Sylvia Moore: On Tuesday, the Federal Communications Commission voted on new rules that critics say could allow media conglomerates to decide whose content gets to be seen on the Internet and whose doesn’t. FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski is said to have the votes he needs to pass net neutrality regulation.
Tina Dupuy: The concept of Net Neutrality is simple – all content should be treated equally. The Internet should be, as it has been, a level playing field. Waxman, the chair of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, said any bill about the issue would have to come out of his committee. What’s taking so long? The hold up is that the term “Net Neutrality” sounds like a fishing ordinance instead of what Senator Al Franken describes as “the free speech issue of our time.”
Sylvia Moore: It’s terrific that Waxman remains on the right side of this issue. For those of us hoping that he would use his position to make net neutrality a higher priority in the House, we were disappointed.
Sylvia Moore: As if the Supreme Court’s enthusiastic approval of oligarchy wasn’t enough, we’re facing another one of the biggest threats to free speech and democracy – corporate control of the Web.
Marian Wang: At stake is the principle of net neutrality — the idea that Internet service providers must treat all traffic equally, and not privilege certain content by giving it more, or less, bandwidth — a principle that the FCC has been more aggressive about implementing under the Obama administration.
The Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) has released a massive survey today that shows just how important the internet has become to most Californians’ lives and has major implications as to how Californians are getting their information about their communities, news in general and political news, variable access to the internet by different demographic […]