Net Neutrality is "Very Pro Business," yet GOP Against it?

Columbia University Prof. Tim Wu dispels the common myth pushed by Republicans about net neutrality; destroys innovation/job killer. That's sooooooooo wrong:



With clueless Republican voters standing up for higher cable rates and slower service, not to mention hurting those smaller job creators, it's frustrating to know these guys are in charge now:

But the Wisconsin State Journal's Tom Still does an amazing job making our current neutral internet sound good, yet improvable with...get this, "light touch regulation." Light touch regulations for guns too?

First,Tom Still praises our current net neutral series of tubes:

By any standard, the Internet ranks as one of the leading innovations of our time. It has revolutionized everything from commerce to medicine to entertainment, all within the confines of a generation. Better yet, it has done so largely without government regulation.

Let's get to the focus group approved spin pushed by Scott Walker and Still. Amazing how they now think it turns back the clock:

So, why would President Obama think now is the time to turn back the clock to Depression-era rules written when all telephones were black, hard-wired and hung on a wall?

The following talking point, using Netflix, is easily argued away with this: The guys in pizza shop who came up with idea of YouTube would not have had a chance, since they are what Still calls "lane hogs," like Netflix. 

While the FCC appeared on course for a hybrid rule to charge broadband “hogs” while protecting small users, Obama has proposed to take it to a new – or, more accurately, old – regulatory level. He wants to reclassify ISPs as common carriers under Title II of the 1934 Telecommunications Act, treating the service as a public utility.

Still has this moment of sanity:

“Net neutrality” is one of those buzzwords that inspires populist support, but it’s not as simple as the big guys conspiring to shove mom-and-pop websites into the Internet’s slow lane.

Behind the scenes, it’s also about a small handful of heavy users – the Internet’s so-called “lane hogs” – hoping to avoid paying for the right to dominate available capacity. Video consumes huge amounts of Internet capacity Today, Netflix and similar services are accommodating customers through the Internet – and gobbling up capacity in the process. Netflix pays Comcast, Verizon and AT&T undisclosed fees for a more direct connection to their networks, an arrangement that could become unnecessary if Obama’s recommendation is adopted by the FCC.

Supposedly, this whole net neutrality gimmick is all about saving Netflix a few dollars?

No wonder Netflix is leading the charge for — you guessed it — “net neutrality.”

It has functioned pretty well so far with light-touch regulation and self-policing functions.

Oh No! FCC and Liberal Group push preserving the internet as a vibrant forum for speech, commerce innovation and cultural expression." God forbid!

It sounds evil:

Documents made public yesterday by Judicial Watch, a conservative nonprofit group, describe extensive collusion by Federal Communications Commission officials with a left-wing advocacy group (Free Press) in a campaign to expand government regulation of the Internet.

(Werewolf howl) Scary!! Free Press is something to dread because they’re advocating for a…free press.

The … FCC and the advocacy group supported a proposal to regulate access to the Internet as if it were a public utility, in the interest of ensuring "Net Neutrality" … would assure equal access for all Internet users by barring companies from offering preferred rates for higher delivery speeds.

(Scream!) Scary and outrageous. Republicans fear Democrats might do to the internet something they’ve thought about, dominate this powerful media. But the articles writer and interviewees have a hard time hiding their extreme conservative ways. They’re actually appalled by the idea that the internet stay the way it is, and not turned into a money making business that would eventually price average people out:

WashingtonExaminer: Emails between former Free Press president John Silver and Democratic FCC Commissioner Michael Copps from October 2010, coordinating "how we'd like to proceed during these next three months on NN [net neutrality]."

Documents summarizing a phone call (where) Silver "emphasized that a strong net neutrality rule is critical to preserving the Internet as a vibrant forum for speech, commerce, innovation and cultural expression."

Now it’s time for a little character assignation if the previous socialist “free speech protecting net” didn’t scare you off:

Free Press was co-founded by Monthly Review editor Robert McChesney and the Nation’s John Nichols. The Monthly Review is "an independent Marxist journal," while the Nation has long described itself as "the flagship of the left." Free Press is partially funded by George Soros' Open Society Institute.

Scary!! They want to destroy the country, obviously. But what conspiracy exists below the surface of these liberals Marxists:

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said the documents suggest "nothing less than the Obama administration's attempt to stage a government takeover of the Internet under the guise of Net Neutrality. So it should come as no surprise that Free Press, the hard-left organization with socialist ties, is improperly driving the so-called Net Neutrality agenda from inside the Obama administration. The American people should be deeply troubled by the fact that the Obama administration, on issue after issue, seems to be run by shadowy leftist organizations."

The appropriately named columnist Conn Carroll, a senior editorial writer for The Washington Examiner, may have a conspiratorial scoop on his paranoid hands.

The Easy Net Neutrality Question.

Would you be for or against allowing your internet provider to discriminate against Internet content and services, including online calling and Web video services that could compete with their core phone and cable operations?

If you’re against such a proposal, then you support net neutrality. If you're okay with these restrictions and want companies to decide what you see and hear, keeping government oversight out, then you need your conservative head examined.

Republicans vote to RAISE cable/internet fees to Americans. What a way to spend your tax cuts!!

Whose side are free market conservatives on? It’s not the people’s side. Our corporate republic isn’t much of a secret anymore. We lost control a while back, and with a little more help from “small government” conservatives, we’ll lock it in place forever.


When the public fights for an industry to make a profit from treating the sick and dying, or making money educating our kids, there is no turning back. Like this small unnoticed story below you’ll be complaining about in a year or two, but won’t remember how and when it happened, leaving Republicans off the hook for picking your pocket:

AP: House Democrats have shelved a last-ditch effort to broker a compromise between phone, cable and Internet companies on rules that would prohibit broadband providers from blocking or degrading online traffic flowing over their networks. House Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman abandoned the effort in the face of Republican opposition to his proposed "network neutrality" rules.

Those rules were intended to prevent broadband providers from becoming online gatekeepers by playing favorites with traffic.

The communications companies also argue that after spending billions to upgrade
their networks for broadband, they need to be able earn a healthy return by offering premium services. Burdensome net neutrality rules, they say, would discourage future investments.

Now you know what to do with your tax cuts.
The free market will be anything but free to consumers.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Net Neutrality Proposal Falls Apart (huffingtonpost.com)
• Art Brodsky: A Clear Message Emerges From The Hill's Net Neutrality Mess: 'The FCC Must Act' (huffingtonpost.com)