AOL Outspends Google on Net Neutrality Issues

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

AOL Outspends Google on Net Neutrality Issues

net neutrality

Could AOL be the unlikely savior of net neutrality?

Net neutrality, IE: keeping the internet fast, robust and open to all, is an important issue to anyone who uses the internet (IE: you, reading this article right now). Most people know that Google, having the biggest tech lobby in Washington aside from the big internet service providers, is constantly fighting to keep the net neutral, but now it seems that another unlikely champion of net neutrality has arisen. America Online (AOL), the company best known for giving the world dial-up internet in the '90s and being one of the country's largest ISPs - has outspent Google on net neutrality issues.

The daily dot has gathered a whole bunch of net neutrality lobbying data from the Sunlight Foundation, and aside from AOL's valiant pro-net neutrality effort, the overwhelming amount of reports being thrown in are anti-net neutrality, from big telecommunications corporations like AT&T and Verizon. You can check out this chart to the right.

Other corporations ranking on the pro-net neutrality list include Microsoft, Level 3 and the Writer's Guild of America. Apple, who would stand to lose quite a lot in regards to media streaming regulations, is no-where on the list, either pro or anti.

Needless to say, the numbers make it plainly apparent that AOL, Google, and others will need help in steering this conversation.

Source: The Daily Dot

Permalink

What's Cisco's dog in this fight? Are they planning new throttle-centric hardware?

Also, hi music industry. Making sure people still don't like you huh?

I think a better name for the article would be how much more Comcost, AT&T and version are sending and spending compared to everyone else on that chart.

I mean look its like a diving board on the chat.

Also why are so many big names like Microsoft and Google seemingly holding back? Then again holding back till all the cards on the table may work...

I'm actually curious where Cox Digital stands on there, because they aren't on that list right there. I'm sure they are probably against Net Neutrality, but damn I didn't think that Verizon paid so much for lobbying against it. AT&T lobbying for it doesn't surprise me in the slightest though, they already have shitty services here and now they can possibly make them worse. What sucks is that in my town the only 2 ISPs available are Cox Digital and AT&T. Roadrunner used to exist here, before AT&T basically ran them out of town.

Also, I find that AT&T is saying "we'll honor net neutrality for a little bit...if you regulators let us rebuild our monopoly again with the DirecTV merger. Tis depressing times we live in for sure. *glances over at the EU, which actually protects consumers*

MCerberus:
What's Cisco's dog in this fight? Are they planning new throttle-centric hardware?

Also, hi music industry. Making sure people still don't like you huh?

Yeah, unless Cisco really has some evil new tech they plan to sell to the pro-fast lane ISPs, they are gonna loose some business, too, when the smaller companies give up upgrading their servers paying for new equipment and the fast lane won't fit the business model. Even the ISPs aren't going to upgrade as fast as their new prices would suggest. Most of that extra money is going into the executives' bonuses and to the future campaigns of their political supporters.

And the music industry in general is being idiots again. (It's the first thing I noticed on that chart. Fancy that.) Customers streaming their songs over and over means they'll get a recurring profit from the stream service compared to someone going on iTunes and buying the few songs they want once. In fact I could imagine a sizable user base streaming songs they already purchased just because they don't have their MP3s on the device they're carrying or logged into the streaming service on a friend's computer/phone. Again, greedy executives in these companies are being so damn shortsighted I'm surprised they got that rich in the first place. If we don't get the proper Net Neutrality back, I hope the resulting changes in the IT economy bites those guys specifically in the asses.

It isn't surprising that the telecom companies that drive me insane by cornering the market and forcing me to deal with ass service are also the ones sending the most money against Net Neutrality. I can only imagine what else they'll have in store if they could destroy that utterly.

Does this affect anywhere else besides usa?

dyre:
Snip

Why would... I mean it actually says "lobbying reports mentioning net neutrality" right on the chart. but I suppose this is an object lesson in reading the linked article before whats posted here so I call tell how much is misrepresented/changed.

OT: I think what should be far more newsworthy than AOL puting slightly more effort into this than Google is just how dedicated major ISP are to opposing NN. Of all the corporations with too much power and government influence Comcast and AT&T are starting to catch up with the RIAA/MPAA copyright mafia in terms of frightening me with their dedication to jackassery.

Orks da best:
I think a better name for the article would be how much more Comcost, AT&T and version are sending and spending compared to everyone else on that chart.

See dyre's post above mine. It's not spending, it's lobbying reports.

Now i get it. the reason the telecom companies run extortionate prices with outdated infrastructure and still manage to run a loss is fault of net neutrality. after all it causes them to spend millions on creating propaganda in thousands.

ExtraDebit:
Does this affect anywhere else besides usa?

Not currently however it can set a dangerous precedent and some countries want that. the only outside force that oppenly opposes this is EU who have confirmed Net Neutrality in law.

Strazdas:

Not currently however it can set a dangerous precedent and some countries want that. the only outside force that oppenly opposes this is EU who have confirmed Net Neutrality in law.

Not quite, while they're moving towards net neutrality as legally binding law its still someway off from that. However most state seem to consider net neutrality a good thing. The UK might not go in with a European law, but is generally for net neutrality and so might make a domestic law.

exobook:

Strazdas:

Not currently however it can set a dangerous precedent and some countries want that. the only outside force that oppenly opposes this is EU who have confirmed Net Neutrality in law.

Not quite, while they're moving towards net neutrality as legally binding law its still someway off from that. However most state seem to consider net neutrality a good thing. The UK might not go in with a European law, but is generally for net neutrality and so might make a domestic law.

the UK will have no choice. you either comply with EU law or you leave the union. And leaving the union would be economic suicide.

Damn, this is pathetic. Money isn't just a form of freedom of speech in the US. It is the only freedom of speech that counts. You can't get the most basic common sense policies without a shitload of money. I wish nothing but the worst possible fate for all of your corrupt officials and the people that do the corrupting.

ExtraDebit:
Does this affect anywhere else besides usa?

Yes, and that's the scary bit. Borders are getting more and more vague, especially on economic territory thanks to the recent trends in globalization and technological development. For instance, take the movie industry and the screwed up way the US treats movie ratings. That, in part, has an impact on what sort of films are getting funded in the first place and thus also what we in the EU will or will not get to see.

It's why I extremely lament the prevalence of, and in a way reliance on, American culture. Or put in a different way, the fact that American culture is spread so widely. And this net neutrality bullshit is just another reason; I not even remotely trust their political system, the immense power lobbying has in the US, and the global impact it could have, really frightens me.

Luckily, in the case of net neutrality the EU is a pretty strong opponent of this nonsense, but I can see it disappearing in the US having impact on a lot of services we use.

dyre:
Snip of DOOM

Simply amazing. It seems the escapist has went the way of other news outlets and traded journalism for shock value. This is happening A LOT more often on the site and needs to be fixed at once!

Strazdas:

exobook:

Strazdas:

Not currently however it can set a dangerous precedent and some countries want that. the only outside force that oppenly opposes this is EU who have confirmed Net Neutrality in law.

Not quite, while they're moving towards net neutrality as legally binding law its still someway off from that. However most state seem to consider net neutrality a good thing. The UK might not go in with a European law, but is generally for net neutrality and so might make a domestic law.

the UK will have no choice. you either comply with EU law or you leave the union. And leaving the union would be economic suicide.

Hang on, isn't the UK not part of the EU union or is is it partially part of it? Cause I remember them keeping their own currency because they though a union was BS.

hickwarrior:

Strazdas:

exobook:

Not quite, while they're moving towards net neutrality as legally binding law its still someway off from that. However most state seem to consider net neutrality a good thing. The UK might not go in with a European law, but is generally for net neutrality and so might make a domestic law.

the UK will have no choice. you either comply with EU law or you leave the union. And leaving the union would be economic suicide.

Hang on, isn't the UK not part of the EU union or is is it partially part of it? Cause I remember them keeping their own currency because they though a union was BS.

The UK is part of the European Union and engages in it politically (no matter who much UK politicians and right wingers complain about it), engaging in meetings and following legislation from Brussels. However they are not part of the Euro Zone or the zone of greater political/economic/financial integration that exists round it. Britain opted out of this and other certain laws both to protect its "independence" but also the city of London which produces a lot of Britain's green economy figures.

God-damnit, if it wasn't for Jim Sterling and Ben Croshaw I'd f***ing avoid The Escapist Magazine like the plague.

Why is this a matter of who spends the most and not about what the people want?
And how is aol spending one pixel more than google pro net neutrality news worthy if it changes nothing in the grand scheme of things?

Cowabungaa:

ExtraDebit:
Does this affect anywhere else besides usa?

Yes, and that's the scary bit. Borders are getting more and more vague, especially on economic territory thanks to the recent trends in globalization and technological development. For instance, take the movie industry and the screwed up way the US treats movie ratings. That, in part, has an impact on what sort of films are getting funded in the first place and thus also what we in the EU will or will not get to see.

It's why I extremely lament the prevalence of, and in a way reliance on, American culture. Or put in a different way, the fact that American culture is spread so widely. And this net neutrality bullshit is just another reason; I not even remotely trust their political system, the immense power lobbying has in the US, and the global impact it could have, really frightens me.

Luckily, in the case of net neutrality the EU is a pretty strong opponent of this nonsense, but I can see it disappearing in the US having impact on a lot of services we use.

Adding to what Cowabungaa wrote, and the original question. Yes, it will effect us in the EU, I cannot speak on behalf of Europeans, but only myself. But I do presume that I'm not the only one whose internet habits are dominated by US content. So the net-neutrality issue affecting the US, will inevitably also have an effect on me ( and fellow Europeans ). But uh, I'm cheering from the side line.

I thought that Net Neutrality had already been struck down. There was a huge outrage about it and everything.

hickwarrior:

Strazdas:

exobook:

Not quite, while they're moving towards net neutrality as legally binding law its still someway off from that. However most state seem to consider net neutrality a good thing. The UK might not go in with a European law, but is generally for net neutrality and so might make a domestic law.

the UK will have no choice. you either comply with EU law or you leave the union. And leaving the union would be economic suicide.

Hang on, isn't the UK not part of the EU union or is is it partially part of it? Cause I remember them keeping their own currency because they though a union was BS.

they are fully part of European Union. They are not part of EURO zone. another country that is like that is Lithuania (where i live).

loa:
And how is aol spending one pixel more than google pro net neutrality news worthy if it changes nothing in the grand scheme of things?

Newsworthy part of this is that AOL is actually for net neutrality, considering its past its a 180 turn.

The Christian Coalition? Sounds out of place but around $20 million for Pro-Net Neutrality makes me want to know more about them.

Does the author of the article realize that those are just numbers from Q1 and Q2 of 2013? The last year they have complete data for is 2012 in which Google was the second biggest spender for the year and AOL wasn't on the list. Additionally, why is it news that AOL is spending more money than Google? AOL has been strengthening quite a bit since 2012 when they sold patents and began making their business viable again. It is horribly ignorant to think that AOL is out of the game. They've more than doubled as a company since 2011.

Maybe journalists should wait until the numbers come in before taping up a Mission Accomplished banner and taking a photo op? Not even sure what the mission was here. Google isn't obligated to spend anything and yet, here they are. Are we somehow indicating that a company spending over 20 million on Net Neutrality is somehow dropping the ball?

dyre:

Steven Bogos:

AOL Outspends Google on Net Neutrality Issues
[...]
America Online (AOL), the company best known for giving the world dial-up internet in the '90s and being one of the country's largest ISPs - has outspent Google on net neutrality issues.

Is it really that hard to read the whole dailydot article before rehashing it into your own article?

The chart in your article merely measures the number of reports filed that have the word "net neutrality" somewhere in them, not the money spent. AOL filed slightly more reports than Google, so one could argue that it was slightly more "active" using that somewhat arbitrary metric. But it clearly did not spend more money...

...in terms of spending, here's the relevant chart. Google remains the only pro-net neutrality company that has lobbying expenditures comparable to the major telecoms.
image

Come on, guys, don't you have any pride as journalists? Even the weekly paper at the high school I attended exhibited consistently higher quality journalism than this site...

Glad I didn't have to be the one to point out that blatant "mistake" (I feel like being generous today) seeing as how, you know, the chart in the article doesn't even have "cash", "money", or "spending" on it anywhere.

OT:
Think I'll just go ahead and leave this quote right here...

"I am in this race to tell the corporate lobbyists in Washington that their days of setting the agenda are over." - Barack Obama

Oh, hello Mr. Tom Wheeler. You say you used to lobby for big cable and telecommunications companies? Well you sound like the perfect presidential appointee to become the head of the federal institution that regulates cable and telecommunications companies.

And the world did laugh at us, as it has been for the past decade and a half.

Steven Bogos:

Apple, who would stand to lose quite a lot in regards to media streaming regulations, is no-where on the list, either pro or anti.

Apple are just a bunch of spineless opportunists, too afraid to alienate their user base on the one hand, but salivating like a hungry Tex Avery cartoon wolf at the prospects of closed internet and what it will mean for their bottom line.

"One possible explanation: The Journal reported in March that Apple and Comcast, who agreed to acquire Time Warner Cable for $45 billion in a deal that has raised concerns for net neutrality backers, are in talks for a streaming-television service that would use an Apple set-top box and get special treatment on Comcast's cables to ensure it bypasses congestion on the Web."

Source: http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2014/05/08/why-didnt-apple-join-opposition-to-fcc-net-neutrality-proposal/

It's times like these you see the true colors of those pulling the strings. Good on AOL! I will support them more. So far I'm disappointed in Google and hoping they will step up their game. As for Apple I will from here on out be boycotting their products and services. This whole Net Neutrality thing is making me draw lines in the sand.

Seriously, fuck those spineless scum bags.

I don't have much to say about the story (seeing how the author didn't really care too much about it either), but can I just say that I'm highly amused that the Christian Coalition has managed to put out more lobby reports on the issue than the freaking Consumer's Union of America?

Orks da best:
I think a better name for the article would be how much more Comcost, AT&T and version are sending and spending compared to everyone else on that chart.

I mean look its like a diving board on the chat.

Also why are so many big names like Microsoft and Google seemingly holding back? Then again holding back till all the cards on the table may work...

It's not that they're holding back, it's that Verison, ATT, and Comcast are going ALL in because they know they will make a SHIT load of money extorting internet based companies for unstrangled internet.

loa:
Why is this a matter of who spends the most and not about what the people want?
And how is aol spending one pixel more than google pro net neutrality news worthy if it changes nothing in the grand scheme of things?

Because America is no longer a democracy. We are an oligarchy. A government system where the rich and powerful set policies while everyone else has little to no say. We've all suspected this for decades until Princeton's study confirmed what we all knew. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/apr/21/americas-oligarchy-not-democracy-or-republic-unive/

The fact that our officials need our votes is a formality at best. Once they're in office money is what talks. They'll pretend to care about your opinions when the next election roles around. You might say "But how can this be!? They can't be bribed. That's illegal!" No, they can't be paid. Directly. But they can accept campaign contributions. Where do you think all the money comes from that allows them to dominate your television every election? And they can accept cushy, overpaid, jobs after their stint in government is over. An award for years of doing what that corporation wanted them to do. Just recently the senate wanted to overhaul the US tax code to eliminate the tax loop holes that have been lobbied into it since the last overhaul in the 1980s. In order to get any of the senators to even consider it they had to be offered 50 years of identity protection so that the corporations that enjoy those loop holes don't use their money to destroy those senators in the next election. You may not have heard about this because MSNBC spent all of 30 seconds talking about it one time. Fox News spent all of two minutes. Why? Because both stations are owned by uber rich men who don't want you to know that they own your country.

So, yes, it does matter. Because this battle, like every other one in our government, is decided by who is throwing the most money at it. You can kick, scream, and petition all you want. Tom Wheeler blatantly doesn't give a shit.

Steven Bogos:
AOL-Outspends-Google-on-Net-Neutrality-Issues

You know, even the Daily Mail doesn't often post articles with headlines claiming the exact opposite of what is shown in the article's images. They usually just settle for spinning the story.

Almost every week we see articles on the Escapist that would violate the TOC if they were forum posts (misleading thread titles and so forth). Do article writers get warned for this sort of thing?

Man, those Internet companies sure are terrible. I'm gonna make my own, better internet service, with hookers and blackjack. You know what? Forget the internet service.

lacktheknack:
I don't have much to say about the story (seeing how the author didn't really care too much about it either), but can I just say that I'm highly amused that the Christian Coalition has managed to put out more lobby reports on the issue than the freaking Consumer's Union of America?

Way to put five on it for net neutrality Christian Coalition!

J-man wants dem nets to be free!

"Savior of the internet"? Screw google and aol. What the data about spending shows is that we are f****d.

Raziel:
"Savior of the internet"? Screw google and aol. What the data about spending shows is that we are f****d.

Not really, I'd say the spending is all directly proportionate to what each entity has to gain or lose on the currently proposed deal.

The lower spenders have the backing of a TON of Americans and companies. If they go through with it, it'd be interesting to see the public response.

It's really hard for outright corruption to succeed in so bright a spotlight.

Strazdas:
Not currently however it can set a dangerous precedent and some countries want that. the only outside force that oppenly opposes this is EU who have confirmed Net Neutrality in law.

But if the opinion polls are anything to go off, UKIP will probably have something to say about this when the muscle some seats in the European Parliament, because fuck equality, rationality and hate immigrants and all things progressive.

OT: Seems odd Google aren't lobbying more for neutrality, then again they could be biding their time.

Edit: UKIP (the UK Independence Party) want to remove themselves from the EU due to "Britain not being about Britain," an argument which is utterly stupid considering Britain would be nothing if it did not have outsiders bringing their culture, because politicians in the EU enforce laws we don't control (like, you know, murder is bad and all that wacky liberal shit) and want to remove the open border policy that comes with the EU because them God Damn Immigrants terkin are jerbs (even though the leader of UKIP's wife is German, whoops.)

MCerberus:

Also, hi music industry. Making sure people still don't like you huh?

Buy our music on iTunes! Watch our videos on extensively ad-laden video channels! But we hate you because if you're on the internet you're a filthy pirate.

I think that's their message, anyway.

Orks da best:
I think a better name for the article would be how much more Comcost, AT&T and version are sending and spending compared to everyone else on that chart.

We already knew they were the driving force, we already knew they outstripped the competition. What we didn't know is that Google isn't quite the "champion of the internet" people are making them out to be.

Of course, that still doesn't pertain to funds, but lobbying reports, so take that as you will. I mean, Google has spent more money, but that "lobbying footprint" as the DD article puts it may still yield less impressive results.

loa:
Why is this a matter of who spends the most and not about what the people want?
And how is aol spending one pixel more than google pro net neutrality news worthy if it changes nothing in the grand scheme of things?

Because politicians don't represent people. There's no fiscal incentive. And in a nation where you need to raise campaign funds annually to compete, you need a fiscal incentive.

lacktheknack:
I don't have much to say about the story (seeing how the author didn't really care too much about it either), but can I just say that I'm highly amused that the Christian Coalition has managed to put out more lobby reports on the issue than the freaking Consumer's Union of America?

Yeeeeeeah, that really came out of left field.

Especially since CC and Pat Robertson have both been in favour of other kinds of censorship.

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here