No Net Brutality is a Student Project

May 13, 2010 -

It turns out that No Net Brutality, mentioned here yesterday, was actually the work of six students for entry into a competition and ended up costing a grand total of $173.95 to produce.

It didn’t even win the competition.

Think Progress had claimed that the No Net Brutality was an astroturf movement backed by the telecom industry. A CNET article blows up those claims and includes a quote from David MacLean, one of the six students involved in the project, who said, “The Think Progress article is hilarious.

MacLean added, “We've had a really good laugh in the last day over this. This is one of the funniest things I've ever seen.”

Kristin McMurray, another student who contributed to No Net Brutality, explained further, “We have not had any contact with any telecom company during this campaign. The only funding we received was the $100 given to us by Atlas.”

No Net Brutality did disclose the $100 Atlas donation on its site.

The project came in third in the competition, finishing behind a project that supported education reform in Poland and another that dealt with sales tax rates in Washington D.C.


Comments

Re: No Net Brutality is a Student Project

 Apparently you're a student project if you say you're a student project. Taliban? student project. Catholic Church? Student Project. Darma initiative? student project.

Re: No Net Brutality is a Student Project

Think Progress making shit up?  No way.  I don't believe it. 

It's so odd that a group involved in so much astroturfing feels it can label others for it.

Re: No Net Brutality is a Student Project

 Except there is a problem here.  The one American involved isn't a student and the contest is actually sponsered and run by a think tank.

http://stopthecap.com/2010/05/11/telescam-exposed-who-really-runs-nonetbrutality-com/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=TeleScam+Exposed:+Who+Really+Runs+NoNetBrutality.com%3F

http://www.linkedin.com/in/kristinmcmurray

So they aren't "students" in the traditional sense at all, unless you count being a student meaning competing in a competition for Atlas Network.  Whose website is down I might add and when it was accessible it was an empty shell website with no pictures or anything.

Also if you look at their facebook page and the "student" website they have proven that they don't understand what net neutrality really is.  Hell I'm a conservative and something smells rotten here because they started as an advocacy group then stated that this is a student project and now have gone back to being an advocacy group.  So the question here is this website nothing more than a farce? Do the people really stand behind it despite being nothing more than a think tank project? Should this type of project be taken seriously considering how they didn't even define net neutrality even on their facts page?

Also normally school projects even for business don't have their students post their work online as it is meant to be just be graded.

 

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Will an M rating hurt Batman: Arkham Knight's sales?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
ZippyDSMleeEh still rather subjective… the haters would be better off going after teen and beauty rags and magazines than fiction, fiction follows reality and going after fiction tends to turn into a bullying fest’s… plus its fiction its unrealistic to start with….02/27/2015 - 1:10am
MechaTama31That's a pretty difficult anatomy to break.02/26/2015 - 11:09pm
MechaTama31"the way her animations repeatedly break her anatomy" <-- I'm sorry, but we are talking here about the woman who can roll up into a little ball and live to tell the tale, yes? ;)02/26/2015 - 11:09pm
Andrew EisenAs far as examples that could be culled from female game characters though, that one's pretty mild.02/26/2015 - 9:11pm
Andrew EisenNot as much the heels or the suit in and of themselves but certainly the way her animations repeatedly break her anatomy to show off her lady bits.02/26/2015 - 9:10pm
E. Zachary KnightWell, Samus's heels are certainly impracticable, but I wouldn't really call her Zero suit objectified. I don't really feel that the new Lara Croft is objectified either, but that is my subjective opinion.02/26/2015 - 9:08pm
Andrew EisenTomb Raider: No but we haven't seen much of anything yet. Samus: Yes.02/26/2015 - 9:07pm
ZippyDSMleeWould you call the new tomb raider objectified? WOuld Samus Aran from the new Smash bros be objectified?02/26/2015 - 9:02pm
WonderkarpI'm hoping they put the rest of the comic book ghostbusters in there. Ortiz and Rookie(From GB the game)02/26/2015 - 8:38pm
Wonderkarpghostbusters board game is doing great. getting close too a 3rd extra playable Character. Ron Alexander.02/26/2015 - 8:37pm
Andrew EisenSmurfette is not subjective. If there's more than one female character, it's not Smurfette. Anyway, as with everything on the list, Smurfette is, in and of itself, not necessarily a bad thing.02/26/2015 - 8:32pm
Andrew EisenI think there's 5 women (out of 15, I think) but other than one being a bit more "hippy" than the others, they pretty much all have the same body type. Especially when compaired to the huge variety of male body types.02/26/2015 - 8:31pm
Wonderkarpso I dont see Smurfette as a bad thing. Unless like all your female characters are Smurfette. remember the Smurfs also had Sassette02/26/2015 - 8:29pm
E. Zachary KnightOne good example of the larger issues is one Anita used in the presentation, Blizzard's Overwatch game. There are a dozen men in the game with a dozen body types. But there are only 4 women with 2 body types, but 3 of them have the same one.02/26/2015 - 8:28pm
Wonderkarpthe smurfette thing is subjective to how many female characters you have. Take Sonic for example. You have Amy, who is obvious smurfette, but there's several other female characters now without that. Including the original animated seriescomics with Sally02/26/2015 - 8:28pm
E. Zachary KnightAE. Very true. I think that is where I was going, but it didn't come out right. Jack Harkness is sexy but not objectified. Whereas, a women would have to be objectified in order to be "sexy" in most games.02/26/2015 - 8:26pm
E. Zachary KnightAnd as Andrew pointed out, there is a big difference between a sexualized man, and an idealized man. But for some reason, there is no distinction between women in games. For the most part.02/26/2015 - 8:25pm
Andrew EisenI think one of the issues we run into repeatedly with these conversations is the confusion over "sexy" and "sexually objectified."02/26/2015 - 8:24pm
E. Zachary KnightYet, for some reason, in orde rto have a sexualized women, she must be wearing lingerie or a bikini. Can't women be sexual and still dress for the job at hand?02/26/2015 - 8:24pm
E. Zachary KnightThe problem I have with complaints of "sexualized men" is that men don't have to wear speedos to be sexualized. Captain Jack Harkness from Torchwood/Doctor Who, was one sexy man, but he spent 99% of his time in a WW2 soldier's trenchcoat.02/26/2015 - 8:23pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician