In 2015, when writing his dissenting opinion against FCC 15-24 — formally known as the Report and Order on Remand, Declaratory Ruling, and Order in the Matter of Protecting and Promoting the Open Internet, but commonly referred to as ‘Net Neutrality,” — Federal Communications Commission Commissioner Ajit Pai had this to say:
“This is not only a radical departure from the bipartisan, market-oriented policies that have served us so well for the last two decades. It is also an about-face from the proposals the FCC made just last May. So why is the FCC changing course? Why is the FCC turning its back on Internet freedom? Is it because we now have evidence that the Internet is not open? No. Is it because we have discovered some problem with our prior interpretation of the law? No. We are flip-flopping for one reason and one reason alone. President Obama told us to do so.”
The singular reason why this-so called “Net Neutrality” came to the forefront is because then President Barack Obama ordered it. And who was prodding Obama to do so? Google. Microsoft. Facebook. Twitter. Amazon.
The Tech Left, funded largely by George Soros, had decided to champion under the banner of a benign-sounding “Net Neutrality” campaign and seize a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to grab the moral high ground in their determination to allow the giant edge providers to censor the Internet to suit their ideological preferences — ridding the Internet of conservative and libertarian content.
More
DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
The author is confused about what net neutrality is and does.
ReplyDeleteRemoving neutrality will not address his fears of censorship of conservative ideas by specific tech companies.
However, it will absolutely give the power to censor ideas to ISP's.
He is not addressing net neutrality at all... but rather his displeasure at what certain web sites handle the content that is delivered. Now, with neutrality rules in place, a competitor could have access and entry rather easily to compete with these ideas... think "conservapedia" in response to "wikapedia".
Remove neutrality... Now ISP's hold the reins to access... and the money to access. These companies are FLUSH with money and resource, and like it or not, they can buy and sell capital hill. It sets up a system where government can collude with information content, thus controlling media going to the masses.
Think "1984".
Protecting net neutrality is paramount. There will be differences in opinion on ideas.. but having access to differing ideas, and being able to enter the marketplace of ideas equally is what is so precious.
We cannot allow it to happen.