Critics of net neutrality in the US have come up with a particularly ingenious talking point, one that borrows the loaded rhetoric of the Tea Party movement while casting communications regulators as the enemies of freedom.
Net neutrality, warned new Republican House Speaker John Boehner in his opening salvo last week, represents nothing less than a “government takeover of the internet“.
“As far as I’m concerned,” he said, “there is no compromise or middle ground when it comes to protecting our most basic freedoms.”
Marsha Blackburn, the conservative congresswoman leading the charge against net neutrality in Washington, went one step further. Offering to speak on behalf of the entire creative community of online content providers, she declared: “They do not want a czar of the internet to determine when they can deploy their creativity over the internet.”
Net neutrality is, of course, the exact opposite of the freedom-trampling “government takeover” as it is tarred by opponents in the capital. Net neutrality is internet freedom, not its adversary. The doctrine is designed to protect consumers’ rights to access information that is unfiltered and unrestricted by telecommunications companies that stand to profit from what could constitute, come to think of it, a “corporate takeover of the internet”.
“The only freedom they are providing for,” Democratic Senator Al Franken and several colleagues snapped back at Republicans in a recent letter, “is the freedom of telephone and cable companies to determine the future of the internet, where you can go on it, what you can attach to it, and which services will win or lose on it.”
The freedom bickering has intensified in the last week, as newly empowered conservatives in Congress began an effort to cut off funding for the Federal Communications Commission’s net neutrality plans. On Wednesday, they held another hearing on the topic in a House communications and technology subcommittee.
Conservatives are counting in the showdown on their pithy catchphrase. Net neutrality, as a concept, is a messy one to grasp. But a “government takeover the internet” it is not. In fact, it’s likely many of the politicians warning of such a future don’t truly understand the stakes themselves. But once they’ve been framed as an affront to individual liberty, many Americans won’t need to hear much more.
Security forces opened fire on demonstrators in Abidjan on Tuesday, killing four people. They were protesting against the deaths of seven female protesters and marking International Women’s Day. Ivory Coast has seen an increase in violence recently, with a rising number of attacks on journalists and media organisations.
The Libel Reform Campaign document What should a defamation bill contain? will be launched in the House of Commons on Thursday 10 March 2011, 11.30am – 12.30pm in Committee Room 5.
The Government’s draft defamation bill is imminent and scientists, entertainers and authors are urging parliamentarians to support the Libel Reform Campaign’s blueprint for reform, calling for:
Easier ‘strike out’ of trivial or inappropriate claims
More effective and clearer defences
Modernisation to accommodate the internet
Rebalancing of the law to protect the ordinary individual or responsible publisher
There is broad agreement that England’s libel laws are unfair, outdated, complex and costly, and that as a result they chill free speech. With the imminent publication of the Government’s draft proposals for reform we are writing to endorse the Libel Reform Campaign’s call for the essential reforms set out in their document “What should a Defamation Bill contain?”
We all believe that any individual whose reputation is damaged by a false and defamatory publication should have recourse to the law. But beyond that we need to protect freedom of expression and the rights of citizen critics, and to prevent powerful interests from shutting down discussion on matters in the public interest. We ask you to ensure that, as the Government’s draft proposals are scrutinised over the coming months, the final legislation matches the objectives of the Libel Reform Campaign.
Signed:
Simon Singh; Dr Ben Goldacre; Dr Peter Wilmshurst; Marcus Brigstocke; Nick Ross; AC Grayling; Joan Bakewell; Professor Roger Penrose; Professor Nancy Rothwell; Jonathan Ross; Dave Gorman; Gillian Slovo; Shappi Khorsandi; John Kampfner, Index on Censorship; Jonathan Heawood, English PEN; Tracey Brown, Sense About Science; Justine Roberts, Mumsnet; Martyn Hocking, Which?; Dr Philip Campbell, Nature; Dr Fiona Godlee, BMJ; Richard Allan, Facebook; Charmian Gooch, Global Witness; Eric Metcalfe, Justice; Naomi McAuliffe, Amnesty
Security forces have opened fire on anti-government protesters trying to join a camp at the University of Sana’a, killing one and injuring 100. The police were accused of using tear gas and rubber bullets, and firing live rounds into the crowd. Mass demonstrations have also been taking place in other cities including Aden, Atiq and Taiz.
