Bicyclist Protests Net Neutrality By Slowing Traffic Outside the FCC Building (thehill.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Hill: A protester opposed to the Federal Communication Commission's (FCC) net neutrality repeal slowed traffic to a crawl outside the FCC Monday as a demonstration against the repeal. A video released Monday shows Rob Bliss, video director for the website Seriously.TV, setting up traffic cones to block all but one lane for cars, then riding a bike slowly in the lane. Bliss wore a sign encouraging drivers to upgrade to "priority access membership" for $5 a month, which would allow them to drive at normal speeds. The protest was meant to mimic what critics say will be the effect of the net neutrality repeal, which will allow internet service providers to favor certain content or require content providers to pay for faster speeds.

Comments

I'd like to see more protests this relevant.

[Futurepower(R)]

Wow! Excellent protest!

One problem.

[cirby]

He inadvertently supported the other side.

By impeding everyone else's "bandwidth" on his bicycle, he made the point that someone should have the power to move him out of the higher-speed lanes and into a lower-priority one.

Oops.

I do not approve of or condone his actions

[Rick Schumann]

As an avid cyclist myself, I neither approve of, nor condone the actions of Rob Bliss in this instance. It further damages the already bad reputation of cyclists everywhere, and we cyclists don't need any more bad press.

That having been said: I'm a firm supporter of Net Neutrality, and while there is humor in this stunt, breaking the law and creating a hazardous situation for both himself and the drivers he inconvenienced is not cool at all and just as likely convinced some people who don't even know what Net Neutrality is, that advocates of it are just lunatics. So I say "no thanks!" to this Rob Bliss, he's probably just made matters worse for both cyclists and for the case for Net Neutrality.

I encourage cyclists at every level to obey the same traffic laws that motor vehicles are bound to, and to ride safely in all circumstances. Lead by example.

I also encourage all advocates of Net Neutrality to make themselves heard whenever possible, and to educate those around them who do not understand what's at stake -- but to do it in a reasonable, rational, and lawful manner.

Re:I do not approve of or condone his actions

[Anonymous Coward]

its a protest... nobody asked for your condemnation or acceptance.
if anything this makes me relate to a bicyclist in a positive way.

Re:I do not approve of or condone his actions

[Moof123]

So protest, but don't make any noise or inconvenience anyone. Definitely never protest on a bicycle Got it.

People politely filed millions of protests through proper channels and got nowhere. So at what point in the breakdown of institutions will it become OK to inconvenience people to get some of our rights back?

Re:I do not approve of or condone his actions

[blind biker]

It further damages the already bad reputation of cyclists everywhere

Hold on a fucking second: "everywhere"? And "further"? That may be the case in the US where car reigns supreme, but here in Finland (and other nordic countries, Germany, Austria etc.) cyclists have a fine reputation.

Re:I do not approve of or condone his actions

[dfm3]

I'll provide a little context, as someone from the US who used to ride a bike to work every day. The "bad reputation" that cyclists get in this country is due in large part to three factors:

1) Our car culture means that outside of urban areas and college campuses, riding a bike for your daily commute is generally looked down upon. A common attitude is... why ride for 30 minutes when you can drive less than 10 and arrive to work without breaking a sweat? Clearly if you had enough money and prestige, you'd buy a car.

2) When it comes to infrastructure planning in suburbs and rural areas, bikes are generally left out of the picture, so it's uncommon to see things like dedicated bike lanes or even a place to lock up your bike at your destination. Our state senator even went on the record as saying that he strongly opposes spending any money to build greenways or bike lanes, because he feels that funds would be better spent on roads that carry vehicles full of goods which, apparently, boost commerce. This means that more bikes are forced onto lanes shared by cars.

3) Quite a few recreational cyclists have taken the mantra "share the road" to such an extreme that they feel their right to ride on the roadways means that they're entitled to act like complete assholes to car drivers. This means doing things like intentionally impeding traffic by riding in the center of the lane in the name of "safety" (that car might hit you as it passes, so be sure it doesn't get a chance to), blowing through stop signs and traffic lights (you can't let that red light slow down your cadence), and refusing to use pullout lanes where they are available (because god forbid you have to stop and unclip while you wait for all that piled up traffic to go by). Now, I'm into road cycling myself, and I can say that it's only a very small percentage of cyclists who act this way, but the actions of a few give a reputation to the whole bunch.