alibi online

Free Will AstrologyAlibi's Personals
 
 V.19 No.33 | August 19 - 25, 2010 

Thin Line

Digital Justice

Google's been known as a fierce advocate for net neutrality. But the web giant, along with Verizon, is suggesting a model critics say threatens Internet freedom. "What they're trying to set up is a public, slower-running Internet and a private, faster-running Internet," says Andrea Quijada, executive director of the New Mexico Media Literacy Project.

Let’s back up. When I picked up the phone to call Andrea Quijada, executive director of the New Mexico Media Literacy Project, my call was not rerouted to a corporation without my permission.

"Just the way that we need water and electricity, we need the Internet. It's that fundamental to our daily lives."

Andrea Quijada, executive director of the New Mexico Media Literacy Project

That's the metaphor she uses when I ask about net neutrality. The Internet as we know it is neutral—your provider doesn’t slow your connection to or route you away from businesses it competes with. Your browsing isn’t directed by corporations.

Under the Google-Verizon proposal, wired connections would remain neutral, but wireless networks would not be subject to the same policy. Removing Internet freedom would mean online discrimination, Quijada says. "We need democracy to extend to the Internet."

Not only does Quijada’s telephone analogy lay out a parallel of what could happen if we lose net neutrality, it also shows the net as a communication service. We use it to apply for jobs, to run our businesses, to stay in touch with friends and families. "It's a basic utility," she says. "Just the way that we need water and electricity, we need the Internet. It's that fundamental to our daily lives."

If the Internet is not viewed as a communication service, then the Federal Communications Commission is not the regulatory body that would govern it, she says. And that could open the net up to corporate censorship. She spells it out further: "I want to read this article, and I go to alibi.com. Because my provider is opposed to the Alibi or doesn't support independent media, I could be slowed down drastically or rerouted. Smaller venues could be blocked."

The basic discussion's been going for years. Net freedom fighters advocate that all information, sites and platforms should stay equally available to consumers. Opponents say rules enforcing neutrality will interfere with progress and competition. These last few days, the topic is back in the national consciousness because of the Google-Verizon suggestion.

Google's public policy blog defended the company's position on Thursday, Aug. 12. Though Google once advocated for wireless neutrality, in the "spirit of compromise," it's suggesting instead that the wireless market should go unregulated "while Congress keeps a watchful eye." Note the lack of FCC in that plan. Four House Democrats are not crazy about the proposal. Reps. Edward Markey, Anna Eshoo, Mike Doyle and Jay Inslee say it's too "industry-centered."

Quijada and the Media Literacy Project are calling for FCC action to keep the Internet free of corporate censorship. You can see more of their work on issues of Internet access and net neutrality at nmmlp.org. The organization is also working alongside Color of Change in Berkeley, Calif., and the Media Action Grassroots Network to spread the word about a petition calling for net neutrality. Go to colorofchange.org/opennet.

The opinions expressed are solely those of the author.
Public Comments (1)
  • Bass-ackwards  [ Thu Aug 19 2010 8:50 AM ]

    Under the Google-Verizon proposal, wired connections would remain neutral, but wireless networks would not be subject to the same policy.

    When this came out last week, at first I assumed some reporter had gotten the story backwards, but it turns out that's really the deal.

    Wires, private property which is physically owned and whose capacity can always be expanded by pulling more cables/fibers through the conduit: regulated, for fair equality at the possible expense of freedom.

    Airwaves -- the ether -- unownable and whose signals pass through us all and our homes whether we consent or not, for which the FCC was invented to somehow deal with, and whose spectrum is only spoken of as ownable because of government-established monopoly, and which has a capacity with a fixed upper limit that technological progress can only approach yet never exceed: unregulated, freedom at the possible expense of fair equality.

    It doesn't matter which side of the political spectrum you're on. You might agree that one of these things make sense, but there's no way they both make sense.

    If you're a bleeding-heart communist hippie who thinks the very idea of property is a thoughtcrime against Mother Gaia, you might argue that the net at large be regulated, even the wires, but then you will surely want the preciously-limited public wireless spectrum even more stringently regulated.

    Likewise, if you're a laissez-faire capitalist-dog Randroid who counts his wealth in victims' tears, you may argue that wireless remain free of government interference (except when someone else broadcasts on "your" frequency; then you'll be crying the loudest for mama government) but if you do that, then likewise you will even more strenuously argue for the privately-owned wires and their virtually limitless abundance to remain free and unregulated.

    Left or right, we all know this is fucked up. Unity at last.

 
Join our mailing list for exclusive info, the week's events and free stuff!
 

  • Select sidebar boxes to add below. You can also click and drag to rearrange the boxes; minimize, maximize and close using the little icons on each box. To re-add a box you closed, return to this menu.
  • Because you are not logged in, any changes you make to these boxes will vanish as soon as you click to another page. If you log in, the boxes will stick.
  • alibi.com
  • Latest Posts
  • Most Active Stories
  • Latest User Posts
  • Highest-Rated Posts
  • Most Active Users
  • Web Exclusives
  • Latest User Blogs
  • Latest Chowtown Reviews
  • Recent Rocksquawk Discussions
  • Recent Classifieds
  • This Week's Alibi Picks
  • Albuquerque
  • Duke City Fix
  • Albuquerque Beer Scene
  • What's Wrong With This Picture?
  • Reddit Albuquerque
  • ABQ Journal Metro
  • ABQrising
  • ABQ Journal Latest News
  • Del.icio.us Albuquerque
  • NM and the West
  • New Mexico FBIHOP
  • Democracy for New Mexico
  • Only in New Mexico
  • Mario Burgos
  • Democracy for New Mexico
  • High Country News
  • El Grito
  • NM Politics with Joe Monahan
  • Stephen W. Terrell's Web Log
  • The Net Is Vast and Infinite
  • Slashdot
  • Freedom to Tinker
  • Is there a feed that should be on this list? Tell us about it.
    Red Light Cameras
    Red Light Cameras5.24.2013