Comcast Packed The Net Neutrality Debate At Harvard

Posted by John Carney, Feb 26, 2008, 3:43pm

Napping For Comcast.jpg

Yesterday a cameraman for the Free Press caught two members of the audience napping during an FCC hearing on net neutrality at Harvard Law School. Now we don’t blame them for snoozing through a meeting about net neutrality—our eyes glaze over just thinking about it—but it does raise the question: why would you go to an FCC hearing if you are bored by that type of thing?

Portfolio’s Sam Gustin has answered the question: they were there because cable giant Comcast paid them to be there. Comcast had planned to pack the meeting with its local employees, and had paid some people off the street to show-up early and hold places in the line for the employees.

“Some of those placeholders, however, did more than wait in line: they filled many of the seats at the meeting, according to eyewitnesses,” Gustin reports. “As a result, scores of Comcast critics and other members of the public were denied entry because the room filled up well before the beginning of the hearing.”

Money can't buy you love, but it can buy you napping bodies to keep your critics at bay.

Comcast Astroturfs the Old-Fashioned Way [Portfolio.com]

2Recommend this! 6Comments
Posted in: Politics, Regulators
Tags: Comcast, Dirty Tricks, FCC, Harvard, Net Neutrality

Comments

Posted by guest, Feb 26, 2008 4:21PM

that is pretty pathetic - of comcast. Manufacturing consent seems pretty obvious. I wonder what they paid those guys?

Posted by diablo, Feb 26, 2008 4:55PM

Actually net neutrality is an interesting topic. Comcast, and other big ISPs (phone companies) want to reverse the model they use for cable tv. In cable tv Comcast pays for most good content (example the YES network). Without net neutrality Comcast wants the content providers to pay Comcast.
The internet as we know will cease to exist. It will be pandemonium. For example, YouTube will have to negotiate with each ISP out there for a rate so their content is not blocked or rendered unusable.

Closer to home, now imagine this:

Dealbreaker will be blocked for sure, they can't pay. Comcast's investment bankers will make sure of that in exchange for some discount in a future merger deal. Imagine the possibilities.

Posted by guest, Feb 26, 2008 5:10PM

Weren't they more talking about Comcast's ability to regulate users on their network and give preference to certain users? More about how they block those individuals that chew up a huge amount of bandwidth with massive file sharing operations?

Posted by guest, Feb 26, 2008 5:13PM

when I first saw the photo of these two guys sleepig I thought they were watching Erin Burnett's Squawk On The Street with Mark Haines.

Posted by guest, Feb 26, 2008 5:47PM

My guess is that they were paid in hackey(?) sacks and hash brownies.

Posted by guest, Feb 27, 2008 4:32PM

Here's the problem: Comcast takes the same approach to public debate that it has to Internet access: that it can wield substantial political and market power to shut out debate and shut up people. For too long, communications policymaking has been rigged against us. We need to send a wakeup call to phone and cable giants and their powerful lobbyists that they will no longer set the agenda. Check out this new video we just released: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RYGtNmmb2y0

The purpose of the Internet is to give power over information to everyone. The role of our elected leaders is to protect our basic right to communicate from those who want to take it away from us. Whether it's on the Internet or at public hearings we must stand up for everyone's right to connect.

Post Your Comment