The Fate of the Internet -- Decided in a Back Room

[katandmoon]

The Wall Street Journal just reported that the Federal Communications Commission is holding "closed-door meetings" with industry to broker a deal on Net Neutrality -- the rule that lets users determine their own Internet experience.

Given that the corporations at the table all profit from gaining control over information, the outcome won't be pretty.

The meetings include a small group of industry lobbyists representing the likes of AT&T, Verizon, the National Cable & Telecommunications Association, and Google. They reportedly met for two-and-a-half hours on Monday morning and will convene another meeting today. The goal according to insiders is to "reach consensus" on rules of the road for the Internet.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/timothy-karr/the-fate-of-the-internet_b_620690.html


So much for net neutrality. With this news, even the pretense has been dropped.

[Angry Dragon]

1. Say good-bye to the country of

We the people, for the people

They might as well shut down everything except fox, then we will know that we are getting all the news we need.

[AndyA]

2. President Obama needs to demand transparency on this.

No. Closed. Door. Meetings.

They've never resulted in anything of benefit for the people.

Contact The White House and leave a message for President Obama to put a stop to censorship of the Internet:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact

[msongs]

11. lol now that is funny - transparency nt

[The Backlash Cometh]

3. Good bye Democracy.

Did I help elect anybody in that room? I doubt it.

[Lance_Boyle]

4. GOOGLE SUPPORTS NET NEUTRALITY - this article is duplicate bunk.

http://www.google.com/help/netneutrality_letter.html

This is a reasonably balanced meeting arranged by FCC between equally-represented sides in the net neutrality debate. Common Dreams and now Huffpo are up in arms over NOTHING.

on edit - replaced TruthOut with Common Dreams. Truthout is not, as yet, mindlessly repeating this same bit of nonsense (as Huffpo is)

[Uncle Joe]

6. I agree with you regarding Google's position, but why is this meeting secret?

[katandmoon]

7. What is the point of the Google link from 2006?

[Lance_Boyle]

8. Google's position has not changed.

This irresponsible fearmongering/outrage-manufacturing by Common Dreams and Huffpo remains spectacularly stupid.

[katandmoon]

9. What does that have to do with this closed door meeting with the telecoms who oppose net neutrality?

[Lance_Boyle]

12. Did you miss the fact that google AND OTHER NET NEUTRALITY PROPONENTS

are also taking part in the meetings? The scare article makes it sound like FCC is only consulting telecoms, which is an outright lie. The fact is that the FCC's consultative meetings are being held with equal representation from both sides of the NN debate. Google is a BIG LOUD voice on the pro-NN side.

[katandmoon]

13. Of course I didn't miss it. I don't think it's RELEVANT. NN OPPONENTS are being given an EQUAL SAY

when they should not have a say at all. THAT is the only thing that is relevant.

[Uncle Joe]

14. Again why is the meeting in secret unless it's to broker a deal?

It makes no difference what Google's position is, if they're outnumbered and or threatened to tow the line or else.

The secrecy of the meeting makes all of that possible.

[amborin]

18. +100 why in secret? and let's not forget how Google cowed to China's request for censorship

[Uncle Joe]

5. This reminds me of Cheney's secret energy meeting, what could go wrong?

"The Wall Street Journal just reported that the Federal Communications Commission is holding "closed-door meetings" with industry to broker a deal on Net Neutrality -- the rule that lets users determine their own Internet experience."

I also differ with their premise of who the "users" are, the users are the People, and overwhelmingly the users are in favor of Net Neutrality, period.

Thanks for the thread, katandmoon.

[CoffeeCat]

10. "Broker a deal on net neutrality"?????

Why are these corporate snakes "brokering a deal" with the Internet? The
Internet belongs to the PEOPLE.

Net neutrality shouldn't even be up for discussion.

PERIOD.

[Cleita]

15. I don't think they can considering how the internet works. There will

always be a back door of some sort that you can bypass the fire walls set up. It might even create a cottage industry of illegal routers in people's garages. However, it won't get that dire because somewhere, somehow, somebody will sue them for first amendment rights.

[walldude]

17. +1 The genie is out of the bottle, there is no putting it back.

The internet isn't going anywhere. The more they try to control it, the more ways people will find around it.

[blogslut]

16. You can be heard

Comment here:

http://blog.broadband.gov/?entryId=509180

File a comment here:

http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/

Tell the FCC that you support the "Third Way" proposal that will define data transmission as a telecommunications service, thus giving the FCC the power to regulate it and enforce Net Neutrality.