February 14, 2017 – For those in love with the internet–here is some sobering news.
Massachusetts Senator, Edward Markey has put out an urgent notice about the attempt by the new Trump administration appointee– Chairman of the FCC, Ajita Pai, looking to eviscerate the Net Neutrality rules for internet communication as we have long been accustomed. Such changes would put consumers, small media outlets and others at a serious competitive disadvantage.
Without Net Neutrality rules in place–those who pay to play–namely, large corporations, large media outlets, or those organizations with some geopolitical agenda can pay to get faster internet speed to give them priority over all other speech on the internet. This priority would give certain viewpoints priority over others. In this manner, speech can be censored and ultimately chilled.
What does this mean for internet users?
This means that whenever someone has a viewpoint, and they have the funds to pay for an “internet fast lane” — their views will gain priority over all others. Whenever a topic is queried, or internet search is begun–certain information will be prioritized over all competing information. Because information is “speech,” giving those with money and power the advantage over others with less money and power–thereby stifling–oppressing and deterring their speech–ultimately having a chilling effect upon their viewpoint.
When is Speech Chilled?
Speech is chilled whenever their is an attempt to quiet speech or censor it–usually under threat of punishment or disadvantage. One can argue that such disadvantage occurs when an internet provider and the law they utilize to effect that purpose–promotes one view over another. Such as promoting content that advantages or favors: big business, a political group, or any entity that can pay the most money or can wield the most power against all others. To further deter speech–those with big money can pay to get this data to your mobile device–with ‘zero data use’–meaning no charge against your data usage–where all other data usage will be counted. The result, those with deep pockets can get their message through at supersonic speed, yet those who do not have deep pockets–educational institutions, nonprofit institutions, small business, third party candidates will be relegated to a speed that by internet standards is comparable to the pony express.
The fallout: voices of communities will fall by the wayside, their speech will be stifled, and some viewpoints may never be heard.
Is Fast Lane v Slow Lane Tantamount to Censorship?
When certain views are given priority over others, this equates to censorship. Such prioritization can be extremely detrimental to those with differing viewpoints. Such as when one political party wields more money and hence more power over the means of access–disadvantaging those with less funds and less power–resulting in viewpoints that will be stifled.
To take a look back at history, we can learn a lot about censorship and the chilling of speech.
During WWII, the Nazi regime promoted propaganda about the allied nations that was patently untrue. Hitler had successfully portrayed to the German people that they were a victimized nation, and that the post World War I Versailles Treaty denied their right of national self-determination–forcing them to disarm and causing them to make substantial territorial concessions and monetary reparations.
In response, the Nazi’s created false propaganda to build national unity. The result of which are the underpinnings of WWII–a war based upon a twisted notion of German national victimization and a need to assert superiority by conquering all those in the world who had differing ideologies. That is, by promoting only one viewpoint–theirs–stifling speech of others by criticism, disparagement and state sponsored attacks. Allegiance to the cause and beliefs was mandatory. Yet, it is this very practice that the Trump administration is to put forth via the FCC that could potentially be just as dangerous.
There is no doubt the US military fought and died for all Americans so that voices and ideas could be heard–for First Amendment rights to free speech to be upheld. No soldier would have laid down his life so that those who scream the loudest, or wield the most money and power could have their voices heard above all others. Yet this is what the evisceration of Net Neutrality would mean. It would allow the speech of the most wealthy and the most powerful, to have the loudest voice. By paying for fast-lane data access–their viewpoints and their propaganda would drown out other data. This is a dangerous precursor to censorship and the chilling of speech. What it means is that some data and hence some viewpoints that cannot afford to pay to play–would in essence be relegated to the back of the bus.
The Truth Be Told…
We’ve already seen false information paraded as ‘Alternate Facts’ when in reality there are only Facts or Lies. We’ve already heard from the administration that what we see with our eyes is not factual–that is challenging satellite and camera data as to the number of attendees at the Trump inauguration. We’ve also seen how the administration accuses the media of not reporting acts of terror that did not occur–Rolling Green. We’ve also seen the administration claim wide-spread voter fraud when there is no evidence of such–New Hampshire. These are reminiscent of actions by the Nazi’s to create national unity by perpetuating only one viewpoint–theirs. We cannot afford to let this happen in America. Eliminating Net Neutrality could do just that.
With this in mind, please join Massachusetts Senator, Edward Markey’s petition to keep Net Neutrality as the law of the land–to keep everyone’s speech on equal footing. That is, by not allowing ‘pay to play’ and no preferential treatment for the rich and powerful or special interests–everyone’s speech will have equal access and equal protection on the internet and under the law.
So join Massachusetts Senator, Edward Markey and myself to demand that the FCC protect Net Neutrality from the heavy hand of the new administration. The time to be engaged is now more urgent than ever.
To learn more, watch for upcoming programming at TheLegalEdition.com and articles here at ‘Blog-Point -in-the-News.’
