SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Sanders Wins Big Among Tech Activists, while Trump Threatens to Take the Internet Away
Sanders is this election's best advocate for internet freedom and access while Trump presents the largest threat, a tech policy advocacy group finds
Mar 14, 2016
Bernie Sanders is far and away the best presidential candidate for those who care about internet freedom and access, the tech policy advocacy group Free Press Action Fund has found.
The Republican contenders generally disdain internet freedom, the group discovered, and Donald Trump in particular presents the most dire threat to a free and accessible internet this election cycle.
"It is absolutely essential that the Internet remain open and free of censorship or the chilling effects that result in self-censorship," Sanders said as he argued against the Protect IP Act (PIPA), a bill which would have "blacked out parts of the internet," Free Press Action Fund noted in its "internet voter" guide to the candidates' positions.
In the group's comparison of the 2016 candidates' platforms, Sanders comes out ahead of all others when it comes to issues that internet activists prioritize: protecting free expression online, fighting for affordable broadband access, working against cable monopolies, supporting local broadband companies, battling against mass surveillance, and supporting net neutrality.
The only category in which Sanders scored less than a top score was encryption. In February, the Vermont senator argued that "a middle ground can be reached" in the FBI's fight to force Apple to break into one of the suspected San Bernardino shooters' iPhones. No candidate received a top rating in this category.
Where Sanders scored well, Trump scored abysmally. Trump believes, for example, that "the government needs to shut down the internet to keep America safe," while simultaneously claiming that "the FCC's Net Neutrality protections are an 'attack on the internet' that would 'target conservative media,'" giving him poor scores in the categories of internet freedom and net neutrality.
"We've been scouring the transcripts of the debates produced by the networks that host them," Tim Karr, senior director of strategy for Free Press Action Fund, explained to the Guardian. "We've gone through the candidates' websites to see if there's anything that relates to the issues in their campaign platforms, and we've been bird-dogging."
"Indeed, the group's staffers have been attending stump speeches, rallies and other public events to ask the specific policy questions that, across the board, the candidates don't seem prepared to answer," the Guardian noted.
In general, the most difficult aspect of the analysis was confronting the candidates' ignorance of key tech policy issues. The newspaper reported:
Simple ignorance is a problem that crosses party lines, said Karr, and it's an acute one in a country where net neutrality and anti-surveillance activism have crossed those lines as well. "We think that there's a constituency out there, what we call the internet voter, that has already demonstrated his or her passion on this issue," Karr said.
"More than 10 million people got involved protesting the PIPA [the Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act] and SOPA [the Stop Online Piracy Act] legislation," he said.
"The candidates by and large haven't caught up with this new constituency."
The Republicans, in particular, are "out of step" with their voting base, according to Karr, who told the newspaper that the issue of net neutrality is one with bipartisan support. Polls even show that a majority of Republican voters support it, Karr said to the Guardian, and yet nearly every Republican candidate has taken a stand against net neutrality on the campaign trail (John Kasich's position on the issue is unknown).
"There's a difference between what these politicians are saying and what their voting base believes," Karr lamented to the Guardian.
Clinton and Sanders are the only presidential candidates who have argued in favor of net neutrality to date.
Overall, the Republican candidates scored very badly--but they also couldn't be ranked in some areas, such as the issues of "industry consolidation" and "local competition," suggesting that the Democratic candidates have been pushed to take positions on issues that the Republicans have thus far been able to continue to ignore.
Raising the alarm about the ignorance of most of the 2016 candidates, Free Press Action Fund argues that its concerns are extremely urgent. The group writes, "No other communications medium in history has had such vast potential to help drive social change and improve the lives of so many so quickly. And yet the Internet's benefits have not been evenly distributed. We need to ensure that the Internet serves the public--and doesn't harm communities by furthering inequality or discrimination."
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Bernie Sanders is far and away the best presidential candidate for those who care about internet freedom and access, the tech policy advocacy group Free Press Action Fund has found.
The Republican contenders generally disdain internet freedom, the group discovered, and Donald Trump in particular presents the most dire threat to a free and accessible internet this election cycle.
"It is absolutely essential that the Internet remain open and free of censorship or the chilling effects that result in self-censorship," Sanders said as he argued against the Protect IP Act (PIPA), a bill which would have "blacked out parts of the internet," Free Press Action Fund noted in its "internet voter" guide to the candidates' positions.
In the group's comparison of the 2016 candidates' platforms, Sanders comes out ahead of all others when it comes to issues that internet activists prioritize: protecting free expression online, fighting for affordable broadband access, working against cable monopolies, supporting local broadband companies, battling against mass surveillance, and supporting net neutrality.
The only category in which Sanders scored less than a top score was encryption. In February, the Vermont senator argued that "a middle ground can be reached" in the FBI's fight to force Apple to break into one of the suspected San Bernardino shooters' iPhones. No candidate received a top rating in this category.
Where Sanders scored well, Trump scored abysmally. Trump believes, for example, that "the government needs to shut down the internet to keep America safe," while simultaneously claiming that "the FCC's Net Neutrality protections are an 'attack on the internet' that would 'target conservative media,'" giving him poor scores in the categories of internet freedom and net neutrality.
"We've been scouring the transcripts of the debates produced by the networks that host them," Tim Karr, senior director of strategy for Free Press Action Fund, explained to the Guardian. "We've gone through the candidates' websites to see if there's anything that relates to the issues in their campaign platforms, and we've been bird-dogging."
"Indeed, the group's staffers have been attending stump speeches, rallies and other public events to ask the specific policy questions that, across the board, the candidates don't seem prepared to answer," the Guardian noted.
In general, the most difficult aspect of the analysis was confronting the candidates' ignorance of key tech policy issues. The newspaper reported:
Simple ignorance is a problem that crosses party lines, said Karr, and it's an acute one in a country where net neutrality and anti-surveillance activism have crossed those lines as well. "We think that there's a constituency out there, what we call the internet voter, that has already demonstrated his or her passion on this issue," Karr said.
"More than 10 million people got involved protesting the PIPA [the Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act] and SOPA [the Stop Online Piracy Act] legislation," he said.
"The candidates by and large haven't caught up with this new constituency."
The Republicans, in particular, are "out of step" with their voting base, according to Karr, who told the newspaper that the issue of net neutrality is one with bipartisan support. Polls even show that a majority of Republican voters support it, Karr said to the Guardian, and yet nearly every Republican candidate has taken a stand against net neutrality on the campaign trail (John Kasich's position on the issue is unknown).
"There's a difference between what these politicians are saying and what their voting base believes," Karr lamented to the Guardian.
Clinton and Sanders are the only presidential candidates who have argued in favor of net neutrality to date.
Overall, the Republican candidates scored very badly--but they also couldn't be ranked in some areas, such as the issues of "industry consolidation" and "local competition," suggesting that the Democratic candidates have been pushed to take positions on issues that the Republicans have thus far been able to continue to ignore.
Raising the alarm about the ignorance of most of the 2016 candidates, Free Press Action Fund argues that its concerns are extremely urgent. The group writes, "No other communications medium in history has had such vast potential to help drive social change and improve the lives of so many so quickly. And yet the Internet's benefits have not been evenly distributed. We need to ensure that the Internet serves the public--and doesn't harm communities by furthering inequality or discrimination."
Bernie Sanders is far and away the best presidential candidate for those who care about internet freedom and access, the tech policy advocacy group Free Press Action Fund has found.
The Republican contenders generally disdain internet freedom, the group discovered, and Donald Trump in particular presents the most dire threat to a free and accessible internet this election cycle.
"It is absolutely essential that the Internet remain open and free of censorship or the chilling effects that result in self-censorship," Sanders said as he argued against the Protect IP Act (PIPA), a bill which would have "blacked out parts of the internet," Free Press Action Fund noted in its "internet voter" guide to the candidates' positions.
In the group's comparison of the 2016 candidates' platforms, Sanders comes out ahead of all others when it comes to issues that internet activists prioritize: protecting free expression online, fighting for affordable broadband access, working against cable monopolies, supporting local broadband companies, battling against mass surveillance, and supporting net neutrality.
The only category in which Sanders scored less than a top score was encryption. In February, the Vermont senator argued that "a middle ground can be reached" in the FBI's fight to force Apple to break into one of the suspected San Bernardino shooters' iPhones. No candidate received a top rating in this category.
Where Sanders scored well, Trump scored abysmally. Trump believes, for example, that "the government needs to shut down the internet to keep America safe," while simultaneously claiming that "the FCC's Net Neutrality protections are an 'attack on the internet' that would 'target conservative media,'" giving him poor scores in the categories of internet freedom and net neutrality.
"We've been scouring the transcripts of the debates produced by the networks that host them," Tim Karr, senior director of strategy for Free Press Action Fund, explained to the Guardian. "We've gone through the candidates' websites to see if there's anything that relates to the issues in their campaign platforms, and we've been bird-dogging."
"Indeed, the group's staffers have been attending stump speeches, rallies and other public events to ask the specific policy questions that, across the board, the candidates don't seem prepared to answer," the Guardian noted.
In general, the most difficult aspect of the analysis was confronting the candidates' ignorance of key tech policy issues. The newspaper reported:
Simple ignorance is a problem that crosses party lines, said Karr, and it's an acute one in a country where net neutrality and anti-surveillance activism have crossed those lines as well. "We think that there's a constituency out there, what we call the internet voter, that has already demonstrated his or her passion on this issue," Karr said.
"More than 10 million people got involved protesting the PIPA [the Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act] and SOPA [the Stop Online Piracy Act] legislation," he said.
"The candidates by and large haven't caught up with this new constituency."
The Republicans, in particular, are "out of step" with their voting base, according to Karr, who told the newspaper that the issue of net neutrality is one with bipartisan support. Polls even show that a majority of Republican voters support it, Karr said to the Guardian, and yet nearly every Republican candidate has taken a stand against net neutrality on the campaign trail (John Kasich's position on the issue is unknown).
"There's a difference between what these politicians are saying and what their voting base believes," Karr lamented to the Guardian.
Clinton and Sanders are the only presidential candidates who have argued in favor of net neutrality to date.
Overall, the Republican candidates scored very badly--but they also couldn't be ranked in some areas, such as the issues of "industry consolidation" and "local competition," suggesting that the Democratic candidates have been pushed to take positions on issues that the Republicans have thus far been able to continue to ignore.
Raising the alarm about the ignorance of most of the 2016 candidates, Free Press Action Fund argues that its concerns are extremely urgent. The group writes, "No other communications medium in history has had such vast potential to help drive social change and improve the lives of so many so quickly. And yet the Internet's benefits have not been evenly distributed. We need to ensure that the Internet serves the public--and doesn't harm communities by furthering inequality or discrimination."
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.