Net Neutrality

The Internet Freedom Preservation Act of 2009 establishes the basic rules of the road for an open Internet. Its arrival couldn't be more timely -- we must act to pass this bill.

As millions of users are opting to upgrade to Internet-enabled "smart phones," carriers have begun blocking access to applications and the free-flowing Web by controlling what these phones can and can't do.

If you are a common carrier -- and you are not China or Iraq -- then you'd better behave in a fashion that supports full, open and transparent communication.

As the first African-American woman commissioner, she represents progressive change that is deeply in sync with the transformation of D.C. politics that Obama is trying to realize.

The open Internet's power cuts both ways: The tools that organize and empower people can also be used to target them. Companies that profit from this technology need to be held to a higher standard.

Why should consumers be hobbled by deals that allow carriers to tie down the hottest new devices and block our ability to use them as they're intended?

If the government opposes Internet filtering in Iran and opposes it in China, then it would be nice if our legislators and our government opposed it here, too.

We are at the dawn of the era of a true mobile Internet but cell carriers are still playing gatekeepers to the next generation of innovation. Imagine what the new iPhone would be if we only set it free.

The truly open network is an anathema to not only the telephone and cable companies, but also to those who want the network used for their own purposes.

AT&T can't decide whether it loves or hates the iPhone. But for many iPhone users there's little doubt: They hate AT&T.

ISPs have stuck consumers with higher prices and slower speeds, while repeatedly threatening to throttle the free and open Internet. And our elected and appointed officials have let this happen.

Is there anyone who thinks Congress could produce anything in the way of a meaningful broadband plan that will make a real difference and raise our broadband ranking in the world?

Should the companies that deliver Internet be allowed to block it, slow it down, or in the current case of Time Warner, overcharge for it?

As early as fall 2007, Obama made a strong commitment to a free-flowing, accessible and open Internet when he unveiled his new media agenda.

Were there more Anna Eshoos to keep an eye on things, a lot of the silliness around Washington when the discussion turns to the Internet and related issues might just be eliminated.

Today the power of the grassroots/netroots movement has prevailed.

Your money cannot be used by powerful companies like AT&T and Comcast to implement plans to "manage," filter or re-route you whenever you traverse the Web.

Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, Ari Fleischer and other right-wing mouthpieces are trying to frame future debates while they reinvent the George W. Bush years...

Every now and then comes something that is a perfect expression of what the Internet is about. ThruYOU has taken the Web by storm, garnering more than a million YouTube views in the seven days since its release.

Obama's appointment is another indication that incoming leadership in Washington will move decisively to protect the free flowing Internet from those seeking to become gatekeepers to new media.

It is a sad irony that the medium which has generated so much political activism on both the right and the left, has been unable to mobilize to protect itself.

Building better broadband is not a bailout. It's a buildout for better democracy.

Sock puppets, for those unfamiliar with the creatures commonly found inside the Beltway, are mouthpieces who rent out their academic or political credentials to argue pro-industry positions.

I said to myself, "Self, I have all of the qualifications that I drew up for someone should have to be the FCC Chairman." And so I thought, "Why not me?" That is how I came to mention the possibility.