AT&T really doesn't like anti-Bush speech

Several days ago it was reported that AT&T had censored the rock band Pearl Jam when

the following lyrics were sung to the tune of Pink Floyd's "Another Brick in the Wall" but were cut from the webcast:

- "George Bush, leave this world alone." (the second time it was sung); and

- "George Bush find yourself another home."

AT&T apologized. It was a single low-level employee acting against company policy.

Yeah, Right. Sensible people didn't believe it then. Now there is more evidence that the low-level employee was following company policy. From Timothy Karr at Huffington Post"

AT&T redeployed its hacks with a "modified" public position:

"It's not our intent to edit political comments in webcasts," said AT&T spokeswoman Tiffany O'Brien Nels. "Unfortunately, it has happened in the past in a handful of cases. We have taken steps to insure that it will not happen again."

Then on Monday a crew member involved with AT&T's webcasts came forward, telling Wired News that he had been issued instructions to "shut it down if there was any swearing or if anybody starts getting political."

Sounds like a censorship policy to us.

AT&T is the problem, and they don't want us to know that Net Neutrality solves a lot of the problem.

This is precisely the behavior ... Net Neutrality advocates have been warning about for almost a decade," Stanford Law Professor Larry Lessig wrote about the Pearl Jam incident. "And not just (or even most importantly) in this explicit form. Much more important are the games played more subtly, to push innovation and content in the direction that benefits AT&T."

Internet Service Providers "believe they have the absolute right to control the content/application on those lines," Lessig writes. If allowed to proliferate, this attitude "will be deadly for Internet innovation."

AT&T's censorship, whether a "mistake" or corporate policy, is a rallying point for the Internet freedom movement. The great promise of the Internet shouldn't be left in the hands of those who confuse telling the truth with spinning for political and economic gain.

But AT&T can still make good on its promise to "never, ever" censor the Web by backing off its multimillion-dollar campaign to kill Net Neutrality.

No one who has watched AT&T business practices believes that they will stop fighting Net Neutrality.

Wait until the Progressives get back into position to apply Sherman Anti-Trust to the phone company - again. They are really making the case for it.

AT&T censors Pearl Jam

The band Pearljam was performing at the Lalapalooza Festival in Chicago last Sunday and the performance was being webcast by AT&T. Here is what Pearljam writes about the incident on their website.

LOLLAPALOOZA WEBCAST: SPONSORED/CENSORED BY AT&T?
08.08.07

After concluding our Sunday night show at Lollapalooza, fans informed us that portions of that performance were missing and may have been censored by AT&T during the "Blue Room" Live Lollapalooza Webcast.

When asked about the missing performance, AT&T informed Lollapalooza that portions of the show were in fact missing from the webcast, and that their content monitor had made a mistake in cutting them.

During the performance of "Daughter" the following lyrics were sung to the tune of Pink Floyd's "Another Brick in the Wall" but were cut from the webcast:

- "George Bush, leave this world alone." (the second time it was sung); and

- "George Bush find yourself another home."

[Snip]

“AT&T's actions strike at the heart of the public's concerns over the power that corporations have when it comes to determining what the public sees and hears through communications media.

“Aspects of censorship, consolidation, and preferential treatment of the Internet are now being debated under the umbrella of "NetNeutrality."

This is pure out-and-out censorship of Internet content by the corporation which conveys it.

AT&T claims that an overzealous employee conducted the censorship, but he violated AT&T policy when he did it.

Whoop-de-doo. Even if that's true, somehow I am supposed to trust AT&T to actually enforce their policy even if they don't get caught? Who controls their policy?

What if Pearljam were singing a song that advocated applying Sherman Anti-Trust and again breaking up AT&T? They change their policy or simply ignore it, apply the censorship, and there is no legal recourse against them. Without a law in place we have to trust in the good faith of AT&T, and that is a guaranteed losing bet.

If we want free speech on the Internet, it will be obtained only by government protection of speech transmitted by the carriers. That means written laws with real teeth preventing censorship, agencies like the FCC which regulate the companies and their compliance with the laws, and courts which enforce those laws.

Personal Rights do not exist unless there is an effective government who recognizes and enforces those Rights. No corporation will do that. It has to be government.

We cannot trust the companies who are carriers. They have their own agendas and the ability to hide behind operational secrecy. We will never know if the individual who violated AT&T policy and censored Pearl Jam was fired, reprimanded, or promoted for his actions.

That is an important aspect of Net Neutrality.