No replies to this topic

[CA3LE6UY]

<img src="http://i.dslr.net/urls/71/4471.gif" width=100 border=0 align="right" />
As we've discussed, AT&T had the lion's share of input into the FCC's neutrality rules, getting more private meetings with the agency than any other company. As such, the final FCC rules are largely what AT&T wanted: namely loophole filled, probably unenforceable, and not applicable to wireless. Despite getting everything they wanted and more, AT&T couldn't quite help themselves, and felt obligated to fire a little high test snark at neutrality supporters in a <a href="http://attpublicpolicy.com/government-policy/a-few-thoughts-on-todays-fcc-vote/">statement at the AT&T blog</a>. After pretending the neutrality debate is "behind us" -- and that AT&T had to really make any real compromises whatsoever -- AT&T's Jim Cicconi felts it necessary to take a few extra pot shots for good measure:<div class="bquote"><p>In particular, we would like to commend Chairman Genachowski and his staff for seeking a fair middle ground in this contentious debate.  As we have seen in many issues, there are always radical voices urging heavy-handed government regulation and control of free markets.  Such voices have not been absent from the net neutrality debate despite their repudiation by the American public.  <u>Too often, well-funded ideologues have used intimidation, vilification, and fear-mongering to advance their goal</u> that government control the Internet and other forms of communication without regard for their impact on the jobs and livelihoods of millions already challenged by a difficult economy.  The Commission's apparent rejection of such unfeeling dogma is an added reason to be heartened by today s FCC vote.</p></div>One, the FCC's rules aren't "compromise," given they're essentially a mirror image of rules already proposed by industry itself. Second, AT&T is probably the deepest pocketed and rabid "ideologue" you'll find in any sector, having spent more on campaign contributions than <u>any other U.S. company since 1990</u>, while using a vast network of think tanks, fake consumer groups, hired PR firms and consultants to smear critics, distort the public debate, and justify protectionist and anticompetitive behavior. AT&T also forgets that <b>AT&T</b> was responsible for beginning the modern network neutrality debate in 2005 -- by insisting they were going to erect illogical new toll roads on the information superhighway.

In other words, if you're looking for the "deepest pocketed ideologue" in the network neutrality debate, look no further than AT&T.

Source: DSLReports.com