from: DSL Reports [1]

Senate Commerce Committee Now a Telco/Cable PR Firm
Push polls, misleading net-neutrality astroturf-flyers....

Written by Karl Bode

Editorial:"A new bipartisan poll released today finds that an overwhelming majority of American voters favor video choice over onerous "Net Neutrality" regulations," states a press release by the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation. While bi-partisan it may be, honest it is not.

The Verizon funded survey (pdf), conducted by Glover Park Group (traditionally Democratic) and Public Opinion Strategies (traditionally Republican) questioned 800 registered voters on their thoughts on network neutrality. The survey in question uses a tactic known as "push polling", which presents questions phrased in such a way as to elicit one particular answer.

This is the question asked used to support the committee's assertion of public opposition to net-neutrality laws:

Which of the following two items do you think is the most important to you: Delivering the benefits of new TV and video choice so consumers will see increased competition and lower prices for cable TV, or enhancing Internet neutrality by barring high speed internet providers from offering specialized services like faster speed and increased security for a fee?

In this case the second option suggests that there is a push to prohibit ISPs from selling faster broadband speeds, a dishonest talking point we've seen used by incumbent PR gurus in multiple editorials.

While push polling is a frequent tactic in corporate PR and political-campaign smear attempts, we should not see the same tactics originating from what's supposed to be an objective Senate committee, tasked with intelligently navigating tough questions in the field of technology law.

This is the second time in as many weeks we've observed this committee engaging in public relations warfare at the behest of the cable and phone giants. They've also been circulating a promotional flyer to "educate" voters on their Senate Communications Act of 2006. Note the flyer only contains links to editorials against net-neutrality laws, many of which contain misleading arguments designed by incumbent marketing departments.

Regardless of party affiliation or your position on net-neutrality regulation, at the forefront of technology law debates should lay the desire for an honest discussion. The U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation has clearly decided to abandon such honest discourse and is now officially a bi-partisan public relation mouthpiece for the incumbent telecom providers.