General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsVerizon wins, net neutrality loses, as court ruling opens door to a tiered Internet
It's been just another fabulous day for the Corporcracy!
Telecom companies won a victory in the battle over "net neutrality" today after a U.S. appeals court invalidated regulations from the FCC that banned carriers from favoring traffic from certain sources.
Those FCC rules were meant to force broadband providers to treat all Internet traffic equally essentially making it impossible for them to charge companies for a faster route into people's homes.
The FCC's "Open Internet Order" has long been supported by President Barack Obama, who, according to a 2010 White House statement, was "strongly committed to net neutrality in order to keep an open Internet that fosters investment, innovation, consumer choice, and free speech."
Now, the door is open for companies like AT&T, Verizon, Sprint and T-Mobile to create a tiered Internet, where those who can pay the most can utilize the fastest connections, while others are stuck transmitting information at slower speeds. A ban on completely blocking certain Internet traffic sources was also overturned.
<snip>
http://www.nbcnews.com/technology/verizon-wins-net-neutrality-loses-court-ruling-opens-door-tiered-2D11922702
upaloopa
(11,417 posts)so I can dump Verizon?
Earth_First
(14,910 posts)jeff47
(26,549 posts)ISPs are natural monopolies. If one in another state respects net neutrality, that really doesn't help you.
In my previous house, there was 1 high-speed ISP. In my current house, there are a whopping 2 high-speed ISPs. Living in a place served by an ISP that "respects net neutrality" is exceptionally unlikely.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)Shandris
(3,447 posts)...whatever is best for a few shareholders in a huge conglomerate!
Bastards, the lot of them.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)The last 30 years have been a continual slide to the Rich/Corporate Power conservative RIGHT.
When will the Working Class and Consumers get to WIN one?
d_b
(7,463 posts)ohheckyeah
(9,314 posts)that is a rhetorical question.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Get an organization going. Donate sacrificially. Work hard.
We do it for politicians. Maybe we should start doing it for ourselves.
Or maybe we should try to unite behind an existing organization, like Occupy.
The worst things I saw and still see about Occupy come from the left.
Unless and until we unite and show up in a big way, no one has any incentive to let us win.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)Some of us have been in the trenches working hard for over 40 years.
Where have YOU been?
We've been waiting for YOU to show up and help us.
and it wasn't very pretty.
[font size=3]We did EVERYTHING right in Arkansas in 2010.
We did EXACTLY what the White House asked us to do to "give the President Progressives in Congress that would work with him."[/font]
We organized and supported Lt Governor Bill Halter, the Pro-LABOR/ Pro-Health Care challenger to DINO Obstructionist Blanche Lincoln.
Halter was:
* Polling BETTER against the Republicans in the General,
*was popular in Arkansas in his OWN right,
*had an Up & Running Political machine,
* had a track record of winning elections (Lt. Governor)
*Had the full backing of Organized LABOR and The Grass Roots activists
*was handing Blanche her Anti-LABOR ass in The Primary until the White House stepped in
Guess what happened.
Our BIGGEST enemy to bringing "change" to The Senate was NOT The "Obstructionist" Republicans.
NO!
Our BIGGEST obstruction to bringing "change" to The Senate was The Obama White House!
The White House stepped in at the last minute to save Blanche's failing primary campaign with an Oval Office Endorsement of The Witch that Wrecked the Obama Agenda,
and Bill Clinton was dispatched on a Campaign Tour for Blanche around the state bashing Organized LABOR and "Liberals" at every opportunity.
White House steps in to rescue Lincolns Primary Campaign in Arkansas
* Bill Clinton traveled to Arkansas to urge loyal Democrats to vote for her, bashing liberal groups for good measure.
*Obama recorded an ad for Lincoln which, among other things, were used to tell African-American primary voters that they should vote for her because she works for their interests.
*The entire Party infrastructure lent its support and resources to Lincoln a Senator who supposedly prevents Democrats from doing all sorts of Wonderful, Progressive Things which they so wish they could do but just dont have the votes for.
<snip>
What happened in this race also gives the lie to the insufferable excuse weve been hearing for the last 18 months from countless Obama defenders: namely, if the Senate doesnt have 60 votes to pass good legislation, its not Obamas fault because he has no leverage over these conservative Senators. It was always obvious what an absurd joke that claim was; the very idea of The Impotent, Helpless President, presiding over a vast government and party apparatus, was laughable. But now, in light of Arkansas, nobody should ever be willing to utter that again with a straight face.
Back when Lincoln was threatening to filibuster health care if it included a public option, the White House could obviously have said to her: if you dont support a public option, not only will we not support your re-election bid, but well support a primary challenger against you. Obamas support for Lincoln did not merely help; it was arguably decisive, as The Washington Post documented today:"
<much more>
http://www.salon.com/2010/06/10/lincoln_6/
When the supporters of Pro-LABOR Lt Gov Bill Halter asked the White House WHY they had chosen to throw their full support behind Lincoln at the last minute, rescuing her failing campaign, the answer was ridicule and insults to Organized LABOR and the Grass Roots.
Ed Schultz sums up my feeling perfectly in the following clip.
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/ed-schultz-if-it-wasnt-labor-barack-obama-
After the Arkansas Democratic Primary, many Grass Roots Activists working for a better government concluded that the current Democratic Party Leadership preferred to GIVE this Senate Seat to a Big Business Republican rather than taking the risk that a Pro-LABOR Democrat might win it.
This was greatly reinforced by the Insults & Ridicule to LABOR from the White House after their Primary "victory" over Organized LABOR & the Grass Roots in the Arkansas Democratic Primary.
Of course, EVERYBODY predicted, Lincoln lost badly in the General Election, giving that Senate Seat to The Republicans.
So what did the White House gain by Stomping Down Labor and the Grass Roots?
We don't know.
The White House has never responded to our questions with an explanation, only insults and more ridicule.
Please give me some details about your claim.
You said, "The worst things I saw and still see about Occupy come from the left."
I haven't heard ANYONE from "The Left" say a single bad thing about Occupy.
I HAVE seen some "bad things" said about OWS from conservatives at DU masquerading as Liberals,
but they are easy to spot.
So please enlighten me with these "worst things" about OWS from "The Left".
[font size=3]Solidarity-OWS![/font]
merrily
(45,251 posts)It's funny that you mention Halter because I donated to Halter through Move On, even though I live in the Northeast.
I also donated to Al Franken from out of state when he was in the recount process because I thought he would be a liberal, though I did not donate to his re-election. It was under $100 in both cases, but the volunteer working for Franken was so thrilled that I was calling from the East Coast that he made me feel like a millionaire.
Of course, I have worked in my own state and supported candidates in my own state financially.
Think I'll leave it at that.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)Ya THINK?
Maybe you should stick to what YOU are doing, and how YOU can do more,
and stop lecturing everybody else about what they should be doing.
BTW: You never answered my question:
What were "The worst things I saw and still see about Occupy come from the left. "
What "Left" are you talking about?
Not everybody at DU considers themselves "The Left".
We have conservatives here who specialize in attacking and ridiculing loyal Democrats, OWS, and "The Left".
merrily
(45,251 posts)from both of us. I usually enjoy your posts very much. Let's leave it there for now.
snooper2
(30,151 posts)Any packet coming into our network (over public internet) COS will not be honored and set back to best effort...
You can control COS on the edge but I wonder what folks like Verizon are thinking about doing with peering agreements. Have to talk to some folks who have thought longer on this than I have-
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)The internet is our last hope.
merrily
(45,251 posts)If people who use any internet account only for personal purposes (as opposed to using your employer's account or using your own account to earn a living) would get together and cancel, I think that would be enough to get providers to respond. Or, am I being naive about that?
jsr
(7,712 posts)online and offline. It's now the law of the land.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Look at corporate-controlled television, which is a sea of malignant corporate propaganda and mind-numbing filler. This is the first step for corporate power to control the information we can access and with whom and how we can communicate.
We have corporate fascists in control of our lives now, and they have now been given the tools to seize greater control over our ability to inform ourselves and communicate with one another.
This is a horrible day for America.
jsr
(7,712 posts)BadgerKid
(4,552 posts)TPTB will have to reach some price point to maximize viewership/profit.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Look at corporate-controlled cable TV. What they will choose to make affordable will be a sinkhole of corporate propaganda and idiocracy. The point is that "access" no longer guarantees access to everything, but can be tiered, manipulated, and limited through both cost and how the delivery is structured. It is about having the power to control and manipulate what people will be able to see and how they will be able to use the internet to communicate.
merrily
(45,251 posts)As I understand it, the decision rested on the actions of the agency, the way that the agency classified internet providers. Regulations have to go through a process. I don't know if the same is true of a re-classification, but I would imagine it is. If so, it cannot be done overnight, but it can be done.
Congress can definitely fix it. It's only a Constitutional decision of the SCOTUS that Congress cannot fix.
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)lpbk2713
(42,757 posts)But they'll make all that back in no time now.
Kingofalldems
(38,454 posts)Brigid
(17,621 posts)Or even know about it.
mikeysnot
(4,756 posts)explaining the repercussions of this to folks....
BelgianMadCow
(5,379 posts)L0oniX
(31,493 posts)LiberalLovinLug
(14,173 posts)along with Huffington Post, and any other more liberal website.
We will suffer through it, and have patience to wait for the pages to load, but many more uniformed newer users will naturally gravitate to places like Yahoo news or the major networks and Fox to get their news. Fox will be loading faster than lightning.
They are playing the long game. But in the end they will win, if Democrats fall in line with Republicans and refuse to stand up to their corporate donors.
Dopers_Greed
(2,640 posts)Haven't had this bad of a day over a court ruling since Citizen's United.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Citizens was a constitutional decision by the SCOTUS. That means that only the SCOTUS itself or a constitutional amendment can reverse Citizens. No constitutional amendment that was even mildly controversial has passed since Eisenhower was President.
This is a regulatory decision. The FCC should be able to fix it and, if not the FCC, Congress.
Question is, will they?
yuiyoshida
(41,831 posts)I can not imagine not being able to access DU. In china, certain websites like Youtube are blocked. Is that not too far off for us as well?
Seedersandleechers
(3,044 posts)Your provider is? I just switched from AT&T to Google.
progrocktv
(38 posts)...former FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski. He had his chance to re-classify the net as a "common carrier" but blew it. I remember the day he explained in his best "Shirley Temple" voice "We're not going to re-classify it because all of those nice ISPs like Verizon promised they won't do something mean like take us to court" Well look where we are a year later, Verizon sues the FCC, Genachowski moves into his nice new office at his new multi-million job at the Carlyle Group which new FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler gets handed a loosing case getting the "Well good luck with all that!" The ball is in the FCC's court now. This is when the truth of who they REALLY are will come out. They'll either finally grow a pair and actually fight this, or shrug their shoulders, keep their hands in their pockets and give us the "Aw shucks! It's fine the way it is. Either way we'll see!
merrily
(45,251 posts)I was not happy about him.
As his tenure as chair was ending, he claimed in an interview that broadband was the most significant thing of his term. And he has been interviewed on the importance of net neutrality a number of times.
There is really no excuse for this.
jsr
(7,712 posts)I'm afraid nothing will change, either.
PasadenaTrudy
(3,998 posts)this would apply to TWC too? We have them and Earthlink still as our provider. Verizon for our iPhones....