NAACP Inconsistent on Broadband - Laments digital divide, while supporting 'franchise reform'

NAACP Inconsistent on Broadband - Laments digital divide, while supporting 'franchise reform'
Links: home · search · speed test · login · more ·

NAACP Inconsistent on Broadband
Laments digital divide, while supporting 'franchise reform'
(old news - 02:29PM Friday May 11 2007)
tags: competition · coverage · business · Op/Ed · Politics

The NAACP's Greg Moore laments the state of broadband deployment in the Asbury Park Press, criticizing the President's failed effort to deploy universal broadband by this year. Moore insists that for the NAACP, "broadband in every home should remain our policy goal," yet in Florida they're supporting bell-lobbied legislation that state consumer advocates say simply aims to legalize deployment of next-gen services to only the most lucrative neighborhoods (aka "cherry picking").

Moore's piece also uses the digital divide as a tool to take a shot at network neutrality, parroting the incumbent position that operations like Google are getting a "free ride" on incumbent networks. Moore takes it even further, suggesting that network neutrality advocates, not ISPs, are to blame for low-income communities being unable to get broadband connectivity:

"Now, some well-intentioned online activists are pushing regulations called 'net neutrality,' which would keep costs low for the large Internet content companies but shift the costs of network expansion mostly to consumers. The effects could be disastrous for low-income and minority communities, pricing them out of the broadband market by guaranteeing a free ride to companies such as Google and eBay while shifting costs for broadband expansion back to consumers."

As we recently mentioned, it's not clear anymore if groups like the NAACP or NAD represent their corporate donors or their constituents. Also see telecom activist Bruce Kushnick's recent report on how incumbent ISPs co-opt existing advocacy groups to push political agendas that frequently are not in consumers' best interests.

Verizon & AT&T Defend 'Anti-Tech' Positions

ISP Lobbying Group: What Rural Broadband Problem?

Can't We All Just Get Along?

Verizon: Stop Yer Broadband Bellyachin'

Nation's Largest ISPs Crafting Fake National Broadband Policy

Broadband Policy: No, We Can't All Just Get Along

FTTH Council Wants 100Mbps For All

Mega-ISPs, Consumer Advocates Demand Broadband Plan

Links: New Topic
Forums »

TK Junk Mail @ 11th May 02:40PM:
Painting all opponents of "net neutrality" with sell-out ...

... label seems to be a favorite tactic of those who support net neutrality. As if anyone with an opinion different from theirs is automatically a bought and paid for shill of the cable and telco firms and couldn't possibly have come to their decision on their own. It is a lame tactic that avoids discussion of the merits and is merely an ad-hominem debate tactic.
--
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page
reply

morbo @ 11th May 02:44PM:
Re: Painting all opponents of "net neutrality" with sell-out ...

show us that the NAACP hasn't accepted money from telco's in the past few years.
reply

ninjatutle @ 11th May 02:46PM:
Why is NAACP still around

:huh:
reply

TK Junk Mail @ 11th May 02:51PM:
Re: Painting all opponents of "net neutrality" with sell-out ...

said by morbo :

show us that the NAACP hasn't accepted money from telco's in the past few years.

And if they have, so what!! I am sure the NAACP accepts donations from thousands of companies and millions of people. It does not mean that every policy stance they take was based on strings-attached donations. What, you think they have some computer program that analyzes every policy stance they have against the stated goals of every donor on dozens of topics. And then does some weighted average to determine their positions? LOL.
--
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page
reply

DaSneaky1D @ 11th May 02:52PM:
Re: Why is NAACP still around

For the same reason the Christian Coalition is still around.

To get cheap broadband access for those that don't have access to it, then force the media companies and ISP's to stop sending smut down the tubes so our children have a chance of being good moral citizens of this country.
--
:: my trivial ramblings ::
reply

xerxes3642 @ 11th May 03:02PM:
once again

naacp talking about crap they know nothing about. who listens to the naacp on corporate franchising issues anyway? why are they even involved? sounds like they need to shut the f*^% up and go back to attacking universities for not having enough diversity.
reply

morbo @ 11th May 03:02PM:
Re: Painting all opponents of "net neutrality" with sell-out ...

their stance on this issue REEKS of telco astroturf campaigns.
reply

Necronomikro @ 11th May 03:13PM:
Re: Why is NAACP still around

said by DaSneaky1D :
then force the media companies and ISP's to stop sending smut down the tubes so our children have a chance of being good moral citizens of this country.

I hope that this is a joke. If parents would watch what their kids are doing, and use vchip and monitoring software on the computers.... you know what, forget it, my mind is going numb from reading what you posted.
reply

MooJohn @ 11th May 03:14PM:
Re: Why is NAACP still around

You'll find that some people's very existence depends on an atmosphere of discord and unrest. To admit otherwise would require them to get real jobs.

To this end, if there is a lack of controversy they simply create a few to keep themselves relevant and in demand.
--
John M - Cranky network guy
reply

Ima @ 11th May 03:15PM:
Re: once again

You're quite hostile towards them.. but why?

Anyway, they can voice their opinion/stance on the matter, hell everyone else in the world does when they have no clue what they're talking about anyhow. Why should the NAACP be excluded?
reply

jtudor @ 11th May 03:16PM:
Re: Why is NAACP still around

Typical NAACP doublespeak!

Me think black man speak with forked tongue :D

The NAACP is still around for the same reason that there is still a "Miss Black America" contest even though there have been several black "Miss America's" in recent years.

The answer is $$$$$$$ and that's all!
--
Best of luck

"Do, or Do not, there is no try!" Yoda

reply

odreian615 @ 11th May 03:27PM:
lies I tell you

I'm black and went to some of the worst hoods in Chicago to fix peoples computers with my laptop I get on a average of ten damn wifi signals no matter how poor the the neighborhood is
reply

Vertickle @ 11th May 03:27PM:
Re: Why is NAACP still around

said by DaSneaky1D :

For the same reason the Christian Coalition is still around.

The NAACP is out there spreading the gospel too?!?!? :huh:
reply

james1 @ 11th May 03:41PM:
Re: Why is NAACP still around

Because every race has extremist racist bigots.
reply

james1 @ 11th May 03:45PM:
Re: Why is NAACP still around

he wasn't saying it as his opinion. That is what those organisations mission statements are is all.
reply

dariena @ 11th May 03:59PM:
Re: lies I tell you

said by odreian615 :

I'm black and went to some of the worst hoods in Chicago to fix peoples computers with my laptop I get on a average of ten damn wifi signals no matter how poor the the neighborhood is

Well I guess that means everything is ok!
reply

anon @ 11th May 04:34PM:
Re: once again

said by xerxes3642 :

naacp talking about crap they know nothing about. who listens to the naacp on corporate franchising issues anyway? why are they even involved? sounds like they need to shut the f*^% up and go back to attacking universities for not having enough diversity.

Sounds bitter, someone has issues.

This is a very irresponsible "news" item. The headline makes it seem like the entire NAACP supports Greg Moore position on broadband deployment. It may surprise some people that not all African-Americans think exactly alike, even if they belong to the same organization. No where does Greg Moore imply that he is speaking on behalf of the NAACP. George W. Bush is white, does that mean everyone who is white support his views? Of course not.

This "news" item does it's best to make it seem like the NAACP is talking out of both sides of their mouths. If you read the release, the NAACP of Florida supports the bill because it increases competiton, which help to keep prices down.

What this "news" item fails to mention is that the cherry-picking provisions were taken out of the bill the NAACP supported. This is FOX NEWS style reporting. Slanting and distorting facts coupled with inflaming sensitive issues is low. BBR should be ashamed.
reply

Necronomikro @ 11th May 04:01PM:
Re: Why is NAACP still around

I sincerely hope so. I apologize for my previous remark if that's the case.
reply

pokesph @ 11th May 04:17PM:
free-ride?

last time I checked, Google, Yahoo, etc. were all PAYING for their bandwidth already (come on, how else will they even be on-line) and I'd imagine it's not chump change with their traffic. So, why is this even a concern? Getting tired of these greedy corp types thinking that they can control every little %*$%#* thing.

bah, go away!
reply

Karl Bode @ 11th May 05:04PM:
Re: once again

quote:
This "news" item does it's best to make it seem like the NAACP is talking out of both sides of their mouths.

The NAACP does that for themselves. Effort wasn't really required.

quote:
If you read the release, the NAACP of Florida supports the bill because it increases competiton, which help to keep prices down.

It does? Surely then you can find me heaps of real Florida consumer advocates who think SB0998 was a good idea. You can't? That's because they all think it's an awful bill.

quote:
What this "news" item fails to mention is that the cherry-picking provisions were taken out of the bill the NAACP supported.

Incorrect, and makes no sense. Actually, all of of the amendments concerned locals tried to include in the bill to prevent cherry picking were pulled, according to my conversations with Florida PIRG's Brad Ashwell.
reply

dogma @ 11th May 05:52PM:
Offensive

said by snippet above :
"...The effects could be disastrous for low-income and minority communities, pricing them out of the broadband market by..."

The NAACP, once the best example of a strong "grass roots" organization that fought for the common man...of all ethnicity's, is now nothing more than another corrupt Washington lobby. Under the guise of fighting a war they won a long time ago, they have reduced themselves to poverty pimps in search of a guilt-paycheck.

I find it highly insulting this bozo correlates "low-income" and "minority" as one. If he were some right-wing neocon, I could better understand his broad brushed bigotry. He is simply looking for continued "donations" from even dumber Corporations.

I wonder if he would consider This Guy among one of the "low-income minorities" (because he describes the two as one in the same) that is lacking Internet access?
reply

tapeloop @ 11th May 06:02PM:
Re: once again

said by Karl Bode :

quote:
This "news" item does it's best to make it seem like the NAACP is talking out of both sides of their mouths.

The NAACP does that for themselves. Effort wasn't really required.

I'm sorry, but I can't find anything that indicates Moore's opinion is that of the entire NAACP. I wouldn't be surprised if others in the organization disagreed with him, considering conflict caused the most recent president Bruce Gordon (who, if you're keeping score, was a Verizon & CBS exec) to resign after little over a year.
--
I cannot stand demagoguery. If you disagree with my stance, you're a blithering twit. You're not a twit, are you?
reply

calvoiper @ 11th May 06:10PM:
Re: Painting all opponents of "net neutrality" with sell-out ...

More accurately, their stance reeks of longing for the days when various "wealth redistribution" programs could be hidden in monopoly utility rates (discount rates for low income, etc., etc.) With the advent of competition, the true cost of these subsidies becomes clear and has to either be fairly spread around the industry (effectively as a fully disclosed "tax") or discontinued.

I think the NAACP, like other liberal groups, is fully aware of the consequences of not having Net Neutrality regulation--the "backroom kickback" culture that develops in such a situation limits new entrants and competition--thereby making it easier for wealth redistribution schemes to be hidden in the rates of one or two players, rather than having to be an explicit surcharge on the rates of 4 or 5 players.

Some of these "consumer and ratepayer groups" are still smarting that they missed the boat and didn't somehow get subsidies for cellular rates to placate their supporters, and they are determined to use any trick they can to hide subsidy schemes in the broadband world.

calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies!
reply

calvoiper @ 11th May 06:17PM:
Re: free-ride?

You have to remember, the telcos (and now, the cablecos) believe that they "own" the customer, and that content and other providers should pay extortion charges to reach the end user.

Just like the "access charges" that local telcos charge to LD companies, this is one way of getting paid twice for the same local distribution plant.

(Or, to look at it another way, it's a way of getting paid by someone else for the local distribution plant so an established ISP can undercharge its customers, thereby discouraging competition even though a new technology might be far cheaper. The newbie doesn't have the "heft" to extort kickbacks from the content providers and so can't offer the subsidized rates the established ISP can.)

calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies!
reply

soothsayer15 @ 11th May 06:43PM:
Re: once again

quote:
said by Karl Bode :

quote:
This "news" item does it's best to make it seem like the NAACP is talking out of both sides of their mouths.
The NAACP does that for themselves. Effort wasn't really required.

Wow. Talk about an objective rational response. The previous two were right. Nowhere does Greg Moore claim to be speaking for the NAACP.

Your article is very misleading and I can see why people would question it's agenda. You fail to mention that the bill passed 117-2. The Florida legislature isn't made up of 117 black members and 2 white ones. This vote was almost unanimous which shows black, white, Latino, republican and democrat voted for this. Why the need to single out the NAACP?

»www.miamiherald.com/458/story/92084.html

Like I've said numerous times in the past, no one reads the articles or researches for themselves. Everyone has a right to their opinion, but sayings it's news is bull. Unfortunately few people can tell the difference between a news article and an editorial.
reply

batterup @ 11th May 06:47PM:
It's a business.

A business has to have a return on investment or the stock holders will bail and the business will fail.

If you legislate a practice that will not make money it will not get built. There was a time when the universal service at an affordable price was the law. That time is long gone.

Ma Bell is dead and yet the people bitch and the US falls farther down the list of the world's networks.
reply

Lil Jon @ 11th May 06:50PM:
Re: lies I tell you

Yup, i dunno wtf ppl think black people dont use the internet.

anywho, how do you get your business? like how do you get to know these people in these hoods so that they'd want you to fix their computer? Do you network on mySpace?
reply

soothsayer15 @ 11th May 06:58PM:
Re: Painting all opponents of "net neutrality" with sell-out ...

said by calvoiper :

More accurately, their stance reeks of longing for the days when various "wealth redistribution" programs could be hidden in monopoly utility rates (discount rates for low income, etc., etc.) With the advent of competition, the true cost of these subsidies becomes clear and has to either be fairly spread around the industry (effectively as a fully disclosed "tax") or discontinued.

I think the NAACP, like other liberal groups, is fully aware of the consequences of not having Net Neutrality regulation--the "backroom kickback" culture that develops in such a situation limits new entrants and competition--thereby making it easier for wealth redistribution schemes to be hidden in the rates of one or two players, rather than having to be an explicit surcharge on the rates of 4 or 5 players.

Some of these "consumer and ratepayer groups" are still smarting that they missed the boat and didn't somehow get subsidies for cellular rates to placate their supporters, and they are determined to use any trick they can to hide subsidy schemes in the broadband world.

calvoiper

BBR is playing propaganda machine on this one. Somehow BBR failed to mention the bill passed 117-2. For those of you that aren't math majors, that almost unanimous. Florida legislature isn't made up of 117 black/liberal/democrats members and 2 white/conservative/republicans.

»www.miamiherald.com/458/story/92084.html

Maybe that little tidbit was left out of purpose to inflame members and drive an agenda which is fraking disgusting, if that is the case. Two issues that had nothing to do with each other were combined to make this news(I use that term lightly) story.

No one feels that can fight propaganda with honest reporting, so they turning into propaganda machines themselves. A half-truth is just as bad as a lie.
reply

soothsayer15 @ 11th May 07:22PM:
Re: It's a business.

said by batterup :

A business has to have a return on investment or the stock holders will bail and the business will fail.

If you legislate a practice that will not make money it will not get built. There was a time when the universal service at an affordable price was the law. That time is long gone.

Ma Bell is dead and yet the people bitch and the US falls farther down the list of the world's networks.

That's what a lot of users here fail to recognize. They seem to want something for nothing while pissing and moaning about stockholders. Those evil stockholders grease the wheels of our economy.

For some reason BBR users think stockholders are shriveled up geezers buying yachts with their money. Investors with the most say-so are the Institutional Investors investing billions of dollars for a steady reliable return. They don't understand the Major stockholders responsibility is to the people that trusted them with their money, like those in 401k plans. Earning a steady rate of return so millions of people can retire is their priority. Making sure people can get 100 Mbps symmetrical downloads on torrents is not.
reply

Freezone @ 11th May 07:26PM:
Re: Why is NAACP still around

said by jtudor :

Typical NAACP doublespeak!

The NAACP is still around for the same reason that there is still a "Miss Black America" contest even though there have been several black "Miss America's" in recent years.

Fnny thing is no one cares about either contest, unless there is sex, drugs and tears involved.
reply

Freezone @ 11th May 07:35PM:
Re: lies I tell you

The number one reason people have cable modem in the "Hood" is for online console gaming.

Also just becuase someone lives in a poor housing area does not mean that they actually are poor. African Americans tend to hold out in a nieghborhood even if it is falling. Those who do leave are labled "Sell outs" for not staying in a bad area and moving to the subss.
reply

DaSneaky1D @ 11th May 08:34PM:
Re: Why is NAACP still around

said by Vertickle :

said by DaSneaky1D :

For the same reason the Christian Coalition is still around.

The NAACP is out there spreading the gospel too?!?!? :huh:

Since when does the Christian Coalition go around spreading the gospel? They're a political organization.
--
:: my trivial ramblings ::
reply

marketex @ 11th May 09:09PM:
Justification Included

Some of the comments on this page constitute some of the best reasons for the continued necessity of the N.A.A.C.P.!
reply

DaSneaky1D @ 11th May 09:12PM:
Re: Why is NAACP still around

said by Necronomikro :

said by DaSneaky1D :
then force the media companies and ISP's to stop sending smut down the tubes so our children have a chance of being good moral citizens of this country.

It was sort of a joke (guess you haven't seen many of my news comments before).
--
:: my trivial ramblings ::
reply

russotto @ 11th May 09:22PM:
NAACP found the problem with broadband.

It's not net neutrality. It's not munis. It's not the digital divide.

After long and careful study, the NAACP has determined....

wait for it....

The problem is white people!
reply

Backspace @ 11th May 10:31PM:
NAAWP

I wonder what the National Association for the Advancement of White People has to say on this matter. :uhh:
reply

russotto @ 11th May 11:26PM:
Re: NAAWP

said by Backspace :

I wonder what the National Association for the Advancement of White People has to say on this matter. :uhh:

They're too busy posting their "Men in Sheets" videos to GooTube.
reply

cdru @ 12th May 12:17AM:
Re: Why is NAACP still around

said by Necronomikro :

said by DaSneaky1D :
then force the media companies and ISP's to stop sending smut down the tubes so our children have a chance of being good moral citizens of this country.

You might check the batteries in your sarcasm-o-meter. Mine was pegged pretty high when I read DaSneaky1D's post.
--
Go Colts
reply

pnh102 @ 12th May 10:23AM:
Re: NAAWP

said by Backspace :

I wonder what the National Association for the Advancement of White People has to say on this matter. :uhh:

They were too busy giving Don Imus the "Civil Rights Activist of the Year" award.
--
Only SHATNER is Kirk.
reply

NYC Girl @ 12th May 12:32PM:
Re: Why is NAACP still around

EXCUSE ME???? :o
reply

fatmanskinny @ 12th May 12:35PM:
Whoops. Another opportunity for racist rants on BBR....

Here they come .... 5, 4, 3, 2, 1........
reply

NYC Girl @ 12th May 12:43PM:
Re: Whoops. Another opportunity for racist rants on BBR....

THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU. TOOK THE WORDS RIGHT OUT OF MY MOUTH (WELL FINGERS). :o :o :o :o

I have not been on this forum long; however, anytime anything is posted about AA people, New Orleans, Africa, etc., it is always a "problem". Everyone's "true colors" come out.
reply

NYC Girl @ 12th May 12:56PM:
Re: Justification Included

AMEN!!!

_______________________________________________

Some of the comments on this page constitute some of the best reasons for the continued necessity of the N.A.A.C.P.!
reply

nfixit2004 @ 12th May 02:47PM:
Re: lies I tell you

said by Freezone :

I would have to disagree! the number one reason has to be cable tv! online gaming might be the second reason, did you ever notice the kids in the "HOOD" dance? they dance better then the dancers in the videos, and lets not talk about sports ;)
reply

calvoiper @ 12th May 03:39PM:
Re: Painting all opponents of "net neutrality" with sell-out ...

I don't see how you think BBR (Karl) was "playing propaganda" on this one--his point WAS the intersection of two stories otherwise not connected in the media. The point was that the NAACP is bashing Bush on Broadband in Washington, but is opposing the traditional consumer groups on a broadband-deployment-related bill in Tallahassee. That's a valid story.

Frankly, the fact that the consumer advocates lost to the NAACP side by a huge margin in one house of the Florida legislature isn't really even news--except for the related fact that the NAACP position gave lots of legislators (particularly Democrats) "cover" to vote against the consumer advocates.

calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies!
reply

Gilitar @ 12th May 04:13PM:
NAACP should be disbanded

National Association for the Advancement of Colored People

The name seems racist in and of itself.

IMO in this day and age there should be no race specific organization fighting for civil rights. It is everyones responsibility to insure that our civil rights our respected. These organizations should be replaced by non race specific organizations.

For those of you that may think that what I say is racist, turn the situation around. What if there was a National Association for the Advancement of White People? How would that be viewed? What if there was a White Entertainment Television?
reply

nOv1c3 @ 12th May 04:17PM:
Re: NAACP should be disbanded

I agree 100% I,m sick of these double standards :/
reply

NYC Girl @ 12th May 04:46PM:
Re: NAACP should be disbanded

You need to go back and review 500+ years AA history and see why this organization was created and needed or perhaps you agree with all the atrocities committed against AA people which is why you resent it so much.
reply

Gilitar @ 12th May 05:05PM:
Re: NAACP should be disbanded

You do realize that blacks aren't the only ones that had atrocities committed against them right?

My point is that all races have been the target of civil rights violations not just blacks. Why should one race have their civil rights protected and more than another? We are all equal and should have equal protection.

.
reply

nOv1c3 @ 12th May 05:31PM:
Re: NAACP should be disbanded

They don't want equal civil rights protection , They want special treatment
reply

NYC Girl @ 12th May 05:32PM:
Re: NAACP should be disbanded

Then they can create their own organization just as AA's have created the NAACP which I "think" was critical at the time of it's inception back in 1912 (helloooo!!!)to keep from being lynched (unsuccessful) and to fight for basic human rights that that every non AA person had automatically. If "WE" weren't going to create an organization to protect ourselves certainly no one else was going to do it for "US". And if you can't understand that then I don't know what to say other than put yourself in those people's shoes back then and see how you would feel.

Non AA people were threatened by this organization back then as they still are today in the 21st century.
reply

NYC Girl @ 12th May 05:34PM:
Re: NAACP should be disbanded

antiquated statement, whatever....
reply

Gilitar @ 12th May 05:44PM:
Re: NAACP should be disbanded

The NAACP certainly was needed in 1912. I am not saying that the NAACP wasn't needed. Times have changed and so should the NAACP.
reply

nOv1c3 @ 12th May 08:43PM:
Re: NAACP should be disbanded

If anyone needs a civil rights organization it should be none AA , Just look at the Stats in this country

»www.racismeantiblanc.bizland.com···6-02.htm

don't like that site check the FBI site :/
reply

nfixit2004 @ 12th May 09:07PM:
Re: NAACP should be disbanded

agreed!

and nOv1c3 please send a link(to the government site you have mentioned)!
reply

Skippy25 @ 12th May 09:34PM:
Re: Painting all opponents of "net neutrality" with sell-out ...

You are bias for you own reasons and I would say just as with everyone else it is money motivated.

If you accept money or any benefits from anyone for any reason then your opinion is skewed and has little value in a debate. So if the NAACP does accept money from any telco or cable company then their opinion is worthless.

For the most part the NAACP is worthless regardless. Their political agenda lost it focus of bringing equality to it's people a long time ago.
reply

supergirl @ 13th May 01:20AM:
Re: Painting all opponents of "net neutrality" with sell-out ...

"I believe in a world where everyone will have 100 UP! ...AND 100 DOWN! I believe there will be NO Bandwidth CAPS! ...and there will be NO COMCAST! I believe geeks will get REAL Dates! No, I don't believe that. But, I do believe 100 UP and 100 DOWN will bridge the entire Digital Divide and there will BE NO MICROSOFT!"

Rev. Al Sharpton
reply

Backspace @ 13th May 11:22AM:
Re: NAACP should be disbanded

Philadelphia has over 65% colored people. They have advanced to the point that we have a colored mayor and most of the city council are colored. They can't advance any further politically in Philly.

There have been over 140 murders so far in 2007 in Philly and most are black-on-black crimes.

While the naacp is out there marching for equal rights, their people are sitting in bars getting drunk, shooting heroin and smoking cocaine, and killing each other for stupid reasons. The naacp is no longer needed in Philly and most of the country.

In Philly we need a NAAWP to counteract the destruction of the city that has taken place since the coloreds became the majority and whites became the minority. Whites are fleeing the city, scared that the coloreds are going to murder them next. Drugs are sold by the coloreds in open air markets throughout their ghettos. And their ghettos were created by them! What were once burgeoning family neighborhoods with small mom and pop businesses on every corner are now slums because people are scared to do business with the drugs being sold on the same street corners.

We do not need to advance the coloreds here in Philly. Please take note that the advancement took place but didn't help. For every black doctor and lawyer there are 10,000 drug addicted idiots ready to kill each other and innocent folks for their next fix. :(

And black racists are worse than white racists because a long time ago the blacks were once victims of racism and now they play the race card. Shame on you. :uhh:
reply

tapeloop @ 13th May 12:04PM:
Re: NAACP should be disbanded

Um...weren't we talking about Broadband?

This is broadbandreports.com right? Right?
reply

NYC Girl @ 13th May 08:20PM:
Re: NAACP should be disbanded

I am not sure anymore. Seems like KKK.com :o :o :o :mad: :mad:
reply

Karl Bode @ 14th May 08:47AM:
Re: NAACP should be disbanded

Yes, let's focus on broadband, please.
reply

Karl Bode @ 14th May 11:27AM:
Re: once again

Greg Moore is a spokesman for the NAACP, and the executive director of the National NAACP Voter Fund, and is taking a political position in a public paper, commenting on the record on NAACP positions...

Yet you can't find anything that indicates he's speaking for the entire NAACP? I imagine yes, hopefully there are people inside the organization that understand these bills have a negative impact on deployment.

Too bad they're not talking.
reply

Karl Bode @ 14th May 11:36AM:
Re: once again

quote:
The previous two were right. Nowhere does Greg Moore claim to be speaking for the NAACP.

Moore is the Executive Director of the NAACP National Voter Fund, taking a political position in a major paper. Yet you don't think he's speaking on the behalf of the NAACP?

quote:
Your article is very misleading and I can see why people would question it's agenda

You're the only one "questioning its agenda" and you work for Verizon in Texas, judging from your posting history. The NAACP is advocating broadband connections to everyone, yet supporting bills that ensure the exact opposite. I don't know, I find that worth mentioning.
reply

anon @ 14th May 03:41PM:
Cherry Picking?

Who are you kidding? The most lucrative communities for cable service are not the rich subdivisions. Low income and rural neighborhood residents buy more premium channels, pay-per-views, high speed Internet and other producs and services. I guess if the projects were "cherry picked" the suburbs would be without cable service. The NAACP supports competition and increased telecommunications industry access for all who have been overcharged or blocked by cable TV.
reply

Karl Bode @ 14th May 03:48PM:
Re: Cherry Picking?

quote:
Low income and rural neighborhood residents buy more premium channels, pay-per-views, high speed Internet and other producs and services.

Yeah, I've heard AT&T execs say that, I know it's an internal talking point, and I'm sure it's based on some marginally relevant statistics that may even be partially true. The truth of that statement should then be pretty easily tested by how quickly U-Verse and FiOS gets deployed to low income and rural areas, yes?

quote:
I guess if the projects were "cherry picked" the suburbs would be without cable service. The NAACP supports competition and increased telecommunications industry access for all who have been overcharged or blocked by cable TV.

Yet they support bills that eliminate the very franchise system that forced providers to push services out to those areas in the first place?
reply

anon @ 14th May 05:00PM:
Net Neut and black folks

So can someone explain to me why net neutrality is good for black folks? Because all I hear you all doing is ragging on NAACP
reply

anon @ 14th May 05:05PM:
Re: Cherry Picking?

So why is Net Neut good for black folks? I hear a lot of ragging on the NAACP but nothing really tells me why net neut is good for blacks!
reply

tapeloop @ 14th May 05:05PM:
Re: once again

said by Karl Bode :

Greg Moore is a spokesman for the NAACP, and the executive director of the National NAACP Voter Fund, and is taking a political position in a public paper, commenting on the record on NAACP positions...

That still doesn't make him the final say on official NAACP policy any more than an op-ed by say, John McCain or Arnold Schwarzenegger makes their single-issue opinions gospel for the entire GOP.

I should also point out that that Moore is executive director for the NAACP National Voter Fund, which is a separate entity from the NAACP.

Unless the better part of the NAACP's board goes on record to share Moore's opinion or the Association issues a statement, resolution or press release reflecting such policy, then Gregory Moore's opinions speak solely for Gregory Moore.
--
I cannot stand demagoguery. If you disagree with my stance, you're a blithering twit. You're not a twit, are you?
reply

Karl Bode @ 14th May 05:08PM:
Re: Cherry Picking?

Depends how you define network neutrality, or if you support network neutrality laws (I don't because I doubt legislator competence, not because I find the concept unsound).

The idea of allowing consumers equal access to competing services without blockades or service degredation is good for all consumers of any race...
reply

Karl Bode @ 14th May 05:20PM:
Re: once again

You're splitting hairs.

He's an NAACP employee taking a political position in a public paper in order to sway voters at the behest of the NAACP. The NAACP in turn is speaking for their phone company donors, which is obvious by the network neutrality position he takes and the bizarre Google "free ride" rhetoric which only incumbents use.

Moore, an NAACP employee, tells us that "broadband in every home should remain our policy goal", yet the organization still supports "franchise reform" as a whole, and participates in a massive disinformation effort funded by incumbent phone providers.

If you want to test your theory that Moore's position isn't theirs, try getting them to publicly state that they support network neutrality laws or oppose bell franchise reform. I promise you they won't do it.....and it has nothing to do with minority concerns...
reply

anon @ 14th May 05:30PM:
Re: Cherry Picking?

I understand that. However, why would you need legislation if there isnt a problem to begin with?
reply

Karl Bode @ 14th May 05:37PM:
Re: Cherry Picking?

You asked "why is Net Neut good for black folks." I answered that.

Whether there should be network neutrality laws is a different issue. As I said, I don't support laws (yet).

The desire for the laws is based on the concern is thatmonopoly power will ultimately lead incumbent providers to shut out content competition. I believe that's a factual worry.
reply

tapeloop @ 15th May 10:12AM:
Re: once again

So noting that one is head of a separate organization is "splitting hairs" now? Hm.

And, disingenuousness notwithstanding, even if one were to prove the negative of the NAACP proper sharing Moore's opinion, it would render the headline moot as the two entities would no longer be in contradiction, would they?
--
I cannot stand demagoguery. If you disagree with my stance, you're a blithering twit. You're not a twit, are you?
reply

Karl Bode @ 15th May 10:26AM:
Re: once again

quote:
So noting that one is head of a separate organization is "splitting hairs" now?

Since the NAACP National Voter fund was created by the NAACP for lobbying purposes, espouses NAACP political positions, and takes funding from the NAACP, yes, you are.
reply