Google's Fight to Socialize Broadband, Part 2
By Erick Posted in Technology — Comments (15) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Yesterday, I told you how Google is funding an effort to bring socialism to broadband with an assorted cast of far left characters including the SEIU and ACORN.
It's important to understand how they are doing it.
First and foremost, we need to go back to Larry Page's comment that he "[doesn't] want people to be misled by people who have interests." The Google co-founder claims he is really bothered by that, but apparently not enough to disclosure the funding mechanisms behind all these "open internet" groups -- all of which are, via various means, being funded by Google while it hides behind innocuous names.
Google is the Obama of corporations -- it issues small platitudes about "internet for everyone" and expects the collective Web 2.0 community to faint.
But what Google, Internet For Everyone, the Open Internet Coalition, and the rest of these groups won't tell us is who funds them and who really operates them. Hypocrisy is frequently referred to as the only sin the left knows. In this case, these left wing organizations are demanding transparency for all, but refusing to give it for themselves. The hypocrisy is thick.
Let's go back to InternetForEveryone.org. It appears to have originated with a rather secretive, left-wing P.R. firm in Washington known as Connections Media. While most P.R. firms will gladly show off their prestigious clients, not so with Connections Media. On its website it write, "We believe in discretion and prefer to let our work advance our client’s goals, not our own. As a result, we do not routinely publish our client list."
But we can get an idea of who the organization is and what groups it works with. And from those, we can get an idea of where this is all headed.
Read on . . .
Who is Connections Media?
Connections Media was started in 2004 by Jonah Seiger, recognized in 2001 by the American Association of Political Consultants as one of “The 25 Who Are Changing the World of Internet Politics.” Prior to founding Connections Media, Seiger was the founder and President of Mindshare Internet Campaigns which was affiliated with the Google-funded NetCoalition. The Executive Director of the NetCoalition at the time was Markham Erickson (no relation) with the Holch & Erickson law firm. Today, Markham Erickson is the Executive Director of the Google-created Open Internet Coalition. See a pattern here?
Prior to founding Mindshare Internet Campaigns, Seiger was a founder of the Center for Democracy & Technology where he worked with Alan Davidson, now Google’s Senior Policy Counsel. The Center for Democracy and Technology is a member of the Google Policy Fellowship. Before that Seiger worked on Telecommunications and Internet Policy issues for Democrat Congressman Ed Markey, a key proponent of “net neutrality.”
Seiger is an adjunct professor at the George Washington University Graduate School of Political Management where he teaches a course on political communications strategies for the Internet. Seiger is also on the board of the New Democrat Network and the Media Access Project – also a member of the Google Policy Fellowship. Seiger is a founding member of YdemsCan.net, a PAC that supports Democratic candidates under 40.
Ties to Free Press
Now that you have an idea of who Seiger is and what his politics are, you need to know what Free Press is. There are two sites. The dot-org site is for progressive news. The dot net site is a "national, non partisan, media reform organization." It is the dot-net site we are interested in.
While claiming to be nonpartisan, Free Press is directly connected to the radical left. Leftist professor Howard Zinn writes, "Free Press is doing the important work of stimulating a national discussion on the role of a free media in this country. It deserves widespread support." Free Press, like internetforeveryone.org, is all about socialism on the internet and, from there, socialism everywhere. It also has ties to campaign finance advocate Josh Silver who, like Larry Lessig, wants to ban private participation in politics in favor of government funded campaigns.
It's important to understand what Free Press is and how far left it is because internetforeveryone.org was registered by Ben Byrne at Free Press on November 5, 2007, according to Whois registration records.
Connecting the Dots
Free Press usually hosts its websites on Singlehop.com. This is very common. Businesses usually have a preferred host for domains. For example, Apple, Inc. regularly hosts its domains with markmonitor.com. Companies go with hosts they know.
But internetforeveryone.org is not hosted at Singlehop.com. It is hosted at Hedgehog Hosting in Alexandria, VA, along with several other Google-funded coalition websites, including Wireless Innovation Alliance, which also has Free Press on board.
A similar domain, www.wireless-innovation-alliance.org actually redirects back to Connections Media. I suppose it forgot to redirect the link. And therein lies some good evidence linking all these far left groups to Google and its plans for your internet.
Connections Media is also affiliated with the Open Internet Coalition, yet another Google group that does the same thing with many of the same players as internetforeveryone.org. And like with internetforeveryone.org, the Open Internet Coalition wants to open up the internet, but refuses to really let you know who is involved and where the funding comes from.
War Against Private Enterprise
By now, you probably know where this is going. Google, ACORN, the SEIU, and the left in general wants to declare the internet a constitutional right. They go so far as to use the word "must" in referring to access people should have to the internet.
There is only one problem. They have to discredit the private businesses currently piping the internet into your house — more often than not the phone companies. Early on the free internet groups came up with "net neutrality." Phone companies and their CEO's played right into their hands, with some saying it was their internet, they could prefer one website to another.
A lot of people, myself included, sided with groups like Google. But while we're all hung up on net neutrality and priorities of websites, etc., Google has shifted the game. Net Neutrality now means a constitutional right to the internet without free market interference. Google wants the government to take over.
First, it must generate a war against phone and cable companies to discredit them and make the case for a government take over. On May 12, 2006, someone named Tom Miller registered the domain name itsournet.org at Network Solutions. Itsournet.org was the precursor to the Google-created Open Internet Coalition. Today, the itsournet.org domain name defaults to the Open Internet Coalition.
Tom Miller is a “senior account manager” at Connections Media according to the “About” page on the company’s website.
In September of 2006, a website called weownthenet.org was launched. The website parodied AT&T with a fictional phone company called CT&T and urged phone company employees to act as “whistle blowers” and anonymously email the site with stories of how phone companies are “screwing” consumers. The website also referred to phone company execs and employees as overcharging customers to protect “their country club memberships, private jets, and vacation homes in the Caymans.” The website is also hosted at Hedgehog Hosting.
On October 11, 2006, Free Press’ Policy Director Ben Scott sent out an action-alert email on the DOJ’s approval of the AT&T/BellSouth merger encouraging recipients to “Watch our exclusive interview with the merger’s mastermind: [CT&TCom’s] Richard Merryweather.” The YouTube video states that the piece was produced for “SavetheInternet.com”.
Interestingly, Free Press is listed as the “coordinator” of the Save the Internet campaign, but has denied any coordination with or funding from Google. Given that the WeOwnTheNet web domain is hosted on Hedgehog’s servers – the same servers hosting the Google-funded Open Internet Coalition – it would appear that there is far more “coordination” between Free Press and Google than has been acknowledged.
The Targets in the War
It is pretty clear that the left, with Google's help, is aggressively targeting companies that serve as internet service providers in the free market. Using Connections Media, Free Press, and a coalition of innocuous sounding groups, Google is funding a long term strategic fight to undermine ISP's and insert the government into controlling the internet.
Couple that struggle with Google funding Larry Lessig's change-congress organization and other groups designed to put into office Google backed politicians, and you get a clear picture that Google wants a powerful seat at the table in controlling your internet connection.
And who are the targets now? You can get an idea by taking a gander at the other websites Hedgehog Hosting is holding -- the majority of which either redirect to Connections Media or the Open Internet Coalition:
AMERICANSFORASECUREINTERNET.COM
AMERICANSFORASECUREINTERNET.NET
KEEPTHENETFREE.COM
KEEPTHENETFREE.NET
KEEPTHENETFREE.ORG
NOTOLLTAKERS.COM
NOTOLLTAKERS.NET
WHOOWNSTHEINTERNET.NET
WHOOWNSTHENET.COM
WHOOWNSTHENET.NET
WHOOWNSTHENET.ORG
YOUOWNTHEINTERNET.ORG
YOUOWNTHENET.ORG
DONTBREAKTHEINTERNET.COM
DONTBREAKTHEINTERNET.NET
DONTBREAKTHEINTERNET.ORG
DONTBREAKTHENET.COM
DONTBREAKTHENET.NET
DONTBREAKTHENET.ORG
WEOWNTHENET.ORG
STOPTHEVERIZONCABLETAX.COM
STOPTHEVERIZONCABLETAX.NET
STOPTHEVERIZONCABLETAX.ORG
STOPVERIZONCABLETAX.COM
STOPVERIZONCABLETAX.NET
STOPVERIZONCABLETAX.ORG
STOPVERIZONSCABLETAX.COM
STOPVERIZONSCABLETAX.NET
STOPVERIZONSCABLETAX.ORG
BROADBANDBILLOFRIGHTS.COM
BROADBANDBILLOFRIGHTS.NET
BROADBANDBILLOFRIGHTS.ORG
NETNEUTRALITYCOALITION.COM
NETNEUTRALITYCOALITION.NET
NETNEUTRALITYCOALITION.ORG
ITSOURNET.ORG
OPENINTERNETCOALITION.COM
OPENINTERNETCOALITION.NET
OPENINTERNETCOALITION.ORG
OPENNETCOALITION.COM
OPENNETCOALITION.NET
Google's Fight to Socialize Broadband — Comments (19) »
Google's Fight to Socialize Broadband, Part 2 15 Comments (0 topical, 15 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
and they affect things that are out in the open. I guess we shall fight fire with fire then.
Impeach the 5 usurpers
Three leftwing leading companies have control of the Internet; Google, Microsoft and Cisco.
There are days that the magnitude of what we face in so many directions just makes you want to give up. The left has all the money, the Internet, the media, the federal government, Wall Street, and the schools. No wonder mindnumbed Obamatons are being churned out by the colleges. The only avenues we have left to get out our message is our blogs and talk radio. Once they put the fairness doctrine back in, we lose one of those. Google is going to take away the other.
"If they were merely incompetent, then at least SOME of their actions would have been to the benefit of the country."
Compared to Google, Microsoft is practically Republican. Scary thought, no?
The main difference between Google and a lot of the Internet and technology powerhouses before them is that, unlike their predecessors, Google has absolutely no qualms about getting government to give them what they want in search of a business advantage.
"Once within the maw of Leviathan, degree of digestion is irrelevant." - Michael Fisk
Microsoft, Intel, etc, do their darndest to manipulate the government. It just seems like Google is in an unusual (unprecedented?) position of strength.
Google is in the position of being able to control the content, where Microsoft, et. al. could only control the technology. All Google has to do is decide change the algorithms for search, and all search results will return "approved" results.
I switched my homepage to Dogpile years ago, but even there many of the search results are provided by Google. And in the cellphone world, Google owns the search engines. You can't even choose to use a different search function on an iPhone. AT&T will refuse to let you go to the alternate search site over the Edge network.
The problem here is that there is no competition to make them play fair. The basic principles of capitalism have been subverted. No one would give you the capital to establish a competitor, especially since the VCs are in favor of Google's political direction.
It is easy to imagine a very bleak future for us.
"If they were merely incompetent, then at least SOME of their actions would have been to the benefit of the country."
Boy this is a depressing day.
Google is simply being capitalistic here. Nothing more nothing less.
First they aren't making war on private enterprise. ATT/Verizon/Comcast are monopolies. State Created and maintained monopolies. Between the players here the only one that is private enterprise is Google.
There is no free market in broadband. In over 90% of the country the best you can do is a selection between the phone company and the cable company. If you can get someone else it's because they are piggybacking on the phone co. (The phone co often does things to destroy their level of service)
Google is certainly lefty but what they are doing is the best business strategy imaginable for them. They organize and link to content. They don't make money off the content, they make money by directing people to it. The phone company and the Cable company are both in the business of controlling content. Both will try to provide you with video and content and will and do try to make things difficult for providers that aren't them.
If the incumbent broadband operators have their way Google disappears. They are flanking their competitors and trying to remove the incumbent providers ability to kill and or shake them down.
Good for Google. We have lousy phone service in this country and its because the people that ran ATT and built the culture that dominates our phone service were poltroons.
I see no problem with making the phone co work for my dollar.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
Stop poking their fingers in peoples eyes by not actively snubbing important holidays.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
So you're saying that the evil Telephone and cable companies are trying to shut down the innocent Google?
Odd, I have Cox Cable at home and I have no problem accessing any websites, even google.
Now, I don't think the citizens of China can say the same thing regarding their use of Google, thanks to Google's customization of its chinese version to fit State Laws regarding content.
So, please try again before you try and paint Google as a victim of the evil phone and cable companies, ok?
Here's why telephone and cable companies are the primary provider of internet access:
They have the network in place due to the nature of their preexisting business.
No one else does.
----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&...
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Google/?p=1070
http://www.betanews.com/article/New_legislation_could_lead_to_ISP_thrott...
http://www.hackaday.com/2008/06/14/detecting-isp-throttling/
http://consumerist.com/consumer/leaks/comcasts-we-dont-throttle-bittorre...
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-9872464-38.html
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080220-disgruntled-customer-sues-...
P.S. at no point did I characterize google as innocent.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
I'm betting that your like 99% of the country, and you have a choice between a single cable company, a single DSL provider, and a variety of (crappy) dial-up connections. Sorry, but no matter how good the service is that you're getting, it's a monopoly (or at the very least an oligopoly). With competition, your prices would be lower, and your service would be better. Now those monopolies want to be able to regulate the speed of various websites unless those websites pay up, especially those (like Google) who've made a ton of money providing a quality product.
Google, however, is in no way a monopoly. If you don't like Google's product, go to Ask, Yahoo, MSN, etc. In addition, there's nothing to stop you from building your own search engine and competing with Google. On the other hand, try cutting through the government regulations that ensure cable and phone company monopolies and starting your own high-speed internet provider.
Sure Google's run by lefties. They make a quality product, though, and they (rightly) don't feel like that they should be required to pony up money to the monopolies that run the ISP's to stay competitive.
Well, I have Cox, ATT, Sprint, NetZero, AOL...
How many choices do I need to disprove your "Evil Conspiracy" ideas?
I would suggest that there are more internet service providers than car companies or power companies....
----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.
One cable internet provider (=good connection)
Two DSL providers (=decent connection)
And two or more dial-up providers (=crap connection)
I said that I bet you have a cable internet provider, a DSL provider, and a bunch of crappy dial-up providers. So I underestimated by one DSL provider.
And I'm not talking about any "evil conspiracy"; it's common knowledge that telecommunication companies are heavily regulated and that these regulations act to create monopolies. Cable vs. satellite is not competition. Ten cable companies competing against ten satellite companies is.
And you might suggest that there are more ISP's than car companies, but that only works if you count every ISP worldwide. Your ISP options are limited to those available in your geographic area, while you can buy a car from any major manufacturer in the world. (Here's a list of automobile manufacturers, if you're interested.)
So unless you've got 20+ options of companies to connect to the internet (and if you do, I'd like to know in which city you reside so that I can start house-hunting there), you're simply wrong.
Disclosure: FreePress has contracted with me, a fiscal conservative, on other projects. However I am not an employee or a spokesperson, they don't know that I'm posting here. My stainless-steel heart will make yours look bleedy by comparison.
Certainly, there are some people in all Liberal groups that want "for free" everything for everyone. That's not the same thing as "freedom" for everyone, which is the better interpretation of the goal sought by these groups that you are "interconnecting" in such a Rube Goldberg manner.
The evil plot is that the Internet transit networks -- even if run by private companies -- must continue to operate in an open and transparent manner. This doesn't give Google any more CONTROL over then net than you have. It does keep Google from having to answer the phone every time some ISP pencil-pusher realizes that it's the content company with the deepest pockets.
A rising tide lifts all boats. A successful, free (as in free-speech, not free-beer) Internet is good for everyone -- from the amateur journalist to the behemoth Google.
Please keep investigating. You're on the verge of blowing the cover off of an effort to simply preserve the Internet's free-marketplace of of commerce and thought. Its an effort by righties and lefties alike. Feel free to uncover more and write about it, too -- because the more you uncover about it, the closer you'll get to the truth and the better it will look to you and everyone.
Robb Topolski
Hillsboro, Oregon
"aggressively targeting companies that serve as internet service providers in the free market"
Which ones would those be?
(If you name any phone or cable company that has benefited from a government-assigned franchise, wear a red clown nose. Then you'll have a face-saving excuse for why people are laughing at you.)
I read it as: broadband bill o' frights dot com.
---
Finrod's First Law of Bandwidth:
A picture may be worth a thousand words, but it takes the bandwidth of ten thousand.