Sunday, April 16, 2017

Time to Retire: Rep. James Sensenbrenner says "Nobody's got to use the internet...!"

Rep. James Sensenbrenner, elected way back in 1978, is still operating under the idea that the internet is just a "series of tubes."
Sensenbrenner: "Nobody's got to use the internet...."
Remember when Sen. Ted Stevens clarified that the internet is not something you dump things on, it's not a big truck?



So it is with Rep. James Sensenbrenner, who probably reflects his party's deep thinking on the internet...you know, the internet is just one of many options? Really?

Tell that to Trump who really has to use the internet to state U.S. and foreign policy, attack his enemies, and use it to become president for gods sake.

Constituent Goes after Sensenbrenner over Privacy: You'll notice Sensenbrenner's answer below is ISP focused, dealing with an ISP's ability to make money advertising, having nothing to do with his constituents privacy or her question in general. (Volume is low):


WaPo: Sensenbrenner told a town hall attendee who was concerned about the elimination of online privacy protections that using the Internet is a choice:
“Nobody’s got to use the Internet. … And the thing is that if you start regulating the Internet like a utility, if we did that right at the beginning, we would have no Internet. … Internet companies have invested an awful lot of money in having almost universal service now. The fact is is that, you know, I don’t think it’s my job to tell you that you cannot get advertising for your information being sold. My job, I think, is to tell you that you have the opportunity to do it, and then you take it upon yourself to make that choice. … That’s what the law has been, and I think we ought to have more choices rather than fewer choices with the government controlling our everyday lives.”
What "government control" of our everyday lives? The GOP's mind numbing pat answer to everything "government" just keeps sounding more and more ridiculous everyday. Especially when it comes to selling Americans internet privacy.

The constituent tried to make it clear she wasn't talking about Facebook or Google searches, she was addressing her monopoly ISP:
Not all Internet users have options to switch to a different company if they don’t agree with their current provider’s privacy practices.
Constituent: “Facebook is not comparable to an ISP. I do not have to go to Facebook. I do have one provider. … I have one choice. I don’t have to go on Google. My ISP provider is different than those providers.”
Backtracking and try to ignore the constituents question while explaining the unexplainable...Sensenbrenner's clueless staff appears just as disconnected:
Sensenbrenner’s press office replied to the tweet: “Actually, he said that nobody has to use the Internet. They have a choice. Big difference.” An official from Sensenbrenner’s office said Saturday that the congressman’s point is that people can choose whether or not they want to use certain websites.
The news media itself does serious damage to this story by relegating comments about Sensenbrenner's comments to supposed losers on "social media," who can't get enough of those cat videos on Facebook:
Sensenbrenner’s statement has since drawn criticism from social-media users....
No, everyone who pays bills, sells their product, gets a job online. Sensenbrenner is technically off base when he says "nobody has to use the internet:"
“Nobody has to use indoor plumbing or electricity. They can just use outhouses and kerosene lamps. They have a choice, right?” one Twitter user wrote.

“Nobody has to use the Internet? Many jobs require it. Schools require it. Take his office Internet away, maybe?” said another.

“I’m an online editor. I have to use the Internet. Welcome to 2017,” another one wrote.

The Internet has become such a fixed part of people’s everyday lives, the United Nations considers access to it a human right. In 2016, the U.N. Human Rights Council passed a resolution declaring that denying someone the ability to access or disseminate information online is a human rights violation.

No comments: