My guest today is Elliot D. Cohen, medical ethicist and political analyst. Welcome to OpEdNews, Elliot. You recently wrote an article Help Stop Destruction of the Free Internet Now . What's going on with Net Neutrality these days? I thought we were safe on that issue. Didn't Obama campaign strongly on that issue?
And yes, Obama strongly expressed support for maintaining Net neutrality, but words are not the same thing as laws, and now the Obama FCC has passed new rules that have the outward appearance of preserving Net neutrality, but they are just smoke and mirrors, which cater to the giant ISPs and have no legal teeth. What I mean is that, while they "encourage" ISPs not to tamper with content, they are not legally enforceable. Consequently, these companies are now poised to dismantle the free and democratic architecture of the Internet. Unless people get to together on this and put their foot down,now, all of us are going to soon be paying higher rates for access to information and getting a lot less of it!
So, that sounds like very bad news. Because the FCC has passed new rules purporting to protect us, has the average net user been lulled into thinking everything's hunky dory? What is the point of passing rules that can't be enforced? And how do we make people understand that we're at great risk from Comcast and their ilk?
Unfortunately, the average person is not fully aware of the situation because the mainstream media is not covering Net neutrality in sufficient detail. Users who surf some of the more progressive websites have more of a sense of the issues, but the average person is not likely to even know about the new FCC rules. This is why the message has to get out and spread virally across the Net and get out into the mainstream.
And this is why I have a campaign to let everyone know about the situation and to take a stance. I am asking all Internet users to go offline between 2 and 3 PM Eastern Standard Time on New Year's Day to express one unified voice against the creation of a pay-for-priority Internet system, the abolition of a flat fee for Internet access, and any attempt by ISPs to block, censor, or otherwise discriminate against legal content. Even one hour will cost advertisers big money, and it will send a message to the big telecoms like Comcast that we the people are madder than hell and that we won't tolerate it.
As to your question about why the FCC passed rules that can't be legally enforced, let me suggest some possible reasons. First, the Obama administration went on record supporting Net neutrality, so the FCC at least needed to appear to take a consistent stance. FCC Chair Julius Genachowski claimed that the new rules would ensure that net neutrality is preserved. But this is very doubtful. In fact, as recent as April 2010, a D.C. federal appellate court found in favor of Comcast, which had been slowing traffic to a popular file sharing website named BitTorrent. This decision clearly established a dangerous precedent against preservation of Net neutrality.
In this legal environment it would take a strong legal mandate from the FCC holding that Comcast and the other ISPs operate public utilities. What I mean is that they are "common carriers" like phone services, and are therefore not allowed to restrict or block legal content--no less than a phone company is allowed to block content of telephone conversations. Instead what the FCC did was to base its rules on a provision of the Telecommunications Act that limply states that the FCC must "encourage the deployment on a reasonable and timely basis of advanced telecommunications capability to all Americans." This is not likely to stand up in court.
And here's a second possible reason for the FCC passing rules, even impotent ones. Notice that the new rules have been approved at a time when the FCC is about to approve a merger between Comcast and NBC Universal, one of the largest content providers in the world. The conflict of interest here is glaring. So what would the average Internet user think if he or she found out that the FCC gave Comcast the right to control NBC Universal and did not tell it not to discriminate against other content providers? So the FCC needed to approve some rules quickly in order to justify its granting the merger. But this does not eliminate the real threat to Net neutrality because, as I said, the rules that were approved have no legal teeth. It's smoke and mirrors.
So we can use (by abstaining from using) the Net on New Year's Day to make a statement about our views on Net neutrality. What about using it to spread the word about this campaign to one another? Are you utilizing Facebook or other social networking to push the message of the boycott now?
Yes, that's it. We are using the very medium that is in jeopardy before it is no longer an option to use it for these purposes. That's why we must act now, not after the free Net is no longer. And yes, we are using Facebook and other social networking to spread the word; and anyone who is reading this should use their Facebook, Twitter, etc. accounts to let others know. We need this initiative to go viral in order for it to work. The stakes are high and everyone need to work together. One hour offline is very little to ask of a single person; but imagine the message it can send if millions of people go offline at the same time for an hour. This is the power of peaceful, collective protest.
So we can use (by abstaining from using) the Net on New Year's Day to make a statement about our views on Net neutrality. What about using it to spread the word about this campaign to one another? Are you utilizing Facebook or other social networking to push the message of the boycott now?
Y es, that's it. We are using the very medium that is in jeopardy before it is no longer an option to use it for these purposes. That's why we must act now, not after the free Net is no longer. And yes, we are using Facebook and other social networking to spread the word; and anyone who is reading this should use their Facebook, Twitter, etc. accounts to let others know. We need this initiative to go viral in order for it to work. The stakes are high and everyone need to work together. One hour offline is very little to ask of a single person; but imagine the message it can send if millions of people go offline at the same time for an hour. This is the power of peaceful, collective protest.
Cyber civil disobedience, to save democracy on the net - fighting fire with fire. I like it. What else do we need to know, Elliot, before we conclude this interview?
Joan, let me conclude by saying this. The Net isn't just another technology we can do without. It has become the cornerstone of our democracy. The consolidated, corporate, mainstream media cannot be counted on to speak truth to power. It is the independent media, the kind that lives and breathes through the Internet, which now has taken over this role. Without a free, independent media to serve the watchdog function of Fourth Estate, our democracy will be dead in the water. We simply cannot afford to let Comcast and the others take away this democratic core. This is serious business. We need to work together. On New Year's Day, between 2 and 3 PM EST, let's make a start and speak truth to power. Go offline.
Thanks for talking with me, Elliot. Okay, folks. You know what to do and you know when to do it. Work those networks of yours and spread the word. Do it only if you use the Internet (or know anyone who does) and want to continue to use it in as you have in the past.
***
Elliot D. Cohen is a media ethicist and political analyst. His latest book is Mass Surveillance and State Control: The Total Information Awareness Project .
Cohen's journal
