Digital Education Coalition Offers FCC Net Neutrality Comments

January 15, 2010 -

The Digital Education Coalition, comprised of The Entertainment Consumers Association (ECA), The International Game Developers Association (IGDA), the Media Education Lab at Temple University and the National Association for Media Literacy Education (NAMLE), has offered comments to the Federal Communications Commission in favor of Net Neutrality.

The document (PDF here) notes why net neutrality is important to coalition members:

The digital education community needs access to a wide variety of online content, which broadband service providers are currently able to block or filter. Further, members of the community need to transmit and access content such as videos, speeches and photos, which require large amounts of bandwidth. The only way to protect educational interests online is to prohibit content-based discrimination.


The group also seeks to persuade the FCC to require internet service providers to act more transparently and to disclose network management practices on their websites.

Members of the digital education community currently have limited access to the network management practices of service providers. Yet, this information is needed to help educators to plan their curricula, enable media literacy educators to teach about network transmissions and assist game developers in the creation of innovative teaching tools.


Disclosure: GamePolitics is a publication of the ECA.


Comments

Re: Digital Education Coalition Offers FCC Net Neutrality ...

So what does that mean for my online college courses? But I read the article & still don't understand what this means, other than it (net neutrality) being gotten rid of......could someone please tell me what this article is about.

 

 

 

"It's better to be hated for who you are, then be loved for who you are not." - Montgomery Gentry

"It's better to be hated for who you are, then be loved for who you are not." - Montgomery Gentry

Re: Digital Education Coalition Offers FCC Net Neutrality ...

keep the net neutral the only other option is unfair bias

Re: Digital Education Coalition Offers FCC Net Neutrality ...

Lobbyists are going to try their damned hardest to kill it like they basically killed healthcare reform.

Re: Digital Education Coalition Offers FCC Net Neutrality ...

I agree with you on this one.

 

 

"It's better to be hated for who you are, then be loved for who you are not." - Montgomery Gentry

"It's better to be hated for who you are, then be loved for who you are not." - Montgomery Gentry

Re: Digital Education Coalition Offers FCC Net Neutrality ...

Because the FCC is known as the champion of protecting against content-based discrimination? 

And I, as someone who has a degree in telecommunications but don't work in the industry (yay economy), ask for evidence that my education is actually incomplete (or at least was when I graduated) because of this limited access to network management practices of service providers.

I highly doubt that any form of government intervention will have the interest of video gamers at heart.

GameDrunk - Celebrating our two greatest passions.

Re: Digital Education Coalition Offers FCC Net Neutrality ...

What I cannot understand is how something that is outlined in black and white before, and supports what gamers and most consumers want could ever do the opposite.

Yes the FCC has censored in the past, but does that mean it can't also keep things from being censored? 

There has yet to be a major censoring by an internet provider but the fact that it could happen, and that it could be done withhout anyone's knowledge right now is what is so worrysome.  I cannot see how net nuetrality could possibly hurt any consumer, and for that matter if no internet provider does discriminate right nowit shouldn't affect them either except to prevent them from trying it in the future. 

I can understand why people can gaina  natural distrust of the government, it does do a lot of stupid things, but can you not simply acknowledge it when they want to do something good?  I personally distrust the companies more than the government and the fact that they are lobbying so hard against it worries me as to whether some really are blocking or limiting certain types of data or sites.


Re: Digital Education Coalition Offers FCC Net Neutrality ...

Let's get to my initial problem of the FCC being involved first.  Does anyone remember when Net Neutrality was supposed to be legislation?  Why now go through the FCC?  Because the FCC is an unelected official body that does not answer to voters.  A bill in Congress must have debate on the floor of the repective houses.  Voters can call and discuss the issue with their elected representatives, who know that they have to answer to voters.  By moving this to the FCC lobbyist letters, like this one here, are the only outside influence involved.  You can call the FCC all day to express your opinion, but they have zero incentive to listen to you because you do not affect their job status in any way.  So, the question has to be asked, if the lobbying groups in favor of net neutrality care about the consumers, why have they moved the issue to a place where consumers' voices have little to no effect?  The move away from the ability to have open debate (I bet CSPAN would even air it) and full transparency is enough to make me question this entire thing.

Now, currently it may easily look like some favorable consumer protection thing, but the moment the precedent is set that the FCC has authority of Internet content bandwidth usage they could easily limit bandwidth for things such as video games so that educational or medical institutions never see a reduction in bandwidth.  And any lobbying group in favor of gaming will look like a villain, wanting to harm educational or medical institutions' ability to work in the name of video games.  Hey, its not censorship, so its not illegal, it is just protecting the greater good.

I stil don't understand how my education was affected when I was in college, as this letter implies.  I also don't understand how anytime a problem, or potential problem in this case, arises people feel the need to run to government to "fix" it.

And for the record, I do not consider any entity or person that will give themselves increasing power as doing anything good, even if their reasoning sounds like it is full of good intentions. 

GameDrunk - Celebrating our two greatest passions.
 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Will limiting Steam services to accounts that have spent at least $5 eliminate spammers?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Matthew WilsonI think its a good article, and devs can take some lessons from life is strange.04/24/2015 - 10:24pm
Andrew EisenI tinyURL'd it. The world is safe!04/24/2015 - 10:23pm
Matthew Wilson@AE my bad there is nothing I can do about that.04/24/2015 - 10:21pm
Andrew EisenLooks like the spoiler is right there in the URL.04/24/2015 - 10:20pm
Matthew Wilsonhttp://tinyurl.com/ok9pf6b a interesting opinion piece on the life is strange episode 2, and a dark event that happens in it. full warning major spoilers.04/24/2015 - 10:11pm
Matthew Wilson@mech no just she, nor her co workers have not. she never said it is not real.04/24/2015 - 8:58pm
MechaCrashWas she saying "I haven't experienced it," or "I haven't experienced it therefore it does not exist"?04/24/2015 - 8:31pm
ZippyDSMleeoy the skyrim paid mod thing is going over well. My 2 lints, I would not mind if Skyrim had a full SDK and not a crappy lil editor....04/24/2015 - 6:46pm
Andrew EisenWell, that is indeed crappy and nonsensical.04/24/2015 - 3:45pm
Matthew Wilsonshe got attacked for saying that she personaly has not experienced the harassment some other female devs have, and she got acused of defending GG and ignoring harassment. she ended up getting dog piled because of it.04/24/2015 - 3:43pm
Andrew EisenFine but do you recall ANY details at all?04/24/2015 - 3:38pm
Matthew Wilsonit was several weeks ago now, and I will admit to not saving it.04/24/2015 - 3:36pm
Andrew EisenAttacked HOW and by WHOM for not writing off WHO as evil? Do you have a link or anything?04/24/2015 - 3:31pm
Matthew Wilsonthat is the whole point she was not attacked for saying anything. she was attacked for being willing to debate in the first place, and not just write them off as evil.04/24/2015 - 3:28pm
Andrew EisenI know there's not a lot of room in the Shout box but goodness you're being vague.04/24/2015 - 3:26pm
Andrew EisenGreat, but that STILL doesn't tell me what she said, why she was attacked (or what the attack was) or what "standard line" she's following. Details, man. Details!04/24/2015 - 3:25pm
Andrew EisenOr what the heck Nina White (someone else I've never heard of) is actually referring to.04/24/2015 - 3:24pm
Matthew Wilson@AE she is a game dev. she used to do stuff with hormanix and now works with https://outact.net/#!/?page_id=2 she will often engage and debate both side.04/24/2015 - 3:23pm
Andrew Eisen...following.04/24/2015 - 3:23pm
Andrew EisenYou mean focus on stopping the bad behavior of those who are doing it rather than condemning all the people that associate with them? Great. But I still don't know who Emma Clarkson is, what she said, why she was attacked or what "standard line" she's04/24/2015 - 3:23pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician