November, 20 2009, 10:12am EDT
Free Press Urges New York City Council to Support Open Internet
NEW YORK
Testifying before the New York City Council today, Free Press
delivered signatures from more than 4,000 New Yorkers calling for
strong open Internet rules. The City Council is considering a
resolution (712A-2007) urging the federal government to protect Net
Neutrality.
"We are greatly encouraged that the New York City Council is taking
the lead on the vital issue of Net Neutrality and believe this
resolution will send a strong message to Washington and serve as a
model for other cities across the country," said Timothy Karr,
campaign director of Free Press, who testified at the hearing. "The
right policies will continue to advance the most democratic
communications technology ever devised. The wrong policies will
jeopardize this openness and hasten the global decline of U.S.
broadband services. We need to pass the right policies right now."
Thousands of Free Press activists also sent letters this week to
members of New York's congressional delegation, urging them to
co-sponsor the Internet Freedom Preservation Act (H.R. 3458) and
support the work of the Federal Communications Commission to institute
rules that would protect the open Internet.
Full Text of Karr's Comments:
Free Press is grateful for the opportunity to testify before the New
York City Council today. As public advocates, Free Press strongly
supports policies to protect an open Internet. We are greatly
encouraged that the Council is taking the lead on the vital issue of
Net Neutrality and are supporting efforts in other cities to follow
your example.
On Tuesday afternoon we asked Free Press members from New York City
to send a note to Congress about the City Council's efforts. In little
more than 48 hours, more than 4,200 New Yorkers put their names on a
letter that "applauds the City Council for considering this resolution"
and calls on Congress to stand behind a strong FCC ruling. I am
delivering a copy of their signatures to the Council with my testimony.
The FCC is weighing a Net Neutrality rule that will determine
whether the Internet will remain a tremendous engine for free speech,
innovation and equal opportunity. There is a great deal of passion
surrounding this issue as much is at stake for the tens of millions of
Americans who rely upon the Internet every day.
Despite the debate, I don't believe anyone on today's panels or in this room would dispute these two notions:
First, over the past 40 years, the Internet has emerged as an unprecedented tool for:
- spreading innovative ideas,
- increasing public participation in our democracy, and
- fostering economic opportunity, even in the most overlooked communities.
Second, I don't believe that we would disagree that we need sound
public policies to encourage faster, more open and affordable Internet
access for everyone in the country.
The right policies will continue to advance the most democratic
communications technology ever devised. The wrong policies will
jeopardize this openness and hasten the global decline of U.S.
broadband services.
We need to pass the right policies right now.
A lot has changed since I testified before you on Net Neutrality in 2007:
- We have a new President who has repeatedly pledged "to take a back seat to no one in [his] commitment to Net Neutrality;"
- President Obama appointed the principle architect of his Net Neutrality agenda, Julius Genachowski, to head the FCC;
- House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Commerce Committee Chair Henry
Waxman have become outspoken supporters of the FCC's efforts to pass a
strong Net Neutrality rule. - And, perhaps most importantly, more than 1.6 million people
across the country have contacted their elected representatives urging
them to support Net Neutrality.
Unfortunately, though, a lot has stayed the same, too:
In the first three quarters of 2009, AT&T, Comcast, Verizon, and
their trade groups spent nearly $75 million and hired more than 500
lobbyists to discredit an open Internet.
And that's just the money we know about. They have also funneled
untold sums to phony front groups, think tanks and populist-sounding PR
campaigns. As we've seen with the health care and global warming
debates, any effort at reform will come under a relentless assault from
deep-pocketed institutions that prefer the status quo.
The money against Net Neutrality is being spent to lock in incumbent
control in America. The present phone and cable duopoly provides 97
percent of fixed broadband connections into American homes. More and
more users are staring to use these connections to create and share
media, and in response these companies have moved rapidly to
reverse-engineer the openness that's the hallmark of the Internet.
The Internet's True Marketplace of Ideas
The history, however, is clear. The Internet was born in a
regulatory climate that guaranteed strict nondiscrimination. Internet
pioneers like Vinton Cerf and Sir Tim Berners-Lee always intended the
Internet to be an open and neutral network. And nondiscrimination
provisions have governed the nation's communications networks since the
1930s.
Originally the Internet's physical wires were regulated separately
from the content flowing over them. The reason for this was simple: to
keep monopoly owners of infrastructure from using their power to
distort the Web's free market.
This "common carriage" protection worked brilliantly. For two
decades, the Internet thrived with low barriers to entry, equal
opportunity and consumer choice. Remove Net Neutrality, and this
marketplace tilts in favor of the network owners. And that's what is
happening.
After intense corporate lobbying, the FCC pulled the carpet from
beneath this marketplace of ideas, in 2005 removing the
nondiscrimination protections that guaranteed Net Neutrality.
Soon after, the top executives of phone and cable companies
announced their intention to change the Internet forever. In the pages
of the Washington Post, BusinessWeek, Wall Street Journal, they spoke
of plans to become the Internet's gatekeepers and begin discriminating
against content that doesn't generate extra income for them.
Internet Policy: Who Benefits?
Some will argue before you today that the Internet has prospered
free of regulation. This is a red herring. The Internet has always had
baseline consumer protections written into law.
The real question isn't: "Should we regulate the Internet?" Without
forward thinking broadband policies, America's economy will suffer. The
real question should be: "For whom do we create this policy?"
The phone and cable companies have held Washington's policymaking
process in their grip for far too long. But for all their talk about
"deregulation," the cable and telephone giants work aggressively to
force through regulations that:
- protect their market monopolies and duopolies,
stifle new entrants and competitive technologies in the marketplace, and - increase their control over the content that travels over the Web
It's now up to the FCC to pro-actively reinstate Net Neutrality.
Without this anti-discrimination rule, phone and cable companies will
have both the incentive and ability to shut the doors on our 40-year
experiment with open media.
We need to protect the open Internet as the essential infrastructure
of our time. It is the social tool with which we will build a more
prosperous, open and just nation. Free Press is encouraged by the
Council of the City of New York efforts to adopt Resolution No. 712. It
will have far reaching implications.
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
Amid Spying Fight, House Passes Fourth Amendment Is Not For Sale Act
"As FANFSA and the 702 reauthorization move to the Senate, lawmakers in that chamber need to take a stand for the rights of people in the United States," said one advocate.
Apr 17, 2024
While applauding the U.S. House of Representatives' bipartisan passage of a bill to ensure that "law enforcement and intelligence agencies can't do an end-run around the Constitution by buying information from data brokers" on Wednesday, privacy advocates highlighted that Congress is trying to extend and expand a long-abused government spying program.
The House voted 219-199 for Fourth Amendment Is Not For Sale Act (FANFSA), which won support from 96 Democrats and 123 Republicans, including the lead sponsor, Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio). Named for the constitutional amendment that protects against unreasonable searches and seizures, H.R. 4639 would close what campaigners call the data broker loophole.
"The privacy violations that flow from law enforcement entities circumventing the Fourth Amendment undermine civil liberties, free expression, and our ability to control what happens to our data," said Free Press Action policy counsel Jenna Ruddock. "These impacts affect everyone who uses digital platforms that extract our personal information any time we open a browser or visit social media and other websites—even when we go to events like demonstrations and other places with our phones revealing our locations."
"We're grateful that the House passed these vital and popular protections," she added. "The bill would prevent flagrant abuses of our privacy by government authorities in league with unscrupulous third-party data brokers. Making this legislation into law with Senate passage too would be a decisive and long-overdue action against government misuse of this clandestine business sector that traffics in our personal data for profit."
Wednesday's vote followed the House sending the Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act to the Senate. H.R. 7888 would reauthorize Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which allows for warrantless spying on noncitizens abroad but also sweeps up Americans' data.
The House notably included an amendment forcing a wide range of individuals and businesses to cooperate with government spying operations but rejected an amendment that would have added a warrant requirement to the bill, which the Senate could vote on as soon as Thursday.
Noting those decisions on the FISA reauthorization legislation, Ruddock stressed that "today's vote is a victory but follows a recent loss and ongoing threat as that Section 702 bill moves to the Senate this week too."
"As FANFSA and the 702 reauthorization move to the Senate, lawmakers in that chamber need to take a stand for the rights of people in the United States," she argued. "That means passing FANFSA and reforming Section 702 authority—and prioritizing everyone's First and Fourth Amendment rights."
Jeramie Scott, senior counsel and director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center's Project on Surveillance Oversight, also praised the House's FANFSA passage on Wednesday.
"The passage of the Fourth Amendment Is Not For Sale underscores the extent to which reining in abusive warrantless surveillance is a bipartisan issue," Scott said. "We urge the Senate to take up this measure and close the data broker loophole."
Kia Hamadanchy, senior policy counsel at ACLU, similarly said Wednesday that "the bipartisan passage of this bill is a flashing warning sign to the government that if it wants our data, it must get a warrant."
Hamadanchy added that "we hope this vote puts a fire under the Senate to protect their constituents and rein in the government's warrantless surveillance of Americans, once and for all."
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), a critic of the pending 702 bill and FANFSA's lead sponsor in the upper chamber, called the the House's Wednesday vote "a huge win for privacy" and said that "now it's time for the Senate to follow suit."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Leaked Cables Show Biden Pressuring Nations to Oppose Palestine's UN Membership
"This is the evidence that President Biden's talk about a two-state solution is nothing but idle talk," said one former Lebanese diplomat.
Apr 17, 2024
As the United Nations Security Council prepares to vote Thursday on Palestine's bid to become a full U.N. member, the Biden administration—which claims to support Palestinian statehood—is lobbying UNSC nations in an effort to wrangle enough "no" votes so that the United States can avoid resorting to a veto.
Leaked cables obtained by The Intercept show U.S. pressure on Security Council members including Malta—which currently presides over the body—and Ecuador.
While claiming that President Joe Biden backs "Palestinian aspirations for statehood," one of the cables asserts that "it remains the U.S. view that the most expeditious path toward a political horizon for the Palestinian people is in the context of a normalization agreement between Israel and its neighbors."
"We therefore urge you not to support any potential Security Council resolution recommending the admission of 'Palestine' as a U.N. member state, should such a resolution be presented to the Security Council for a decision in the coming days and weeks," the document advises.
The U.S. argument essentially is that the U.N. should not create an independent Palestinian state by fiat—even though that's precisely how the world body voted in 1947 to establish the modern state of Israel.
The renewed push for Palestine's U.N. membership comes as Israel wages a genocidal war on the Gaza Strip. The Palestinian Authority, which hasn't controlled Gaza for nearly two decades, rejected the Biden administration's requests to hold off on seeking full membership.
"We wanted the U.S. to provide a substantive alternative to U.N. recognition. They didn't," one unnamed Palestinian official toldAxios on Wednesday. "We believe full membership in the U.N. for Palestine is way overdue. We have waited more than 12 years since our initial request."
As The Intercept's Ken Klippenstein and Daniel Boguslaw noted:
Since 2011, the U.N. Security Council has rejected the Palestinian Authority's request for full member status. On April 2, the Palestinian Observer Mission to the U.N. requested that the council once again take up consideration of its membership application. According to the first State Department cable, U.N. meetings since the beginning of April suggest that Algeria, China, Guyana, Mozambique, Russia, Slovenia, Sierra Leone, and Malta support granting Palestine full membership to the U.N. It also says that France, Japan, and Korea are undecided, while the United Kingdom will likely abstain from a vote.
Along with the United States, China, France, Russia, and the United Kingdom are permanent members of the UNSC, so they also have veto power.
Ahead of Thursday's planned vote, Spain has been doing its own lobbying in Europe to build greater support for Palestinian statehood. At a joint Tuesday press conference with Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez, Slovenian Prime Minister Robert Golob said the question is "when, not if, but when is the best moment to recognize Palestine."
Belgium—which is seeking economic sanctions against Israel in response to its genocidal war on Gaza—is expected to join Spain's push for Palestinian statehood after the country's European Union presidency expires in June.
Currently, 139 of the U.N.'s 193 member states recognize Palestine as an independent state.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu—who has also claimed to support a so-called "two-state solution"—has alternately boasted about thwarting Palestinian statehood.
Critics pointed to the leaked cables as more proof of U.S. duplicity and double standards on the Israel-Palestine issue.
"This is the evidence that President Biden's talk about a two-state solution is nothing but idle talk," Massoud Maalouf, a former Lebanese ambassador to Canada, Chile, and Poland, said on social media.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Database Exposes 'Illicit Network Undermining Democracy Around the World'
Yanis Varoufakis hailed the effort as "a treasure chest of well-researched reports on how the reactionaries of the world unite."
Apr 17, 2024
"Coups. Assassinations. Riots. Detentions. Disinformation. We know the tactics that have been deployed to undermine our democracies. But who is behind them?"
Progressive International (PI) asks and answers this and other questions with an extensive new database published Wednesday that connects the dots in what the leftist group calls the "Reactionary International"—a loose global network of right-wing leaders and organizations working to subvert democratic institutions.
PI calls it an "illicit network undermining democracy around the world."
"Today is a mask-off moment for the Reactionary International and the parties, politicians, judges, journalists, foundations, think tanks, tech platforms, NGOs, activists, financiers, and entrepreneurs that comprise it," PI said.
"After a year of preparation, we finally open the doors to our new research consortium, exposing the global network of reactionary forces that corrode our democracies, destroy our planet, and drive us closer to world war," the group added.
"The twin insurrections at the U.S. Capitol in 2021 and BrasÃlia's Three Powers Plaza in 2023 left no doubt about the international coordination of reactionary forces," PI argued. "Yet far too little is known about the entities of this network, their sources of financing, and their institutional allies operating inside our political systems."
Ultimately, PI aims to "support democratic systems to become more resilient to their insidious tactics."
From leaders like Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, and former U.S. President Donald Trump—the presumptive 2024 Republican presidential nominee—to evangelical Christian groups influencing laws in African countries criminalizing LGBTQ+ people and tech companies empowering ubiquitous state surveillance, Reactionary International is a who's-who of the world's right-wing forces.
A cursory search of the database's contents shows users can:
- Learn about Israel's NSO, Rayzone, and Team Jorge, and how a team of Tel Aviv tech entrepreneurs fuel unrest in Latin America;
- Meet the Grey Wolves, Turkey's roving death squad with links to President Recep Tayyip ErdoÄŸan and the ethno-nationalists in his governing coalition; and
- Explore the global network of the Falun Gong, its Trump-connected media outlet The Epoch Times, and its traveling dance troupe known as Shen Yun.
Yanis Varoufakis, a PI member and secretary-general of the left-wing Democracy in Europe Movement 2025, called the database "a treasure chest of well-researched reports on how the reactionaries of the world unite."
PI invites the public to contribute to the database.
"Together, we will not only name, shame, and expose the forces of the far right—but also dismantle their network of complicity," the group said.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular