NLPC Chairman Ken Boehm sent this letter today to Freedom House President Mark Lagon:
I am sure that you are familiar with the furor over the alleged censorship of conservative stories by Facebook in its “trending" news section. As you know, Facebook is a funder of your annual Net Freedom Index.
On November 19, 2015, I wrote you regarding the appearance that the Net Freedom Index reflected the lobbying priorities of large Silicon Valley firms, rather than serving as an objective index of freedom on the Internet.
Although our concerns focused primarily on Google, viewpoint discrimination is a serious across-the-board problem in the United States. See for example, our website posting yesterday by Dr. Carl Horowitz of our staff titled, “Social Media CEOs Embrace Black Lives Matter; Censor Critics.”
For years, conservative and libertarian Internet users have complained that Google, Yahoo, Facebook and Twitter suppress and/or discriminate against conservative and libertarian information …
Greenpeace, which has campaigned against technology companies for nearly two years over their coal-burning electricity use at “cloud computing” data centers, has convinced one – Facebook – to promise to use renewable energy at facilities they build in the future.
The international environmental pressure group’s members have singled out the popular social networking site in a drive to “Unfriend Coal,” in order to fight the global warming problem that is still vivid in their collective imagination. They are particularly incensed that Facebook has built data centers in Oregon (Pacific Power) and North Carolina (Duke Energy) that are customers of utilities that generate a large percentage of their electricity from coal. Greenpeace initiated its campaign using the site’s own online tools against it, by starting groups in English and Spanish that gather members who wanted “Facebook to run on 100 percent renewable energy.” The group also attempted to …
The competition in corporate America to show who is “Greenest” or “most sustainable” has spun out of control, with the Alinskyite effect that drives corporations to spend vast amounts of time and money trying to address the whims and requests of every Leftist niche group that waves some kind of scorecard in their faces.
Meanwhile customers pay for the lunacy in higher prices, and shareholders (those not in the Corporate Social Responsibility movement) bear the burden in diminished returns on their investments.
A Businessweek report from Thanksgiving Eve illustrated how unwieldy the demands of eco-graders and CSR activists have become, as “companies are buried in requests for data as groups jockey to be the arbiters of sustainability.” And you thought IRS and other government regulatory compliance was a headache.
The article explains how companies like Intel and Walmart are inundated by organizations who seek to rank their performances on …
Greenpeace, which has been blown off by one of its co-founders because of its radical behavior, often leaves itself open to easy ridicule – for example, by the promotion of dirty energy sources. Now they’ve done it again.
Only 1½ years ago Greenpeace cheered Apple Computer for its departure from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce over its disagreement on cap-and-trade and federal climate change policy. With Al Gore on the board of directors, you understand what side of the issue the company is on.
So imagine everyone’s surprise when Greenpeace this week slammed Apple in a report on the electricity sources (coal, nuclear, gas, renewables, etc.) technology companies use for their “cloud” computing offerings. Tech companies such as Google, Facebook, and Amazon provide many of their services (like searches, social interaction, product sales, email, and in Apple’s case, iTunes) from servers based at massive data “farms,” located at various …
Today NLPC released a letter to members of Congress responding to a letter from a Google front group called the Open Internet Coalition (OIC). The June 29th OIC letter raised concerns about the use of new technologies like deep packet inspection which the group argued could be used by governments to “spy on Internet communications, censor speech and prevent grassroots democratic activism and free expression.” The letter called for Congressional hearings on the deployment of such technologies.
In our response, we pointed out the hypocrisy of a Google front group calling for regulation of new technologies that can hypothetically be used to subvert free expression, when Google itself has already implemented technologies that do the very same thing in countries like China. Click here to download a four-page pdf of the letter.
I pointed out that it’s some of the very “edge providers” that OIC holds up as “innovators” …