Joho the Blog » [rootscamp] Net neutrality
EverydayChaos
Everyday Chaos
Too Big to Know
Too Big to Know
Cluetrain 10th Anniversary edition
Cluetrain 10th Anniversary
Everything Is Miscellaneous
Everything Is Miscellaneous
Small Pieces cover
Small Pieces Loosely Joined
Cluetrain cover
Cluetrain Manifesto
My face
Speaker info
Who am I? (Blog Disclosure Form) Copy this link as RSS address Atom Feed

[rootscamp] Net neutrality

About twenty people are at this session, evenly split by gender. Sentiment in the room is definitely pro Net neutrality, although we probably don’t all agree about what exactly it is. Many in the room are activists on the issue, from the political side more than the technical side. Nancy Scola, the moderator, is interested in how the issue of Net neutrality might be used to energize progressives. I think everyone agrees that we’re not good enough at explaining that the issue is. [I’m paraphrasing and taking notes. I’m missing much and undoubtedly getting things wrong. Sorry.]

Noel from New York says it’s a civil rights issue. “We’ve moved into a digital age.” When we entered the industrial age, everyone got access to the benefits, from indoor plumbing to an expanded range of travel. We need to give everyone the benefits of the digital age, he say6s.

Someone from the DNC says that the civil rights framing is too abstract. When the telcos claim Net neutrality is a form of government regulation, the Hill gets that.

(I say that the response to the carriers’ claim that Net neutrality is the government regulating the Internet should be: “No. It’s about the government regulating you.”)

There’s discussion, kicked off by Matt Stoller‘s comment, about the need to provide Internet as a common good, rather than relying on private industry to provide it. Not everyone thinks this is a practical political approach. Many think that it’s important to see Net neutrality within a broader context.

Steve says that maybe we should make the claim that there’s a right to information. “You can’t have a democracy if you can’t find out what’s going on.”

A woman whose name tag I can’t see says that Democrats ought to have as a core belief that “you don’t outsource public goods.” (Nice phrase. She works on the Hill.)

Corinna says that it ought to be explained to Congress as being about the American dream, i.e., about what’s possible.

Matt says it’s fundamentally about morality.

Julie says that the right way to frame it is to say that something you have is about to be taken from you, rather than saying that we want something we don’t currently have. [Nice point.]

[Tags: ]

Previous: « || Next: »

Leave a Reply

Comments (RSS).  RSS icon