Blog Relations
The Death of the Internet
I’ve just signed up for a blogging campaign called “Save the Internet.” Save the Internet believes that major American Internet Service Providers want to block or slow-down sites by The Army of Davids who hold so much sway these days. In other words, bloggers will become second or third class citizens, and only “preferred partners” – ie Major Media Companies will have access to the internet’s fast lane. It wants to enshrine a principle called Net Neutrality into law, making this sort of discrimination illegal. There’s a good video introduction (6 min 30) on YouTube, called, The Death of the Internet?
Interesting to see how social media is organising itself so well into a campaign. Beware the Bloggers! Take them on at your peril!
Hi, I work with a company in the Hands Off coalition, and I don’t know if you’ve heard from our side of it, but I’d like to give it a shot.
I actually like the way you put it, the group “believes” the telecom companies will slow down people’s Internet. It’s a belief and only that because that isn’t on anyone’s agenda.
It won’t make anyone “second class” — the web and the rest of the Internet will continue to speed up. The “fast lane” will benefit everyone, and you the consumer shouldn’t have to pay for it directly.
So-called Neutrality laws would make this impossible — and that would certainly slow down audio/video on the Internet.
To see some more of the arguments used by Hands off and the counter arguments see http://www.openrightsgroup.org/orgwiki/index.php/Net_Neutrality#Anti_Net_Neutrality
Thank fully we are sheltered from some of the worst excess of it by the competition in the UK. Today, more than 50 percent of Americans have only one or no choice of broadband service provider.
Comments are included in-line.
> It won’t make anyone “second class” –
The top executives of the large phone and cable companies who are funding the Hands Off coalition have announced plans to discriminate in favour of Web sites and services that can afford their proposed broadband tolls.
> the web and the rest of the Internet
> will continue to speed up.
Yes I agree. Interesting comment seemingly unrelated to any thing being talked about by the pro Net Neutrality folks. Even more interesting given what he says later.
> The “fast lane” will benefit everyone, and you the
> consumer shouldn’t have to pay for it directly.
Nobody is getting a free ride on the Internet. Any Web site or service you use on the Internet has already paid these providers to reach you — just like you pay to send e-mail and download files. In fact, total expenses from major content and service providers to expand network capacity totalled about $10 billion last year. But the cable and phone companies want even more — forcing content providers to pay protection money to get a spot in the fast lane. Who do you think will pay that bill? Customers will … big time. The costs will be passed directly to consumers. If Net Neutrality is so bad for consumers, why do ALL the major consumer groups support it and ALL the major phone companies oppose it? Who do you trust more to defend your Internet rights? Without meaningful protections of Net Neutrality, there will be less choice on the Internet and higher prices, at a time America is already falling far behind the rest of the world.
>
> So-called Neutrality laws would make this impossible
> — and that would certainly slow down audio/video on
> the Internet.
How does that tie in to the internet will continue to get faster comment? There’s nothing new about the principles underlying Net Neutrality. They have been a fundamental part of the Internet since its inception. As the “common carriage” tenet of communications policy, they go back some 70 years. Only last year did the Supreme Court uphold a bad decision by the Federal Communications Commission to do away with the rules that forced cable and phone companies to open up their networks to competitors. Those rules protected Internet freedom by ensuring lots of competition (think of all the choices you’ve had for long distance service or dial-up Web access). In fact, Net Neutrality rules still protect the Internet under a temporary FCC ruling. All a Net Neutrality law would do is maintain the even playing field we’ve always enjoyed — by preventing big cable and telephone corporations from taking over as gatekeepers.