I posted on my blog, crossposted to friendfeed; a person I know, in friendfeed, told me that..
"I personally know 2 of the creators of the campaign, I can assure you that all started like an exercise in the context of this program http://atlasnetwork.org/programs/ttmba/ ... it was, effectively, their homework. this is the story so far. regarding the possibility of obtaining some financing, I wish them luck :)" ciao, s. Lauren Weinstein wrote: > 'Secret' telecom anti-Net neutrality plan isn't > > When I viewed the PowerPoint in question, it looked like an amateurish > independent effort, and was to me the least interesting part of the > original article ( http://bit.ly/96KEHR [Think Progress] ). > > It's worth noting that no attempt is made below to refute the other > aspects of the article discussing the political and funding chicanery > behind various elements of the anti-Net Neutrality movement, some of > whom are increasingly embracing the "dirty tricks" playbook. > > --Lauren-- > NNSquad Moderator > > > ----- Forwarded message from David Farber <[email protected]> ----- > > Date: Wed, 12 May 2010 13:17:34 -0400 > From: David Farber <[email protected]> > Subject: [IP] 'Secret' telecom anti-Net neutrality plan isn't | Politics and > Law - CNET News > Reply-To: [email protected] > To: ip <[email protected]> > > Yesterday I got sent the PPT and I held it out of IP since it had a VERY > fishy order. Seems my nose was accurate djf > > > May 12, 2010 9:30 AM PDT > 'Secret' telecom anti-Net neutrality plan isn't > > by Declan McCullagh > > The Center for American Progress seemed to have blockbuster news on Tuesday: > an expose titled "Telecoms' Secret Plan To Attack Net Neutrality." > > On its Think Progress blog, the liberal advocacy group announced it had > "obtained" a PowerPoint document "which reveals how the telecom industry is > orchestrating the latest campaign against Net neutrality" through a > pseudo-grassroots effort. The story was echoed on Slashdot, Boing Boing, and > innumerable pro-regulation blogs. > > There's just one problem with Think Progress' claim: It's not, well, accurate. > > In a case of truth being stranger than astroturf, it turns out that the > PowerPoint document was prepared as a class project for a competition in > Florida last month. It cost the six students a grand total of $173.95, > including $18 for clip art. > > The "No Net Brutality" campaign idea was one of the four finalists created as > an assignment for a two-and-a-half week "think tank MBA" program. The other > finalists were a project promoting free speech in Venezuela, one supporting > education reform in Poland, and one dealing with sales taxes rates in > Washington, D.C. ("No Net Brutality" came in third. The Polish reform idea > won.) > > Not only was the PowerPoint document presentation no secret, but it was > posted publicly on the competition's blog, along with an audio recording of > the event in Miami where the student contestants presented their ideas to the > judges. > > The competition was organized by the Atlas Economic Research Foundation, a > nonprofit, free-market group that spends millions of dollars a year > supporting regional think tanks in other countries, especially those where > the rule of law or protection of individual rights may be impaired. Some > examples include the Imani Center for Policy and Education in Ghana, the > Fundacion Global in Argentina, and the Cathay Institute for Public Affairs in > China. > > "The Think Progress article is hilarious," David MacLean, the Canadian member > of the six-person student team from four different continents, told CNET on > Wednesday. "We've had a really good laugh in the last day over this. This is > one of the funniest things I've ever seen." > > MacLean added: "It was a class project done at the Atlas think tank MBA > program. We came up with the concept in a few days." Part of Atlas' > curriculum on how to manage think tanks required creating the campaign on a > $100 budget and "the goal was to make it launch," said MacLean, who lives in > Alberta. > > Neither Lee Fang, the author of the Think Progress article, or a spokesman > for the Center for American Progress responded to repeated requests for > comment. > > Kristin McMurray, the American member of the team, said: "We have not had any > contact with any telecom company during this campaign. The only funding we > received was the $100 given to us by Atlas." The campaign actually ended up > costing the students money, since they chipped in some of their own cash, > said McMurray, an editor at the Sunshine Review, a nonpartisan organization > that pushes state and local governments to post more information online. > > A post that appeared late Tuesday on the NoNetBrutality.com Web site says: > "I'm sorry to dash all the conspiracy theorists hopes and dreams, but No Net > Brutality is a bonafide concerned citizens initiative." The post said that > the contestants spent all of $173.95 on the idea, including printing and $20 > to register the .com and .org domain names. > > The origin of "Net Brutality" > To brainstorm ideas and create proof of concept campaigns, the students > attending the Atlas program split into multiple teams. Besides McMurray and > MacLean, the other students assigned to the group that came up with the > "NetBrutality" idea were Yolanda Talavera (Nicaragua), Vincent De Roeck > (Belgium), Huafang Li (China) and Aykhan Nasibli (Azerbaidjan). Talavera's > name appears in the PowerPoint document as its creator. > > Their PowerPoint presentation sketches out suggestions for how to rally > opposition to the Federal Communications Commission's move to regulate how > broadband providers are allowed to manage their network. > > Many conservatives and libertarians oppose the idea, arguing that the > Internet has flourished precisely because it has been unregulated. FCC > Chairman Julius Genachowski has said that new rules--the agency's previous > attempt was tossed out by a federal appeals court earlier this year--are > necessary to stop discriminatory activities by Internet providers. > > The presentation shown at the Miami conference says: "Our agenda is to stop > the government from taking over the Internet" by making the public aware of > the "negative effects of this proposal." The students suggested targeting > video game users and other potential allies through a Twitter account, a > Facebook page, and a blog written in Chinese. > > Because De Roeck, who runs a student group in Belgium, had a previous > invitation to show up at a weekly meeting of conservatives convened by > Americans for Tax Reform, he used his three minutes of allotted time as an > opportunity to distribute a flyer about their "NetBrutality" idea. The Atlas > students thought "maybe that would give us an edge over the competition," > McLean said. > > The concept of large corporations spreading their money around Washington to > push for or block new laws is, of course, nothing new in political circles. A > 2008 CNET article revealed how a secretive lobbying organization in > Washington, D.C., called the LawMedia Group--hired by Comcast--did some or > all of the writing for an anti-Net neutrality op-ed. An anti-Google campaign > of dubious provenance that enlisted groups such as the American Corn Growers > Association and the League of Rural Voters also was linked to LMG. > > And it is an article of faith among broadband providers that Silicon Valley > companies give millions to groups that support extensive Net neutrality > regulations. Free Press redacts the source of over $3 million in > contributions from pages 16 and 17 of its financial disclosure statement, and > Google, eBay, and Amazon.com give money to Public Knowledge. > > "There are genuine concerns with how the network is managed," said Jim > Harper, director of information policy studies at the free-market Cato > Institute, who was not aware of the Atlas student competition until > Wednesday. "There are genuine concerns with asking the FCC to do it. But > groups that are obsessing themselves with the politics of it are diluting > their own stories." > > The phrase "Net Brutality" may have been first used three years ago when > FreedomWorks chairman Dick Armey, now a prominent figure in the tea party > movement, assailed a Maryland proposal that he said would not allow Internet > service companies to charge different prices for different amounts of > bandwidth. > > But it wasn't a good enough slogan to win Atlas' student competition in > Florida. "I still think in my mind, no disrespect to our competitors, that we > had the best project," said MacLean, the Canadian team member. > > Declan McCullagh has covered the intersection of politics and technology for > over a decade. E-mail Declan. > Topics: > Regulation > > > [snip] > > > ----- End forwarded message ----- -- blog.quintarelli.it www.eximia.it www.reeplay.it
