Home / News / How Gutting Net Neutrality Poses a Direct Threat to Political Organizing

How Gutting Net Neutrality Poses a Direct Threat to Political Organizing

Photo Credit: Free Press/ Free Press Action Fund Follow / Flickr

Federal Communications Commission authority Ajit Pai released a major sequence Tuesday in which he summarized his devise to idle landmark regulations that safeguard equal entrance to the internet. Pai wants to dissolution net neutrality manners that bar internet service providers from interlude or negligence down the delivery of websites and stop companies from charging additional fees for high-quality streaming. A grave opinion on the devise is set for Dec 14th. We pronounce with Tim Karr, Senior Director of Strategy for Free Press, which is organizing support to keep the manners in place forward of the vote.


This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.


JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai released a major sequence Tuesday patrician “Restoring Internet Freedom,” in which he summarized his devise to idle landmark regulations that safeguard equal entrance to the internet. Pai described his devise to overturn manners put in place by the Obama administration during an speak with the Heritage Foundation.

AJIT PAI: Essentially, my offer to dissolution the Obama administration’s clumsy regulations adopted two years ago on a party-line opinion that regulated the Internet. And what I’m proposing to do is to get absolved of those regulations.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Pai’s offer would dissolution net neutrality manners that bar internet service providers from interlude or negligence down the delivery of websites, and stop companies from charging additional fees for high-quality streaming. A grave opinion on the devise is set for Dec 14.

AMY GOODMAN: Ajit Pai pronounced his plans had extended support. But, on Tuesday, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman pronounced he’s questioning poignant numbers of feign comments filed with the Federal Communications Commission in its examination of net neutrality rules. In the past 6 months, Schneiderman pronounced the FCC has “refused mixed requests for essential evidence.” For more, we’re assimilated by Tim Karr, Senior Director of Strategy for Free Press. Welcome back to Democracy Now!, speak about this, how poignant is what Ajit Pai is articulate about?

TIM KARR: This is one of the many extreme proposals we’ve seen this FCC, which is observant a lot, given there have been a series of very extreme proposals over the last 6 months including efforts to hurl back broadband subsidies for operative families, efforts to hit divided media tenure manners that would concede a company like Sinclair to control internal television. This goes even further. It takes divided the essential insurance that Internet users have to safeguard that their online connectors aren’t blocked, aren’t throttled, or that their communications aren’t censored in any way.

I mean, really what this is about is the future of communications. The internet is conspicuous given it puts that control, the control over media in the hands of internet users. What Ajit Pai is proposing to do is take that divided from internet users and palm it to a handful of companies, companies like ATT, Comcast, and Verizon, who have designs on the Internet that are not in the best seductiveness of people like you and me.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Well, Tim, it took the Obama administration, really, about 6 years before they finally came out in preference of net neutrality. The FCC controlled by President Obama mostly — democratically controlled FCC. How vicious is this issue of either the Internet is seen as a open utility, really, a common carrier, or either it’s just — it’s privatized to concede all these companies to continue to operate?

TIM KARR: Well, the Internet was combined as this network where, where there were no gatekeepers. Essentially, anyone who goes online can bond with everybody else online. And that’s given arise to all sorts of innovation, it’s allowed domestic organizers, and secular probity advocates to use this apparatus to hit people, to organize, to get their summary out.

What Pai is proposing is to take that principle, net neutrality, out of the network and concede these very absolute companies to insert themselves as gatekeepers. And when you demeanour at a company like Comcast which owns NBC Universal, there will be this good inducement for them to preference their own calm and to reduce calm from websites and services like Democracy Now! or other services. So, this essentially upsets the turn personification margin of the Internet.

The good news is, though, that there has been a very large cheer and it took millions of people to get the Obama administration to put these 2015 manners in place. And given Pai and the Trump Administration started the routine progressing this year, tens of millions of people have commented at the FCC. We’ve looked at those comments, and yes, there are some feign comments in there, but we took those out and counted the strange comments and some-more than 98% of those commenting pronounced they wish to keep these net neutrality rules.

So, Ajit Pai is ignoring the public, he’s ignoring the law. These manners have been challenged in justice and they withstood those challenges. And he’s ignoring the facts. He says this is supervision law of the Internet. It’s not. It’s a law of internet service providers.

AMY GOODMAN: Once again, explain net neutrality.

TIM KARR: Net neutrality is the thought — it’s actually a flattering elementary idea. Anybody who has been on the internet is informed with this idea that you can go to whatever website and service that you choose. That is the energy that is in the hands of internet users. It protects it. It allows us to bond to everybody else that’s online. And it prevents internet service providers from blocking, throttling, or spiritless entrance to sites, or doing paid prioritization deals where they’ll preference one website over another, and pull people to that service by making its streaming abilities much better.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Well, Tim, in other media converging news, the Trump administration has changed to retard ATT’s try to buy Time Warner for $85 billion. On Monday, the Department of Justice sued ATT, arguing that it would use Time Warner’s calm to force rival pay-TV companies to compensate “hundreds of millions of dollars some-more per year for Time Warner’s networks.” President Trump was asked about the case Tuesday.

PRES. TRUMP: Personally, I’ve always felt that that was a understanding that’s not good for the country. we consider your pricing is going to go up. we don’t consider it’s a good understanding for the country. But, I’m not going to get concerned in its litigation.

AMY GOODMAN: Trump has frequently pounded Time Warner-owned CNN as feign news and once tweeted a video in which he is portrayed as wrestling and punching a figure whose conduct was transposed by the CNN logo. Meanwhile, Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren has also against the due ATT, Time Warner merger, observant it would “place even some-more energy in the hands of hulk companies while harming tiny businesses, entrepreneurs, and operative families — and that’s since I’ve argued that it should be blocked. The President’s anti-democratic attacks on the free press have expel a cloud of guess over the Justice Department’s decision to try to stop this merger, but at a time when energy is some-more and some-more strong in a handful of hulk companies, the courts and the open must proceed this case as they would any other — formed on the law and the facts, and not President Trump’s steady efforts to retaliate his enemies.” So that was — those were the difference of Elizabeth Warren. Clearly, people see this as punitive. Trump hates CNN and he’s getting them. But, here is Elizabeth Warren saying, besides that fact, which is bad, she pronounced she’s against this. She’s against this serve consolidation, Tim.

TIM KARR: Well, the Department of Justice is making the right pierce in severe this large merger. They competence be doing it for the wrong reasons, given Trump has such a absolute disposition against CNN, it’s rarely likely that this was finished in sequence to punish CNN, as you’ve mentioned. But we need to demeanour at the antitrust concerns here. This is what is called straight consolidation, which is a flourishing concern. As we mentioned earlier, Comcast, NBC was a multiple of a placement company with a company that produces content. ATT and Time Warner would benefaction those same issues where you have the company that delivers calm prioritizing over the Internet the form of calm that, in this case, Time Warner produces.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: I wanted to ask you, the last big deregulation call came in the Bush of administration, but even that took several years to play out, when Michael Powell was conduct — conduct of the FCC. Have you been repelled by the acceleration with which the Federal Communications Commission has changed to deregulate media and pull major converging all over again of media companies?

TIM KARR: Well, it’s tough to contend that we are repelled by much of anything anymore. But, this FCC has been intensely active in trying to preference the seductiveness of very absolute media companies. And they’ve unleashed, by a series of order changes, a new call of media converging that includes companies like Sinclair, which runs — owns stations, internal radio stations that can entrance some-more than 70% of the nation. There are manners in place. Congress has put manners in place that demarcate this form of media consolidation. And it’s the FCC’s charge to promote localism, competition, and farrago over the airwaves. This FCC has depressed down and is unwell to perform that mandate.

AMY GOODMAN: Tim Karr, we wish to appreciate you for being with us, Senior Director of Strategy for Free Press. The date of the FCC vote is Dec 14. Is criticism duration open until then?

TIM KARR: Yes. In fact, there’s a lot of activity going on in the last 24 hours, some-more than 100,000 people have called their members of Congress on the net neutrality issue. And so — and they’re also contacting the FCC, they’re holding these issues into the street. Dec 7, there’s going to be a criticism outward of Verizon offices. And on Dec 14, we’re also formulation protests outward of FCCheadquarters before this decision is made.

AMY GOODMAN: And of course, we’ll cover them. Tim interjection for joining us. This is Democracy Now! When we come back, 60,000 Haitians threatened with deportation from the United States. Stay with us.


Juan González is the co-host of the nationally syndicated radio news program, Democracy Now!.

auto magazine

Check Also

The Sick Paying for the Healthy: How Insurance Companies Drive Up Drug Prices

Photo Credit: Production Perig / Shutterstock Faced with angry consumers and imminent domestic reforms, the …

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>