On Sept. 10, 2014, Fight for the Future (Holmes Wilson), Demand Progress (David Segal), and Google-funded activist Marvin Ammori organized a “day of action” / Internet Slowdown to show the world what life would be like without Net Neutrality.

The event was also designed to generate large numbers of comments into the FCC, supporting the Agency’s pending Net Neutrality rule – an important, if unstated, PR goal of the organizers to further “prove” Net Neutrality’s worth.

Recent FOIA’d documents from the FCC show how the organizers blatantly ignored FCC guidance, bringing down the comment system through their actions. Further, these documents reveal how the organizers then demanded and got red carpet treatment from the Agency, working exclusively and collaboratively with the FCC’s IT and press departments, to file their comments and get their story told through the media.

Ironically, at the end of all this mess, commenters against the Net Neutrality rule dominated the process, tallying 900,000+ comments, over 100,000 more than the “day of action’s” FCC-coddled efforts.

Interestingly, for the 900,000, this all occurred without any special outreach or help from FCC personnel.

Over two years ago, MediaFreedom asked the FCC to look into these shenanigans, hoping to reform the virtually unverifiable mass electronic comment system pushed for by Fight for the Future et al. After numerous FOIA requests and an appeal, only three e-mails (which were never even released to MediaFreedom) were ever devoted to this inquiry by the Agency’s Inspector General.

FCC “day of action” / Internet Slowdown E-mails

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

This clip was shot at an FCC rally for Net Neutrality on May 18th.  It tells you all you need to know about the anti-free speech Left and its “media reform” agenda, which it hopes can be realized on the Internet via Title II Net Neutrality.


Me: I think we all agree on the goal.

Activist: What’s the goal?

Me: We want all Americans to be wired and have access. So how do you go about that?

Activist: That’s only part of the goal…You don’t want to sell, throw the baby out with the bathwater. You want all Americans to have access to an open and free Internet that is fair, that allows for everybody to get access.

Me: There you go…but that’s all the wiggle words.

Activist: We need strong neutrality guidelines. We need a very straightforward, this is how we make sure that every bit is created equal. And we don’t let ISPs make private deals – yes, contracts with websites – because that hurts the little guy who doesn’t have the money to buy his way into the market.

Me: The little guy wants that.

Activist: He doesn’t need to buy his way into the market now…

Me: The little guy wants that. I’m the little guy. I want it.

Activist: Why…

Me: I want it. Why would you want to ban me from doing the way I want to do my business? Why?

Activist: Because it breaks down the market for everyone. These are the rules we are fighting for, the fundamental rules that prevent them from becoming monopolistic. I’m aware that your rights are being infringed. But so is the right of monopolies to be monopolies.

Me: We have rules to deal with that…

Activist: We have to take away certain people’s rights to build a society. But they have to be limited, and we have to understand why. (Emphasis added)

“We have to take away certain people’s rights to build a society.”

This activist is not alone; the same statement could have been cried aloud by anyone at that rally that day.

The Left needs to abolish one’s liberty of contract, property, association and speech rights…

…in order to build a society.

It’s never limited.  It never ends, the overreach to correct the “unfairness” and the “un-level-playingfield-ness” the Left sees in everything.


Like at the EPA. Or, Obamacare. Or, the IRS.

Or, in the colleges of late, banning “controversial” speakers like Anne Coulter. Or, with Obama’s FEC Commissioners, seeking to regulate such sites as Drudge for its “political speech.” Or, Justice Steve Breyer, who in a recent Supreme Court dissent exclaimed:

“The First Amendment advances not only the individual’s right to engage in political speech, but also the public’s interest in preserving a democratic order in which collective speech matters.” (Emphasis added)

The collective. Over the Constitution. Over the Individual.

What a brand those “progressives” have.

Like mob rule: “When we want your opinion, we’ll give it to you.”

This is yet another reason to ensure that the FCC repeals Obama’s Title II Net Neutrality Order.  With the rise of the Internet as being the predominant communication medium in our world, that Order was designed as an essential tool to “take away certain people’s rights” – especially if you’re conservative – in order to build a “fair society.”

It’s time to take back our liberty.

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

Last week, the FCC voted to move into the formal comment phase of its Restoring Internet Freedom proposal, which seeks to alter / overturn the previous Commission’s specious Open Internet / Title II / Net Neutrality rules imposed on ISPs. At the same time as the vote was occurring, professional protesters filled the vacant lot next to the FCC to demonstrate about the “end of the Internet as we know it,” which they believe will somehow result should the new FCC pass its proposal.

Former FCC Commissioner turned Soros lobbyist, Michael Copps, urging the professional protesters to stay strong for Net Neutrality, last week at the FCC.

In the picture above you may notice a number of empty file boxes stacked up in a pyramid to the speaker’s right.  For the protesters, they represent “votes,” comments and petitions, which supposedly show just how popular and important utility regulation of the Internet is to “real people.”

A who’s-who of Soros-paid groups, all seeking “media reform” (a.k.a., content control) of the U.S. communications landscape.

Of course, they’re more than that, too.  They reveal the organization behind the show’s curtain.  That is, Soros and his “media reform” agenda.  If you look closely, the boxes with all their logos show a who’s-who of Soros grantees who take his money and then professionally protest for “fairness,” “free speech,” “diversity,” etc., etc., etc.

Most all of those people in the picture are in attendance on Soros’ dime. They’re real professionals, not “real people.”

Atop the pyramid of boxes is the activist front-group, Free Press – one of the main organizers of the FCC event. It’s potentially the biggest loser in the new rule proposed by the FCC. You see, the group – along with the White House and Google – practically wrote the Open Internet Order.

They’re there for a reason; they are the embodiment of the “media reform” movement – one which seeks to use government-imposed mandates like Title II Net Neutrality to limit and control “undesirable” speech.

The group’s founder and former leadership says that that agenda looks like this (Spoiler alert: They favor broad censorship of free speech for the “greater good”).

When FCC Chairman Ajit Pai first introduced the agency’s Restoring Internet Freedom proposal last month, he went out of his way to point this agenda out, giving a special shout-out to Free Press, exclaiming:

Consider, for example, the leading special interest in favor of Title II: a spectacularly misnamed Beltway lobbying group called Free Press. Its co- founder and current board member makes no effort to hide the group’s true agenda. While he says “we’re not at th[e] point yet” where we can “completely eliminate the telephone and cable companies,” he admits that “the ultimate goal is to get rid of the media capitalists in the phone and cable companies and to divest them from control.” And who would assume control of the Internet? The government, of course. The overall goal is to “remove brick by brick the capitalist system itself, rebuilding the entire society on socialist principles.”

And what would the government do once it is in control? Certainly not protect free speech as we know it here in the United States. For example, he has said that “[w]e need to do whatever we can to limit capitalist propaganda, regulate it, minimize it, and perhaps even eliminate it.” And this “Free Press” founder takes his inspiration from Venezuela. No, really! Back in 2007, he said that “aggressive unqualified political dissent is alive and well in the Venezuelan mainstream media, in a manner few other democratic nations have ever known, including our own.” And he and another co-founder of this special interest argued during the Obama Administration that “[o]nly government can implement policies and subsidies to provide an institutional framework for quality journalism.”

To be sure, it is tempting to dismiss these statements as isolated rants. But unfortunately, it is all too typical of a larger movement in our country today that is fundamentally hostile to free speech. We see it in efforts to banish those who express unpopular views online. We see it when speakers are barred from college campuses, violently of late. We see it when university bureaucrats use Orwellian phrases like wanting “to continue empowering a culture of controversy prevention.” And we see it when members of the Federal Election Commission seek to restrict political speech and regulate online platforms like the Drudge Report.

And where do the people who are driving this closing of the American mind stand on greater government regulation of the Internet? They don’t just favor it; they strongly demand it. They raise money off of it. And we are somehow supposed to believe that their true motive is to protect free speech on the Internet? Please.

Free Press is not an outlier.  It is the poster child for Left’s “normal.” It is its “free speech” brand.

Think about that for a moment.  Its brand is built on limiting “unapproved” voice, hoping to box it up and lock it in some dark closet so that “progress” may continue unfettered by dissenting points of view.  That sounds like something which was done in the Cold War, behind the Iron Curtain. And the Left wants that here, now.

That ain’t right, man.

“Media reform” represents enslavement of individual expression and free thought to the government-controlled “collective.” We must not abide George Soros’ hostile takeover of free speech. That agenda stands against all Americans. It deserves full-throated rejection.

Repealing the Open Internet / Net Neutrality Order via the FCC’s Restoring Internet Freedom proposal would be an important first step toward tearing down that pyramid of empty boxes.

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

Washington, DC, May 18, 2017 – MediaFreedom hails the FCC’s new Restore Internet Freedom NPRM. We hope it leads to the elimination of the last FCC’s regulatory overreach, especially as it pertains to the re-classification of ISPs as common carriers. We hope also that the resulting rules axe in their entirety, or greatly relax, the agency’s present Net Neutrality regulations on blocking, throttling and paid priority. We have long-argued that agency-mandated Net Neutrality rules were never needed. Not only are they inapt for today’s converged marketplace, they unconstitutionally abridge the speech and association rights of all players in the Internet ecosystem.  The FCC would do well to rid innovation and free speech of these needless proscriptions.

Of course, this good and necessary work can only be temporary. Ultimately, Congress must step in and stop the regulatory ping-pong game for good. We urge their intensified focus – and action – on this matter. Americans deserve no less.


{ Comments on this entry are closed }

Canada’s Zero-Rating Ban “Proved Correct” by Its Rigged Deck.

May 16, 2017

What’s an agency to do when it wants to prove – er, find out – if “consumers” are concerned about 0-rating / Net Neutrality policy? Well, if you’re like Canada’s CRTC, you get some of your proof – er, “evidenced-based facts” – from an activist group called OpenMedia, and reddit users. Though market-based parties presented […]

Read the full article →

Tell the Net Neutrality Mob to Put Away Their Pitchforks, Racism, Hate

May 11, 2017

On Sunday night, HBO’s John Oliver urged the Internet’s trolls to flood the FCC with pro-Net Neutrality comments in the agency’s pending Restore Internet Freedom docket.  On Tuesday night it was reported numerous of those “filings” were hate-filled, racist barbs specifically directed at FCC Chairman Ajit Pai (shown here in this story). This ugliness should […]

Read the full article →

Too Late, “Media Reformers,” the Last FCC Closed the Open Internet in 2015

May 9, 2017

This shot – of a Free Press “media reform” staff activist – reveals the clear disconnect between those who want the FCC to regulate the Internet via utility regulation (as in her Soros-funded group, and numerous others), and those who don’t. She and her group support a “diverse media landscape,” which in their view must […]

Read the full article →

Democrat Leader Confirms His Party Is Immune to Economics, Facts in Net Neutrality Debate

May 4, 2017

I went to an event at the New America Foundation yesterday entitled, “The Fight for Net Neutrality Begins Again.” During the Q&A, the event’s headline speaker – Ranking Member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Representative Frank Pallone (D-NJ) – provided an interesting response to an audience question (transcribed below). It was, to say […]

Read the full article →

Restore Internet Freedom – Heck Yes!

April 28, 2017

MediaFreedom hails Chairman Ajit Pai and Commissioner Mike O’Rielly’s proposal to (in their words) “end the utility-style regulatory approach that gives government control of the Internet and to restore the market-based policies necessary to preserve the future of Internet Freedom, and to reverse the decline in infrastructure investment, innovation, and options for consumers put into […]

Read the full article →

Net Neutrality – The (Fundraising) Gift That Keeps on Giving

April 25, 2017

It’s that time of year again. As non-profits ready their tax returns due next month, activist “c3’s” like Public Knowledge and Free Press are looking woefully at their anemic, post-Trump-win bank accounts and are desperately searching for their next fundraising opportunity. In the telecom world, they’ve turned to their old reliable cash cow – Net […]

Read the full article →