Insanely, ragingly mad props to Karl, who writes the Municipal Report for Broadband Reports.com.
Karl puts the smackdown on a buncha libertarians and right-wingers (like there is a difference) who have banded together as the Freedom Foundation in order to, as they say, serve the cause of "optimizing broadband deployment" in the U.S.
Documenting the Freedom Foundation members ties to traditional telecom providers, Karl then goes on to state his opinion about what their real agenda is.
When I read Karl's piece this morning, I kept going, "right on!!" "oh yes!" "Karl, you rule!" "Frickin A!"
I now have the pleasure of offering three meaty paragraphs from Karl's smackdown.
While these financial ties obviously do not invalidate these groups' positions, the suggestion that these outfits are concerned with broadband "deployment" should be insulting to those interested in honest debate over this nation's telecom infrastructure. These groups and the compact's signees are concerned with one thing: maximum possible revenue for their clients and donors.
Their focus is not to increase broadband deployment. That would require offering broadband services to rural portions of America, where their employer's ROI would be dubious and stock prices would suffer. Whether you can get DSL in the remotest regions of your Ohio suburb is the very last thing on the mind of individuals such as Joseph Bast and Sonia Arrison, or organizations such as the Heartland Institute (note-a member of this coalition)
The coalition's suggestions for "maximizing deployment", include the elimination of all "unnecessary regulations", telecom taxes or fees (though as discussed many of these are phony and imposed by the providers themselves), as well as ensuring that municipalities are "prohibited from investing in, managing or operating broadband infrastructure and services."