Who Are The People Against Internet Freedom?
Who are the people looking to stand against Internet freedom, and what are they looking to achieve? Check out the infographic below for a detailed breakdown.
Via WhoIsHostingThis and MakeUseOf
Click on image below to enlarge.
In a nutshell – Governments for a variety of self-serving reasons, and Telecom for control, and unfair, free-wheeling increases in profits Phone/Internet/TV all securely bundled and controlled through their computer-controlled “set-top boxes”. That’s NOW. Taking away internet freedom will leave us with nothing but even-more censored information and communications. Not very different from Nazi book-burning, and communist propaganda of the past. President Obama has requested and scheduled to address the nation tonight at 8 pm for 15 minutes.
ABC, CBS, NBC, and FOX have said they will not air it. Whatever the subject matter doesn’t really matter. The PRESIDENT of the UNITED STATES wants to communicate with the PEOPLE of the UNITED STATES, and the TV networks are telling us THEY will decide whether we can or can’t watch? DISGUSTING!
And what would be the sense…..he’ll only be spouting more lies! That’s all he ever does. Personally, I don’t want to hear him or have to look at him! I have a brain, I can think for myself, and I don’t need to hear his lies! Bottom line, if he and his party are for it, it’s a safe bet to take the opposite point of view!
You are 100% correct. His object of the internet is strictly so he can control the content.
Agree!
Ok Cloudeight what else you got. We have seem to got of subject on this one a little….
OMG – Most have missed the point. It’s about censorship. The President – whoever he is, has ALWAYS had PUBLIC airways available to communicate with the people for as long as we’ve had PUBLIC airways.
Muriel S. I so agree with you, it’s censorship, control and greed no matter what your political beliefs are.
So are we, the “free” world, actually going to suggest a completely libertarian (absolute freedom) position for the internet? Freedom must always have its checks and balances, just like delegated power and authority. Human nature, such as it is, will not allow for a healthy functioning society or community without some communally accepted standards of acceptable behavior. If we say that it really is ok to have a completely open, absolutely free internet, we will have more problems than we bargained for. Should it be free from the control of a select few? Yes. Should it be absolutely free so that anything goes? Absolutely not! How do we find the right structure for the appropriate checks and balances? I do not know. But we certainly do need it!
I’m somewhat shell-shocked by the reply to Bob Crozier’s comment.
Did the author totally miss his conclusion?
“Should it be free from the control of a select few? Yes. Should it be absolutely free so that anything goes? Absolutely not! How do we find the right structure for the appropriate checks and balances? I do not know. But we certainly do need it!”
I can’t believe it, there is nothing listed for Australia. Does this mean we are free of interference?
To Marian Fern,
I am in Australia and an extremely competent computer user, and the local computer Mr FixanFit.
I research many subjects via the Internet as am retired (part time) and believe me, skull-duggery is taking place among the smoke and mirrors of politics to interfere with people using the Internet.
A very small amount of information is given by our local media, due to the old ‘wheels within wheels’ syndrome, caused by the lack of independent media companies, which is different in other countries.
Read this from the past, and still on the agenda of ASIO :-
http://www.truthology.org.au/index.php/posts/319-asio-wants-more-power-to-monitor-you-online