Just after dark on Thursday night in Washington, Free Press parked a Jumbotron right outside the swanky hotel hosting a dinner and roast honoring FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler.
Last Monday night, I was struck by the fear that washed over me after the announcement in the Michael Brown case. Fear because I live in a country that blatantly disregards the value of some people simply because of the color of their skin. People who look like me.
The anti-Net Neutrality crowd at the Progressive Policy Institute claims that Internet service providers and users would pay billions of dollars in new fees if the FCC reasserts its Title II authority. This is just another scare tactic designed to sink real Net Neutrality.
In November, President Obama called for strong open Internet protections. But telecom companies and others are continuing to spread misinformation about what real Net Neutrality would look like.
A lot of us felt devastated after learning that Darren Wilson won’t be indicted for the murder of Michael Brown.
We listened to prosecutor Bob McCulloch’s statement last night on cable news channels, public radio stations, YouTube webcasts and on-the-ground livestreams. We were glued to the media, old and new. And we went there to find community.
On Nov. 20, members of the Media Action Grassroots Network and our allies at ColorOfChange.org, Presente.org and Free Press met with FCC Commissioner Mignon Clyburn to deliver a letter signed by more than 90 racial justice and civil rights organizations.
On Thursday night, the skies were overcast in San Francisco and threatening to storm. A group of Net Neutrality supporters standing on the steps of San Francisco City Hall opened their umbrellas as it began to pour. The group held out, chanting “Fair communication, no discrimination!”
ABC, CBS and NBC are refusing to broadcast Thursday’s historic presidential address on immigration. They think The Big Bang Theory, Grey’s Anatomy and The Biggest Loser: Glory Days are more important.
On Tuesday night the USA Freedom Act failed to move forward.
While this bill would have helped rein in key parts of the government’s surveillance programs, not all is lost.
