Will the Internet Set Us Free?

excerpted from the book

Rich Media, Poor Democracy

by Robert McChesney

The New Press, 1999

Will the Internet Set Us Free?

p128

The ultimate importance of the corrupt Telecommunications Act of I996 was and is to establish that the private sector would determine the future of U.S. electronic media and digital communication. Although the debates surrounding the Telecom Act rarely mentioned the Internet, with that law, Congress (and the public) effectively washed their hands of that matter, apparently for all time... the powerful corporate communication lobbies have no interest in public debate over whether or not their control of communication serves the public; they feel the same way about the commercialization of the Internet. In addition, the computer industry has established itself as a formidable lobbying force in Washington.' The leading media, telecommunication, and computer firms also have lobbying groups specifically commissioned to advance their interests on the Internet. And it is not a case of the computer industry giants finding an unresponsive audience in Washington, quite the contrary. Vice-President Gore has actively cultivated computer firm CEOs, forming a "cyber-cabinet" of these "Gore-Techs" to meet monthly so he can stay on top of industry policy concerns. By I998 leading congressional Republicans were making almost weekly sojourns to Silicon Valley to convince the powers of the computer industry that they, more than the Democrats, would advance their interests on Capitol Hill and elsewhere.

The goal of the corporate sector is unambiguous; it wants to entrench a commercial system before there is any possibility of public participation. Once such a system is entrenched, regulatory codes can then be enacted to lock it in for all time. This is entirely contrary to the democratic notion of public determination of policy before a commercial system gets entrenched. Once a communication system is established, and has powerful lobbies behind it, the difficulty in changing it through public policy increases exponentially. The necessity of the privatization and commercialization of cyberspace is also the official position of the Clinton administration, the Republicans, and indeed the entirety of the mainstream political spectrum. As one reporter put it, we live in "a climate where any regulation of the Internet in its commercial infancy is considered high treason." It is now axiomatic, as one publication put it, that the "fundamental consideration" in all Internet policy making "must be how to transform the Net into a reliable and stable commercial tool which businesses and consumers know they can trust."

p151

It is in relation to digital television that the corrupt and antidemocratic nature of the Telecommunications Act of I996 becomes most evident." The commercial broadcasters wanted to control digital television, but they did not wish to have any public debate over who should get the new channels and under what terms. In I995, the NAB and the top executives in the broadcasting industry used their influence to have a clause quietly added to the prospective act that would require the FCC to give each existing television broadcaster an additional six megahertz of spectrum so they could begin broadcasting simultaneously in digital and cable. Rupert Murdoch, owner of Fox television interests, and his lobbying machine were instrumental in the process. Murdoch s close relationship with Rep. Jack Fields, the ranking Republican on the relevant House committee, paid big dividends, as Fields shepherded the legislation through Congress.

As one industry observer put it, Murdoch's people called the shots for Fields and his staffers, and everyone knew it. ' It is worth noting that communication firms have to pay to use the scarce spectrum for non-broadcast purposes like cellular telephony. The spectrum was valued at anywhere from $40 billion to $ I00 billion. As the NAB intended, this clause received no debate at the committee level. It also received no media coverage to speak of. The public was completely in the dark.

p185

... the illusions of consumer choice and individual freedom merely provide the ideological oxygen necessary to sustain a media system ( and a broader social system) that serves the few while making itself appear accountable and democratic.

Rich Media, Poor Democracy

Index of Website

Home Page