Gov. Scott Walker’s administration in Wisconsin is under fire today for being allegedly caught blocking access to a website popular with protesters fighting the governor’s position on public unions.

Democratic party officials said that the website, www.defendwisconsin.org, run by the University of Wisconsin-Madison Teacher Assistants, was accessible after its launch last week until at least Friday.

But by Monday, the website organizers discovered the site was blocked for those using the state’s free Wi-Fi network available inside the Capitol building.  The website is used to coordinate protest actions and keep volunteers informed about the pushback campaign against the Walker Administration.

Wisconsin Democratic Party Chairman Mike Tate says that the site was put on a blacklist typically used to filter out pornography sites so that protesters inside the Capitol could not access the site.

Former Wisconsin Assistant Attorney General Charles Hoornstra said that, if Walker is blocking the website, it could be a violation of state and federal laws concerning free speech laws.

This isn’t the first time the state government has been accused of cutting off Internet access.  The Teaching Assistants Association earlier accused state authorities of cutting off Wi-Fi access to a room they had taken over as a headquarters inside of the Capitol.

Some of the activists in Madison used the occasion to draw comparisons with Internet shutdowns in Egypt and Libya. CNN picked up the story, taking it nationwide, and Sachin Chheda, a Democratic activist and former IT employee at the Capitol, said someone inside the government would have to consciously add the website to a blacklist for the software to block access.

The Walker Administration offered its own explanation of the blocked website, claiming the state’s software initially allows access to all websites until it is updated, then blocks sites until they are manually reviewed.

Department of Administration spokeswoman Carla Vigue said, “DOA’s security software automatically blocked the site, as it does all new websites.”

“No one here at DOA decided to block it or took action to do so,” he said. “The website is handled like any other website.”

Activists at the state Capitol tested Vigue’s explanation today, visiting newly registered domains with new websites, and had no trouble accessing any of them.

“The state got caught censoring and now they are making up stories to distract and deflect,” Paul Jeson tells Stop the Cap! “Since when does net nanny software require the manual review of every website in the world to unblock access — the whole point of the software is to arrive with a blacklist filter pre-installed and programming that checks content in real-time looking for triggers.”

Jeson says unless a protester exposed themselves in a photo republished on the site, there is no reason it should have been blocked.

“I doubt Gov. Walker himself ordered the block, but some of his associates treat the 1st Amendment as something worthy of defending only when it protects their point of view,” Jeson opines.  “Imagine what would happen if the Capitol Wi-Fi blocked Fox News or one of several anti-union, pro-Walker websites that popped up at the same time defendwisconsin.org was launched; I am not surprised none of those sites favorable to the governor’s position have complained about similar blocks.”

The governor’s office late in the day tried to change the subject.

“The Democratic Party should spend less time lying about Gov. Walker, and more time trying to get their AWOL State Senators back to Wisconsin,” said a statement released by the governor’s office.

CNN covered this statement from the Wisconsin Democratic Party on a poor telephone line. (1 minute)
You must remain on this page to hear the clip, or you can download the clip and listen later.

[flv width=”640″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/CNN Net Neutrality Primer 12-21-10.flv[/flv]

For those who may not fully grasp Net Neutrality, CNN’s Ali Velshi delivered a primer that helps explain how Internet traffic moves, how providers want to manage that traffic, and the implications of not enforcing robust Net Neutrality.  Velshi’s explanation delivers both sides of the argument with only a few minor errors.  We’d remind him consumers already paid for the big pipe depicted in the video.  Consumers should not have to pay twice for the same thing.  Less useful is CNNMoney Staff Writer David Goldman, who got several points wrong, especially about wireless. (8 minutes)

The implications of the deal between Google and Verizon were colorfully explored on last Thursday's 'Countdown With Keith Olbermann' on MSNBC.

A progressive group has collected more than 300,000 signatures protesting talks between Google and Verizon to establish a “separate peace” on Net Neutrality while throwing the rest of America’s open Internet under the bus.

The Progressive Change Campaign Committee joined forces with groups like MoveOn.org, Color of Change, Free Press, and Credo Action to launch an emergency petition to Google to get them to back away and rethink their deal with Verizon.

A package containing the signatures was delivered to Google’s offices in Washington, but another trip may be necessary as the group claims it has collected nearly 50,000 additional signatures since Monday.

The groups are calling for strong Net Neutrality policies to be enacted and enforced to preserve the open Internet.

Support for Net Neutrality comes from a diverse mix of Americans, from Barry Diller, who founded Fox Broadcasting to progressive MSNBC host Keith Olbermann.

[flv width=”596″ height=”356″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/MSNBC Olbermann Silver Net Neutrality 8-5-10.flv[/flv]

Free Press’ Josh Silver appeared on Thursday’s edition of MSNBC’s Countdown With Keith Olbermann to explore the implications of a non-Net Neutral Internet.  (7 minutes)

[flv width=”640″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/CNN Why Diller pushes for net neutrality 7-27-10.flv[/flv]

CNN talked with Fox Broadcasting founder and media mogul Barry Diller about his strong support for Net Neutrality. (4 minutes)

With all of the discussion about Net Neutrality recently, the mainstream media often has a difficult time absorbing what this concept means and ends up confusing it with Internet Overcharging schemes.  CNN is the latest to make the mistake — not once but twice in three days as Nicole Lapin and Tony Harris discuss how Net Neutrality policies will impact consumers.

Lapin suggests this week’s decision by the FCC to begin writing a formal Net Neutrality policy was a done deal, and that it would prevent Internet providers from charging higher prices for consumers who use their broadband accounts a lot.

Both statements are incorrect.

The FCC is only at the start of writing a formal Net Neutrality policy.  The basic tenets Chairman Julius Genachowski would like to see a part of a formal Net Neutrality rulemaking are on the table, but there is plenty of time between now and a final vote for telecommunications industry lobbyists to sweep several pages from Genachowski’s wish-list to the floor (and replace them with their own.)

Nothing in the proposed Net Neutrality policies would currently prohibit providers from moving to Internet Overcharging schemes like usage allowances, overlimit fees, and other pricing changes that are ultimately designed to reduce usage and extract higher pricing from consumers.

Rep. Eric Massa (D-NY) has a bill to put a stop the Internet Overcharging schemes that continues to need your support and advocacy with your member of Congress.  See the Take Action section for further details.

For the record:

Net Neutrality: A set of policies that prevents Internet providers from discriminating against certain broadband services or website content providers with speed throttles, blocks, or other impediments.  Providers would not be allowed to set up special premium traffic lanes with faster speed delivery of online web content for “preferred partners,” while leaving everyone else on a slower traffic lane.  It preserves the Internet we have today.

Internet Overcharging: Practices by broadband providers to limit usage of your broadband service and/or charge higher pricing based on arbitrary claims that consumers are “overusing” their unlimited broadband service.  These include usage caps or limits, usage allowances, consumption billing that includes usage allowances, overlimit fees/penalties for exceeding those limits, speed throttles that kick in when a user reaches their usage limit, and any accompanying services sold to consumers who think they might exceed their plan allowance (overlimit “insurance” policies, extra usage blocks sold at premium prices, etc.)

[flv width=”570″ height=”324″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/2009-10-21-CNN-FCC Net Neutrality.flv[/flv]

CNN’s Tony Harris talks with Nicole Lapin about Net Neutrality, and how the policy impacts small businesses that sell on the web.  (October 21 – 3 minutes)

Earlier today the two revisited the issue of Net Neutrality to explore the outcome of the FCC Net Neutrality decision:

[flv width=”570″ height=”324″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/2009-10-23-CNN-Net Neutrality Victory.flv[/flv]

CNN’s Tony Harris and Nicole Lapin discuss the “victory” for Net Neutrality proponents.  (October 23 – 2 minutes)