Between the Lines

Larry Dignan, Andrew Nusca and Rachel King

New attack against Net Neutrality utilizes scare tactics

By | May 13, 2010, 2:15am PDT

Summary: A group that opposes Net Neutrality efforts is using scare tactics to fight the government’s efforts to impose regulations over broadband access se

When all else fails, launch a scare campaign.

That’s exactly what Americans for Prosperity - a group that’s reportedly backed by the telcos, among others - is doing with a new $1.4 million campaign to fight Net Neutrality.

At a time when people are actually believing everything they hear on TV, the Washington-based activist group has launched TV commercials that puts Net Neutrality right there alongside government bailouts of the banks, the mortgage insurance industry and the automakers. In fact, it claims that “Washington wants to spend billions to take over the Internet.” (see YouTube video below)

What? I have written quite a few things about Washington’s role in Net Neutrality and I don’t ever recall reading or hearing anything about Washington spending “billions” to “take over” the Internet. How can a group like AFP make such a claim?

The group does make a point about the Internet experiencing massive growth over the last decade because “government stayed out of the way.” You know what else happened when government stayed out of the way? The mortgage bankers, unregulated and free to hand out loans to people who couldn’t afford them, sent the housing market into a complete tailspin.

That’s not to say I want the heavy-hand of government in the broadband pot either, but I’d prefer that over the providers of broadband calling the shots on what gets through the pipeline and what doesn’t.

Sure, when the Internet started and companies like AOL and Compuserve were closed, membership-based content providers, as well as access providers, it was appropriate to classify them as information services.

But since then, broadband service has really morphed into more of a utility like telephone or electricity service. Comcast, AT&T and other providers aren’t giving providing me with online content - they’re providing me with access to that content. Imagine your electricity provider trying to tell you that you can power a toaster or a lamp with its service but that you can’t power an air-conditioning unit or that air compressor in your garage with its electricity.

Politics aside, there are some facts to be considered:

  • The latest proposal from the FCC calls for the “transmission component of broadband access service” to be the only piece of the Internet that would be regulated by the government, ensuring that there is equal access and pushing forward a plan that would bring broadband service to underserved areas.
  • The Internet has flourished without government regulation but, as the type of content being pushed through the Internet pipelines has grown, some are using more than others. If the telcos can start charging more for - or blocking - certain types of content from moving over their networks, it could slow the innovation and adoption of heavy-usage services, such as video and telephony transmissions.
  • President Obama himself has said that it is unacceptable that the United States ranks 15th in the world in broadband adoption. And it’s kind of embarrassing, too. Proposals to bring broadband and broadband services to the entire nation are long overdue. While I’m not suggesting government heavy-handedness here, I do believe that there needs to be some regulation to ensure that broadband is made widely available.

If you don’t agree with the direction that the government is taking in the regulation of broadband access, then that’s your right. If you want to tell all of your friends to call Washington and demand that they keep their paws off the Internet, then that’s your right, as well.

But please be factual about the information that you’re putting out there. The government is not trying to spend billions to take over the Internet - as if the Internet itself were listed on an eBay auction.

In a post-9/11 America, the government used plenty of scare tactics - remember the WMDs? - to get us into Iraq. And while the consequences there were far greater than being able to stream Hulu on your PC, the tone of this group’s TV commercials sound very familiar.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Sam has been a technology and business blogger for more than 18 years.

Disclosure

Sam Diaz

Sam Diaz has nothing to disclose.

Biography

Sam Diaz

Sam has been a technology and business blogger, reporter and editor at ZDNet, the Washington Post, San Jose Mercury News and Fresno Bee for more than 18 years. He's a member of the National Association of Hispanic Journalists and a graduate of California State University, Fresno.

Talkback Most Recent of 112 Talkback(s)

  • RE: New attack against Net Neutrality utilizes scare tactics
    This anti-regulation everything attitude is nauseating. Put a bunch of kids in a room and say do whatever you want with no rules then watch what happens. Conservatives are idiots.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    eprisencc
    13th May 2010
  • Gov't love is nauseating
    @eprisencc
    That's the difference between conservatives and liberals; WE are GROWNUPS, not "a bunch of kids". We can take care of ourselves, we don't need the gov't to regulate much of anything.

    You know what happens when you take a bunch of capitalistic conservatives and put them in a country with (almost) no rules? You get a prosperous and free United States.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    hiraghm@...
    13th May 2010
  • RE: New attack against Net Neutrality utilizes scare tactics
    @hiraghm@... Sure has worked out great so far.. long live teabaggers!!
    ZDNet Gravatar
    FireKrotch
    13th May 2010
  • RE: New attack against Net Neutrality utilizes scare tactics
    @FireKrotch

    Please cite examples of capitalist conservatives in positions of political power in the last 20 years? Then name me the powerful capitalist conservatives in the private sector. Goldman-Sachs? Nope. Hard-core democrat contributors. GM? Ditto. Chrylser? Ditto. GE? Ditto. Everything you want to blame capitalism on is actually the result of socialism. Deal with it.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    frgough
    13th May 2010
  • Balance....
    @hiraghm@... First, many of us ARE kids--quite alarge percentage of the population, and they can't vote and have few legal rights.

    Second, while "we" (literate, online, educated,) may not be children, many adults are NOT capable of even living without help.

    I was at a political party meeting a while back, and some one managed to put "We do not believe that corporations should be subject to any government laws or regulations."

    There are incredibly stupid people still living.

    Civilisation requires rules, though it may not require a lot of rules.

    Your right to do what you want ends when it infringes upon other people.

    Natural resources do not belong to those who can grab them...that is exactly the kind of allocation of resources civilisation has been fighting.

    There is a fallacy abroad that more laws equate to tighter control, when in fact, the more laws there are, the easier it is to find holes.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    wizoddg
    13th May 2010
  • RE: New attack against Net Neutrality utilizes scare tactics
    @hiraghm@...
    Like the economy melt down. Yes housing was a part of it. However, thugery and thievery was the greater part. Like partners getting together to sell useless cra**. Then, having the gall to insure this cra** and bringing the insurance companies down also. So much for grownups in a room. Really, it does not matter if kids or "grownups" If the room is full of criminals.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    windozefreak
    14th May 2010
  • RE: New attack against Net Neutrality utilizes scare tactics
    @hiraghm@...

    No, you liberals are not grownups either. If you were, you would not have been hoodwinked into supporting some of the latest liberal fads.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    mejohnsn
    18th Aug 2010
  • RE: New attack against Net Neutrality utilizes scare tactics
    @eprisencc
    Let's go over the concept of a free market... shall we?

    In a capitalist society you have competition - for you younger kids that's a dirty word, but hear me out. If Telecom A wants your business, they have to compete with Telecom B. To compete they have to offer services for competitive prices, these fluctuate to maintain ROI. Then when Telecom C wants to break into your regional market they have to be even more competitive to steal A and B's customers - yes steal - this in turn makes A and B have to adapt and compete with C to maintain.

    In a regulated environment A, B, and C are given a fixed price - whew it wouln't go up right? Wrong, now part of that fixed price feeds the political machine. Taxes go up every bloody year, postage goes up, in what reality do you think the price of bandwidth wouldn't as a result?

    Also, if regulated A, B, and C are virtually the same company. Personally I despise Comcast's business practices so I go with Verizon - but I realize much like competition, choice is another one of those dirty c words they don't like you using in school.

    Open your eyes. You cannot regulate thought, expression, or something that is comprised thereof - the internet.

    *Case and point, using 56k modems you could easily establish an internetworked (zomg) group of computers with your friends, set up file, mail, and other services - all across copper. Frightening concept I know, but that's the heart of it.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    ITSamurai
    13th May 2010
  • RE: New attack against Net Neutrality utilizes scare tactics
    @ITSamurai

    You are the one who need to open your eyes. China is having great success regulating the Internet. Iran seems to be happy with their 'success', too.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    mejohnsn
    18th Aug 2010
  • "At a time when people are actually believing everything they hear on TV"
    What? You mean... you aren't? Really??? C'mon, be sensible.

    I love my daily diet of Fox News, you should do the same. More, you shouldn't be allowed to publish an opinion piece unless you're an avid Fox News viewer.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    OS Reload
    13th May 2010
  • Conflict
    I can say that I detest the telecoms and their dreams of walled gardens.

    However, I think a government "solution" will almost assuredly be worse.

    Government is and always has been the greater threat to our freedom. Less is more. The FCC should make a simple statement in support of the principle of net neutrality with a promise to investigate any attempts by a telecom to violate this principle.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    Tim Patterson
    13th May 2010
  • RE: New attack against Net Neutrality utilizes scare tactics
    @Tim Patterson That is fairly sensible however, with out some type of law to break the telcos basically can say, "O.K. investigate, we haven't broken any laws here."

    In the absence of a law, the judicial branch of the government becomes useless. A consumer can't really sue a company for a service, only a deceptive claim. With out some sort of law, all a telco has to do is clearly state they are regulating and tiering traffic. If that action isn't illegal, consumers don't have much of a leg to stand on.

    Now if there were 15-20 different telcos in every single market competing for my consumer dollars, regulations would NOT make any sense. In most places they are monopolies so some regulation is required.

    For consumer protection, you either need tremendous competition or regulation. I would prefer the competition but I also have to face the reality I am presented with, which are monopolies.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    mr1972
    13th May 2010
  • Caveat Emptor
    @mr1972
    Screw consumer protection. Y'know what? I lived 30 years without the internet. The internet is not fundamental to individual survival. If all the telcos conspire to limit my access to the internet, I'll either go in competition with them, pirate my usage, or do without!

    No matter what the telcos can do, they can't make me buy internet access, they can't fine me when I refuse, and they can't throw me in jail for not paying the fine.
    It has been demonstrated time and again, that when a business or industry becomes dominated for a period of time by a small minority, people find alternatives and/or go into competition.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    hiraghm@...
    13th May 2010
  • RE: New attack against Net Neutrality utilizes scare tactics
    @mr1972
    Self regulate the industry and switch providers when they start inspecting and throttling traffic to keep an archaic networking method 'competitive' by telling you they provide more bandwidth than they can actively support all the while telling you it's Comcastic!
    ZDNet Gravatar
    ITSamurai
    13th May 2010
  • RE: New attack against Net Neutrality utilizes scare tactics
    @mr1972
    You correct. But, there is more. They know you really want or need their services so they play a little trick. You can legally sue for bad services and such, except they strong arm you in to agreeing to not use the legal system. They make you agree to "just" talk to them so they can straighten it out (arbitration anyone?). You think we don't need government control. Again when dealing with criminals, they can't be trusted.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    windozefreak
    14th May 2010

Talkback - Tell Us What You Think

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources