Department of (In)Justice Department Rules Against Net Neutrality

By: KathyinBlacksburg
Published On: 9/8/2007 5:55:32 PM

The Justice, or rather Injustice, Department, has, with a sweep of the pen, eliminated net neutrality.  Or so it thinks.  So, it's official: We have government of, by and for AOL-TimeWarner, Verizon, Comcast, and ATT. 

This must not stand.

Here'swhat CBS News had to say:

The Justice Department on Thursday said Internet service providers should be allowed to charge a fee for priority Web traffic.  The agency told the Federal Communications Commission, which is reviewing high-speed Internet practices, that it is opposed to "Net neutrality," the principle that all Internet sites should be equally accessible to any Web user. Several phone and cable companies, such as AT&T Inc., Verizon Communications Inc. and Comcast Corp., have previously said they want the option to charge some users more money for loading certain content or Web sites faster than others.

I don't have to tell bloggers about the importance of net neutrality.  However, those others who may need persuasion should understand that unfettered internet access protects the internet access of the "little guy."  In other words, it democratizes the internet.  Common Cause outlined the many reasons this is vital to democracy here. PC World also weighed in here. Here'sa Bill Moyers story on the subject

This InJustice decision follows on the heels of one misdeed after another to affect the status of voter's registration for 2008.  One can only conclude that the administration is trying one more tactic to assure Democrats never regain the White House.

With a stranglehold on the media, the corporations can flaunt their Katie Couricized version of pro-administration pablum it feeds us.

Some Republicans are so ignorant they think the internet is a bunch of "tubes."  You  can bet, however, that despite his complete mental vacancy on how to act and be a President (witness the protocol-free zone that follows him whenever he tours the world), George W. Bush knows the stakes here.

As we hear more and more about the "little magazines," those independent magazines such as The Nation and Mother Jones, being crushed by the new changes in Time- Magazine-favoring postal rate legislation, we can see the future of the people's internet.  And yet the government oversees the internet on our behalf, or so we thought.

It is clear that democratizing the press and  internet is crucial, but at odds with what our government has in mind for us.  Indeed, by design, the internet will be controlled by giant corporations who will run ordinary people,who oppose various government policies, off the internet.  Once again it's "socialism" for the rich and big corporations and "free enterprise" for the ordinary citizens. 

Truth is, though, the administration uses of the term "democracy" bears little resemblance to democracy.  From their imperial perches, you can hear administration members saying: "Let them eat cake."

Please renew your efforts to let your Congressman and Senator know the importance of net neutrality before it's too late.  If we delay, it may be (too late) for democracy.


Comments



Should have also mentioned... (KathyinBlacksburg - 9/8/2007 7:34:46 PM)
The whole CBS story (such as it was)pretty much told the industry side of the argument. 


Right-ON Kathy !!! (Used2Bneutral - 9/9/2007 10:19:34 AM)
There is no way to communicate how important stopping these actions are to keeping the Internet a free and open platform for all technology innovation and general communication of our society. The USA is now 24th or 26th in the world in broadband penetration because of the competitive advantages the "Monopolies" further regain from this decision. The time line to kill this is short and intentionally being rammed through now because it has to be before the changes in administration that the public are screaming for in every poll taken. The big phone companies and cable companies are going to spend HUGE tons of money (Hundreds of millions short term) to make this stand, because they know that a democrat administration (which is a very real probability) will favor more competition and openness for all users.


Actually, this is anti-small business too (AnonymousIsAWoman - 9/9/2007 5:49:36 PM)
Besides just threatening genuine democracy and the marketplace of ideas, this would hurt the many small start up companies that owe their very existence to the Internet being free.

There may be a natural alliance here with these groups.  And as a strategy, it might be wise to show how this is actually in support of wealthy special interests, but is very anti-business because it hurts the much vaunted competition conservatives think they support.

This is a perilous time because this is being rammed through before people have a chance to organize their opposition to it (or so the administration hopes).  But it's also a great opportunity to show once again how hypocritical the people in this administration are, how much they betray their own principles of free enterprise and open competition.

We should be looking for some small business allies here.



FWIW (Sui Juris - 9/9/2007 10:48:12 PM)
The DOJ didn't "rule" on anything.  It certainly did express an opinion on the matter, but it doesn't have the power to decide policy/regulatory matters at this stage.