The Federal Communications Commission voted 3-2 along party lines on Thursday to restore net neutrality. The move fulfills a promise made by President Joe Biden in 2021 and effectively restores regulations put in place during the Obama administration.
“In our post-pandemic world, we know that broadband is a necessity, not a luxury,” FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel wrote.
Net neutrality is the idea that internet service providers (ISPs) must give the same level of access to all data and websites. However, service providers are against net neutrality because they want the ability to charge for a higher tier of access or provide more bandwidth to sources they own. Without net neutrality, they were also allowed to block access to sites or to slow their data rates.
Under Donald Trump, net neutrality rules were rapidly dismantled, with Republican FCC Chairman Ajit Pai celebrating the destruction. Pai was previously an attorney at Verizon and called concern over how ISPs would treat consumers’ “hysteria.” Pai resigned when Biden took office, but the damage he did remained until this week.
The initial adoption of net neutrality took over a decade after it was first proposed in 2002 and considered by the FCC in 2005. Along with other progressive sites, Daily Kos has been involved in the fight for net neutrality from the beginning and celebrated its implementation under President Barack Obama.
Concerns over how ISPs could use their control over the internet are well-founded, and the end of net neutrality under Trump affected service for many Americans, even if they didn’t realize it.
Without net neutrality,USA Today reports, ISPs can charge streaming providers a fee for high-quality access, even when that access comes through an app. That fee ends up being paid by consumers, though it may not be visible on their bills.
The lack of net neutrality doesn’t just impact data sources, but also the end users. Mallory Knodel of the Center for Democracy and Technology described what she called the “dirt road effect” where low-income subscribers to ISPs can find that their data traffic has been “deprioritized” leading to an internet that is slower and less reliable.
AsWired notes, net neutrality is returning to an internet that has seen major changes. Broadband access is now much more common and more vital than when Trump and Pai pulled the plug in 2017.
The importance of high-speed internet was underscored during the pandemic when millions of schoolchildren found their classrooms moved online. And it’s equally vital to the growing numbers of workers who perform some or all of their tasks from home.
The more people who depend on fast and reliable internet, the more important net neutrality becomes.
It’s unclear if this ruling is here to stay. Without solid legislation, the next Republican administration could simply tip the power back to service providers. Pai may now be working for a Washington, D.C., law firm, but he took time this week to call restoring net neutrality “a complete waste of time.” And he’d probably be happy to trot back to the FCC offices long enough to stamp it out again.
But for now, Trump is out, Pai is sidelined, and net neutrality is restored. That’s all worth celebrating.
Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.
Far-Right Intelligentsia Struggles To Come To Terms With Norway Tragedy
It’s been less than 2 weeks since the tragic terrorist attacks in Norway carried out by anti-Muslim extremist Anders Behring Breivik, and already far-right commentators have started justifying them. The most recent and egregious example is a blog post from Pamela Geller — the conservative commentator who started the false “Ground Zero mosque” rumor last year — which implies that Breivik was justified in murdering teenagers at summer camp because they were not white.
On Monday, Geller posted a picture of the summer campers murdered by Breivik, along with this caption: “Note the faces that are more Middle Eastern or mixed than pure Norwegian.” The rest of the post pointed out that the teenagers were interested in politics and members of a political youth organization, “Arbeidernes Ungdomsfylking,” similar to the “College Republicans” and “College Democrats” organizations in the United States.
Geller later edited out the racist line, but retained the information about the campers’ politics. Geller’s insinuation that the teenagers were a legitimate target because they supported a political party she dislikes has been a common refrain on the far-right. Last Thursday, former Fox News host Glenn Beck compared the terrorist victims to “the Hitler youth,” since they were politically active.
Geller may be blaming the victims to distract from her links to Breivik. Reports have emerged that someone — possibly Breivik — left comments on Geller’s site saying he was “stockpiling and caching weapons, ammunition and equipment.” Geller prominently featured these comments, while keeping their author’s identity anonymous. Breivik was certainly familiar with Geller’s site, and cited her approvingly numerous times in his manifesto.
Meanwhile, other ultra-conservatives took to the opinion pages to defend Breivik’s views. Bruce Bawer, the author of such Islamophobic books “While Europe Slept: How Radical Islam Is Destroying the West from Within” and “Surrender: Appeasing Islam, Sacrificing Freedom” was also referenced approvingly in Breivik’s manifesto. After the attacks, he wrote a piece published in Rupert Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal that seemed less concerned with the victims of Breivik’s rampage than with the damage it could do to Islamophobic movements in Europe. Bawer says that once he learned one of his fans — rather than Al Qaeda — committed the attacks, “it was immediately clear to me that his violence will deal a heavy blow to an urgent cause.”
That cause, of course, is religious discrimination against Muslims in Western Europe. Bawer admits that the attack by an anti-Muslim terrorist on a government he felt was not discriminating against Muslims enough has made him fearful — of the government. “It will, I fear, be a great deal more difficult to broach these issues now that this murderous madman has become the poster boy for the criticism of Islam,” he concludes.
Pat Buchanan, the former Republican presidential candidate best known for his Holocaust denial and hardline views on immigration, wrote an op-ed for the conservative website World News Daily. In the piece, Buchanan argues that “Breivik may be right.” Buchanan condemns Breivik’s violence, but argues that he was right to prepare for a religious war in Europe on the scale of the Crusades, “a climactic conflict between a once-Christian West and an Islamic world that is growing in numbers and advancing inexorably into Europe for the third time in 14 centuries.”
Buchanan also seems to approve of Breivik’s choice of targets, noting that he “chose as his targets not Muslims whose presence he detests, but the Labor Party leaders who let them into the country, and their children, the future leaders of that party.” Like Beck and Geller, he frames the campers killed in Utoya as dangerous political operatives, rather than innocent teenagers.