[276] in Privacy_Forum
[ PRIVACY Forum ] Verizon Wireless Blocks Pro-Choice Text Messages
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (privacy@vortex.com)
Wed Sep 26 22:05:45 2007
Message-Id: <200709270058.l8R0wfAw031502@chrome.vortex.com>
To: privacy-list@vortex.com
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2007 17:58:41 -0700
From: privacy@vortex.com
Reply-To: PRIVACY Forum Digest mailing list <privacy@vortex.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Errors-To: privacy-bounces+privacy-forum=mit.edu@vortex.com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Verizon Wireless Blocks Pro-Choice Text Messages
http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/000297.html
Greetings. I did a double take when I read the New York Times
headline noting that Verizon Wireless had refused to allow a text
messaging campaign from a pro-choice group. You can read the
details for yourself:
( http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/27/business/27cnd-verizon.htm ).
Now, you may already know that I'm not a fan of third-party text
messaging services, especially when fees are involved -- there's
tremendous fraud potential in many cases, but the proposed messages
being blocked by Verizon don't seem to fall into the abuse
category ( http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/000293.html ).
Verizon's reaction does however make one wonder what country we're
talking about. Usually if you want to find text messaging content
control, you have to head over to someplace like China, not Basking
Ridge, New Jersey, where Verizon Wireless apparently houses their
content control star chamber.
With all of the utter garbage in unsolicited text messages flowing
through the wireless carriers' networks -- including Verizon's --
for Verizon to take this stance sets the imagination into high
gear. Is some highly placed mole inside the company setting out to
make a case for legislated network neutrality -- against Verizon's
stated corporate position on the topic? Or are we (much more
likely, admittedly) simply dealing with corporate hubris run amok?
For after all, while we usually speak of net neutrality in terms of
bits and bandwidth, other small matters like freedom of speech can
also play into the mix.
Odds are that the negative publicity about this story will
ultimately trigger a reversal on Verizon's part. But that's not the
point. That Verizon Wireless even had the gall to take such a
censorship stance on an important public policy issue in the first
place speaks volumes.
Even Verizon's funky old "not the same old line" ancestor
General Telephone couldn't have dreamt of such power over what people
say to each other.
--Lauren--
Lauren Weinstein
lauren@vortex.com or lauren@pfir.org
Tel: +1 (818) 225-2800
http://www.pfir.org/lauren
Co-Founder, PFIR
- People For Internet Responsibility - http://www.pfir.org
Founder, PRIVACY Forum - http://www.vortex.com
Member, ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy
Lauren's Blog: http://lauren.vortex.com
_______________________________________________
privacy mailing list
http://lists.vortex.com/mailman/listinfo/privacy
