The Last Bastion of Free Speech: The Internet ( Pass On )

[Guest guest]

Please pass this message on to others)

 

 

 

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_katherin_060225_the_last_bastion_of_.htm

 

February 25, 2006

 

The Last Bastion of Free Speech: The Internet

 

 

 

by Katherine Brengle

 

 

http://www.opednews.com

 

The Pentagon and corporate media empires want control of the Internet.

This is a very, very bad idea.

 

While the net itself was developed by the Pentagon (with Congressional

backing thanks to good old Al Gore), it is currently run through a

system of government funded servers and the funds of users who pay a

small fee per month to gain access to the network. Individual URLs are

owned by individuals and companies. Consumers pay for connection

services (through companies like AOL, MSN, and other available service

providers), but once connected are able to access free email services

and a nearly unlimited range of Internet sites. For instance, I pay

about $25 per month for AOL, and for that I am able to send and

receive as much email as I choose, access millions of pages of

information and network with other progressive activists through

forums, blogs, chatrooms, and alternative media outlets. The site you

are reading this article on is an independently owned and operated

website available for viewing free of charge to anyone in the world

who chooses to view it.

 

The problem we are facing is not unique to the Internet itself.

Privatization has been a major goal of the Bush administration for the

past five years, and a major goal of the Republican Party in general

for much longer than that. From healthcare to Social Security to

reconstruction in Iraq, conservatives want control taken out of the

hands of the US government (or in some cases, prevent it from falling

into the hands of the government) and put into the hands of individual

corporations that operate with little governmental oversight.

 

The issue at hand this time around is a potential strategic

initiative, in my opinion, that could be highly effective in stamping

out the recent buildup of alternative media outlets. Privatizing the

net will have many immediate consequences. Among them, increases in

price, pay-per-use email taxes (much like cell phone billing, where

you pay for both outgoing and incoming messages), bulk email sender

taxes, and corporate control over what information you can access

online and when you can access it. Aside from these fairly transparent

problems, this privatization effort has the potential to stall the

progress of Internet-based political activism.

 

No one wants to pay more for their Internet service (as an overpaying

AOL user, I can attest to this personally), that's a given. But how

would you feel if you lost the ability to freely and quickly access

sites like this one, could no longer stream Air America Radio while

washing dishes or eating lunch, and had to pay an additional charge

every time you wanted to send a message to your favorite Group?

 

Personally, I use the net as a professional tool, a research tool

(paying for some services, such as LexusNexus, and using other

services free of charge, such as Google), and as a means to

communicate with other like-minded individuals. I use it to donate to

causes I consider worthy, and make contacts in the political and media

arenas. I to several in order to share

information with thousands of other activists through a network that

has become highly effective in the past few years. For twenty-five

bucks a month, I consider this a good deal. But what if every time I

wanted to Google someone or something, I were required to pay a

nominal fee, maybe even just a few cents. Two things would

happen–first, I would become extremely cautious about what information

I chose to pursue. This would, in effect, limit my access to

potentially important information, thus causing me to become less

informed and less capable of making well thought out decisions about

political and social issues. Secondly, it would stand to reason that

if I had to pay per use for services such as these, then these

transactions would have to be recorded. This means that my information

would be stored–personal information, credit card information, and

search criteria as well as results.

 

For instance, say I read a headline that says Osama bin Laden has been

identified as the speaker on a new televised video tape speaking

directly to the United States government. I am curious, so I hop over

to Google and type in " bin Laden terrorist tape US. " Maybe the search

engine spits out a bunch of CNN links and some other major networks,

but since I don't trust the mass media to give me accurate

information, I continue to sift through the information for stories

from Al Jazeera and other international news outlets. Because I am

being charged for the search, this information is logged, and I am

flagged by the feds as a possible terror suspect.

 

Of course, this is just one possible scenario, and assumes that search

engines could be affected. A more concrete example would be the

proposed AOL email " tax " that is being floated. I receive, between two

email accounts, about 100 emails per day ranging from personal mail to

reader feedback to email from newsgroups to daily newsletters from

Salon and the Center for American Progress (amongst several others). I

send an average of ten or twenty emails on an average day. While the

" tax " is only proposed at this point for bulk email, it will not

effect personal mailing, but it will effect email from newsgroups and

r services like those I participate in on a daily basis. The

vast majority of the email I receive comes in this form–from groups

mailing to hundreds, and in many cases, thousands of accounts. The

proposed amount for the tax is $.0025 per message. While this may

sounds small, it is sizeable when multiplied by the number of messages

sent over the course of a month. This money would not go to the

government, as " taxes " do, but to the corporations which charge it.

 

This is guaranteed to have a negative effect on free speech, as it

will cut out low- or no-budget groups such as currently free

Groups, Google Groups, and free newsletters sent out by thousands of

media and activism sites. The corporations pushing for this fee argue

that the email tax will discourage spammers, as they will not be

willing to pay for the privilege of sending unwanted email.

Ironically, the more likely effect will be that many spammers will

choose to pay for the service, and once they do, no spam filter in the

world will keep your mailbox free of their annoying messages. The

burden will inevitably fall upon users, as smaller independently owned

newsgroups and information resources will either have to begin

charging members for their participation in order to pay their

overhead, or these last bastions of democracy will be cut out because

of their inability to pay up.

 

While these last two examples are based in corporate control,

government control is closely intertwined. Our democratic government

has become increasingly dominated by business interests in the past

century, and the Internet has become an extremely powerful tool for

those who continue to fight against this partnership.

 

If the Pentagon takes control of the Internet, power is taken away

from the people. The long-opposed military-industrial complex will

have an even stronger hold on what information is available to the

public than it already does. Already, the Pentagon holds press

briefings daily, deciding what (if any) information will become

available about our country's military aims and operations. The White

House offers its own tidbits, and we are left to figure out most of

the truth on our own. Without free control of the net, this

information will become much more difficult to locate, if it is

possible at all.

 

Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld thinks that Pentagon control over

the web is an important step in our fight against terrorism. Speaking

to the Council on Foreign Relations recently, he said, " Consider that

the violent extremists have established `media relations

committees'—and have proven to be highly-successful at manipulating

opinion-elites. They plan to design their headline-grabbing attacks

using every means of communications to intimidate and break the

collective will of free people. "

http://www.opednews.com/articles/%94http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/art\

icle12060.htm%94

 

Loosely translated from Rumsfeldian Newspeak, letting the US military

complex control the net will keep dissident factions from using the

net's versatility to communicate with one another. Of course, judging

from this administration's past in dealing with opposition, it is much

more likely that these measures will be used to shut up dissenters

inside the United States than keep terrorists from getting in touch

with one another.

 

Addressing Rumsfeld's speech, Mike Whitney concluded that the

Pentagon's move will amount to complete dominance of the net: " The

Pentagon is aiming for " full spectrum dominance " of the Internet.

Their objective is to manipulate public perceptions, quash competing

points of view, and perpetuate a narrative of American generosity and

good-will. "

 

With the Pentagon coming in from one side and powerful

media-dominating corporations squeezing in from the other, the only

force that can stop this takeover from happening is the power of the

American people. We alone, through organizing efforts and demands to

our individual Internet service providers, hold the power to keep this

from happening and changing forever the face of democracy in the

United States.

 

The Internet is too important and too powerful a tool for the Pentagon

to be allowed to take from us. Should Rumsfeld & Co. along with AOL,

, and other powerful corporate interests succeed in their

efforts to halt the free flow of information, all we have fought for

will be lost.

 

For many of us, the Internet is the last bastion of democratic process

in this country. It allows us to communicate, organize, get informed,

and stay in touch with the rest of the world.

 

Don't give up your power.

 

 

MoveOn petition

http://civic.moveon.org/emailtax/

 

Common Cause petition

http://www.commoncause.org/siteapps/advocacy/index.aspx?c=dkLNK1MQIwG & b=1408869 & \

action=5458 & template=x.ascx

 

 

 

Take action -- click here to contact your local newspaper or congress

people:

Make your voice heard--don't let the Pentagon and private interests

take over the Internet.

http://www.usalone.net/cgi-bin/oen.cgi?qnum=187

 

 

Click here to see the most recent messages sent to congressional reps

and local newspapers

http://www.usalone.net/cgi-bin/transparency.cgi?qnum=oen187

 

Katherine Brengle is a freelance writer and activist. She is also a

member of Military Families Speak Out, and her husband currently

serves with the United States Marine Corps in Iraq.

http://www.mfso.org/

 

Katherine recently joined the staff of the American Liberalism Project

where her column appears on Tuesdays.

http://americanliberalism.blogspot.com/