A month ago, Free Press claimed it was “troubled by some of the heated rhetoric that has gone back and forth over whether civil rights organizations should be for or against Network Neutrality. In general, this debate has too often descended into outrageous allegations of all kinds.” They added, “A commitment to civility will benefit everyone involved.” They urged everyone to avoid “outrageous allegations” that “divide us along ethnic and racial lines.”

I confess: about that same time, I was in the process of strongly challenging Free Press for its offensive claims that minorities who disagreed with them were dupes of big business. But I never posted it – because I agreed we needed a civil debate.

This issue is just too important to wallow in crazy claims and race-dividing rhetoric. At its root, all agree we need an open Internet, and that everyone – particularly consumers – benefits. But despite what Free Press claims, the openness of the Internet is not at risk. That is a smokescreen. Internet activity has and will continue to be guarded by the Four Internet Freedom principles set forth by the FCC. ( a fact that these outlets never mention those BTW), and ISPs are already prohibited from blocking, discriminating against, or deterring Internet users from accessing online content and applications of their choice. The Internet works wonderfully as it is, and in the very rare cases where an ISP breached a principle, corrective action was taken promptly. ISPs are on high alert not to repeat anything close to those one or two errors. What is at risk is the goal of 100% broadband and our need to ensure access by all children, families, small businesses, and voices.

Well, at least that was supposed to be the heart of the debate. I’m not going to repeat all of Free Press’ new outrageous claims, but its government relations manager days ago wrote that the policies that minorities (like me and many of you) are supporting would create a “segregated community.” They suggest minorities who work for AT&T, Verizon and others are unwittingly helping their employers erode “online rights of marginalized communities.”

Shame on Free Press, and shame on us if we allow such offensive and preposterous comments to ever go unchallenged. Free Press, please don’t backtrack on your appeal to civility and facts. Let’s respect our communities and consumers enough to give them knowledge and information, and let them decide where they stand – without your scare tactics and rhetoric. I could not be more sincere, and I’ll reach out to you off line to see how we can make this happen together.