skills.

Shadowgm's picture

I always hear legislators, "If you want this, you have to tell us."

FUCK. You can't figure out for yourselves that this is a necessity for our democracy? Do you really want a corporation like NewsCorp controlling what you can and cannot see on the web?

But, no, they're going to roll over just like they did on the Fairness Doctrine. Might as well declare Emperor Rush I and be done with it.

Who was that guy giving the speech? Wish we had him as president.

Handypants's picture

"and to protect the public interest."

Sure but does it protect the corporate interest - THAT is the only public interest they are interested in.


"I know that there are people who do not love their fellow
man, and I hate people like that!
" ~ Tom Lehrer (1928 - )

I am also not going to hold my breath...

ricky's picture

“Why would anyone with a functioning brain believe this guy?”
Some guy with an eating disorder

YourMom's picture

For those of us stuck with crappy satellite internet service, net neutrality really seems like no big deal. It couldn't get much worse whatever happens! We're already paying through the nose for service only slightly better than dial-up.

savannah43's picture

Censorship. This will be the final nail in the coffin of free speech and any pretense of democracy. It's that important.

ricky's picture

flowers Sunday.


“Why would anyone with a functioning brain believe this guy?”
Some guy with an eating disorder

The real concern of net neutrality is not really about the quality of the connection overall. It is about levels of access within your connection. So, even with a bad connection, a non-neutral net would mean the "premium" content, as defined by your ISP, would be at your normal bad connection speed and everything else will be, say, 60% slower than that.

Atomic-Bass-Banger's picture

satellite is slower upstream than dialup, unless your dialup is way out in the wilderness and very clicky. When I got fios, I cut off that microwave producing Vienam era packet modem abomination with a hacksaw. It was very satisfying, I feel your pain.
:D

We won't be able to trade our "thoughts" anymore

But get some bitchen William Hung reruns...


Diabolus est Deus Inversus

EL SEGUNDO's picture

i predict obama will be worse than bush when all is said and done.

ysbaddaden's picture
)O(

Said the resident republican...


Diabolus est Deus Inversus

Peter G's picture

To steal a line from Driftglass, Obama would have to throw flaming kittens at homeless veterans to achieve that standard. Somehow I don't think that's gonna happen.


Hasa Diga Eebowai

Rich H's picture

no way.

Atomic-Bass-Banger's picture

-a spokespuppet for the big money that owns us like pets.

cw's picture
evol's picture

I thought the telecoms, in exchange for tax breaks and monster deregulation put into the Communications Act of '96, were supposed to have laid lines so everyone would have broadband access? We can see what a great job they did at that and no one held them accountable for not following through.

They owe us net neutrality, although I don't see this administration making it happen.

Porn. No politician-especially the ones who preach "family" values"- will want to go back to the old days of a rain-coat and an 18+ section at a video store when they can shop for it online. They know the monopolies would shut that option out, so no dice.

Paul's picture

is an excuse to bail, an excuse to "compromise", and he'll be able to give the telecoms everthing they want. Everything.

Comments are closed on this entry