- action | issues
- Academic Freedom
- Books
- Classrooms
- Copyright
- Film
- Government Secrecy
- Hate Speech
- Internet
- LGBT
- Libraries
- Music
- Nudity & Pornography
- Political Correctness
- Political Dissent
- Public Spaces
- Race Ethnicity Gender
- Radio & Television
- Religion
- Science
- Theater & Performance
- Video Games
- Violence
- Visual Art
- Youth
- advocacy | projects
- education | resources
in support of free expression
The information presented here by the National
Coalition Against Censorship (NCAC) may be freely redistributed in its entirety,
provided that readers are informed that the information was obtained from
NCAC's World Wide Web site and that credit is given to the appropriate source
of whatever information is used. Permission is expressly granted for the information
obtained to be made available for file transfer from installations offering
unrestricted anonymous file transfer on the Internet. Information found here
may not be sold for profit or incorporated in commercial documents without
the written permission from the National Coalition Against Censorship.
©Copyright 2005 NCAC
WEB DESIGN
Jeanne Criscola Criscola Design
free speech first amendment censorship
The Opposition: Big Telecom Front Campaign
Considering the enormous economic, technological, and legal implications of network neutrality, the fine points in this debate can certainly be confusing. On top of all that, a telecom-funded opposition group has launched a counter-campaign to further obfuscate the issue. Hands off the Internet mimics the appearance of a grassroots campaign, but counts among its sponsors AT&T and BellSouth. The site garners support from many who fail to understand that their message is not in the interests of Internet users.
Their view is that net neutrality amounts to "government interference." They have even put forward the bogus argument that keeping the Internet non-discriminatory amounts to compelled speech, and therefore violates the telecommunications industry's First Amendment rights!
The telecom companies would have us believe that network neutrality is an unnecessary form of government interference. They go so far as to call it "a solution in search of a problem." However, network neutrality has been the standing rule, and in fact we now need Congress to intervene in order to only preserve the vital regulatory function that the FCC has performed ever since the inception of the Internet.
NCAC would not typically support a measure to "regulate" the transmission of information in any way. But in this case, some government intervention is necessary to protect free expression and access to information from interference – not from the government, but from powerful interests whose only priority is profit. COPE's weak language would only grant the FCC the ability to "investigate" and "report to Congress on" violations of network neutrality; we need explicit and enforceable language in the law that would prevent the telecom companies from abuses that infringe on our freedom.
» Click here for a debate between "Hands Off the Interent" Co-Chair Mike McCurry and Amazon.com's Paul Misener.
Action Alerts
