Today's Must-Read: The Internet For Sale

If FCC Chairman Ajit Pai has his way:

Net-neutrality protections assure that the essential democratic discourse on the World Wide Web cannot be bartered off to the highest bidders of a billionaire class that dominates the political debate on so many other media platforms.

Citizens love net neutrality. “The overwhelming majority of people who wrote unique comments to the Federal Communications Commission want the FCC to keep its current net neutrality rules and classification of ISPs as common carriers under Title II of the Communications Act,” Ars Technica reported in August. How overwhelming? “98.5% of unique net neutrality comments oppose Ajit Pai’s anti–Title II plan,” read the headline.

The media monopolists of the telecommunications industry hate net neutrality. They have worked for years to overturn guarantees of an open Internet because those guarantees get in their way of their profiteering. If net neutrality is eliminated, they will restructure how the Internet works, creating information superhighways for corporate and political elites and digital dirt roads for those who cannot afford the corporate tolls.

It's part and parcel of Trump's agenda: Dismantle America and hand the pieces over to the "right people."

Read the whole thing. And call your congresscritter.

Via Bark Bark Woof Woof.

Yep -- Another Must Read: Pirvatizing Our Heritage

Trump's assault on America is certainly multi-valent. I've touched on this before
, but it bears repeating, since Trump seems hell-bent on doing away with our pubic lands.

In the few days since President Trump issued his Executive Order on National Monuments, many legal scholars have questioned the legality of his actions under the Antiquities Act. Indeed, if the president attempts to revoke or downsize a monument designation, such actions would be on shaky, if any, legal ground. The Conversation

But beyond President Trump’s dubious reading of the Antiquities Act, his threats also implicate a suite of other cultural and ecological laws implemented within our national monuments.

By opening a Department of Interior review of all large-scale monuments designated since 1996, Trump places at risk two decades’ worth of financial and human investment in areas such as endangered species protection, ecosystem health, recognition of tribal interests and historical protection.

It's worth reading the whole article, just to get a good idea of what we stand to lose.

Hopefully, a few court challenges will stop this cold.

Today's Must-Read

Finally, someone says it -- Michelangelo Signorile, to be exact:

But Trump can count on much of the media falling for stock phrases, engaging in superficial coverage and often running with a false narrative that the Trump campaign hands to journalists on Trump and LGBT issues rather than doing the most basic reporting and presenting an accurate story. Throughout the campaign, Trump has often been treated to a different standard than other political candidates, and that’s been true on some issues more than others as the media prioritizing what to focus on.

Our so-called "independent press" has been suffering from a couple of maladies since news divisions stopped being a public service and started being required to deliver ratings: the stenographer syndrome (typified by the "he said, she said" school of reporting) largely stimulated by the perceived need to maintain access to the movers and shakers, and the search for "hot" headlines -- click bait. This impacts not only how stories are reported, but which stories are reported -- it's a fault even more evident at the editorial level.

Signorile notes something I've also noticed:

So, from the stage last night in Cleveland, Donald Trump said, “As your president, I will do everything in my power to protect our LGBTQ citizens from the violence and oppression of a hateful foreign ideology, believe me,” in the context of his fear-mongering about foreign terrorism and how the country is supposedly in chaos and government is supposedly inadequately responding to the threat. And ABC News, in coverage similar to other news organizations, focused on the “historic” use of the term “LGBTQ” by a GOP presidential candidate without including the context of the “historic,” extreme anti-LGBT GOP platform, and Trump’s own extreme positions, including promising religious conservatives – on the Christian Broadcasting Network, on Fox News, in a town hall with Pat Robertson ― that he would overturn the historic Obergefell ruling, which he’d called “shocking.”

A number of bloggers -- and even more commenters -- have crowed about the fact that Trump actually referred to us in his speech, without noting the context: it was just a convenient way to pivot once again to his perennial anti-Muslim plug: it wasn't about us, it wasn't about LGBTQ rights, it was about Islamist terrorism.

Read Signorile's whole piece -- it's as good a take-down of the press and its failure as an independent watchdog as I've seen.

It's symptomatic of the state of journalism in this country that we have to go to Comedy Central to get any real reporting.

Investigation du Jour

Well, it looks like the House Witch Hunt Committee has a little time on its hands:

Congressional Republicans are accusing the White House of having "an improper influence" over the Federal Communications Commission's decision on net neutrality, and are launching an investigation.

The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform wrote to FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler today demanding documentation of all communication between FCC personnel and the White House, as well as calendar appointments, visitor logs, and meeting minutes related to meetings with the White House, and all internal documents discussing the views and recommendations of the White House.

And just in case you thought Committee chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-Comcast) wasn't being aggressive enough:

The committee's document request had several other components, including "all documents in the possession of FCC personnel working in the Office of Chairman Wheeler and the Office of General Counsel."

It seems chairman Wheeler and the FCC had the audacity to recommend classifying the Internet as a "public utility" under Title II of the Federal Communications Act of 1934, when everyone knows that the Internet should be the sole province of major telecoms. Just ask them.

Oh, and not only did President Obama abuse the powers of his office (Tyranny!!1!) by publicly supporting net neutrality, but the public overwhelmingly supports it, so you know it can't be good for the country.

One commentator echoed my thoughts exactly:

xWidgetArs Centurion

I believe communications companies may have been having improper influence on this committee. I'd like to see their communications, meetings with company representatives, and any documents in their possession.

Via Balloon Juice.

The Through the Looking Glass Award: Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Comcast)

By now I'm sure you've heard about Sen. Ted Cruz' tweet about Net Neutrality:

Gods. Where to start? How about my designation of Ted Cruz as (R-Comcast)? Turns out, he's one of many.

And of course, he's flipped reality on its head. His tweet was in response to this statement from the President:

An open Internet is essential to the American economy, and increasingly to our very way of life. By lowering the cost of launching a new idea, igniting new political movements, and bringing communities closer together, it has been one of the most significant democratizing influences the world has ever known.

“Net neutrality” has been built into the fabric of the Internet since its creation — but it is also a principle that we cannot take for granted. We cannot allow Internet service providers (ISPs) to restrict the best access or to pick winners and losers in the online marketplace for services and ideas. That is why today, I am asking the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to answer the call of almost 4 million public comments, and implement the strongest possible rules to protect net neutrality.

Click through to read the whole thing.

In essence, Cruz is coming out against maintaining the free and open Internet that we now have. He wants the major ISPs -- Comcast, Verizon, AT&T, TimeWarner -- to be able to dictate who gets what content and what speeds. The battle-cry, of course, is "No regulation! Free market! Freedom!" This follow-up tweet from Cruz' communications director summarizes Cruz' bullshit statement neatly:

Amanda Carpenter @amandacarpenter

Net neutrality puts gov't in charge of determining pricing, terms of service, and what products can be delivered. Sound like Obamacare much?

9:51 AM - 10 Nov 2014

It's a lie, of course.

Ted Cruz and his team have the facts wrong about net neutrality. Obama specifically said the government would NOT be in charge of pricing: "I believe the FCC should reclassify consumer broadband service under Title II of the Telecommunications Act — while at the same time forbearing from rate regulation and other provisions less relevant to broadband services."

A lot of the commenters on various sites reporting this little dust-up assume Cruz is stupid. He's not. He's throwing red meat to his base. Besides, Obama supports Net Neutrality. Therefore, the Republicans are agin' it.

Given that the FCC's website entertained over 4 million comments from the public, overwhelmingly in favor of Net Neutrality, it's going to be interesting to see how this plays out.