They Took Your Seat

On Monday this week, at Harvard, the FCC held a meeting on Comcast and Net Neutrality, a chance for the public to air its views over the issues.

Turns out a not so funny little thing happened on the way to the forum: Comcast tried to pack the meeting, going so far as paying people to come in and take up the spaces that could have been filled by concerned members of the public.

How big are the stakes in the so-called network neutrality debate now raging before Congress and federal regulators?

Consider this: One side in the debate actually went to the trouble of hiring people off the street to pack a Federal Communications Commission meeting yesterday--and effectively keep some of its opponents out of the room.

Broadband giant Comcast--the subject of the F.C.C. hearing on network neutrality at the Harvard Law School, in Cambridge, Massachusetts--acknowledged that it did exactly that.

Trying to lock out the public is a great example of why we need net neutrality. If the other side will use their money to restrict public access to a public meeting, how can we feel confident they won't use their power to restrict voices in the virtual world?

And the company's response to the revelation doesn't exactly assuage that worry:

A number of people in the audience wore yellow highlighter marking pens on their shirts or jackets; Karr said that was to identify them to Comcast employees coordinating the company's appearance at the event. Khoury acknowledged that Comcast coordinated the employees that it brought to the hearing.

"For the past week, Free Press has engaged in a much more extensive campaign to lobby people to attend the hearing on its behalf," Khoury said.

The official response from this industry giant is to say that paying people to pack a hearing is simply a tit-for-tat response to the efforts of a grassroots organization of activists trying to make their voices heard. This is an outlook where money can overwhelm public participation, and where speech is a commodity not a sacred right of democracy.

The commercial success of the Internet, the entrepreneurship it has unleashed, has been because of its free and open architecture. The explosion of innovation that created boosted our national productivity and added untold billions to our national economy. To try to restrict the Internet would hamper the innovation still to come.

But even more important is the potential of the freedom on the Internet to transform our civic conversation - an effort we're watching right before our eyes. It's not a coincidence that my.barackobama.com has been the vehicle for millions to organize around the campaign of a firm supporter of net neutrality and the benefits of free and open information exchange. Freedom on the Internet is a core value for progressives, and it holds the potential for enormous advances in empowering citizens to take control of the political destiny of our country. Efforts like this by Comcast simply put in stark relief the importance of the fight for those values.

I'll be watching closely the future actions of these large companies around these hearings, and I'll continue to fight for more broadband access to an open, information-neutral Internet.

Comments

[Probus]

Thank you Sen. Kerry for all your efforts on this very critical issue. I was disappointed that you chose not to seek presidency in 2008. I wish you were our president, our country would be better off with your leadership. Thank you for your exemplary service to our country.

[avraamjack]

.
Fighting against gang stalkers who openly notoriously poison irradiate stalk harass and murder their victims would be a good thing as well.
.

[Meah]

Running Comcast out of business is the answer. To fill the seats at the FCC meeting is the epitome of arrogance.

Alternatives should be explored.

Changing companies sends the strongest message.

Hands off the internet!!!

[PauCK]

This does not surprise me at all. The Internet is a great vehicle for change in addition to it's economic abilities. ( I earn my living on the internet and also post my personal political opinions online. www.reelectnoone.com)

Big business wants the money, but they do not favor an open exchange of ideas that might undermine their attachment to right-wing government.

Net Neutrality will help those with deep pockets control what the rest of us want to see, read or post. Those with the most money will get heard over those with meager resources.

Typically the citizens who have something to say, won't be heard anymore because their sites will be buried under a ton of for-pay content and hard to find.

Even small business which is a major part of the commercial internet may find it hard to succeed without paying a high tariff just to be "allowed" to be in business online.

If you care at all about your rights as a user of the internet, you need to join in with those grass root organizations to help them fight big business. http://www.savetheinternet.com

[mamacat]

Thank you Sen. Kerry. Please keep fighting the good fight. It would be a shame if the neo-cons shut down the internet.

[cruisepuppy7452a]

Net Neutrality isn't just about banning the internet. It goes way beyond this. If we allow this to happen, you will lose the ability to read, listen to music, write, think. Thought shouldn't scare people. What should scare the hell out of them, is anyone who would prevent this from happening. It should cause serious doubt as to what else it would lead to. Imagine not having the ability to defend yourself, or someone else. Imagine not having the ability to inquire about a subject you know smells funny. Now imagine wanting to speak out, in silent protest, as an 80 year old woman. Do you think age would prevent the thought police from arresting this person from her silent protest? Nope. She would get hauled in like everyone else. This net neutrality goes way beyond internet. It goes beyond finding facts that shoud disturb people, make them think, question everything.
Those who have the guts to do the research, voice thier discontent, are not dissenters. They are silent heroes who are not there for the money, rather to give people the chance to see what is really happening in thier government, that impacts every aspect of thier lives. Dissent is not allowing this to take place. Trying to foster a utopian enviornment, where nobody questions anything, thinks for themselves, speaks out, isn't normal. Dictators don't want people to think, speak, question anything. They want total control, mentally and physically. You question them, you go to the hague. This is the year 2008. The ovens were burned down, the gas chambers closed, and yes, WWII came and went. Those who cannot get over that, need to understand, men died for that freedom, and to take those things they faught and died for away, is a slap in the face to them and those who faught after them.
You cannot support our troops, if you don't support all they faught and died for. Freedom of speech, Net Neutrality is proof they were there. Yes fill those seats, but not the ones who want to ban freedon of speech, expression, thought, fill yours, and speak out. The voice is a wonderful tool.

[vipersdad]

Think about America's ability to compete in this "global marketplace." Comcast may ultimately be able to prevail in it's attempts to control the content in the US-Based Internet. It may even be able to extend it's reach beyond our borders.

But freedom is a need as much as it's a right. And the WWW is just that..... "world-wide." Other countries, sensing commercial potential and seeing the strategic advantage of free and fair competition, will find a way to get content and products to world wide customers regardless of Comcast's efforts. The problem is - that it won't be American content and products. Or worse yet - it'll be American products and content, but Americans will not be getting benefit from their consumption.

Comcast is trying to have it both ways - simultaneously paying lip-service to "free and open markets" while in the background lobbying to provide itself with an unfair advantage. If we have learned nothing else from such behavior - it's that it's bad for the consumer and bad for the economy in the long run...and it will make America less competitive. Mr. Senator - it's your JOB to see the end-game here and to look at the strategic benefit that a free internet provides to American businesses - small and large alike.

[Xander]

As an expert in the internetworking field, I can say without question I could talk all day on the importance of this and why we need to fight it--and not even scratch the surface of the issue. This is important not only for every citizen of the US, but every member of the Internet community worldwide.

Not only is this company, which ranks below government in every sense of the word, attempting to perform a maneuver only seen in communist governments like China by restricting access, they are attempting to do it in such a way that when their end game for this maneuver finally comes, it will open the door for them to extort more money out of consumers for "premium" access.

This is not what the Internet is about. This is not why I and many others helped mold the Internet into what it is today. This is not what's in the best interest of the people. And if legislators allow Comcast to do this, allow the Internet to become a restricted access club, they are not only not acting in the best interest of the people, but have also taken a check from companies like Comcast, effectively placing a giant "For Sale" sign on the rights, freedoms and voices of their constituents.

If that happens, the people need to know who these politicians who are willing to sell out their rights are.

[shaggles]

I heard bout this via email from one of the groups advocating for net neutrality but I haven't seen anything about this on the evening news. I wonder why?

[Mandelay]

Glad to see you're doing something, John.

[LiarLiarIraqsOnFire]

Sen. Kerry wrote: If the other side will use their money to restrict public access to a public meeting, how can we feel confident they won't use their power to restrict voices in the virtual world?

I would remind Sen. Kerry that 'The Other Side' use their money to garner PRIVATE ACCESS TO LEGISLATORS AND THEIR VOTES by way of CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS.

We The People can only feel confident THEY won't use their power to restrict voices in the virtual world when CONGRESS USES THEIR POWER TO REGULATE THEM!

AND THAT'S CAN ONLY HAPPEN WHEN CAMPAIGNS ARE PUBICLY FUNDED! How about doing spomething about that, Senator?

[PKSSK]

Senator Kerry, I appreciate and fully expect you to confirm these outrageous acts of Comcast, if only because, as one of your constituents, I am angry and fed up with the rule of law always favoring the elite and the Corporations that own our government. I will be closely following your input on this issue, as well as Senator Kennedy's and my congressional rep., Mr. Delahunt.

I fully expect all of you to influence all those in Congress to follow the path that supports the people, as opposed to the corporate lobbyist money influence that allows them to write the very legislation that works in their favor!!!

We the people have had enough and our voting patterns will demonstrate this, beginning with our support of OBAMA for president.

[lisakaz]

Thanks for your post. I have Comcast but I'm rethinking it. Probably when I next move, I will get someone else. I was sent an email to sign a petition to protest what Comcast did. Guess what? I couldn't access the website. Gee, I wonder why? When I used my work computer, I had no problem signing.

It seems to me between Big Brother and censorship by companies, Americans are in big trouble. We HAVE TO FIGHT!

[WASanford]

Try the Dish network or Direct TV, all you need is access to the southern sky. You won't be sorry!

[hellinabucket]

I pay for top of the line access with my hughes.net (there is no cable access where I live). I was fairly happy w/it but wasn't near as quick as the cable modem I had before moving to this remote location (at half the cost). Recently when my browser slowed down or kept quitting, I called tech service & was told that because of "Fair Access/Fair Use" policies I had gone over my quota & they were limiting my access! So I had to shut down/limit BOINC. There's one for internet control, zero for science!

[jazzman]

Time for me to dump Comcast. I'll be calling Verizon this week to change my Internet provider.

[NoFactsJustTruth]

If the FCC unilaterally roles out some new anti-free speech directives, Senator Kerry, you'd better create legislation to restore neutrality, and slap some party members into line so they vote with Constitutional free speech Rights and NOT the corporate lobbyists campaign donors.

To many of us, it seems some Dems of CONgress are either conspirators WITH the GOP, engineering behind-closed-door votes to only LOOK close, or many are asleep at the wheel and could care less about an oath to protect the Constitution, as long as they're re-elected.

WE need a lot more LEADERS that take their oath seriously, sir, and a lot less that are just followers of whatever the GOP wants. Even just 'appearing' slightly similar.to the preznutz at this point turns most citizens stomachs, and I consider the Senators that voted for ex-post-facto telecom immunity are TRAITORS to their oath of office and OUR country, and obviously 'on-board' with this CRIMINAL administration..

The VERY sad thing is that those Senators HAVE SHOWN they couldn't care less what 'We the People' hold as a self-evident TRUTH.