FCC Defends Their Super Secret Process on Open Internet Order – Can’t Release Document Yet B/C They’re Still Writing It

by Scott Creighton

UPDATE: A White House-backed bill would give the corporate elite control over how our data is collected and used.

According to the FCC, public agencies in service to the people in democratic systems like ours work best in total secrecy. That from an agency run by Thomas Wheeler, a former cable and telecom lobbyist who now claims to be fighting for our internet freedoms.

Over a week ago, the FCC voted for their “open internet order” after a rough draft of the plan was handed down from the White House. Yes, that’s the same White House that is looking for fast-track authority to push through the TPP and the TTIP. The same White House that had insurance and healthcare companies write the Affordable Care Act.

For three weeks prior to the vote, not one of the five FCC commissioners bothered to leak the 317 page document so the people who would be most directly effected by the plan could read it and understand what was actually in it.

The FCC opened up their website in order to allow comments from the public on the subject of the order, but of course, having never seen the order, none of the 4 million or so comments could have possibly addressed the plan accurately.

Freedom of Information Act requests have apparently been filed by various citizens, all of which have been rejected from my understanding of what the FCC’s website says. They apparently believe it is not in the public’s interest to have access to the closed door discussions between the commissioners regarding this “open internet order”

The confidentiality of the Commissioners’ internal deliberations is a critical part of the process, long recognized by the law. So, for example, the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) – an additional congressional command – contains a statutory exemption protecting the internal deliberative processes of an agency

… In other words, allowing the Commission to engage in frank, non-public discussions improves the decision-making process, just as receiving public comments boosts the Commission’s expertise. FCC website

Let’s unpack that one a bit.

Keeping secret the discussion about rules they are making to our internet which will effect our lives and how we understand the world around us, is in our best interest and “improves their decision making abilities” while opening up their website for uninformed comments from the rabble “boosts the Commission’s expertise”?

Is anyone else even slightly concerned about the ridiculous nature of those statements? If not, hang on. It gets worse.

Continue reading

Advertisements

Key Provisions and Rules of the FCC’s Open Internet Order

UPDATE: see updates at end of excerpt

——

(the following excepts come from the FCC’s website. I am still trying to find the 317 page document)

New Rules to Protect an Open Internet While the FCC’s 2010 Open Internet rules had limited applicability to mobile broadband, the new rules— in their entirety—would apply to fixed and mobile broadband alike, recognizing advances in technology and the growing significance of wireless broadband access in recent years (while recognizing the importance of reasonable network management and its specific application to mobile and unlicensed Wi- Fi networks). The Order protects consumers no matter how they access the Internet, whether on a desktop computer or a mobile device.

Bright Line Rules: The first three rules ban practices that are known to harm the Open Internet:

  1. No Blocking: broadband providers may not block access to legal content, applications, services, or non-harmful devices.
  2. No Throttling: broadband providers may not impair or degrade lawful Internet traffic on the basis of content, applications, services, or non-harmful devices.
  3. No Paid Prioritization: broadband providers may not favor some lawful Internet traffic over other lawful traffic in exchange for consideration of any kind—in other words, no “fast lanes.” This rule also bans ISPs from prioritizing content and services of their affiliates.

The bright-line rules against blocking and throttling will prohibit harmful practices that target specific applications or classes of applications. And the ban on paid prioritization ensures that there will be no fast lanes.

Continue reading

FCC Plan – “It’s Title II With a Lot of Changes Within It in Order to Avoid the Worst of Utility Regulation” Hillary Clinton

by Scott Creighton

(see UPDATE at end of article)

——–

The other day, Killary Clinton had a little chat at some women’s issues conference (the Lead On Watermark Silicon Valley Conference) in Santa Clara, California. It’s basically a bunch of upper middle class petty bourgeoisie women getting together to drool over the idea of Killary as the next president.

While she tried her best to sound like a populist, her globalist shilling was pretty evident at the beginning. She talked about the need to get salaries and pay rates on par with productivity yet never mentioned giving up free trade deals and bringing well paying production jobs back to the U.S. Instead it seems she was hinting at giving Big Business more tax breaks in the hopes they might give their employees a raise or two rather than buying another sports car, mansion or another politician with the proceeds as they’ve been doing for decades.

Continue reading

FCC Vote is Today – Gee, I wonder what this betrayal will look like

by Scott Creighton

(see UPDATE at end of article)

———-

Today is the day for the so-called “net neutrality” vote at the FCC. It’s been a long time coming and a lot of ink and pixels have been devoted to the subject over the last year.

What is at stake is fundamentally the entire internet as we know it: open and free (for the most part)

How the vote will turn out is about as much of a mystery as is wondering if the NFL will ever hold the Patriots organization responsible for all their cheating.

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is made up of three democrats and two republicans who, regardless of party affiliation, were all appointed by Barack Obama.

Barring a surprise flip like the one we saw when the Affordable Care Act went to the Supreme Court (a republican flipped his position and thus, the “constitutionality” of the fascist mandate was upheld) you can expect the vote on the 317 page “net neutrality” proposal that came from the White House to look something like this:

Continue reading