Hey Google, Don't Be Evil. Your Secret Deal To Kill Net Neutrality Is Wrong.
UPDATE: Google says the Times (and Bloomberg, and the WSJ) is wrong and they remain committed to an open internet. The Times says they stand by the story.
Remember when Google's motto was "Don't be evil"? You can forget about that:
Google and Verizon, two leading players in Internet service and content, are nearing an agreement that could allow Verizon to speed some online content to Internet users more quickly if the content’s creators are willing to pay for the privilege.
The charges could be paid by companies, like YouTube, owned by Google, for example, to Verizon, one of the nation’s leading Internet service providers, to ensure that its content received priority as it made its way to consumers. The agreement could eventually lead to higher charges for Internet users.
Such an agreement could overthrow a once-sacred tenet of Internet policy known as net neutrality, in which no form of content is favored over another. In its place, consumers could soon see a new, tiered system, which, like cable television, imposes higher costs for premium levels of service.
Any agreement between Verizon and Google could also upend the efforts of the Federal Communications Commission to assert its authority over broadband service, which was severely restricted by a federal appeals court decision in April.
This will have huge ripple effects on the netroots, because how are we going to compete with million-dollar astroturf organization when they have to money to push activist blogs into oblivion?
Never had a g-mail account nor ever will...no Facebook, no MySpace, no Twitter.
Makes it easier to figure you who the rat was, when the goons finally come to get me.
"Anyone that makes less than $150K in this country, has no business voting Republican."
This is the fault of the Obama administration, and specifically FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski, who, when given an out by the courts, repealing the clearly corrupt redefinition of broadband as an "information service," and going back to defining it as a "telecommunications service," decided to play footsie with the entrenched incumbents to come to a "consensus," just like they did with healthcare, financial reform, and etc. See Here.
The rats aren't Google, who has been in the meetings and knows that the FCC won't move, because they don't want to offend the baby Bells, it is with the FCC Chairman and the Obama administration, who has decided that they need to treat the malefactors who created our worst in the developed world communications infrastructure as partners.
Blaming Google is like blaming Life Savers for moving their candy factory from Michigan to Canada because sugar price supports in the US made making candy here too expensive.
FWIW, I hope that it is just timidity and incompetence driving this, but I am beginning to think that this is actually Obama administration policy, because, after all, they will need campaign donations from these folks in 2012.
ditto.
Um, there's no "could" about it.
These sunzabumpuses will never be content until they've sucked every dollar out of our wallets each month.
how are we going to compete with million-dollar astroturf organization when they have to money to push activist blogs into oblivion?
Morse code? Smoke signals? Maybe we can pass notes to one another in class.
"Anyone that makes less than $150K in this country, has no business voting Republican."
I think that's a bit of overreacting.
It would definitely adversely effect high-traffic blogs and sites with media (C&L included), but it's not exactly the death of speech as we know it.
Especially blogs. It's mostly text. I doubt that a site consisting mostly of textual information is going to be noticeably slower. A bloaty site, yeah, I could see that.
(Note: I'm a proponent of net neutrality. I just don't believe that if it is destroyed that it'll be the end of free expression as we know it.)
(Note: I'm a proponent of net neutrality. I just don't believe that if it is destroyed that it'll be the end of free expression as we know it.)
Nope. The hackers will come up with a way around it...probably wirelessly.
It's the magic hand of the free market, working feverishly to pump out the ejaculate of innovation.
"Anyone that makes less than $150K in this country, has no business voting Republican."
more imortant is that corporations will gain measures of control over numerous aspects of our internet "experience." Once they can charge for speedier they'll no doubt manipulate that to maximize upgrades. It will also mean consolidation of information, i.e. they'll gain much more control over content, and consolidation of our personal data too, not that it's not already all over the place.
I'm sure there are other, sneakier plans being hatched in Google/Verizon/ATT offices right now. Franken's article linked to above is a good summary of the dangers.
What are some of the biggest and most effective online groups fighting for Net Neutrality? I used to know but I've lost track.
"Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people." ~ Eleanor Roosevelt
.
Democracy is too important to be entrusted to politicians.
Rise Up!
Protest!
And if we can get some more elected like him that will be our best strategy.
"Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people." ~ Eleanor Roosevelt
It's OUR tax dollars at work.
.. but isn't that the story here in the US? Our tax dollars finance technological innovation then the Fat Cats steal it and sell it for BIG BUCK$ ..
We need a Democratic Economy.
Democracy is too important to be entrusted to politicians.
Rise Up!
Protest!
We need a Democratic Economy.
LOLOLOLOL! Nooo...no...stop! You're killin' me!! Next thing you know...you'll start saying things like...the airwaves are public property! LOLOLOL! Oh...my sides hurt!
"Anyone that makes less than $150K in this country, has no business voting Republican."
.. but I'm not the only one ..
:)
Democracy is too important to be entrusted to politicians.
Rise Up!
Protest!
:)
"Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people." ~ Eleanor Roosevelt
You can hope!
A Democratic economy?
I haven't heard that one before. I'm pretty sure it's a capitalist economy with some socialism for those on top. ;)
Anarchists Unite…
Oh wait…
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
Why don't they rob the anti-american sites like Drudge, Fox Noise and Limpballs? They've helped rob the treasury, not me.
they can defy the government...oh, wait.....never mind.
The only fix I would see for something like what they are planning is a worldwide boycott of Verizon( and AT&T, since they are joined at the hip) and Google, including those who advertise through Google. Alternatively the citizens couold demand that a national communications network be establish by the government using tax payer dollars, have it run by the government as the trustee for the People's property and build a parrellel internet system that the telcoms would have to compete against. Put their asses out of business. Pie in the sky....the only thing I can trust our government to do is be willingly corrupted.
Perhaps this is an admission by Google that even they don't have enough of a lobby in congress to stand up to the forces against Net Neutrality.
It is Google's best interest for Net Neutrality to pass. In doing this deal with Verizon, they are willingly forcing the FCC's hand to come down and make a final decision. This deal is set up to fail, to googles long-term advantage.
Is it 'evil' if they are using this situation to force the govt to finally make the move that google REALLY wants.
...which is an implication of my post above.
I can see the government making an absurd decission that they DO NOT want...
like say $ = free speech
or many of the other insane rulings out there.
This sounds like something for the government to get involved in and stop.
Too bad there isn't a democrat in the White House.
Eventually, these SOB's are gonna find a way to charge us for the air we breath.
Rush Limbaugh is what a smart person thinks a stupid bigot sounds like.
for allowing congress/FCC spectrum auctions that allow corporations to dictate law, price and the size of fine print.
This sounds like something for the government to get involved in
and stop. and gain contributions from.There...fixed it for ya.
"Anyone that makes less than $150K in this country, has no business voting Republican."
missed the net-neutrality boat.
I recon that if net-neutrality had been an enforcement action, the FCC would've been right on it.
But instead, net-neutrality is common-folk, so of course it gets back burnered by the FCC.
A Government that is only attuned to confronting threats to itself is corrupt.
The double edge sword is visible when looking at the commodity (spectrum) that has decision making authority (wireless telecom ie:Verizon).
Thanks man.
Rush Limbaugh is what a smart person thinks a stupid bigot sounds like.
In most of the "civilized" world you already have to pay for clean air due to the pollution.
Crank up the AC.
Democracy is too important to be entrusted to politicians.
Rise Up!
Protest!
The fact is GOOGLE IS THE NSA.
My name is Big John, and remember, I told you so.
You do what was done BEFORE the internet. Small press, only add 'distributed' to it. So it wouldn't just be Amato printing things up, it'd be Amato and Madrak and Belle and Karoli and Niewert ...
We all know the net revolutionized things for the better.
Think how long it took between the invention of the printing press and Playboy.
"I mean Romney is the most conservative on illegal immigration and I don't think Ronald Reagan could get elected in California today."
Ann "Clipped" Coulter
don't stick together.
i am a strong supporter of net neutrality... but pessimism creeps in and i wonder how long it will take for the internet to become a tiered medium, 6 months, a year?
corporate interests always win out, its just a matter of money, time, money, and money.
Be aware that both Verizon and Google have specifically said the NY Times article got it all wrong.
Verizon Policy Blog: New York Times' Story is Mistaken
The NYT article regarding conversations between Google and Verizon is mistaken. It fundamentally misunderstands our purpose. As we said in our earlier FCC filing, our goal is an Internet policy framework that ensures openness and accountability, and incorporates specific FCC authority, while maintaining investment and innovation. To suggest this is a business arrangement between our companies is entirely incorrect. http://policyblog.verizon.com/BlogPost/740/Ne...
PC World: Net Neutrality Deal May Not See Wider Support
A Google spokeswoman declined to comment on talks between her company and Verizon, but she denied a New York Times report that said the two companies were negotiating a tiered service agreement that would give Google services faster network speeds than some competitors. That story "is quite simply wrong," said Mistique Cano, manager of global communications and public affairs at Google. "We have not had any conversations with Verizon about paying for carriage of Google traffic. We remain as committed as we always have been to an open Internet." http://www.pcworld.com/article/202636/net_neu...
Josh Silver: Google-Verizon Deal: The End of The Internet as We Know It
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/josh-silver/goo...
"Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people." ~ Eleanor Roosevelt
is denying the deal now (HuffPo is reporting it).
With the new Droids coming out just recently (Google Verizon) people are stuck in a two year contract. The Droids are killing right now. I'm in a Verizon landline market and I hat VOIP so I'm stuck with Verizon.
is intended to be a factual statement
This is the same thing that happened with the public option. Remember? First someone reported that the public option was dead, then Gibbs or someone would say, "no, that article got it wrong." Then some time would pass. Then someone would report that the public option was dead. Then Gibbs or someone would say, "no, that's not true." And so forth. Then the public option died. That's what's happening now with net neutrality.
Since I 'upgraded' to Safari 4.1 I have been seeing evidence of being throttled.
I haven't determined if it is the upgrade, the cable modem neighborhood or the gateway.
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
Did some actual research / reading and I think we are jumping the gun here folks , once again setting off the fire alarm when there is no fire ... not yet anyway .
I jumped the gun once. Took 6 weeks for my nuts to heal.
"Anyone that makes less than $150K in this country, has no business voting Republican."
Every website under the sun is running with this bogus story which Google and Verizon are BOTH saying is wrong.
You believed them?
Sucker.
me-oww!
Comments are closed on this entry