US: The End of the Internet
by Jeffrey Chester, The Nation
February 6th, 2006
http://corpwatch.org/article.php?id=13245
The nation's largest telephone and cable companies are
crafting an alarming set of strategies that would transform the free, open and
nondiscriminatory Internet of today to a privately run and branded service that
would charge a fee for virtually everything we do online.
Verizon, Comcast, Bell South and other communications giants
are developing strategies that would track and store information on our every
move in cyberspace in a vast data-collection and marketing system, the scope of
which could rival the National Security Agency.
According to white papers now being circulated in the cable,
telephone and telecommunications industries, those with the deepest pockets --
corporations, special-interest groups and major advertisers -- would get
preferred treatment. Content from these providers would have first priority on
our computer and television screens, while information seen as undesirable,
such as peer-to-peer communications, could be relegated to a slow lane or
simply shut out.
Under the plans they are considering, all of us -- from
content providers to individual users -- would pay more to surf online, stream
videos or even send e-mail. Industry planners are mulling new subscription
plans that would further limit the online experience, establishing "platinum,"
"gold" and "silver" levels of Internet access that would
set limits on the number of downloads, media streams or even e-mail messages
that could be sent or received.
To make this pay-to-play vision a reality, phone and cable
lobbyists are now engaged in a political campaign to further weaken the
nation's communications policy laws. They want the federal government to permit
them to operate Internet and other digital communications services as private
networks, free of policy safeguards or governmental oversight. Indeed, both the
Congress and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) are considering
proposals that will have far-reaching impact on the Internet's future. Ten
years after passage of the ill-advised Telecommunications Act of 1996, telephone
and cable companies are using the same political snake oil to convince
compromised or clueless lawmakers to subvert the Internet into a turbo-charged
digital retail machine.
The telephone industry has been somewhat more candid than
the cable industry about its strategy for the Internet's future. Senior phone
executives have publicly discussed plans to begin imposing a new scheme for the
delivery of Internet content, especially from major Internet content companies.
As Ed Whitacre, chairman and CEO of AT&T, told Business Week in November,
"Why should they be allowed to use my pipes? The Internet can't be free in
that sense, because we and the cable companies have made an investment, and for
a Google or Yahoo! or Vonage or anybody to expect to use these pipes [for] free
is nuts!"
The phone industry has marshaled its political allies to
help win the freedom to impose this new broadband business model. At a recent
conference held by the Progress and Freedom Foundation, a think tank funded by
Comcast, Verizon, AT&T and other media companies, there was much discussion
of a plan for phone companies to impose fees on a sliding scale, charging
content providers different levels of service. "Price
discrimination," noted PFF's resident media expert Adam Thierer,
"drives the market-based capitalist economy."
Net Neutrality
To ward off the prospect of virtual toll booths on the
information highway, some new media companies and public-interest groups are
calling for new federal policies requiring "network neutrality" on
the Internet. Common Cause, Amazon, Google, Free Press, Media Access Project
and Consumers Union, among others, have proposed that broadband providers would
be prohibited from discriminating against all forms of digital content. For
example, phone or cable companies would not be allowed to slow down competing
or undesirable content.
Without proactive intervention, the values and issues that
we care about -- civil rights, economic justice, the environment and fair
elections -- will be further threatened by this push for corporate control.
Imagine how the next presidential election would unfold if major political
advertisers could make strategic payments to Comcast so that ads from
Democratic and Republican candidates were more visible and user-friendly than
ads of third-party candidates with less funds.
Consider what would happen if an online advertisement
promoting nuclear power prominently popped up on a cable broadband page, while
a competing message from an environmental group was relegated to the margins.
It is possible that all forms of civic and noncommercial online programming
would be pushed to the end of a commercial digital queue.
But such "neutrality" safeguards are inadequate to
address more fundamental changes the Bells and cable monopolies are seeking in
their quest to monetize the Internet. If we permit the Internet to become a
medium designed primarily to serve the interests of marketing and personal
consumption, rather than global civic-related communications, we will face the
political consequences for decades to come. Unless we push back, the
"brandwashing" of
Why are the Bells and cable companies aggressively advancing
such plans? With the arrival of the long-awaited "convergence" of
communications, our media system is undergoing a major transformation.
Telephone and cable giants envision a potential lucrative "triple
play," as they impose near-monopoly control over the residential broadband
services that send video, voice and data communications flowing into our
televisions, home computers, cell phones and iPods. All of these many billions
of bits will be delivered over the telephone and cable lines.
Video programming is of foremost interest to both the phone
and cable companies. The telephone industry, like its cable rival, is now in
the TV and media business, offering customers television channels, on-demand
videos and games. Online advertising is increasingly integrating multimedia
(such as animation and full-motion video) in its pitches. Since video-driven
material requires a great deal of Internet bandwidth as it travels online,
phone and cable companies want to make sure their television
"applications" receive preferential treatment on the networks they
operate. And their overall influence over the stream of information coming into
your home (or mobile device) gives them the leverage to determine how the
broadband business evolves.
Mining Your Data
At the core of the new power held by phone and cable
companies are tools delivering what is known as "deep packet
inspection." With these tools, AT&T and others can readily know the
packets of information you are receiving online -- from e-mail, to websites, to
sharing of music, video and software downloads.
These "deep packet inspection" technologies are
partly designed to make sure that the Internet pipeline doesn't become so
congested it chokes off the delivery of timely communications. Such products have
already been sold to universities and large businesses that want to more
economically manage their Internet services. They are also being used to limit
some peer-to-peer downloading, especially for music.
But these tools are also being promoted as ways that
companies, such as Comcast and Bell South, can simply grab greater control over
the Internet. For example, in a series of recent white papers, Internet
technology giant Cisco urges these companies to "meter individual
subscriber usage by application," as individuals' online travels are
"tracked" and "integrated with billing systems." Such
tracking and billing is made possible because they will know "the identity
and profile of the individual subscriber," "what the subscriber is
doing" and "where the subscriber resides."
Will Google, Amazon and the other companies successfully
fight the plans of the Bells and cable companies? Ultimately, they are likely
to cut a deal because they, too, are interested in monetizing our online
activities. After all, as Cisco notes, content companies and network providers
will need to "cooperate with each other to leverage their value
proposition." They will be drawn by the ability of cable and phone
companies to track "content usage...by subscriber," and where
their online services can be "protected from piracy, metered, and
appropriately valued."
Our Digital Destiny
It was former FCC chairman Michael Powell, with the support
of then-commissioner and current chair Kevin Martin, who permitted phone and
cable giants to have greater control over broadband. Powell and his GOP
majority eliminated longstanding regulatory safeguards requiring phone
companies to operate as nondiscriminatory networks (technically known as
"common carriers"). He refused to require that cable companies, when
providing Internet access, also operate in a similar nondiscriminatory manner.
As
But now, the phone companies are lobbying
Besides their business interests, telephone and cable
companies also have a larger political agenda. Both industries oppose giving
local communities the right to create their own local Internet wireless or
wi-fi networks. They also want to eliminate the last vestige of local oversight
from electronic media -- the ability of city or county government, for example,
to require telecommunications companies to serve the public interest with, for
example, public-access TV channels. The Bells also want to further reduce the
ability of the FCC to oversee communications policy. They hope that both the
FCC and Congress -- via a new Communications Act -- will back these proposals.
The future of the online media in the
If Americans are to succeed in designing an equitable
digital destiny for themselves, they must mount an intensive opposition similar
to the successful challenges to the FCC's media ownership rules in 2003.
Without such a public outcry to rein in the GOP's corporate-driven agenda, it
is likely that even many of the Democrats who rallied against further
consolidation will be "tamed" by the well-funded lobbying campaigns
of the powerful phone and cable industry.
Jeffrey Chester is executive director of the Center for
Digital Democracy (www.democraticmedia.org).
====
This e-mail is intended solely for the addressee. It may contain private and confidential information. If you are not the intended addressee, please take no action based on it nor show a copy to anyone. Please reply to this e-mail to highlight the error. You should also be aware that all electronic mail from, to, or within Northumbria University may be the subject of a request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and related legislation, and therefore may be required to be disclosed to third parties.
This e-mail and attachments have been scanned for viruses prior to leaving Northumbria University. Northumbria University will not be liable for any losses as a result of any viruses being passed on.