The new FCC Commissioner wants to preserve net neutrality and keep providers from instituting their favored “two tier” system (so they can make more money by charging you more for using the internet). Not surprisingly, some folks (yes corporations and lobbyists are still legally considered persons in America, only with more influence, power and rights than ordinary men, women and children) don’t cotton to his notions of government interference with their business model. Who would these “people” be? Betcha you get it right with your first guess:
Mobile providers have argued that US proposals to ensure that all traffic on the internet is treated equally should not be applied to wireless traffic.
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) wants rules to prevent providers blocking or slowing down bandwidth-heavy usage such as streaming video.
Providers claim a two-tiered system is essential for the future vitality of the net.
To which I call bullshit. By the way, what are these doyens of the telecommunications industry objecting to so vociferously? Why, only these statements by FCC chairman Julius Genachowski:
Genachowski said that the two rules are necessary to preserve the openness of Internet architecture and to ensure that carriers are accountable to consumers.
. . . Genachowski said that carriers should not be allowed to favor certain types of content or applications over others and that they could not degrade traffic of Internet companies that offer services similar to those of the carriers. […]
“Broadband providers cannot discriminate against particular Internet content or applications,” Genachowski said. “The Internet must continue to allow users to decide what content and applications succeed.” […]
[T]he second proposed new rule that would force carriers to be more transparent in their traffic management practices.
Gosh, that sounds like a (gasp!) free market approach to me combined with simple fairness and honesty in the way you treat your customers. No wonder the corporate welfare hounds are braying so loudly. Because if you, a large multinational corporation who only cares about profits, had the choice between establishing control over the internet and monopolizing access in order to make a lot more money, or treating internet users and providers equally and fairly, what would you choose?*
* That’s a purely rhetorical question, my friends.
By the way, what was the Republican response to this imminently sensible approach in which we let the market decide who will be the winners and losers on the internet? No need to guess that one:
Six Republican senators introduced a measure that would cut the FCC’s funding to “develop and implement new regulatory mandates”.
Because, naturally, we’ve all seen how less governmental regulation has worked so well over the years in the financial services industry, environmental protection, food safety, drug safety — need I go on?
“This is about fair rules of the road for companies that control access to the internet,” said the FCC chairman.
Which is why I expect Glenn Beck’s next target might very well be you, Chairman Czar Genachowski. Because we all know fairness and concern for actual living human beings (as opposed to the rights of corporate entities whose only purpose in life is greed) is a no-no in bizarro right wing crazy world. Hope you have better luck than some of your fellow appointees. And I mean that sincerely.
