1 edit | Corporate lobbying, indeed. telecom lobbyists concocted this pseudo-emergency as a political ploy. Actually, it's "network neutrality" lobbyists who concocted a pseudo-emergency as a political ploy -- to get regulation enacted for their corporate masters. There really are network capacity issues (witness, for example, the very real congestion which iPhones are causing on AT&T's cell sites). But there's no need for "network neutrality" regulation.
The lobbyists for "network neutrality" regulation make it out to be a matter of freedom, motherhood, and apple pie. But the truth of the matter is that there is no problem to solve; in the US (where these regulations would have effect) the Internet is not being censored or blocked. And if an ISP did so, its customers would switch in a New York minute.
So, why all the lobbying for regulation to "solve" a nonexistent "problem?" Because -- along with assurances that we will get what we already have and are in no danger of losing -- the regulations contain provisions that would favor certain large corporations with big lobbying money. (First and foremost of these is Google, which is funding the majority of the "network neutrality" lobbying in DC.) These provisions would actually hinder the rollout of broadband in our country (which IS an important goal). They'd also increase the cost of broadband service, limit consumer choice, and even make certain services that businesses -- especially startups -- might want or need unavailable. (The motive behind this seems to be to prevent another company from arising to compete with Google.) In short, the predictions of gloom and doom if regulation is not passed are a smokescreen. "Network neutrality" regulation is a corporate agenda that simply isn't in consumers' interest. |
