The “Radical” Fight for Net Neutrality

We may all be watching the elections, but if we don’t pay attention to this issue we may end up with access to far less information on the web to prepare for subsequent ones. Take a look.

The Federal Communications Commission’s failure to protect Net Neutrality and free speech online, and prevent big corporations from controlling the Internet, point to a broader, ongoing government-wide failure to challenge the supremacy of industry lobbyists in Washington. FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski continues to cling to a myth that contaminates Washington: That he need never make tough choices that place the public interest squarely ahead of corporate interests; that consensus is always both possible and desirable; and that a policy that privileges the people’s interest above corporate interests is by definition untenable, or even “radical.”

Every time Mr. Genachowski is faced with a moment that requires action to make good on his lofty promises to protect the Internet, he dithers, calls for a new study, and asks industry behemoths to solve policy issues for him — a style reminiscent of the regulatory failure that preceded the recent financial crisis and the Gulf oil spill. Disasters that could have been avoided if regulators had simply exercised meaningful oversight of the industries they were supposed to be monitoring. Those regulators dithered and capitulated, and our economy and our oceans are worse for it.

In the Chairman’s world, a hostile letter from politicians tainted by phone and cable campaign contributions constitutes a legitimate reason not to act in the public interest. In the Chairman’s world, the range of debate is dictated by corporate lobbyists and their friends with the financial resources to shape public opinion and exert political pressure. Pro-industry rhetoric from respected former politicians who feed at the corporate trough provide additional political cover. Industry-funded mercenaries with lovable names like “Americans for Prosperity” spew scintillating propaganda across television and radio outlets.

And the media are more interested in political bloodsport than substantive coverage of policy debates, or who pays the mercenaries’ bills. Charges of “Marxist” and “socialist” rain down on public interest advocates and principled politicians, while wedge issues are wielded like grenades to manipulate honest folks against each other and for corporate-backed deregulation that continues the downward spiral of American politics. Indeed, in today’s Washington, taking on corporate interests has become radical.

And it’s about to get worse. Come November, you will hear a post-election chorus of media analysts declaring that the Democrats’ agenda went too far, and that the public rejected calls for basic regulations or critical public programs. Those analysts will be wrong, deregulation will find new friends in government, and the largest companies will continue to run amuck while the American people foot the bill.

We cannot let protect Net Neutrality go the way of big banks and big oil, because it represents one of our best chances to reduce the influence of corporate interests in Washington, and replace propaganda with critical, accountable journalism, and web-based watchdogs.

Here’s why: with low barriers to entry, an open Internet allows political campaigns to cheaply and effectively reach small donors, and over time, lessen their dependence on corporate money. That same open Internet creates a space for independent commentary and hard-hitting journalism, researched and written by journalists who aren’t beholden to Washington mores, fierce profit pressures or the 24 hour news cycle. (How we pay for that kind of reporting – even if we’ve secured a distribution mechanism for it – is another issue I spend a lot of time thinking about.)

If the public can win this one battle, we will be in a better position to reshape Washington in our own images, and create a sustainable, accountable government that puts the public back in public policy.

It’s the change we were promised and the change that we desperately need.

By paltelegraph
By Josh Silver, Executive Director, Free Press

quick poll

vote now!

Loading poll...

no!
leaning no
leaning yes
yes!

no!
leaning no
leaning yes
yes!

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of
Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

Caroline L.

7:42AM PST on Nov 8, 2010

This is a brilliant article in that it articulates the problems at all levels of governement in a terse, concise fashion. I copied and pasted it into a file and will share her comments with my friends. Thanks for this. It is very good.

send a green star

Vivianne M.

10:26AM PDT on Oct 25, 2010

Freedom on the net is very important. It lets people communicate. That scares the big business and the controllers.
(oil,banks.insurance,energy providers) Don't let them be in charge of any thing more.

Patricia Ann A.

7:35AM PDT on Oct 25, 2010

Yes to Net Neutrality. Keep Freedom of Speech FREE! Thank you so much for posting this extremely important issue that has almost entirely gone unnoticed in the media!

liz j.

1:54PM PDT on Oct 22, 2010

Since when did the US own the Internet?

Charlene R.

11:35AM PDT on Oct 22, 2010

Morals? What are they? I think I heard about them, when I was young.

It's clear why people want a change, but what change? Hopefully, in 2012, we will be able to elect 'new' politicians, who can help President Obama put through the policies he wants to make our country the great country it can be, again.

Ria T.

9:23AM PDT on Oct 22, 2010

I felt crazy/er until getting access to the net daily. It's incredible--today. May it continue to be relatively free.

Edith B.

9:11PM PDT on Oct 21, 2010

De regulation worked so well for the airline and banking industries, didnt it? Oh, that's right, it didn't and we foot the bill for them. We need to keep Net neutrality, but I am sure neither my senator or representative will stand up for the people. The vote consistently with the corporations.

Doug D.

7:56PM PDT on Oct 21, 2010

If net neutrality is lost, all speed will be given to conservative or tea party groups/causes. Care2 will be at a snail's pace I'm sure. :-(

Aludra N.

7:15PM PDT on Oct 21, 2010

It's refreshing to finally see someone point out ALTERNATIVES. It's like people are hypnotized into believing there are only two choices, and they are just two sides of the same coin. Both parties are rotten and corrupt to the core, have been bought, and have sold out the american people on so many levels. Yet people still act like if the right one of the two is in power everything will be just peachy. People in this country are not fast learners. Our only hope is to get rid of both of them and start over. For the life of me I can't understand why the people have not revolted and thrown them both out, along with the corporations and lawyers. Pond scum. I sent in my absentee ballot and voted for green party candidates when possible, and otherwise chose another candidate. If you want to terify them, vote outside of the two parties, why is there not a national call for that??? WAKE UP

Elaine B.

7:03PM PDT on Oct 21, 2010

Congresswoman Judy Biggert R-IL Dist.13 VOTES NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO FOR NET NEUTRALITY!! WELL, ELECTION TIME IS JUST AROUND THE CORNER JUDY!!! XD