• Home
• Reviews
• News
• Downloads
• CNET TV

About me

My posting summary

1 to 1 of 1

My comments

• This IS at least among the top 3 issues we should focus on.
  The following is from http://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/
  2007/06/05/ed-whitacre-gone-but-not-forgotten/:
  
  Ed Whitacre: Gone But Not Forgotten
  AT&T chief Ed Whitacre handed over the keys to his replacement
  Randall Stephenson yesterday, but not before giving a rousing
  pep talk to fellow executives in the company?s San Antonio
  board room.
  ?There?s a problem. It?s called Net Neutrality,? Whitacre told the
  heirs to AT&T?s telecommunications empire. ?Well, frankly, we
  say to hell with that. We?re gonna put up some toll booths and
  start charging admission.?
  * * * * *
  Despite claims of poverty whenever pressed to offer better
  services, these AT&T execs are privately gloating over more than
  $35 billion in gross profits over the last 12 months. Moreover,
  Whitacre (and now Stephenson) are pressuring Congress to allow
  them to provide privileged Web access to their customers to
  companies that pay them a special fee.
  * * * * *
  ?Will Congress let us do it?? Whitacre asks his colleagues. ?You
  bet they will ? cuz we don?t call it cashin? in. We call it
  ?deregulation.??
  ?Deregulation?: AT&T Code for More Handouts
  It?s Whitacre?s brand of ?deregulation? that has left the United
  States behind other nations in providing fast, affordable Internet
  to more people.
  Recent broadband data from the Organization for Economic
  Cooperation and Development (OECD) had the U.S. slipping to
  15th out of 30 nations in per capita broadband use. Our free-fall
  will continue as long as we allow phone and cable companies to
  dictate broadband policy in Washington and monopolize
  broadband access across the country.
  * * * * *
  Whitacre remains intent to defy public opinion, funnel cash into
  Washington and win over control of the Internet once and for all.
  ?With all of our generous campaign contributions, I?m quite
  certain that Congress will see it our way,? he said during his
  farewell speech. ?Who else they gonna listen to? The public?!?"
  
  See also http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/06/05/theres-a-
  problem-its-called-net-neutrality/ for partial text. On the same
  topic, see http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/27/business/
  27cnd-verizon.html?
  _r=2&hp=&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1190923320-xJ
  +fhyXuhe5GngCtAt7PXA&oref=slogin , via boing boing [from a
  post on 9/27/07]:
  "Verizon Wireless last week rejected a request last week from the
  abortion rights group NARAL (National Abortion Rights Action
  League) to send txts over the Verizon network to subscribers
  who chose to receive them. . . . saying it had the right to block
  ?controversial or unsavory? text-messages. . . . . [F]rom NYT
  story by Adam Liptak: '[e]ven as dramatic as the adoption of text
  messaging for political communication has been in the United
  States, we?ve been quite slow compared to the rest of the world,'
  said James E. Katz, the director of the Center for Mobile
  Communication Studies at Rutgers University. 'It?s important in
  political campaigns and political protests, and it has affected the
  outcomes of elections.'
  Timothy Wu, a law professor at Columbia, said it was possible to
  find analogies to Verizon?s decision abroad. 'Another entity that
  controls mass text messages is the Chinese government,'
  Professor Wu said.
  Read the whole article, there's some fascinating history in here
  about Western Union blocking 'unsavory' messages back in the
  telegraph days."
  
  From http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/boingboing/iBag/
  ~3/153130837/doj-slams-net-neutra.html : DoJ slams net
  neutrality, says all packets not created equal
  From http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/agendas/att-may-have-
  censored-bands-political-speech-in-the-past-288236.php :
  AT&T may have censored bands' political speech more than once
  http://www.corporations.org/media
  http://www.mediachannel.org/ownership/chart.shtm
  http://www.stopbigmedia.com
  http://www.monthlyreview.org/301rwm.htm ? note, this article
  was first presented in 2000 so presumably summarizes the
  situation based on statistics from even earlier; I?d bet money
  that, overall, considerable further consolidation has occurred In reply to: "Net neutrality becomes issue in presidential race"

  October 30, 2007

  0 replies