
Think you have the right to speak freely via cellphones, websites 
and social media? Well, the companies that provide you with access to 
the Internet don’t.
The framers drafted the First Amendment as a check on 
government
 authority — not corporate power. But whether we’re texting friends, 
sharing photos on Facebook, or posting updates on Twitter, we’re 
connecting with each other and the Internet via privately controlled 
networks.
 
(photo: watchingfrogsboil)
And the owners of these networks are now twisting the intent of the 
First Amendment to claim the right to control everyone's online 
information.
Right before the Fourth of July, 
Verizon filed a brief
 with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit that expressed this
 intent in no uncertain terms. The brief was part of the telecom 
company’s bid to overturn the Federal Communications Commission’s Net 
Neutrality rules, which prohibit carriers from blocking or 
discriminating against Internet users’ content.
In the brief, Verizon argues that the First Amendment gives the company the right to serve as the Internet’s editor-in-chief.
The First Amendment “protects those transmitting the speech of 
others, and those who ‘exercise editorial discretion’ in selecting which
 speech to transmit and how to transmit it,” the company’s attorneys 
wrote. “In performing these functions, broadband providers possess 
‘editorial discretion.’ Just as a newspaper is entitled to decide which 
content to publish and where, broadband providers may feature some 
content over others.”
By “content” Verizon means 
all digital communications that 
cross its wires, from photographs of your cousin’s backyard barbeque to 
YouTube videos of human rights violations in Syria.
Verizon filed its brief quietly just before the July Fourth holiday, 
but it has caught the attention of the Internet freedom community like a
 skunk under the back porch.
This is not the first time Internet Service Providers (ISPs) have 
suggested that they have a First Amendment right to stifle speech 
online. 
AT&T argued in 2010
 that its role is similar to that of an editor who selects content and 
speaks — and that it is not merely a conduit for the communications of 
others.
This defense of corporate censorship is no idle threat but a pretext 
for a full-scale takeover of the Internet — a move that first requires 
killing off any consumer protections that stand in the way.
We live in a time when growing numbers of people watch television 
programs, listen to music, create videos and share photographs via 
Internet connections provided by private entities.
A 2011 report from 
European Digital Rights
 states that ISPs and other technology companies are fast becoming the 
information cops of the world. The report paints a picture of an 
emerging “censorship ecosystem” fueled by private entities that often 
work hand in glove with governments.
This collusion serves both corporate and political interests. ISPs 
are seeking new authority to interfere with user traffic, including 
limiting access to the content of competitors like Netflix or shutting 
down the accounts of users they charge with sharing too much media. 
Governments are demanding that access providers help them 
filter and police the Internet — and that they do so under a veil of secrecy.
The most dangerous threats to free speech today lie at this 
intersection between corporate and political power. While businesses 
might do many things better than governments, our government is at least
 by definition directly accountable to the American people. So when 
Verizon claims the right to decide who gets free speech on the Internet,
 it’s making this claim as a benevolent despot, not as a representative 
democracy.
The framers of the U.S. Constitution could not have foreseen a time 
in which technology allowed more than a billion people to communicate 
via mobile phones connected to the World Wide Web. Nor could they have 
envisioned a world in which companies like Verizon, AT&T and Comcast
 wield more authority over our free speech than a British monarch.
And yet the First Amendment has survived to this day in defense of 
democracy’s most consequential right. People on both the left and right 
value freedom of speech. Just days after Verizon filed its brief, a 
diverse coalition of more than 1,000 groups and Internet dignitaries 
joined together behind a 
Declaration of Internet Freedom that establishes freedom of expression as its first principle.
But popular consensus behind free speech on the Internet is running 
headlong into media giants like Verizon that want to suppress open 
Internet culture.
Any claim that the First Amendment protects corporations — and not 
people — is absurd. And it shows just how far some companies are willing
 to go to control 21st century communications.
© 2012 Tim Karr
As the Campaign Director for Free Press and 
SavetheInternet.com,
 Karr oversees campaigns on public broadcasting and noncommercial media,
 fake news and propaganda, journalism in crisis, and the future of the 
Internet. Before joining Free Press, Tim served as executive director of
 MediaChannel.org and vice president of Globalvision New Media and the 
Globalvision News Network.