Motley Moose – Archive

Since 2008 – Progress Through Politics

Open Thread: A Sad Day for the Intertubes

The FCC voted on its net neutrality proposal today, and we’ve all come out the losers.

I will admit to having been distracted of late. Between Christmas, work, the excitement over the repeal of DADT, the new tax deal, and my personal life, I pretty much forgot that this was coming up. And frankly, it depresses me, so I won’t be offering much commentary.

From Raw Story,

Sen. Al Franken (D-MN), who has championed “Net Neutrality” in the past, said the FCC’s proposed rules would actually “destroy” the principle of “Net Neutrality.”

[. . .]

But the plan would also allow for a greater fractioning of the Internet and data rationing on mobile and wired networks, according to analysis of the policies. Major network stakeholders like Verizon and AT&T would be able to sell bandwidth in capped tiers, with overage charges for users who download too much information, and certain types of data traffic like peer-to-peer file transfers could be banned altogether.

Raw Story


The FCC would additionally require broadband providers to disclose their network management practices.

If they pass and telecoms are allowed to move forward with their plans, “the Internet as we know it would cease to exist,” Sen. Franken concluded in an editorial published by Huffington Post.

“That’s why Tuesday is such an important day,” he continued. “The FCC will be meeting to discuss those regulations, and we must make sure that its members understand that allowing corporations to control the Internet is simply unacceptable.”

In a recent speech, Genachowski specified that the FCC’s rules would permit ISPs to charge heavy bandwidth users even more, creating a tiered pricing structure. ISPs would also be able to charge fees to businesses serving large quantities of data.

Raw Story

Franken speaking about Net Neutrality on the Senate floor Saturday:

As some on dKos were eager to point out, it was Obama appointee Julius Genachowski who led the charge on the proposal. I’m not sure I’m willing to go into my opinion in detail, but if you’re one of the ones who believes Obama broke his campaign promise to protect internet access from corporate censorship, you can sign this.

Full text:

FCC breaks Obama’s promise on Net Neutrality: 3 things you need to know

BREAKING: Minutes ago, the FCC — led by Obama appointee Julius Genachowski — sold out Net Neutrality and the future of free speech online. The rules — written by Comcast and AT&T, the companies the FCC is supposed to regulate — broke Obama’s campaign promise1 and allow corporate censorship.

Read the 3 reasons why — then share with friends by filling out the form on the right.

1: Corporate censorship is allowed on your phone

The rules passed today by Obama FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski absurdly create different corporate censorship rules for wired and wireless Internet, allowing big corporations like Comcast to block websites they don’t like on your phone — a clear failure to fulfill Net Neutrality and put you, the consumer, in control of what you can and can’t do online.

2: Online tollbooths are allowed, destroying innovation

The rules passed today would allow big Internet Service Providers like Verizon and Comcast to charge for access to the “fast lane.” Big companies that could afford to pay these fees like Google or Amazon would get their websites delivered to consumers quickly, while independent newspapers, bloggers, innovators, and small businesses would see their sites languish in the slow lane, destroying a level playing field for competition online and clearly violating Net Neutrality.

3: The rules allow corporations to create “public” and “private” Internets, destroying the one Internet as we know it

For the first time, these rules would embrace a “public Internet” for regular people vs. a “private Internet” with all the new innovations for corporations who pay more — ending the Internet as we know it and creating tiers of free speech and innovation, accessible only if you have pockets deep enough to pay off the corporations.

The FCC could have reclassified and regulated these greedy corporations in an enforceable way, but instead, they sold out. This isn’t Net Neutrality, this is a historic mistake.

Sign on the right to hold President Obama accountable to his promise — and then share with your friends!

So what do you think, mooses? How bad is it, to what extent can we hold Obama accountable, and if no changes are made, isn’t this a bit of a slippery slope?


  1. The main complaint I’ve seen is that they gave the wireless companies some of what they wanted and didn’t make those same concessions for wired companies, like Comcast. That last block of text talking about “public” and “private” networks and online toll booths doesn’t gibe with everything else I’ve read on this. If that’s true then this is more than a slippery slope – net neutrality is completely gone. The corporations got everything they wanted. I have a hard time believing that.

  2. IL JimP

    on this. Everything I’ve read on this, doesn’t point to the slippery slope that the above citation leads us to believe.  The argument I’ve been reading is that this puts regulation framework in place where there was none in the past.  It’s a first step, but not the last step.

  3. spacemanspiff

    lol <– the o is a head the l are arms.

    I can’t unsee it.

    I’m thowing up my arms and coughing up a lung.

    (is it obvious I’m on vacation?)

  4. spacemanspiff

    Hugo Chavez and the goverment of Spain took similiar (in the context of gaining more control) steps recently as well. I think it sucks but what this all means I’ll figure out after some other Moose jump in here. I really want to think this one through and form a stronger opinion.

  5. IL JimP

    I was trying to embed a Youtube in a diary but it showed a blank.

    I copied and pasted the embed code, but nothing.

    Help me please if you can.

  6. spacemanspiff

    Are you kidding me?

    I was a bit lost on the whole “new DKos” and read up on it.

    What I don’t understand is why some are so against it to the point of flaming… Markos?

    From a recent diary on the wreck list.

    I’ve seen some of their comments (2+ / 0-)

    It’s meant to separate the “wheat from the chaff”—and the chaff is what the community discusses, and what gets onto the rec list. They don’t want that “chaff” on the front page, and think it’s beneath them.

    I work with B2B PAC, and all views and opinions in this account are my own.

    by slinkerwink on Wed Dec 22, 2010 at 09:43:42 PM PST

    Did he ever say this? That would be real douchey (hey cg!) of him. It would be even more douchey if slinkerwink made that up to gain support.

    For anybody that surfs left blogistan I think this might be interesting.


    First of all, so it’s clear as day: 99 percent of the changes, and certainly all major ones, are my doing. I’ve had a vision about how this site should operate for the last five years that only now is close to launch. And that vision is based on four fundamental problems I see with this current site:

    It’s hard for new people to be noticed. You have a 30 minute window before your diary scrolls off the recent list, and you better hope one of the site’s celebrity diarists doesn’t post at the same time as you do.

    You can spend all day working on a well-researched masterpiece post, only to see it bumped immediately by the latest lame BREAKING! diary or 15 straight posts on the latest meta war.

    Even if it gets noticed, your diary has a short shelf life. There’s no good archival function to make sure your well-researched piece continues to be a resource for others. And

    What if you have more to say? The one-a-day limit is needlessly limiting. And sure, you could hit blogspot and start a new blog, and then have to deal with single-digit traffic.

    So in short, what I wanted was a site that:

    Made it easier for content to be found

    Made it easier for good content to rise to the top

    Made it easier to retain good content for future reference; and

    Made it easier for good writers to make Daily Kos their blogging home, tapping into its large community.


  7. sricki

    most of you seem to be saying, but I really don’t have time to argue the point over the holidays. Will find some time after Christmas.

    In any case, Happy Holidays, all.

Comments are closed.