Worse for Web Freedom: Hugo Chavez or the FCC?
Amongst many other unpleasant things, Venezuela’s Communist dictator Hugo Chavez is famous for yanking the licenses — and presences — of radio and television stations. He has, in fact, declared open war on all opposition media, silencing nearly any outlet that stands opposed.
This is information control — with Chavez seeking to ensure that no Venezuelan citizen learns anything beyond that which Chavez wants them to know.
Now, he has turned his Sauron eye to the Internet. An information-control bill has been presented to the Venezuelan parliament that includes some Internet regulation. As Reuters reports, the bill
proposes applying limits on content in “electronic media” according to the time of day, with adult content reserved for programing after midnight.
Such limitations already are in place for TV and radio programing. It was not clear how they would be applied to the Internet.
The bill also proposes allowing the government to restrict access to websites if they are found to be distributing messages or information that incite violence against the president.
Even by Venezuelan standards, that last proposition is over the top. Ominous and open-ended, left to the discretion of the enforcer — it’s very Chavez-esque, to be sure.
But how does it stack up against the latest efforts of our own Federal Communications Commission (FCC)?
In the FCC’s employ as its inaugural chief diversity officer is Mark Lloyd — a HAY-YUGE fan of Chavez’s “incredible, democratic revolution,” who loves the way Chavez “began to take very seriously the media in his country.” Which, as we have just seen, is hardly… pleasant.
As we have repeatedly observed of late, the FCC is hurtling towards an Internet power grab that would, it appears, make even Chavez blush. At the very least, Hugo seems to think he should be more democratic about his Web takeover.
Let us again highlight the fact that Chavez is proposing legislation. FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski has no time for such republican formalities.
The chairman is ramming through an authoritarian, 85-page Web order in last-minute fashion — behind closed doors, unreviewed, without public comment, under cover of Christmas. So will he allow a Democrat Party-line December 21st vote by three unelected bureaucrats to serve as justification for a government appropriation of 1/6th of our economy, and the implementation of the terrible idea that is network neutrality.
This despite the fact that the FCC has zero authority over anything, unless and until Congress writes a law giving them said authority — and Congress has never done that with broadband Internet. It’s a fact Chairman Genachowski knows and readily admits. This is to say nothing of the D.C. Circuit Court, which in April unanimously reminded him (and everyone else) that the FCC doesn’t have the juice.
The power grab sets up the chairman and his commission as overlords of… everything, potentially. If the chairman knows he’s not supposed to lord over the Internet and he does it anyway, what’s to stop him from later declaring his intent to lord over anything else? Everything else?
And from all we’ve heard, the chairman’s Web usurpation goes way beyond where the comparatively mild-mannered Chavez is trying to get with his legislation. I say all we’ve heard, because Captain Transparency — I mean Chairman Genachowski — won’t make public what he intends to do.
While mayhem in the streets is always to be avoided as a last resort strategy, surely this may be a clarion call to such an option.
The very fact that millions of people rely on the internet for freedom of information, understanding that a dictatorship is not far behind, this FCC putsch has the tailor made markings of a revolution-of one sort or another.
After all,American history is rife with such popular revolts once freedoms are seen to be trampled upon.
Freedom of speech IS a big deal!!
What is the loony left saying about this?
Can’t have anything as organic and unfettered as the internet running around. Gotta make sure it’s “fair”.
Obviously fairness has nothing to do with it and everything with control of it. The media they do control has lost support from the masses because of the bias. They want to push Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck off the radio by forcing their carriers to host Garafolo and Franken to engage the audience with a sanctioned “two minute hate”, then complain about Fox News as being not legit, with the President of the United States advising others to ignore what is on Fox.
A “Diversity Officer”? Tell me that doesn’t have an Orwellian ring to it?
i don’t know what this bill is about since, as you said, no one has been allowed to read it but net neutrality is “suppose” to keep the big companies like at&t and verizon from taking over and keep them from giving search preference to a few big corporations over small businesses and individuals
It *is* a problem when ISPs prioritize packets based on extortion (as opposed to simply charging more for more bandwidth). However, it is not a problem as long as consumers and businesses are able to switch to another provider. The kind of abuse “Net Neutrality” is supposed to address only flourishes in monopoly markets created by our wise government.
One thing the Federal government *is* explicitly authorized to do in the Constitution is address the false advertising in the phrase “unlimited bandwidth”. There is no such thing, and the motivation to prioritize traffic based on protection rackets (instead of the Quality of Service bits) arises from attempting to maintain the fiction of “unlimited bandwidth”.
“One thing the Federal government *is* explicitly authorized to do in the Constitution is address the false advertising in the phrase “unlimited bandwidth”.”
Really? Where? I seem to have missed that part.
No, don’t try to run the Commerce clause up the flagpole. That authorizes Congress to regulate commerce between the states, that is, any tarrifs, duties, import or export restrictions, etc., that the several States might enact concerning (get ready for it!) COMMERCE BETWEEN the States.
It does not give Congress ANY authority over things, services, goods, persons, or anything else that is, or might be used or in other ways participate in interstate commerce.
No, it’s NOT blanket authority to regulate the economy and everything IN the economy. It’s simply the authority to act as referee between the sovereign States in matters of trade.
“net neutrality is “suppose” to keep the big companies like at&t and verizon from taking over and keep them from giving search preference to a few big corporations over small businesses and individuals”
That’s what they tell us. The problem is, under our current regulatory environment, there’s no sign of any of that happening.
This is a solution in search of a problem. Or, more accurately, this is a power grab pretending to solve a problem that doesn’t exist.
(BTW, it’s “supposeD”, not “suppose”.)
“He has, in fact, declared open war on all opposition media, silencing nearly any outlet that stands opposed.”
Oh, I’m sorry. For a minute there I thought the author of this piece was talking about Obama. Obama, Reid, and Pelosi don’t really know how much damage they have done to the liberal/progressive cause, Thank God. Just shows you that they have to slap down and silence whatever they can’t have, like good little communists. There is a growing hatred in this land against these people and 2012 may see an even bigger uprising against them.
“Obama, Reid, and Pelosi don’t really know how much damage they have done to the liberal/progressive cause”
Sorry sir, dictatorship IS the Obama, Reid, and Pelosi liberal/progressive/communist cause. I’d only hoped it wouldn’t happen in my lifetime. Guess I was wrong about that.
The critical consideration will be enforcement power. The FCC must call upon federal enforcers — probably the U.S. Marshals service; less likely the FBI — if it wants to enforce its decrees. Would the Marshals, or any federal enforcement power, be willing to dance to the FCC’s tune?
If the answer is no, then the FCC would be shown to be all bluster, without the ability to impose its will on the Internet in the United States. It would lose a great part of its authority overall, simply because it had issued an order that was disregarded without consequence. But imagine that the answer is yes. What risks would the nation’s major Internet service providers be taking, were they to defy the FCC and the enforcers that choose to serve it? Would the majority of the American people rally to the service providers’ cause, side with the FCC, or stand aloof?
We might be finding out very soon.
Yeah we will be finding out what will happen, but remember the Federal Police work for Home Land Security and the Justice Department, they are run by Obama’s appointees so don’t count on them not following orders and enforcing the FCC rulings.
Nope. The FCC carries out enforcement by way of fines, using the courts to impose them when necessary. This is not a CRIMINAL matter, so the Federal Marshalls and FBI have nothing to do with it.
http://www.fcc.gov/eb/
When the FCC thinks a person (corporate or real) has violated FCC regulations (not LAWS), it issues a “Notice of Apparent Liability” to that person. The NAL spells out the violation, and the fine. The person is allowed to respond, and, after some ‘fact finding’ the FCC decides to impose the original fine, a reduced fine, or no fine at all. It then issues a final notice of its findings.
If the person refuses to pay, the FCC sues in Federal Court, like the FTC.
From day one, this sorry crowd in Washington has been itching to get its hands on the internet and talk radio. Anything to stifle free speech. I have already started contacting my Congressman and hope that after Christmas, something can be done to put a stop to this. Sooner or later, the American people are going to have enough of all this and we are not going to tolerate the government running and RULING every aspect of our lives.
This will result in nothing more than a rule imposed without any merits & no Teeth to enforce it, you could say this is strictly a rule/Law to make those who pass such rules/laws to make themselves feel good and feel as if they pocess the almighty power authority among there own group think bottom of the food change relics in DC. This is without Doubt a department that should be given great thought to put them in their place as to just what there limits are and that is among other things to impose what Congress deems to be unlawful and there only job is to levy the fines or forfeitures that may or may not be included with such fines.
Chavez on the other hand does have alittle more authority to impose such rules/laws as their Gov’t works differently than most other Countries especially ours, Except when we have Political figures such as Obama who believe there the Beall of Political think tanks and among Congress excpet where he now lost all authority in the one place he need to have it and that’s the House of Representative’s. Hallalua !!!!
Awake conservatives!
Obama under disguise of protecting people is on his path to take our freedom away by chipping away at 1st amendment. Just part of his agenda to grind us down to path of socialism.
The minute that the FCC pushes this crap through, the ISP’s should cut off their network links. Hit it as far down the tree as needed, even if it means taking half the federal government off-line.
Maybe that will give them a hint. Sorry, boys, you don’t own it.
We also need them to take over TV media and newspapers. Job Done! We are truly INSANE!
As noted on a previous occasion, the Democrats lost big in the last election but elated predictions of Obama’s political demise are premature. He is still surrounded by many of his hand picked Czars that are radical, Communist, bureaucrats ready, able and willing to impose draconian controls over every sector of governance and commerce without the consideration or approval of Congress; everything they can possibly connive, cajole and get away with that gives them and Obama dictatorial control by circumventing the democratic process; Obama’s promised transformation of America. It ain’t over yet folks. We’ve got two more years to do battle with this crowd and must continue to call, email and FAX our representatives, every damn day if necessary and hold them accountable for protecting and defending the U.S. Constitution as they’ve sworn to do. They’re going to need all the help they can get with these devious bastards lurking in Obama’s shadow.
The big test for the coming House of Representatives will be their use of the power to defund out of control government bureaucracies. If they don’t use this power then a third party is the next step.
I fail to see any difference in choosing between Hugo Chavez and the proposed future of the FCC
This is a test to see how the public and Congress will react to Obama running things by fiat, we may be seeing the forerunner to an American Reichstag fire.
Hugo decides to go out one day and see what it’s really like for the workers, so he puts on a disguise and sneaks out of the gold domed Capital building in Caracas. After a while he wanders into a cinema. When the film has finished, the Anthem plays and a huge picture of Hugo appears on the screen. Everyone stands up and begins singing, except Hugo, who smugly remains seated. A minute later a man behind him leans forwards and whispers in his ear: “Listen Comrade, we all feel exactly the same way you do, but trust me, it’s a lot safer if you just stand up.”
Why do ex-Venezuelan officers make the best taxi drivers? Because you only need to tell them your name and they’ll already know where you live!
Hugo Chavez Frias is no dictator. He is the democratically elected ( and re-elected) president of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.
Hi luke,
I have a few acres of absolutely “prime” building land in Florida.
You sound like a person who would be interested in acquiring this property.
The Brooklyn bridge is also coming on the market. I can get you a great deal.
#17:LUKE:YOU’RE A PUKE!(and a useful idiot!)
isn’t it interesting how some people like Senor deguello love to attack personally those they disagree with?
By the way, I am not interest in purchasing the Everglades.