A timely story on the issue of net neutrality – the principle that Internet traffic should move equally without regard to content, destination or source – started off promising enough; Lourdes Garcia-Navarro opened the piece with an important observation: “The FCC is a small agency with a big impact on our daily lives.”

But correspondent Brian Naylor’s story went downhill from there. A five-point checklist reveals more spin than substance in this report.

1. Downplay the Revolving Door. Check.

Naylor briefly mentions FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler was a former cable TV lobbyist. But Naylor fails to acknowledge the corrosive influence the revolving door between industry and government regulators has on public policy.

2. Trivialize activists. Check.

A brief exchange between Wheeler and an unidentified activist gives the impression that supporters of net neutrality are just a bunch of wingnuts.

3. Stack the Deck. Check.

Throughout the story, Wheeler gets plenty of airtime. As do other proponents of new rules that would create Internet fast lanes. Net neutrality advocates, on the other hand, are labeled “critics” of Wheeler’s plan and denied comment.

4. False equivalence. Check.

Nicol Turner-Lee, another lobbyist, asserts that Wheeler has “listened to us the same as he listened to the protesters that were sitting on his lawn.” Denigrating activists this way, Turner-Lee inadvertently reveals the glaring disparity between the access to policy makers lobbyists enjoy, and that of ordinary citizens.

5. Bury the Lead. Check.

Naylor fails to note that during the public comment period, the FCC received a record-breaking 4 million comments from individuals, groups, and business owners who overwhelmingly support net neutrality.

When NPR confuses public relations with public interest journalism in this fashion, the forecast is clear: expect more Beltway balderdash for the New Year.

Sources:

Ammori, Marvin. (6 June, 2014). “John Oliver’s Net Neutrality Segment Speaks the Truth.” Slate.com.

Copps, Michael. (6 January, 2015). “The Biggest FCC Vote Ever.” Common Cause.

Karr, Timothy. (10 November, 2014). “President Obama Call for Title II for the Best Way to Protect Real Net Neutrality.” Free Press.

Naylor, Brian. (1 January, 2015). “Net Neutrality Debate Forces FCC Chairman into Spotlight.” All Things Considered.

Wyatt, Edward. (14 November, 2014). “Obama Asks FCC to Adopt Tough Net Neutrality Rules.” New York Times. 

Since then, China has changed a great deal. But the problems that triggered the Tiananmen Square protests are still present.

Today’s China is far more prosperous than it was in 1989. Its major cities glisten with impressive, new buildings, but much of the work was done by low-paid rural migrants with little security or health insurance. Its leading companies compete successfully throughout the world, but often depend on maintaining the favor of government officials at home. Poverty has declined significantly and a middle-class has blossomed. But the gap between rich and poor is vast.

More people in China have access to the Internet than in any other country in the world. Yet, web traffic is closely monitored and censored. Don’t expect to watch YouTube or read The New York Times when you are in Beijing. Though small-scale experiments in local government have been tried, China, as Evan Osnos writes, is the only country where a Nobel Peace Prize winner is in jail, democracy advocate, Liu Xiaobao.

Last month, Indiana University opened an office in Beijing to expand student and scholarly programs in China. If it serves to promote the values of political, economic, and academic freedom to which IU subscribes, it will be a fitting way of honoring the sacrifices made a quarter century ago.

Sources:

Tiananmen protests

Internet usage

Evan Osnos, Age of Ambition: Chasing Fortune, Truth and Faith in the New China, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2014.