Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Free Press balks as FCC leans toward keeping broadband framework

A greater possibility that the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission will keep the current regulatory framework for broadband in place has drawn criticism from the public interest group Free Press.

A story in today's paper outlines where FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski appeared to stand as of late last week. He has not made a final decision, and circumstances could change.

But Free Press's executive director, Josh Silver, warned that by not reclassifying broadband as a common carrier service, the FCC won't be able to carry out its net neutrality policy that Genachowski first introduced last fall. The FCC, despite any legal maneuvering, would have a tough time carrying out key portions of its national broadband plan too, the group said.

“We simply cannot believe that Julius Genachowski would consider going down this path. Failing to reclassify broadband means the FCC is abandoning the signature communications and technology issues of the Obama administration. Such a decision would destroy Net Neutrality," Silver said in a statement. "It would deeply undermine the FCC’s ability to ensure universal Internet access for rural, low-income and disabled Americans. It will undermine the FCC’s ability to protect consumers from price-gouging and invasions of privacy."

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

By Cecilia Kang  |  May 3, 2010; 10:36 AM ET
Categories:  Broadband , FCC , Net Neutrality  | Tags: Common carrier, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski, Federal Communications Commission, Free Press, Internet access, Julius Genachowski, Network neutrality, United States  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: FCC chair prefers to keep framework for broadband unchanged: sources
Next: FCC reclassification would face political, legal opposition, analysts say

Comments

In this article, Cecilia Kang -- who is, apparently, Google's wholly owned reporter at the Post -- publicizes the corporate lobbying message of Google lobbying group Free Press, and does so without critical analysis or counterpoint. In short, she's essentially giving them free ink. And she's failing to report the other side of the argument, which is stronger. See, for example, the compelling counterargument filed by AT&T at

http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view.action?id=7020443237

I shouldn't have to be including this link in the comments. If Cecilia were doing unbiased reporting, she would have mentioned it in the story. But apparently, she is completely committed to lobbying -- in print and online -- for the corporate agenda of Google, which contributes to her paycheck by placing ads in her blog.

Posted by: LBrettGlass | May 3, 2010 1:37 PM | Report abuse

@LBrettGlass - Agreed. Who cares about Free Press. They are just one of many groups interested in the issue. Not sure why they deserve their own item in the Post.

Posted by: ghokee | May 4, 2010 9:52 AM | Report abuse

welcome to :===== http://www.smalltrade.net ====

Air jordan(1-24)shoes $33

Handbags(Coach l v f e n d i d&g) $35

Tshirts (ed hardy,lacoste) $16

Jean(True Religion,ed hardy,coogi) $30

Sunglasses(Oakey,coach,gucci,A r m a i n i) $16

New era cap $15

Bikini (Ed hardy,) $25

FREE sHIPPING

====== http://www.smalltrade.net ====

Posted by: itkonlyyou38 | May 4, 2010 9:59 AM | Report abuse

welcome to :===== http://www.smalltrade.net ====

Air jordan(1-24)shoes $33

Handbags(Coach l v f e n d i d&g) $35

Tshirts (ed hardy,lacoste) $16

Jean(True Religion,ed hardy,coogi) $30

Sunglasses(Oakey,coach,gucci,A r m a i n i) $16

New era cap $15

Bikini (Ed hardy,) $25

FREE sHIPPING

====== http://www.smalltrade.net ====

Posted by: itkonlyyou38 | May 4, 2010 10:00 AM | Report abuse

"It would deeply undermine the FCC’s ability to ensure universal Internet access for rural, low-income and disabled Americans. It will undermine the FCC’s ability to protect consumers from price-gouging and invasions of privacy."

Fearmonger much?

Posted by: millionea81 | May 4, 2010 10:42 AM | Report abuse

Net neutrality means not having pay per view on the internet. Once that takes hold you are that much closer to making it cable TV. Do you really want that?

Posted by: atroncale1 | May 4, 2010 11:29 AM | Report abuse

If he does not make a change then we all will have fewer and fewer choices on who provides our Internet connections. Even Mr Glass may find down the road as the telcos get greedier that his ISP is no longer able to provide connectivity, when they decide they want his customers also, and no longer need his services. Right now I pay comcast for a 6 meg line and there are many times that my connection is less than 500k. You call them and they seam to care less. Might it be because in our area they are one of two residential providers the other being at&t, who only offers low end DSL.
We need more competition to bring the quality up and the pricing down.

Posted by: rfceo | May 4, 2010 12:25 PM | Report abuse

We have let the companies have their way too long. I still cannot get broadband where I live. We need rules that everyone can have access if companies want to provide services to the more profitable areas. Also we need net neutrality to keep these corporate masters from limiting our choices to what they think is profitable.

Posted by: waawaazaire | May 5, 2010 3:42 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company