It’s not my usual time to post, (I will post on Saturday, too) but I spoke with Joan Blades, co-founder of MoveOn.org yesterday afternoon on the issue of “Net Neutrality� from her Berkeley, California home. And she said Friday might be the day when the internet changes for all of us.

Here’s Joan…

There was always the presumption for the last ten years, that there had to be equal access for everyone on the internet. And there was a ruling that came down that basically said not necessarily and sent it back to the FCC. The FCC then said well, we’ll treat cable and phone companies differently. And now [cable and phone companies] have this huge opportunity to increase their revenues, which is what businesses like to do. But that would mean that the neutrality of the internet would no be longer there, and there would be a fast lane and a slow lane. And if you know the difference between DSL and dial-up, you know how much of a difference it makes to have good access. So, to be able to have ideas and commerce flourish on the internet, it would be at risk [without Net Neutrality]. And because there are only a couple of players, [these companies] would be a monopoly or duopoly, which would be just a huge loss.

For me, I think of MoveOn and what happened. There are all sorts of creative and good things that would never happen if the legislator does not act to put into place the kinds of regulations for everyone that we really had until last year. That’s a huge deal. And we have a coalition of over 700 working on this issue across the political spectrum. For example, MoveOn and the Christian Coalition are working on this together. It’s just so important to all of us. We don’t want businesses essentially deciding our speech. The marketplace for free speech has become smaller and smaller, and the public sphere has become smaller and smaller. Here’s this one area where public speech has flourished and to have that closed and narrowed would just be awful.

Basically, the companies that own the cables are going to be able to charge for better access [if there is no Net Neutrality]. That hasn’t happened yet because up until a year ago, there was the understanding that you had to give everyone equal access [on the internet]. For example, [cable companies] wouldn’t charge you more, they would charge the theater group, or whatever it is that has the content up [that you’re looking at via the internet], more. MoveOn is a provider of content. Amazon, all of the companies that post content, will have their content slowed down unless they pay. And so what it means is, speech from MoveOn and a lot of other organizations will likewise be impaired.

What is the legislative process now?
Proponents of the legislation are lobbying Congress to have less control of the internet. Lots of representatives voted against Net Neutrality, now it’s going to the Senate, and they’re talking about the [June] 22nd as being the day they’ll be voting on it. This deadline meets the interests of major providers like AT&T and Verizon because they’d much rather have it sooner rather than later because the longer it takes, the more time there is to work on [Net Neutrality].

These major phone and cable providers have put millions of dollars into this for years. And when I say “into this,� I mean members of Congress. And it’s very hard to tell people who have been giving you hundreds of thousands of dollars to not do what they ask you to. So, it’s bad news for us. It means that our big chance of mobilizing the base, which is not something as simple as you get it, I get it, right away. And so, it’s great that we’ve mobilized this many people, but it’s going to be very dicey. And the nature of the internet as you and I know it, is really going to change if we don’t succeed here.

Are you serious?
No, I’m terribly serious. It’s scary. I’m deeply worried about this. You know, we’re doing everything we can and hopefully it will be enough.

Did the Christian Coalition approach MoveOn? Or did MoveOn approach the Christian Coalition?
Actually, I’ve been part of transpartisan work for better than a year now. It connects with the fact that I’m a mediator and it connects with a lot of things for that matter. One of the reasons I did the Motherhood Manifesto [interview with co-author Kristin Rowe-Finkbeiner coming to a Saturday soon] was that I saw that we have a lot more in common than what separates us. And so I think it’s time to build good bridges and find those commonalities. I was in the process of doing this when this issue came up, and it was obvious that for both of us [MoveOn and the Christian Coalition], online business is very important to our success.

Roberta Combs [president of the Christian Coalition] and I did an op-ed that got into The Washington Times this week. And we’ve had an ad in The New York Times and I believe we just put one in the Post.

What can people do from now until the end of the week?
Join the coalition. Hillary Clinton has a net neutrality legislation that she’s sponsoring. Check out www.savetheinternet.org. Check out MoveOn.org.

That’s the advantage of joining online organizations and MoveOn, we tell you this is what’s happening. We make it much easier for people to know what the opportune time and action are. That’s the power of online organizing.

What do you see as happening, or do you not want to say?
You know, it’s incredibly close. [Net Neutrality] is not on many people’s radars. This issue is so much deeper than most people are going to go. It’s one of those things where it was completely invisible until about a month ago. And so it’s amazing to have a coalition of 700 [organizations] come together, across the gun owners of America [Laughs], along with all the organizations MoveOn has traditionally associated with. It’s a pretty amazing coalition.

But then you have the other side creating ads that are very misleading. Saying that we’re trying to put restrictions on the internet or close off [Laughs] traditional American values and free enterprise. That it’s really the monopoly versus the open free space. And so all of a sudden it becomes very confusing to people when they start seeing these other ads.

It’s natural for organization like AT&T to say, “Hey, this is wonderful. This is a huge new area for potential profits.� But, we know that huge, new areas of potential profits for a couple of companies can lead to all parts of opportunities closing down in the marketplace. They have control over a crucial part of the infrastructure.

We thought we had it taken care of. But the fact is it passed in the House, although we did have some bipartisan opposition. It’s very, very, very close.

Would you say then that this is also an issue of business ethnics?
We want the government to play its appropriate role. Businesses are there to make money for their shareholders. And we can’t expect when this big loophole opens up that big businesses are going to say, “Oh, we don’t want to make money off of that.� That’s not the way businesses work in America. So, what we need to do is make sure the government plays its role in making sure we have an equal playing field. It’s crucial.

Even when the FCC stopped regulating fair and equal access on TV, it’s changed a lot. The quality of our political dialogue on TV is not impressive. The political dialogue that is happening online I think is actually pretty quite remarkable. And I would hate to see it diminished. Losing that neutrality I think would diminish the dialogue online dramatically and it would also under mind this vibrant economic opportunity, too. I worry less about that because I’m a founder of MoveOn, that’s where my focus is.

Basically, just having a couple of folks, organizations, own a crucial piece of infrastructure puts everyone else at risk.

6 Comments

June 21, 2006 12:15 PM

[0+]  Mitchell said:

Celina,

My thanks for this outstanding and informative interview.

I've been working on the issue of the future of the internet since January, and I'm glad to see this issue get on Feministing.com (which I love to read), and reach out to wider and wider audiences.

I especially encourage readers of Feministing to get involved. The policies in play now which helped make a blog like Feministing possible may not be there by the end of the week.

I encourage readers to learn more about the issue and get involved:

http://www.savetheinternet.com

http://www.saveaccess.org

And contact your Senators _now_ (not later, now). The issue could be settled by tomorrow (Thursday, June 22).

And remember: The internet you save could be your own.

I  Liked  Liked this comment  |  Reply |

June 21, 2006 12:30 PM

[0+]  nonwhiteperson said:

You can call the following list of undecided Senators via the main switchboard toll free at: 1-888-355-3588. Only 13 so far are on the side of Network Neutrality. Call today or you will lose your internet on Friday. You can say the following suggested by savetheinternet:

Network Neutrality is the First Amendment of the Internet. Congress must protect this set of principles, which keeps the Internet free and open to all. Sens. Olympia Snowe and Byron Dorgan have introduced a bipartisan bill (S. 2917), which protects Internet freedom. Please support their efforts for meaningful, enforceable Network Neutrality protections.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/net-neutrality.php

I  Liked  Liked this comment  |  Reply |

June 21, 2006 12:32 PM

[0+]  Anonymous said:

Thanks for posting this. I've been getting email messages and action alerts from MoveOn and SaveTheInternet for awhile now - but this helps remind me how this decision is coming down the line quickly.

SaveTheInternet also has a myspace account - http://www.myspace.com/savetheinternet -
and they send friends bulletins pretty often.

This is a BIG deal!!

I  Liked  Liked this comment  |  Reply |

June 21, 2006 12:36 PM

[0+]  Anonymous said:

nonwhiteperson - thanks for that link.

Isn't it interesting how so far all the Senators (except one) who support neutrality are (D) and all the Senators so far who oppose are (R). Hummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

I  Liked  Liked this comment  |  Reply |

June 21, 2006 12:42 PM

[0+]  nonwhiteperson said:

The "netroots" are to Dems what talk radio is to Repubs so they want to shut it down asap.

I  Liked  Liked this comment  |  Reply |

June 21, 2006 1:28 PM

[0+]  nonwhiteperson said:

Part of this deal is to streamline high tech video and audio. I bet they'll stream Fox News -- free to the public! -- on full blast.

I  Liked  Liked this comment  |  Reply |

Leave a comment

Comments (You may use HTML tags for style)