I sincerely hope followers of the Network Neutrality (NN) debate were wearing their seatbelts last week. The pro-NN Media Marxists’ rapid lurch in position on the issue would otherwise have ensured full chiropractor employment for a pronounced period of time.
What led to this The-Ends-Justify-Any-Means-Necessary backflip is the Cablevision-Fox dustup over fees Cablevision pays Fox to retransmit the latter’s programming. The two parties couldn’t reach an agreement, the contract elapsed and Fox pulled its channels from the Cablevision lineup.
Fox then went a step further, temporarily making some of its online content unavailable to Cablevision subscribers.
Let us be clear what happened here. The Content Provider (Fox) had prevented the Internet Service Provider (Cablevision) from access to its online content.
And after all, it is Fox’s property. They paid a LOT of money for its creation, development and deployment – they can do with it whatever they wish. They can offer it to whomever, or not offer it to anyone at all. If they want to withhold some or all of it from some or all people, that is their prerogative – especially when they are not being paid for it.
It is here that the pro-Net Neutrality crowd jumped the intellectual shark. Well, again. They asserted that Fox – by not giving away their property online – was in violation of the Media Marxists’ warped definition of NN.
And that Fox’s “violation” served as further “justification” for Federal Communications Commission (FCC)-mandated Net Neutrality – and the radical, extra-lawful Internet power grab they have been demanding the FCC make so as to commandeer the authority necessary to enact and enforce it.
(An investment-devastating move which the FCC may very well execute as soon as November 30th.)
FCC Commissioner Michael Copps said in a statement:
For a broadcaster to pull programming from the Internet for a cable company’s subscribers, as apparently happened here, directly threatens the open Internet.
And Art Brodsky, Director of Communications for Public Knowledge, wrote:
Fox committed what should be considered one of the grossest violations of the open Internet committed by a U.S. company….
In this case, of course, it’s the content provider that was doing the blocking…. (B)ut it shouldn’t matter who is keeping consumers away from the lawful content….
If one values the open Internet, however, there should be rules against that sort of thing, whether the blocking is done by the ISP or by a content provider….
Yes, it would be nice if someone (like the FCC) could step in and tell Fox that it is unacceptable to block Internet content.
For years these Leftists have been vociferously insisting that the enemies of NN are the evil Internet Service Providers – who would allegedly block access to online fare. And thusly Net Neutrality was required to stop them from so doing.
But by attempting to frame the Cablevision-Fox dispute in NN terms – by demanding that Fox give away its content to everyone – the pro-NN gaggle clearly demonstrates that this fight is not (just) about ACCESS to Internet content – it is about GOVERNMENT CONTROL of Internet content.
They seek to neutralize the Internet – by having the government control its content.
Of course, they have all along stridently asserted that Net Neutrality is not about this.
Right-wing media have falsely claimed that the net neutrality principle supported by the Obama administration is an attempt by the government to control Internet content. In fact, net neutrality does not mean government control of content on the Internet; rather, net neutrality ensures equal and open access for consumers and producers of content and applications…
But their demands of Fox clearly demonstrate that it is.
Yesterday, it was about access to content. Today, it’s the government demanding content providers give away the products they produce.
Tomorrow, it will be the government demanding content providers pull from the Web the products they produce. Shutting you up by insisting you shut it down.
After all, government control is government control. Once they have it, they have it all the way.
How pathetically sad it is that the ACLU – the alleged champion of the First Amendment – has so readily sacrificed it on the altar of Leftist ideology. And done so in such an intellectually vacuous fashion – the First Amendment protects us from GOVERNMENT censorship, not the actions of private companies or individuals.
To say that force feeding the nation Net Neutrality is a First Amendment imperative is both factually and morally bankrupt.
Has the White House been influenced by a convicted domestic terrorist for its attack on the Chamber of Commerce?
The latest assault on the Chamber has been spear-headed by none other than the President himself and picked up by David Axelrod, MoveOn.org and all the usual Astro-Turfers who receive marching orders from the DNC. It’s become part of the standard talking points for cable-news pundits and their well-programmed guests and has been the new rallying cry for the left as they try their best to explain the imminent electoral disaster that looms on November 2nd.
But one group was well ahead of the curve on this movement to stop the Chamber of Commerce. In fact, they even own the URL “StopTheChamber.com”. That group is the infamous Velvet Revolution headed by convicted violent criminal and bomber, Brett Kimberlin. In her extensive and detailed article on Kimberlin and his past violent crimes, Liberty Chick noted that left-wing blogs and main stream media organs routinely site Kimberlin and his partner, Brad Friedman as legitimate sources and as normative “watch-dogs” over-seeing right-wing election shenanigans. The problem is, Kimberlin is a convicted domestic terrorist who has been described as a habitual liar by those who have looked into his past.
And yet, the mainstream Democrats clinging to any strategy to stop the bleeding over the next two weeks are latching on to the Stop the Chamber narrative that was first hatched at Kimberlin’s Velvet Revolution site last year.
At first glance, the StopTheChamber page looks like a clearing house for various, unfounded attacks on the Chamber of Commerce by Velvet Revolution and by politicians who repeat their assertions. But, it doesn’t take you long to see the prominent “Donate Now” button in the center of the page. And, it looks like it’s working. The bottom of the page lists over 4,000 names of individuals who appear to be supporters of the movement (we have no idea if any of them realize they are putting money in the pocket of a convicted violent felon). Interestingly, the first name on this list of individual supporters is Bill Moyers.
The Stop the Chamber campaign appears to be nothing more than a fund-raising operation that solicits donations and then produces press releases and an advertisement in the style of a Wanted poster soliciting “tips” on the CEO of the Chamber, Tom Donohue. It seems to be a two-pronged fishing expedition: One is fishing for “tips” that prove “criminal behavior” by Mr. Donohue and the Chamber (an expedition that has proven to be fruitless as of now), the other is fishing for donations to continue the campaign’s valuable work.
How Kimberlin has been able to pass himself off as a legitimate and respected part of the national political dialogue is a question that deserves exploring, if not some serious soul-searching from our friends on the left who appear to be ready to latch-on to anyone who might be effective for them regardless of how many disgraceful skeletons inhabit their closets. But what is truly outrageous is how eagerly our President and his associates have followed this man’s lead in pursuing this fruitless enterprise of demonizing the Chamber, demonizing Karl Rove and demonizing the Tea Party despite the lack of evidence to substantiate the obscene charges they are leveling.
We have already heard David Axelrod’s new standard for making these accusations. When asked if he had any proof that the Chamber was involved in campaign fraud, he responded by asking CBS’ Bob Schieffer: “Do you have any proof that they aren’t?” That is the President’s closest advisor turning the Constitution and the Magna Carta on its head for the sake of winning a vote or two.
If they are willing to do that, then they are surely willing to align themselves with a habitual liar and convicted bomber like Kimberlin. The question is: Other than this site, who else will be willing to call them out on it?
AMERICAblog <b>News</b>: In Afghanistan, 'The insurgency seems to be <b>...</b>
News and opinion about US politics from a liberal perspective.
BREAKING <b>NEWS</b>: James Cameron's Next Films Are 'Avatar 2′ & '3′ For <b>...</b>
BREAKING NEWS: James Cameron's Next Films Are 'Avatar 2' & '3' BREAKING NEWS: James Cameron's Next Films … TV Pitch Season Coming To An End � Michael Jackson Song 'Thriller' In Center Of Pic Auction Michael Jackson Song 'Thriller' In ...
Exclusive: Yahoo Courts Former <b>News</b> Corp. Digital Exec Ross <b>...</b>
He's baaaaaack. Former Fox Interactive Media President Ross Levinsohn, that is, who is the top candidate to replace Hilary Schneider as Yahoo's US head, according to several sources close to the situation.
bench craft company complaints
bench craft company complaints
AMERICAblog <b>News</b>: In Afghanistan, 'The insurgency seems to be <b>...</b>
News and opinion about US politics from a liberal perspective.
BREAKING <b>NEWS</b>: James Cameron's Next Films Are 'Avatar 2′ & '3′ For <b>...</b>
BREAKING NEWS: James Cameron's Next Films Are 'Avatar 2' & '3' BREAKING NEWS: James Cameron's Next Films … TV Pitch Season Coming To An End � Michael Jackson Song 'Thriller' In Center Of Pic Auction Michael Jackson Song 'Thriller' In ...
Exclusive: Yahoo Courts Former <b>News</b> Corp. Digital Exec Ross <b>...</b>
He's baaaaaack. Former Fox Interactive Media President Ross Levinsohn, that is, who is the top candidate to replace Hilary Schneider as Yahoo's US head, according to several sources close to the situation.
bench craft company complaints bench craft company complaints
I sincerely hope followers of the Network Neutrality (NN) debate were wearing their seatbelts last week. The pro-NN Media Marxists’ rapid lurch in position on the issue would otherwise have ensured full chiropractor employment for a pronounced period of time.
What led to this The-Ends-Justify-Any-Means-Necessary backflip is the Cablevision-Fox dustup over fees Cablevision pays Fox to retransmit the latter’s programming. The two parties couldn’t reach an agreement, the contract elapsed and Fox pulled its channels from the Cablevision lineup.
Fox then went a step further, temporarily making some of its online content unavailable to Cablevision subscribers.
Let us be clear what happened here. The Content Provider (Fox) had prevented the Internet Service Provider (Cablevision) from access to its online content.
And after all, it is Fox’s property. They paid a LOT of money for its creation, development and deployment – they can do with it whatever they wish. They can offer it to whomever, or not offer it to anyone at all. If they want to withhold some or all of it from some or all people, that is their prerogative – especially when they are not being paid for it.
It is here that the pro-Net Neutrality crowd jumped the intellectual shark. Well, again. They asserted that Fox – by not giving away their property online – was in violation of the Media Marxists’ warped definition of NN.
And that Fox’s “violation” served as further “justification” for Federal Communications Commission (FCC)-mandated Net Neutrality – and the radical, extra-lawful Internet power grab they have been demanding the FCC make so as to commandeer the authority necessary to enact and enforce it.
(An investment-devastating move which the FCC may very well execute as soon as November 30th.)
FCC Commissioner Michael Copps said in a statement:
For a broadcaster to pull programming from the Internet for a cable company’s subscribers, as apparently happened here, directly threatens the open Internet.
And Art Brodsky, Director of Communications for Public Knowledge, wrote:
Fox committed what should be considered one of the grossest violations of the open Internet committed by a U.S. company….
In this case, of course, it’s the content provider that was doing the blocking…. (B)ut it shouldn’t matter who is keeping consumers away from the lawful content….
If one values the open Internet, however, there should be rules against that sort of thing, whether the blocking is done by the ISP or by a content provider….
Yes, it would be nice if someone (like the FCC) could step in and tell Fox that it is unacceptable to block Internet content.
For years these Leftists have been vociferously insisting that the enemies of NN are the evil Internet Service Providers – who would allegedly block access to online fare. And thusly Net Neutrality was required to stop them from so doing.
But by attempting to frame the Cablevision-Fox dispute in NN terms – by demanding that Fox give away its content to everyone – the pro-NN gaggle clearly demonstrates that this fight is not (just) about ACCESS to Internet content – it is about GOVERNMENT CONTROL of Internet content.
They seek to neutralize the Internet – by having the government control its content.
Of course, they have all along stridently asserted that Net Neutrality is not about this.
Right-wing media have falsely claimed that the net neutrality principle supported by the Obama administration is an attempt by the government to control Internet content. In fact, net neutrality does not mean government control of content on the Internet; rather, net neutrality ensures equal and open access for consumers and producers of content and applications…
But their demands of Fox clearly demonstrate that it is.
Yesterday, it was about access to content. Today, it’s the government demanding content providers give away the products they produce.
Tomorrow, it will be the government demanding content providers pull from the Web the products they produce. Shutting you up by insisting you shut it down.
After all, government control is government control. Once they have it, they have it all the way.
How pathetically sad it is that the ACLU – the alleged champion of the First Amendment – has so readily sacrificed it on the altar of Leftist ideology. And done so in such an intellectually vacuous fashion – the First Amendment protects us from GOVERNMENT censorship, not the actions of private companies or individuals.
To say that force feeding the nation Net Neutrality is a First Amendment imperative is both factually and morally bankrupt.
Has the White House been influenced by a convicted domestic terrorist for its attack on the Chamber of Commerce?
The latest assault on the Chamber has been spear-headed by none other than the President himself and picked up by David Axelrod, MoveOn.org and all the usual Astro-Turfers who receive marching orders from the DNC. It’s become part of the standard talking points for cable-news pundits and their well-programmed guests and has been the new rallying cry for the left as they try their best to explain the imminent electoral disaster that looms on November 2nd.
But one group was well ahead of the curve on this movement to stop the Chamber of Commerce. In fact, they even own the URL “StopTheChamber.com”. That group is the infamous Velvet Revolution headed by convicted violent criminal and bomber, Brett Kimberlin. In her extensive and detailed article on Kimberlin and his past violent crimes, Liberty Chick noted that left-wing blogs and main stream media organs routinely site Kimberlin and his partner, Brad Friedman as legitimate sources and as normative “watch-dogs” over-seeing right-wing election shenanigans. The problem is, Kimberlin is a convicted domestic terrorist who has been described as a habitual liar by those who have looked into his past.
And yet, the mainstream Democrats clinging to any strategy to stop the bleeding over the next two weeks are latching on to the Stop the Chamber narrative that was first hatched at Kimberlin’s Velvet Revolution site last year.
At first glance, the StopTheChamber page looks like a clearing house for various, unfounded attacks on the Chamber of Commerce by Velvet Revolution and by politicians who repeat their assertions. But, it doesn’t take you long to see the prominent “Donate Now” button in the center of the page. And, it looks like it’s working. The bottom of the page lists over 4,000 names of individuals who appear to be supporters of the movement (we have no idea if any of them realize they are putting money in the pocket of a convicted violent felon). Interestingly, the first name on this list of individual supporters is Bill Moyers.
The Stop the Chamber campaign appears to be nothing more than a fund-raising operation that solicits donations and then produces press releases and an advertisement in the style of a Wanted poster soliciting “tips” on the CEO of the Chamber, Tom Donohue. It seems to be a two-pronged fishing expedition: One is fishing for “tips” that prove “criminal behavior” by Mr. Donohue and the Chamber (an expedition that has proven to be fruitless as of now), the other is fishing for donations to continue the campaign’s valuable work.
How Kimberlin has been able to pass himself off as a legitimate and respected part of the national political dialogue is a question that deserves exploring, if not some serious soul-searching from our friends on the left who appear to be ready to latch-on to anyone who might be effective for them regardless of how many disgraceful skeletons inhabit their closets. But what is truly outrageous is how eagerly our President and his associates have followed this man’s lead in pursuing this fruitless enterprise of demonizing the Chamber, demonizing Karl Rove and demonizing the Tea Party despite the lack of evidence to substantiate the obscene charges they are leveling.
We have already heard David Axelrod’s new standard for making these accusations. When asked if he had any proof that the Chamber was involved in campaign fraud, he responded by asking CBS’ Bob Schieffer: “Do you have any proof that they aren’t?” That is the President’s closest advisor turning the Constitution and the Magna Carta on its head for the sake of winning a vote or two.
If they are willing to do that, then they are surely willing to align themselves with a habitual liar and convicted bomber like Kimberlin. The question is: Other than this site, who else will be willing to call them out on it?
bench craft company complaints
AMERICAblog <b>News</b>: In Afghanistan, 'The insurgency seems to be <b>...</b>
News and opinion about US politics from a liberal perspective.
BREAKING <b>NEWS</b>: James Cameron's Next Films Are 'Avatar 2′ & '3′ For <b>...</b>
BREAKING NEWS: James Cameron's Next Films Are 'Avatar 2' & '3' BREAKING NEWS: James Cameron's Next Films … TV Pitch Season Coming To An End � Michael Jackson Song 'Thriller' In Center Of Pic Auction Michael Jackson Song 'Thriller' In ...
Exclusive: Yahoo Courts Former <b>News</b> Corp. Digital Exec Ross <b>...</b>
He's baaaaaack. Former Fox Interactive Media President Ross Levinsohn, that is, who is the top candidate to replace Hilary Schneider as Yahoo's US head, according to several sources close to the situation.
bench craft company complaints bench craft company complaints
AMERICAblog <b>News</b>: In Afghanistan, 'The insurgency seems to be <b>...</b>
News and opinion about US politics from a liberal perspective.
BREAKING <b>NEWS</b>: James Cameron's Next Films Are 'Avatar 2′ & '3′ For <b>...</b>
BREAKING NEWS: James Cameron's Next Films Are 'Avatar 2' & '3' BREAKING NEWS: James Cameron's Next Films … TV Pitch Season Coming To An End � Michael Jackson Song 'Thriller' In Center Of Pic Auction Michael Jackson Song 'Thriller' In ...
Exclusive: Yahoo Courts Former <b>News</b> Corp. Digital Exec Ross <b>...</b>
He's baaaaaack. Former Fox Interactive Media President Ross Levinsohn, that is, who is the top candidate to replace Hilary Schneider as Yahoo's US head, according to several sources close to the situation.
bench craft company complaints bench craft company complaints
AMERICAblog <b>News</b>: In Afghanistan, 'The insurgency seems to be <b>...</b>
News and opinion about US politics from a liberal perspective.
BREAKING <b>NEWS</b>: James Cameron's Next Films Are 'Avatar 2′ & '3′ For <b>...</b>
BREAKING NEWS: James Cameron's Next Films Are 'Avatar 2' & '3' BREAKING NEWS: James Cameron's Next Films … TV Pitch Season Coming To An End � Michael Jackson Song 'Thriller' In Center Of Pic Auction Michael Jackson Song 'Thriller' In ...
Exclusive: Yahoo Courts Former <b>News</b> Corp. Digital Exec Ross <b>...</b>
He's baaaaaack. Former Fox Interactive Media President Ross Levinsohn, that is, who is the top candidate to replace Hilary Schneider as Yahoo's US head, according to several sources close to the situation.
bench craft company complaints bench craft company complaints
No comments:
Post a Comment