Techdirt: Note To Telcos: Please Get Better Shills
As the battle for net neutrality goes on and on, the most annoying thing to many of us has been the dishonest arguments being used in the debate. I’ve made it clear that I do not think legislation is the right way to go here, as it opens up a Pandora’s box in handing over additional regulatory control to the FCC. However, too many people who are fighting against the legislation are doing so with incredibly dishonest statements. In almost every case, it’s not hard to track the individual making the statements back to a front group funded by the telcos. Earlier this month it was Mike McCurry whining about how the “grassroots” opposition was really all funded by a $117 billion company named Google. McCurry conveniently left out that his own work is funded by a $117 billion company named AT&T. McCurry went on to claim that Google was pushing for the legislation so they “wouldn’t have to pay a dime” for bandwidth — which is flat out false.Now, we have Sonia Arrison, who works for a think tank that is funded by telcos. Last month she was claiming that if net neutrality legislation came to be it would be the end of the internet, while then trotting out a freebie about how muni-WiFi would also destroy the internet (ignoring, of course, that almost every muni-WiFi effort nowadays is structured in an almost identical manner to the deals her telco funders got for copper and fiber rights of way — and, in fact, that telcos have now started bidding on muni-WiFi contracts themselves). This time, however, she’s flipped the argument we’ve made here around, saying that dishonesty from the likes of Google proves that net neutrality legislation isn’t needed. There’s just one problem: it’s her side which seems to be acting much more dishonest. She calls it a “scare tactic” by Google to suggest that there would be a two-tiered internet where people might not be able to get to Google. She might want to go talk with the heads of the telcos that fund her think tank, because they’ve all made it clear that they would love to force Google to pay extra to reach their subscribers. She then claims: “If the loss of net neutrality principles was really a problem, advocates wouldn’t need to scare Americans in order to win their support.” Unfortunately, the same could be said for the telcos. After all, she was the very telco mouthpiece claiming that “the Internet, as we know it, will be over” if net neutrality legislation came to be. Yet, now she’s against scare tactics? Sorry. The telcos really need to learn to hire better shills. Even as someone who supports their position that legislation may be premature, I’m embarrassed by the hired help they trot out who can’t even sound halfway competent.
I’m reminded of the Music Business, fighting change and trying to rewrite the basic laws that have stood for decades and allow us to enjoy music that we’ve bought. In this case the Telephone companies are threatened by the fact that someone is using their service… and getting richer then they are. The hosting pays for it’s bandwidth, the User has paid for it’s internet access and they want a another bite somehow in there… so are portraying themselves as the middle men.
Tags: Interesting, Internet, OpEd
