Verizon Blocks Pro-Choice Text Messaging

We've just been handed another view of Verizon's gatekeeper tendencies with a report Wednesday night that the company's wireless arm is blocking pro-choice text messages.

According to the New York Times, Verizon Wireless has rejected Naral Pro-Choice America efforts to use Verizon's mobile text-message program to communicate to its membership.

What free speech looks like Photo courtesy of gizmodo

Such text messaging is an important new tool for advocacy organizations seeking to educate and alert their members.

Verizon decision to block this new form of political speech interferes with its users' right to get information that they choose to receive.

The move gives off a familiar scent -- and puts Verizon in the same league with its cohorts at AT&T, who in August censored the live Webcast of a Pearl Jam performance that included criticism of President George Bush.

The truth is that whenever given the choice, phone companies will opt to discriminate against content they don't like. Such efforts to stem the free flow of information should be a wake up call for anyone concerned about phone company plans to begin filtering Internet content.

Verizon and AT&T routinely rail against Net Neutrality as a "solution in search of a problem." They swarm Washington with lobbyists offering promises never to interfere with the free flow of online content. And then they lobby for new laws that will allow them to do just that.

AT&T and Verizon share a history of breaking trust with the public, including handing over customer phone records to the government -- and then seeking immunity from prosecution for doing so; promising to deliver services to underserved communities and then skipping town; pledging never to interfere with the free flow of information while hatching plans with the likes of Cisco and Viacom to build and deploy technology that will spy on online traffic.

Earlier this month, Verizon filed suit against the FCC for trying to pry open the wireless market to more consumer choice and competition. In Verizon's myopic view, consumers should never benefit from the free market -- and especially not those who are locked into their draconian wireless contracts.

The bottom line is never trust Verizon or AT&T at their word. Phone companies act in bad faith toward the public and will do whatever they can get away with -- including sacrificing their users' freedom to choose -- to advance their financial interests.

The Verizon network crowd that famously shadows users wherever they go has now taken on an Orwellian cast. No, Verizon, we don't want your mob to surround us. We simply want you to get out of our way.

= = = =
Sept 27 UPDATE:

Let the backpedaling begin. Verizon Wireless just announced that it has dropped its ban on text messages from NARAL one day after news of their censorship was reported by the New York Times.

"The decision to not allow text messaging on an important, though sensitive, public policy issue was incorrect," Verizon spokesman Jeffrey Nelson said in a statement, adding that the earlier decision was an "isolated incident."

Don't believe it. This gives us a dim view at the gatekeeping mindset of phone companies -- and what we might expect in a future where the likes of AT&T and Verizon are handed control of the free flow of information. It's time Congress reaffirmed its commitment to protecting free speech over all 21st Century communications - on the Internet, on cell phones, on the streets, everywhere.

You can take action to stop similar abuses here.

Follow Timothy Karr on Twitter: www.twitter.com/TimKarr

Comments

[drblack]

If you give money to Verizon you support a corporate controlled government.
Verizon is anti-freedom and wants to control as much of the information infrastructure as possible. Hillary will be on Verizons side.

[Peabodies]

Verizon has been repressive for many years. I did everything, including paying more for another provider, than have anything to do with them. For a corporation to generate this kind of reaction from me, they have to be BAD. They're not alone. I have my private list of businesses I will not do business with. It's the only weapon I have against what's going on.

[elleng]

Raw and Mr. Karr, headlines and text MUST REFLECT THE FACTS. Its hard enough to get the truth from the main stream media; please don't aggravate the situation.

'blocking pro-choice text messages'
is NOT the SAME as 'reject[ing] Naral Pro-Choice America efforts to use Verizon's mobile text-message program to communicate to its membership.'

Please help.

Tnanks

[Timothy Karr - Huffpost Blogger]

Ummm ... yes, elleng, it is the same.

[Pippilin]

Pardon my sarcasm: perhaps NARAL can turn to
Joe Lieberman for support.

[Rory]

Verizon just caved on this issue, saying "The decision to not allow text messaging on an important, though sensitive, public policy issue was incorrect, and we have fixed the process that led to this isolated incident.” Company spokesman Jeffrey Nelson added in a statement that “It was an incorrect interpretation of a dusty internal policy."

But Verizon still appears to reserve the "right" to censor messages when they deem it a "correct interpretation" of their dusty internal policy!

[TheoD]

Here is what outraged people should do. Go to this website ( www.VerizonWireless.com ) and send VERIZON a clear statement (thru the Contact Us section) that you will be boycotting their service until they reverse this policy and their policy on Net Neutrality. Be polite, but firm, about what you are against. Such corps can understand loss of business.......

[mscreant]

Did it as soon as I heard this story...and, yes, people have to be willing to write as well as act. The problem is, it is self-interest that usually drives decisions versus social responsibility. I left Verizon, then AT&T, for similarly social reasons....even though I incurred some expense and the service is not as good with my current company. If I didn't act, though, how could I possibly reserve the right to complain?!?!?

[gardengoddess]

Me too! They got an eyefull! Surely they don't consider themselves an "American" company, do they? They couldn't have acted much more unAmerican than trying to deny the First Amendment rights to their customers, many of whom I hope will be ex-customers soon.

[nanorich]

http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/prnewswire/NYTH06227092007-1.htm


Verizon: Oops.

Never mind. Our mistake. Sorry.

[CallMeLiberal]

The only surprise here is that there is anyone left who might find this surprising. The legacy telcos, i.e. the old Bell monopolists, are joined at the hip with the government (and the military). No interest group was more fearful of Democrats taking back Congress, though they have plenty of fully-funded Dems in their deep pockets. Watch as Verizon pulls another Criss Angel mindfreak move on this one.

[curlytop]

"No interest group was more fearful of Democrats taking back Congress, though they have plenty of fully-funded Dems in their deep pockets."

No kidding. After all, it was none other than Republicrat Bill Clinton who gave us the Telecom Act that allowed the communications companies to do whatever the hell they please in the name of competetive free-market economics.

[gardengoddess]

I often wonder why the Republicans were so intent on discrediting Clinton when he was really the best Republican president to hold office in the last 30 years. After all, he cut government spending, cut the size of the government, helped big business, balanced the budget, created a surplus - all the things Republicans supposedly think are good.

So why were they - and still are - so afraid of him? Aside from the fact most are born cowards, of course.