The Past

Matt Stoller has crucial background on Verizon's puzzling decision to block pro-choice text messages (and, yes, they eventually flip-flopped but that merely shows the vital role of public criticism). Specifically, Verizon policy chief Tom Tauke's "was a right-wing anti-choice Congressman from Iowa until 1990, when NARAL spent $100,000 to successfully defeat him as he tried to jump to the Senate." Under the circumstances, it makes perfect sense that he'd view pro-choice messages as unsavory.

Comments

Matt,

This is ridiculous reasoning (but at least it doesn't have any spelling errors). To believe this, you have to believe that Tauke, head of lobbying ("government relations") for the parent company Verizon, which is based in NY but Tauke's office is in DC, went out of his way to inform the wireless company to specifically stop NARAL. The wireless company is a joint venture with Vodafone based in New Jersey with its own corporate structure. Tauke certainly lobbies on behalf of the wireless concern - that's his job: he's a lobbyist. There may have been other people within Verizon Wireless's management who made this decision. The decision was wrong.

Tauke certainly is lobbying (perhaps with over-the-top tactics) to end Net Neutrality. That's in his company's interest, or so they've decided.

To reason by implication that X (having Tauke as chief lobbyist for the parent company) caused Y (an internal decision by the wireless carrier to deny NARAL access), however, is incredible.

-A former classmate

Posted by Adam | September 29, 2007 1:51 PM