Home > 1st Amendment, Videos > The Case Against “Net Neutrality”

The Case Against “Net Neutrality”

Mark Lloyd, Minister of PropagandaWASHINGTON: Comments by the FCC’s “Diversity Czar” Mark Lloyd reveal this administration’s attempt at seizing control of media in an attempt to shut down freedom of speech.

Lloyd called Chavez’s totalitarian regime “an incredible revolution, a democratic revolution,” when it really was anything but democratic. In the first video below he points out the Obama administration needs to learn from Chavez that the takeover of private media outlets is essential to shut down dissent to further the ends of an autocratic government. In the second he hints at his plan to shut down talk radio. Like much of this administration, Mark Lloyd is in fact a Saul Alinsky disciple:

In his [Lloyd’s] 2006 book entitled Prologue to a Farce: Communication and Democracy in America, he calls for an all-out “confrontational movement” against private media.  He wants leftist activists – through incessant political pressure – and the government – through the creation of a totally untenable operating environment of fees, fines and regulations – to work together to force the commercial broadcasters out, to be replaced by  public broadcasters.

And in his tome, Lloyd had this to say about the First Amendment:

“It should be clear by now that my focus here is not freedom of speech or the press. This freedom is all too often an exaggeration. At the very least, blind references to freedom of speech or the press serve as a distraction from the critical examination of other communications policies.

“The purpose of free speech is warped to protect global corporations and block rules that would promote democratic governance.”  Seton Motley, Newsbusters

Next on the chopping block is surely the Internet. The natural evolution of communication is a force that defines American freedom of thought. During the first part of the 20th century newspapers dominated the marketplace of ideas. Along came radio whose listenership heavily outweighed newspaper readership. When the 50’s introduced television news it seemed to threaten the radio market. Radio made a resurgence with talk radio while network news has given way to cable news.

Now the Internet competes with traditional media. YouTube serves up more video content every day than all the television stations combined. Put all the blogs and Internet news outlets together and they dwarf the influence of traditional media.

The NIP has previously called attention to this administration’s clandestine attempt to control the Internet with the website SaveTheInternet.com. This site that purports to preserve freedom of expression wants to do anything but that. It is an attempt to give control of the Internet to the government who will then be able to regulate content.

The NIP is a good example of how even an inconspicuous web site can call attention to important issues that can help educate the public. Our 3,000 Twitter followers keep us posted of breaking events. When the Hadley CRU was broken into and the Climategate files were posted on a server in Russia, our Twitter followers tipped us off. We had the files posted on the NIP within hours of the leak, long before traditional media picked up on the story.

Hundreds of thousands have viewed our McChrystal Clock which called attention to the troops languishing while Obama dithered while making up his mind to send reinforcements to Afghanistan. Our Countdown to Take Back America Election Clock has already displayed the photos of those voting for the socialist takeover of American healthcare over 5 million times. This could only happen with a free and open Internet.

Keep Mark Lloyd and his FCC thugs away from the Internet, as a free and open Internet is the best way to preserve your First Amendment rights.

Be Sociable, Share!
  1. Ernesto Regalado
    May 19th, 2010 at 09:41 | #1

    You have no idea what Net Neutrality is. The idea of Net Neutrality has been around since 2003, before Obama was even a Senator. It is the idea that every ISP must allow all bits of data to reach people without being slowed down no matter where they came from or what they say. Please read this site by one of the originators of the concept, Tim Wu, before spouting your misinformed opinions again. http://timwu.org/network_neutrality.html

  1. April 23rd, 2010 at 18:09 | #1