IP Democracy: Verizon Tempts Fate, Blocks Naral's Message

In an unbelievable move, Verizon Wireless has rejected a request by Naral Pro-Choice America to participate in a text messaging program, according to this great article by The New York Times' Adam Liptak. Saying that it has the right to block "controversial or unsavory" text messages, Verizon denied to Naral the very same service available to other political organizations, including the Republican National Committee, Save Darfur, Amnesty International and dozens of other groups.

Naral wanted to set up a short-code messaging account that allows supporters to receive text messages by entering a five-digit code, a very common tool in both politics and commerce for effectively reaching targeted individuals. The group didn't have plans to "blast out" to unsuspecting recipients messages about abortion.

Nevertheless, Verizon Wireless doesn't like the subject matter and rejected Naral's plan. Verizon said it "does not accept programs from any group 'that seeks to promote an agenda or distribute content that, in its discretion, may be seen as controversial or unsavory to any of our users.'"

Promote an agenda? Unsavory content? Verizon is seriously effed up if it thinks Naral is promoting an "agenda" but the Republican National Committee is not. And clearly Verizon believes that a woman's right to choose is somehow "unsavory."

But Verizon's political views are beside the point. What's truly disturbing is that Verizon is imposing its own political views on its wireless customers without their consent, something that the carrier could not do in the landline voice world.

Even more to the point, if Verizon doesn't immediately retract its dangerous and idiotic "controversial and unsavory" policy, and apologize to Naral, then it will have no one else to blame when the thunderous hand of regulation comes and slaps the arrogance right out of the company.

As Columbia's Tim Wu notes in the article, Western Union in the 19th century also rejected messages on the basis of political content, a practice that ultimately gave rise to the common carrier, non-discrimination regulations that dominated communications for so long. And despite the divisive nature of abortion, few politicians will defend a communication company's right to censor on the basis of political content, no matter what side of the aisle they are on.

Too many lawmakers, Republican and Democrat, have felt the pain of what they believe are unfriendly attitudes by the corporate owners of newspapers, TV stations and other outlets of political persuasion. They're not about to give Verizon much leeway in serving as the message gatekeeper today on this issue because they know that tomorrow the telco could turn on them.

Posted by Cynthia Brumfield on September 26, 2007 9:05 PM to IP Democracy