July, 15 2014, 10:24am EDT
Americans Bombard the FCC with Demands for Real Net Neutrality
WASHINGTON -- Grassroots organizations on Tuesday applauded the American public for its passionate support of real Net Neutrality protections. In an unprecedented outpouring of concern, millions of Americans have submitted comments to the Federal Communications Commission rejecting Chairman Tom Wheeler's plan to allow priority Internet access for a few rich companies.
WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON -- Grassroots organizations on Tuesday applauded the American public for its passionate support of real Net Neutrality protections. In an unprecedented outpouring of concern, millions of Americans have submitted comments to the Federal Communications Commission rejecting Chairman Tom Wheeler's plan to allow priority Internet access for a few rich companies.
The agency's docket for public input reached its halfway point as the initial comment period drew to a close. The influx of public comments was so heavy on Tuesday that the FCC's site sputtered off and on, prompting many in the D.C. area to deliver comments by hand. The public may continue to submit comments through Sept. 10.
This is the greatest public response to any rulemaking in the FCC's history. More than 1 million people had petitioned the agency for strong Net Neutrality protections within weeks of a January 2014 court decision that overturned the FCC's 2010 Open Internet Order. During the agency's May 15 meeting, more than a million people submitted additional petitions.
That number has grown significantly since then. On Friday, the FCC said an additional 647,000 comments had been entered into the docket. Hundreds of thousands of comments are expected in the weeks to come. The vast majority of the comments submitted so far urge the agency to scrap its pay-for-prioritization proposal and implement real Net Neutrality rules.
"In close to a decade of fighting for the open Internet, I've never seen more awareness and enthusiasm about this issue," said Free Press President and CEO Craig Aaron. "Millions of Internet users have flooded the agency with support for real Net Neutrality. And almost no one outside FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler's office is advocating for his pay-to-play proposal. Wheeler claims he supports the open Internet, but the rules he's proposing would allow rampant discrimination and fast lanes for the fortunate few. That's totally unacceptable, and it's why so many everyday Internet users are so upset. The best and only path forward for Wheeler is to reclassify Internet providers as common carriers."
"Anything less than Title II classification is a retreat, an assault on the dynamic nature of the Internet, and a complete denial of the public interest," said former FCC Commissioner Michael Copps, who is now a special adviser to Common Cause and a member of the Free Press board. "Standing up against the corporate takeover of the Internet may not be easy, but it is essential."
"If the president is serious about fighting inequality, he can't be part of AT&T, Comcast, and big telecom's plan to let the Internet discriminate," said CREDO Political Director Becky Bond. "This is an opportunity for the president and his FCC to stand up for American consumers who overwhelmingly want to preserve the open Internet."
"Demand Progress members have spoken out in support of Net Neutrality more than 500,000 times in the last six months, joining millions of other Americans," said Demand Progress Executive Director David Segal. "This is because they understand the importance of maintaining an open Internet where everybody can participate on equal terms -- without fear of being blocked or having their sites slowed to a crawl if they refuse to pay extortive fees to the ISPs. It's time for the FCC to realize that their plan simply doesn't achieve this and choose to protect the Internet with common-carriage regulations."
"The public outcry has been clear in its opposition to FCC Chairman Wheeler's proposal to allow cable companies to force websites big and small to pay in order to get their content to load faster," said Daily Kos Campaign Director Rachel Colyer. "The FCC must heed the call of the public to protect an open, equal Internet by treating it as a public utility. We urge Chairman Wheeler to listen to the voices of Americans -- not the voices of Big Telecom -- by holding public field hearings on the future of the Internet."
"With this unprecedented public response, FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler now has an obligation to abandon his flawed plan and truly protect Net Neutrality by pushing forward with reclassification and treating Internet service providers like any other utility company," said Democracy for America Executive Director Charles Chamberlain.
"A handful of already hated cable companies want to make every American's Internet experience slower, less reliable and more annoying, gutting the very principle that has made the Internet such a great place to do business and speak freely," said Fight for the Future Co-Director Tiffiniy Cheng. "The fact that the FCC would even consider letting this happen is an outrage."
"Net Neutrality has made the Internet a level playing field for all voices, allowing Black bloggers, activists, and entrepreneurs to flourish online despite being blocked out of ownership and participation in traditional media," said ColorOfChange Executive Director Rashad Robinson. "That's why thousands of ColorOfChange members have raised their voices in demanding strong open Internet protections and calling out deceptive arguments from the telecom lobby. The FCC must protect the open Internet if it wants to protect diversity online."
"The unprecedented outcry from nearly a million everyday Americans supporting Net Neutrality makes FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler's choice crystal clear: He can side with everyday Internet users or with telecom companies like Comcast, AT&T, Verizon and Time Warner," said Keith Rouda of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee. "The right thing for the FCC to do is to listen to those at NoSlowLane.com and across the Internet who are calling for the FCC to reclassify the Internet as a public utility like water -- equally accessible to all."
"The FCC is proposing a plan that would allow Internet providers to give preferential treatment to some websites over others," said Electronic Frontier Foundation Staff Activist April Glaser. "When new innovative websites can't get high-quality service, they'll be less likely to reach users and less likely to succeed. The result: a less diverse Internet. That's why we join over a million Americans in speaking out: It's our Internet, and we're going to fight to protect it."
"As a candidate back in 2007, then-Senator Obama pledged to protect Net Neutrality," said Progressives United Executive Director Cole Leystra. "But now President Obama may break his promise by throwing more power to big corporate telecommunications companies. But President Obama and Chairman Wheeler can still do the right thing and stand up for Americans who count on the Internet for their everyday lives."
"The public has spoken in record numbers, and their voice is clear," said SumOfUs Campaign Director Paul Ferris. "The FCC needs to act now to protect this shared vision of an equal and open Internet, not the two-tiered Internet demanded by big corporations."
"President Obama appointed Tom Wheeler as chairman of the FCC, and must fulfill his promise to the American people to save the Internet as a level playing field for all," said MoveOn.org Civic Action Executive Director Anna Galland. "The only way to do that is to treat the Internet as the public utility it is."
"For decades, the world looked to the U.S. for inspiration when it came to open technologies and the policy frameworks behind them," said Access Advocacy Director Josh Levy. "Now Internet users and governments around the world are looking to the FCC to set a strong precedent by preserving the open Internet by reclassifying broadband under Title II of the Telecommunications Act."
Free Press was created to give people a voice in the crucial decisions that shape our media. We believe that positive social change, racial justice and meaningful engagement in public life require equitable access to technology, diverse and independent ownership of media platforms, and journalism that holds leaders accountable and tells people what's actually happening in their communities.
(202) 265-1490LATEST NEWS
'We Do Not Support' ICC Probe of Israeli War Crimes in Gaza, Says White House
"ICC warrants against Israel and Hamas will offer the West a choice: Either torpedo the international criminal justice project they have advanced since 1945 for good or hypocritically demand impunity for Israeli war crimes."
Apr 29, 2024
White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre on Monday reaffirmed the Biden administration's opposition to the International Criminal Court potentially issuing an arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu or other top officials related to Israel's war on the Gaza Strip.
"Would the U.S. or the White House see any potential arrests by the ICC as an aggravating factor in the negotiations?" one journalist asked about talks to end the bloodshed and free hostages.
Jean-Pierre responded: "So, we've been really clear about the ICC investigation. We do not support it. We don't believe that they have the jurisdiction. And I'm just gonna leave it there for now."
#WATCH | On International Criminal Court's (ICC) investigation into Israel's conduct in Gaza, White House press secretary Karine Jean Pierre says, "...We don't believe is in the ICC jurisdiction in this situation. We do not support the investigation. And I think that kind of… pic.twitter.com/du8NpEtLxj
— ANI (@ANI) April 29, 2024
Asked later about President Joe Biden's Sunday call with Netanyahu and whether the U.S. government is involved in any attempts to avert warrants from the Hague-based court, the press secretary echoed her previous comments.
The exchanges followed reporting that the Israeli government, in partnership with the U.S., is "making a concerted effort to head off" possible arrest warrants from the ICC targeting Netanyahu as well as Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant and Israel Defense Forces (IDF) Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi.
Citing two unnamed Israeli officials, Axiosreported that Netanyahu on Sunday asked Biden to help prevent the ICC from issuing warrants. A spokesperson for the White House National Security Council told the outlet that "as we have publicly said many times, the ICC has no jurisdiction in this situation and we do not support its investigation."
Neither Israel nor the United States is a party to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, the treaty that established the tribunal, but Palestine accepted its jurisdiction over alleged crimes committed "in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem," in 2015.
The ICC formally launched its war crimes investigation in the occupied Palestinian territories in 2021, long before the IDF began its ongoing retaliation for the Hamas-led attack October 7 on Israel. The probe includes crimes going back to June 13, 2014.
Urging Biden "to intervene as part of the administration's ongoing commitment to Israel," U.S. Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) on Monday declared that "it would be a fatal blow to the judicial and moral standing of ICC to pursue this path against Israel."
Mark Kersten, an assistant professor at the University of the Fraser Valley, responded: "Now a Democratic senator is threatening the ICC's very existence if it does what it was created to do: Impartially and independently investigate international crimes, without fear or favor. I hope this grotesque threat and atrocity-denialism is roundly condemned."
Also noting Fetterman's comments, Alonso Gurmendi, a lecturer in international relations at King's College London, said: "They really don't realize just how isolated Western governments are on this. Even among their own populations. This won't be a fatal blow to the ICC. It will relaunch its relationship with the global majority. Fighting this will only isolate and weaken the West further."
In January, the International Court of Justice found that Israel is "plausibly" engaged in genocide in Gaza. As of Monday, the Israeli bombardment and blockade had killed at least 34,488 Palestinians in the Hamas-governed strip, injured another 77,643, left thousands more missing in bombed-out communities, and displaced around 90% of the enclave's 2.3 million people.
Since October, the United States has ramped up its billions of dollars in military support for Israel. The Biden administration has been accused of being complicit in genocide in federal court. The next hearing in the case is scheduled for June.
Keep ReadingShow Less
To Remove 'Cloud of Doubt,' Journalism Professors Urge Review of NYT Story on Oct. 7 Sexual Violence
Nothing can "reverse the damage done to Palestine and to Palestinians," said the professors, "but the Times could still reverse some of the damage it has done to itself with its silence."
Apr 29, 2024
A front-page New York Times story that Israel used to galvanize public support for its U.S.-backed assault on Gaza must be subject to an independent review, said more than 50 journalism professors in a letter to the newspaper on Monday, as growing protests signified widespread outrage over the destruction that followed the bombshell article.
The professors, many of whom worked as full-time journalists before turning to academia, wrote to Timespublisher A.G. Sulzberger, executive editor Joe Kahn, and international editor Philip Pan, calling for a "thorough and independent review" into the article "'Screams Without Words': Sexual Violence on Oct. 7."
The letter urged the newspaper to form a commission made up of journalism experts to examine the "reporting, editing, and publishing processes" for the story.
The article came under scrutiny shortly after it was published, having been reported by not only international correspondent Jeffrey Gettleman but also two inexperienced freelancers based in Israel. One, Anat Schwartz, is a "former air force intelligence official" with whom the Times cut ties after it was revealed that she had "liked" a social media post calling for Gaza to be turned into a "slaughterhouse."
"It appears that extraordinary trust was invested in these individuals andthe Times would benefit from publicly explaining the circumstances that justified such unusual reliance on freelancers for such an important story," wrote the professors, including Mohamad Bazzi of New York University, Shahan Mufti of University of Richmond, and Jeff Cohen, who retired from Ithaca College.
Mufti joined Northwestern University assistant professor Steven Thrasher in gathering the signatures, and told The Washington Post that after "serious consideration and deliberation," the academics "came to the conclusion that this is necessary."
In addition to questions that have been raised about Schwartz's and Sella's experience and bias, the professors pointed to the newspaper's acknowledgment on March 26 that "new video evidence 'undercut' some important details" in "Screams Without Words," as well as Gettleman's comment suggesting he did not view the information in the story as hard "evidence."
"Can the paper 'establish' fact if its own reporter does not consider his information 'evidence'?" asked the professors.
In March, a spokesperson for Kibbutz Be'eri toldThe Intercept that victims of the Hamas-led attack on southern Israel were not sexually assaulted, and the family of one woman who was a key figure in "Screams Without Words" has denied the report's graphic details of sexual abuse were true.
The Intercept also reported that in reporting on the alleged sexual assaults, Schwartz relied on interviews with a rescue group that was "documented to have mishandled evidence and spread multiple false stories about the events of October 7, including debunked allegations of Hamas operatives beheading babies."
Al Jazeera journalist Laila Al-Arian called Monday's letter a "major development" and urged the Times to "do the right thing."
The methods used by Schwartz, The Interceptnoted earlier this month, were the building blocks for a story that "instantly served as a powerful reference in a mounting campaign waged by Israel and its supporters" to excuse Israel's assault on Gaza.
"The impact of The New York Times story is impossible to fathom," the professors wrote on Monday. "This is wartime and in the minds of many people, the Times' story fueled the fire at a pivotal moment when there might have been an opportunity to contain it before, as the International Court of Justice has ruled, the situation devolved into the 'plausible' realm of genocide. Considering these grave circumstances, we believe that the Times must waste no time in extending an invitation for an independent review."
The article, said one signatory, Sandy Tolan of the University of Southern California, was published "as the death toll mounted in Gaza, and criticism was beginning to focus more on Israel."
"Being cognizant of the potential damages of and consequences of the timing," Tolan told the Post, "given that it didn't appear to be as well-reported as it should have been, there's all the more reason why an external review is appropriate."
The signatories pointed out that there is significant precedent for newspapers conducting independent reviews of articles that have raised questions about bias and veracity.
"If an independent review finds that the Times did nothing gravely wrong, then it will be a win not just for the Times but for all journalism," the professors wrote. "In the worst case, if an investigation does find remarkable errors or negligence in the way the newsroom operated, nothing that the Times would do in response could ever reverse the damage done to Palestine and to Palestinians but the Times could still reverse some of the damage it has done to itself with its silence."
"Doing nothing, however," they added, "and allowing a cloud of doubt to hang over this historically consequential story will ensure that all the journalism that The New York Times produces in the course of this conflict will remain under a dark shadow."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Seven 'Incredible' Earth Defenders Honored With Goldman Environmental Prize
One winner said the award "signifies an international recognition that we are facing a new stage in humanity," one in which "human beings understand they are part of nature."
Apr 29, 2024
Activists who blocked fossil fuel development, protected vulnerable ecosystems, and helped enact clean air regulations are among the seven winners of this year's prestigious Goldman Environmental Prize.
The San Francisco-based Goldman Environmental Foundation announced Monday that the winners of the 35th annual Goldman Prize—which some call the "Green Nobels"—are:
- Marcel Gomes, Brazil: Gomes, a journalist , worked with colleagues at Repórter Brasil to coordinate "a complex, international campaign that directly linked beef from JBS, the world's largest meatpacking company, to illegal deforestation in Brazil's most threatened ecosystems."
- Murrawah Maroochy Johnson, Australia: Maroochy Johnson, a Wirdi woman from the Birri Gubba Nation, "blocked development of the Waratah coal mine," a "carbon bomb" that "would have accelerated climate change in Queensland, destroyed the nearly 20,000-acre Bimblebox Nature Refuge, added 1.58 billion tons of CO2 to the atmosphere over its lifetime, and threatened Indigenous rights and culture."
- Alok Shukla, India: Shukla "led a successful community campaign that saved 445,000 acres of biodiversity-rich forests from 21 planned coal mines in the central Indian state of Chhattisgarh."
- Andrea Vidaurre, United States: Vidaurre's "grassroots leadership persuaded the California Air Resources Board to adopt, in the spring of 2023, two historic transportation regulations that significantly limit trucking and rail emissions."
- Sinegugu Zukulu and Nonhle Mbuthuma, South Africa: Zukulu and Mbuthuma "stopped destructive seismic testing for oil and gas off South Africa's Eastern Cape" by "asserting the rights of the local community to protect their marine environment," safeguarding "migratory whales, dolphins, and other wildlife from the harmful effects of seismic testing."
- Teresa Vicente, Spain: Vicente "led a historic, grassroots campaign to save the Mar Menor ecosystem—Europe's largest saltwater lagoon—from collapse, resulting in the passage of a new law in September 2022 granting the lagoon unique legal rights."
Michael Sutton, executive director of the Goldman Environmental Foundation,
described the winners to The Associated Press as "an incredible group of individuals laboring, sometimes in obscurity, against overwhelming odds to prevail against governments, against industry."
Goldman Prize winners receive a $200,000 award and can apply for additional grants to fund their work.
Reacting to his win, Gomes said: "This award recognizes the impact that journalism can have to protect the environment and ultimately improve people's lives.Repórter Brasil was able to track the Brazilian meat chain from the farm to supermarkets abroad, which companies said was not possible to do."
Vicente told the AP that the prize "signifies an international recognition that we are facing a new stage in humanity," one in which "human beings understand they are part of nature."
Shukla toldThe New York Times that he hopes his award will inspire frontline communities around the world.
"There is a way," he said, "that local communities can actually resist even the most powerful corporations using just their resolve and peaceful, democratic means."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular