Will ‘Astroturf’ Groups Block Net Neutrality Reform?

• subscribe to print magazine

• stay in touch with our email newsletter

  Subscribe to our regular weekly e-mail newsletter. It's packed with updates on recent and upcoming stories, events, campaigns and things every progressive should be informed about.

   

• email this article to a friend

  Your Name Your Email Recipient Email

  Personal message Thought you might be interested in this article from In These Times.

   

  Please help us prevent spam by verifying the word you see in the image above

  Send to multiple recipients. Just separate each email address with a comma.

• Reader Comments (1)

  Page 1 of 1 pages

  It’s ironic that Megan Tady should grouse about “astroturf” groups, when in fact she works for one herself. “Free Press,” a DC lobbying group, carries water for Google—a large, monopolistic corporation—and is lobbying to have the Internet regulated in ways that would benefit Google and prevent new companies from being able to compete with it.

  The so-called “Internet Freedom Preservation Act” would do just this. In particular, the bill would prevent a newcomer from buying services that would accelerate delivery of its content to consumers. It thus would prevent newcomers from being able to deliver their data as speedily as Google, which is already big enough to have placed its servers in the network centers of large ISPs.

  Ms. Tady’s group has packed hearing rooms where issues on which it was lobbying—e.g. regulation of the Internet—were being discussed. (In one case—a hearing at Stanford University—it bused homeless people in from San Francisco and gave them remarks with which to harangue the Commissioners. That’s astroturfing!) And Free Press has “spammed” the FCC public comment system with thousands of identical letters claiming to be from concerned citizens. Worst of all, it has lied to the public about its intentions and motivations.

  Don’t believe the lobbyists who claim, without any substantiation at all, that ISPs such as AT&T and Time-Warner are interested in becoming “gatekeepers.” They’ve never done so, and have no interest in doing so because their subscribers would leave for other providers. The purpose of the scare stories is to invent bogeymen as an excuse to regulate the Net—which has flourished without regulation and in fact owes its existence to a lack of regulation.

  And be especially suspicious of inside-the-Beltway, lawyer-run, unaccountable Washington DC groups like Ms. Tady’s. Free Press refuses to reveal its funding sources (What does it have to hide?), maintains a “shadow organization” with an interlocking directorate as a tax dodge so that it can lobby Congress in ways that harm consumers, and operates under multiple different names, including “Save the Internet.” They’ve got a lot of ‘splainin’ to do before they accuse anyone else of being an astroturf group.

  Posted by cyberella2002 on Sep 13, 2009 at 5:07 PM

  Page 1 of 1 pages

• register a new account »Posting Security

  To participate in our forums, please register for a free account.

  Username Password

    Remember me
  

  Retreive lost password »

Also by Megan Tady

• Consolidation Station: News ‘Sharing’ Erodes Journalism
  
• Drowning Out the Noise Machine
  
• Will ‘Astroturf’ Groups Block Net Neutrality Reform?
  
• Mr. President, Help Save the News
  
• The Stupidity of ‘Smart’ Phones
  
• Capitol Improvement
  If nonprofits are supposed to save journalism, why aren't their reporters allowed into congressional press galleries?