Looking For Marxists In All The Tech Places

By: Charles Cooper
Topics: In The News

Glenn Beck's latest evidence of commie subversion of the republic: The FCC's upcoming vote on Thursday regarding Net neutrality. Along with a hired gun from a group called Americans for Prosperity, Fox's popular game, um, news show host devoted a significant chunk of time to a prolonged rant warning about the sinister threat that Net neutrality poses to our constitutional freedoms. Check out the clip:

Amusing but inaccurate. Truth be told, I must confess more than a little surprise at the paranoia. When it comes to the intersection of technology and politics, there obviously are disagreements about proper policy. But when you count noses, turns out that most Silicon Valley execs support some kind of net neutrality safeguards to prevent big carriers from deciding winners and losers online. (Google's Eric Schmidt calls this "light touch regulation.") Otherwise, the fear is that the Internet Service Providers, or ISPs in tech lingo, would be able to exert unfair pressure on Web content sites that don't want to pay up by selectively blocking or slowing their content.

Actually, I'm surprised that Beck or anyone else would get this worked up. This is basically a back to the future moment when you recall that Net neutrality was a core principle of the Internet until a rule change in 2005. That's when nondiscrimination requirements which had applied to phone service and most residential Internet access got eliminated. But here's Beck's take and that of his guest, Phil Kerpen from AFP.

Kerpen: "Look, the short-term impact of these types of regulations will just be that the Internet won't work as well, because you won't have as much competition. You won't have as much investment. They won't be able to manage the network. Things will load slowly. You'll have a more difficult time."

Beck: "So we have Marxists that are designing and working on net neutrality -are big believers in net neutrality, right? Gosh, it does seem that these would be the wrong people to help, you know, innovate business for it."

By that logic, folks like Schmidt, Barry Diller Jeff Bezos and John Donahoe constitute a cohort of commies. (Here's a letter they and several other tech CEOs sent to FCC chairman Julius Genachowski, expressing their support for Net neutrality. Even the telecommunication industry's lobbyists are less apoplectic about the prospect. My former colleague at CNET News.com, Maggie Reardon, has a good piece up today reporting that even the industry's paid critics say they can live with some of the proposed Net neutrality legislation.

And this is the stuff of red revolution? Not quite, folks.

Charles Cooper is an executive editor at CNET News. He has covered technology and business for more than 25 years, working at CBSNews.com, the Associated Press, Computer & Software News, Computer Shopper, PC Week, and ZDNet. E-mail Charlie.

28 Comments Have Your Say
Email Story Send to a Friend
Share This Tell Your Friends
Tweet This Tweet This
More Share It

Add a Comment

See all 28 Comments


by skepticalJM October 23, 2009 3:15 PM EDT: I'm sure all the fascists and Nazis out there enjoy Glenn Beck, after all they want to keep the status quo, so that the capitalist Masters of the world are always in charge. I love the way they come up with all these important sounding institutions, and Freedom this and Freedom that rhetoric. As far as I'm concerned tyrants are tyrants by any name, whether you call them Capitalist, Communist, Nazi or Fascist -- they're all the same -- people who want to take other people's freedom away, and the ones that predominate today live in corporate American office buildings, and call themselves entrepreneurs. There is nothing wrong with a little revolution once in a while; every so often a democracy needs to cleanse itself of all the liars, hypocrites and parasites its freedom has allowed it to accumulate; America needs an enema, to flush all the Becks and Murdocks down the toilet where they belong.; Reply to this comment

by proudmilvet October 22, 2009 9:56 PM EDT

Constitionalist... I know, i should have narrowed it down a little bit. What i meant by those at Fox not serving in the Military, i meant all of the super patriots, the flag wavers, such as Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, Ann Coulter, Michelle Malkin, Karl Rove, Newt Gingrich, & Dick(Old Draft Dodgin Dick)Cheney. So Patriotic, but they still could not find the time to serve in the Military! I know that Obama, Biden & Bill Clinton never served either, but they are not hypocrits about it by posing as Holier then thou, Super Patriots. As far as Clinton & Cheney, Clinton was at least true to his principles. He was opposed to the War in Vietnam & did not serve. Cheney fully supported the war, but took 5 Draft Deferrments anyway. What a Patriot! As long as someone else did the fighting for him!!

Reply to this comment


by skepticalJM October 23, 2009 3:18 PM EDT: Hooray, give that man a cigar!


by britney171 October 22, 2009 4:04 PM EDT: Here's the actual summary from the bill below. Note in particular the words "Makes it the duty of each Internet Service Provider to NOT BLOCK (etc.) the ability to use the Internet" - meaning, they can't limit how you use your own website or your own internet connection. THIS IS WHAT WE HAVE NOW. BUT IT IS NOT WHAT VERIZON, COMCAST, ETC. WANT - they want to charge you extra fees for people to access your website, like it's the online yellow pages. THEY'RE TIRED OF LOSING ALL THAT YELLOW PAGES REVENUE AND THEY WANT IT BACK. And BLOCKING Net Neutrality is the way they have devised to do it. This was addressed in a bill a few years ago, which did pass - allowing Comcast & Verizon to limit internet access by 2012.

THE CURRENT BILL IS TO STOP COMCAST and VERIZON FROM TAKING OVER. As I mentioned previously, the previous bill would cause millions of small businesses to suffer, and this bill prevents that. The text summary of the bill follows:

Internet Freedom Preservation Act of 2009 - Amends the Communications Act of 1934 to set the policy of the United States regarding various aspects of the Internet, including access, consumer choice, competition, ability to use or offer content, applications, and services, discriminatory favoritism, and capacity. Makes it the duty of each Internet access service provider to: (1) not block, interfere with, discriminate against, impair, or degrade the ability of any person to use an Internet access service; (2) not impose certain charges on any Internet content, service, or application provider; (3) not prevent or obstruct a user from attaching or using any lawful device in conjunction with such service, provided the device does not harm the provider's network; (4) offer Internet access service to any requesting person; (5) not provide or sell to any content, application, or service provider any offering that prioritizes traffic over that of other such providers; and (6) not install or use network features, functions, or capabilities that impede or hinder compliance with these duties. Requires the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to promulgate related rules. Prohibits construing this Act to prohibit an Internet access provider from engaging in reasonable network management. Requires the FCC to: (1) promulgate rules to ensure that an Internet access service provider does not require a consumer, as a condition on the purchase of any Internet access service, to purchase any other service or offering; and (2) take certain actions, including regarding private transmission capacity services.; Reply to this comment


by britney171 October 22, 2009 1:59 PM EDT: This is ridiculous. Like millions of other CAPITALIST small business owners, I depend on having my own website to generate business. The yellow pages just doesn't cut it anymore; no one uses it anymore - they all turn to Google instead.

For those of you who are not knowledgeable on Net Neutrality, it is what we have now - the ability to publish your own website containing whatever you deem to be appropriate, whether a brochureware site, a blog, or whatever. So when people say they are in favor of Net Neutrality, they are saying that they like the free speech and access to the web that we have now.

This is in contrast to a proposal that has been in the works by Verizon, Comcast, and virtually every other major internet carrier to CHARGE FOR ACCESS TO WEBSITES - Not just charge for access to the internet, but to individual websites. Small businesses will be killed by this. So anyone who is against Net Neutrality is AGAINST small business, and therefore ANTI-CAPITALIST.; Reply to this comment

by rocketjl October 22, 2009 12:15 PM EDT

Good try CBS. Please address the whole issue. We support the idea the net should be neutral. Having said that, lets take a look at what Beck is saying. There are those who will use net neutrality as a smoke screen to make the internet open to everyone, which is a good thing. The bad thing is that these same folks want the government to use our tax dollars to pay for it. For those that pay for internet services now, it won't take much to figure how much in tax dollars we are talking about. This is another 'redistribution' step to take from the 'haves' and give to the 'have not's.

Reply to this comment


by matuliska October 22, 2009 1:48 PM EDT: Wow, totally not the same issue at all.

by rocketjl October 22, 2009 12:09 PM EDT

Read the article and all the comments. I was trying to get a better picture about the pros and cons of net neutrality. If it is like some say and will prevent ISPs, governments, or whatever from interfering with the content on the internet, I am for it. Then I read it all again and watch the videos. It seems that some are trying to make sure that 'access to the internet' is available to everyone and the government should use our tax dollars to pay for it. There is a lot of smoke and mirrors here. Glenn Beck may not be your favorite, but he has sufaced something you need to question.

Reply to this comment


by finn95 October 22, 2009 7:56 PM EDT: "It seems that some are trying to make sure that 'access to the internet' is available to everyone and the government should use our tax dollars to pay for it."

You mean like roads? Electricity? Water? The fact is, other countries are leaving us behind in terms of their network infrastructure. I suggest researching this to see where we currently stand compared to other countries.

If you want this trend to continue, giving up our advantage to grow and innovate something that we created, that's fine - just be informed in your opinion. Fear and progress usually don't go that well together, if Glen examined actual communists as opposed to imagined ones, that might become clear. But for a guy that does "goo-goo" talk with his dog on live TV? Perhaps not.


by doc_holliday76 October 22, 2009 11:18 AM EDT: by orbea1234567:
Instead of mud slinging and personally attacking those who have different opinions, you should read the actual bill being proposed. You can find it here: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-3458
-------------------------------------

Thank you for the address to a very easy to read piece of proposed legislation:

"To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to establish a national broadband policy, safeguard consumer rights, spur investment and innovation, and for related purposes."

By reading the entire bill, I certainly stand by my original comments that glenn beck is a delusional conspiracy theorist with paranoid tendencies, in his usual shill for corporate American monopolies and against the consumer having rights and freedoms!

This is a perfect example of exactly what is wrong with the rabid rightwads like glenn beck being so anti-American and hurting the average American.; Reply to this comment


by doc_holliday76 October 22, 2009 10:37 AM EDT: by Constitionalist:
"Information is the currency of democracy." Providing free internet access to all is just like free libraries and schools. While technically not 'free', they are open to all so that people can educate themselves.
---------------------------------------

I fail to understand the glenn beck paranoia and conspiracy theories pointing to his usual rants about "socialism" and "marxism," since this is basically about $7 Billion in the Stimulus Bill to provide broadband internet access to everyone, especially the poor, and keeping corporate America from gaining another monopoly!

By providing broadband access to everyone through places like public libraries, seems to allow the TRUTH to be dispensed easier so that paranoid bozos spouting conspiracy theories like beck, would be disproved easier. No wonder beck and the other foxnewsus propagandus junkies are afraid of the TRUTH disproving their usual LIES and DECEPTIONS.; Reply to this comment

by orbea1234567 October 22, 2009 9:55 AM EDT

Instead of mud slinging and personally attacking those who have different opinions, you should read the actual bill being proposed. You can find it here: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-3458

If you are a statist and you agree with central planning then great, you will probably like everything in this bill. If you are not a statist and do not agree with central planning then great, you will probably not like anything in this bill. But at least try to formulate your opinions based on the actual law being proposed and not what Beck or CBS News has to say.

Also, if you want a more claim response to what is being proposed then please read this article: http://www.campaignforliberty.com/article.php?view=247

Reply to this comment


by Constitionalist October 22, 2009 10:14 AM EDT: Thanks for the link. I read through the whole bill. It's actually quite short and not filled with legalese. This is a very consumer oriented bill. Anyone who opposes it either hasn't read it, or has some special interest for isp's. That's just my anti-statism, limited government opinion.


by babooph October 22, 2009 8:47 AM EDT: Just saw Mrs Obama with that hula hoop-made me wonder when Beck will accuse her of stealing Rushes belt?; Reply to this comment