On Tuesday morning, an AT&T-funded front group, Americans for Prosperity, announced a $1.4 million advertising blitz to try to convince Americans that the FCC is plotting to "take over the Internet."
Last week, the FCC simply proposed to "reclassify" aspects of broadband under Title II of the Telecommunications Act to better advance its goals of bridging the digital divide and safeguarding the free and open Internet.
But AFP is spinning this into, laughably and somewhat ironically, a "government takeover." During yesterday's press conference, AFP trotted out Grover Norquist, the right-wing hit man perhaps best known for threatening to "drown the government in a bathtub," to put his stamp on their cause.
Looks like they want to drown the Internet, too - along with our democracy.
Hours later, AFP's message came spewing forth from FOX News' Megyn Kelly, who invited Josh Silver, executive director of Free Press (which runs the SavetheInternet.com campaign) on her show to presumably discuss both sides of Net Neutrality, only to shut him out of the conversation.
Of course, this isn't the first time Fox has spread misinformation about Net Neutrality and the FCC's role in protecting the Internet for the public. AFP Vice President Phil Kerpen has repeatedly been a guest on Fox's Glenn Beck program to vilify Net Neutrality as Obama's scheme to take control of all media - a crackpot conspiracy that Beck is always happy to spread.
And now, two top Republican leaders - Reps. John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Eric Cantor (R-Va.) -- have inserted these same lies in a letter to President Obama today telling him to tell the FCC to back away.
The "takeover" meme is downright scary - because even though it couldn't be further from the truth, millions of people are watching, and now AT&T and others are spending millions to brand it on our brains. They're hoping that if they say "Internet takeoever" enough, people will start to believe it. After all, from "death tax" to "death panels," it has worked before.
During the Free Press policy summit in D.C. on Tuesday, Sen. Byron Dorgan called the AFP on their "big lie," saying industry lobbyists are trying to stigmatize people who are "trying to make sure the Internet remains open and free ... and is not controlled and managed by increasingly larger corporations." Watch an excerpt of his speech:
And FCC Commissioner Mignon Clyburn also reiterated the FCC's mission to protect the Internet for consumers at the same event, saying, "We are trying to keep the Internet in your hands and not in the hands of industry gatekeepers. The only threatened "takeover" of the Internet is by industry. If they begin to restrict access, prioritize their own offerings, or make other critical changes to the structure of what has been an incredible economic driver as an open platform, then we all should be concerned."
Indeed, we've already experienced what Clyburn warns about - Comcast blocking legal file-sharing traffic, for example - and Internet service providers have made clear their plans to shut down the open nature of the Internet, as corporations have done with every other media platform in history.
Here's the good news about industry's recent actions: They wouldn't be spending $1.4 million if they weren't scared - and they're scared of you, and of us, and of all the tech groups, businesses, advocacy organizations, law professors and lawmakers who have expressed support for Net Neutrality and reclassification.
What's good for the public - and the country - isn't always good for corporations. FCC provisions to protect the open and neutral platform of the Internet run counter to industry's future business model for the Internet (a place where they cash in while controlling what we can and cannot view on the Web), and they're doing whatever they can to keep their plans in place.
We warned that the coming months would bring a tidal wave of opposition from phone and cable company lobbyists - the likes of which we have never seen before - and indeed, it is already happening. Strap on your life jackets, folks. We're going to need you.
Follow Megan Tady on Twitter: www.twitter.com/MegTady
"Net neutrality just means that ISPs (Internet Service Providers like Comcast) cannot be selective about what we see or who has access to their internet.
Take for example what the person above said, if net neutrality fails then Comcast can censor whatever they like, block access to sites of organizations they do not agree with, etc.
The FCC wants to prevent that from happening. The FCC wants to make sure the internet is open, free, and uncensored."
But that's not what the FCC has historically done. Television is censored. The radio is censored. Why would the internet be any different?
Here's their website:
http://www.fcc.gov/eb/oip/
"It is a violation of federal law to air obscene programming at any time. It is also a violation of federal law to broadcast indecent or profane programming during certain hours."
Maybe if I could get a provision in the law that says the FCC can't censor anything on the internet for content, I'd be down with it.
You know when the characters mentioned in this article get involved there is a very real and diseased program coming your way.
Wonder if we can set up a new pipeline?
What the heck ever happened when back in the seventies ATT was busted up because it was a monoply?
It's all about the money and it drives ATT and Comcast crazy that they can't charge more then they do now... and you can just bet that improved customer service is NOT part of their plan.
Hands off our Internet, clowns.
Look at the recent attempts to destroy facebook because it's becoming a threat to their media machines
Please wake up people
This administration is not our friend
What people are saying now about facebook is stuff I have been saying since 2005 when I first heard about it. So what exactly are you talking about? Are you a paid poster?
that make it clear enough for you?
1. Net Neutrality is the rules that the internet has used since its inception. If you like the way the internet works you like Net Neutrality.
2. The FCC is simply trying to keep the telecom companies from being able to set whatever new rules they like.
3. Every site you like about the internet was able to start small and rise on its own merits because they did not have to bribe the gatekeepers of the internet to allow their information to flow smoothly. The telecoms companies think that they can make extra money if they can extort companies to allow their information to flow freely or to only allow the telecoms-provided sites and services to flow freely.
4. To give an example. Friendster was overtaken by MySpace and MySpace was overtaken by Facebook and who knows what might overtake Facebook. But without Net Neutrality Friendster could have influenced the telecoms (either with cash or an ownership stake) to make Myspace and all other competitors run terribly. We would still not just be using Friendster, but the 2003 feature set and design of Friendster.