They want Net Neutrality because they want a single-payer government Web – they want the government to be your sole Internet Service Provider (ISP).
“(T)he ultimate goal is to get rid of the media capitalists in the phone and cable companies and to divest them from control.”
How is that pro-consumer? I’m fairly sure consumers of Veterans Administration services wouldn’t think it is.
As the deeply unpopular Barack Obama Administration wanes into oblivion, the Left senses time is short and is upping the Internet takeover schedule – demanding the government right now commandeer total control. A move known as Title II Reclassification.
“The FCC had an opportunity to reverse its failures and pursue real net neutrality by reclassifying broadband under the law. Instead, in a moment of political cowardice and extreme shortsightedness, it has chosen this convoluted path that won’t protect Internet users.”
What is Title II Reclassification?
“Reclassification” means unilaterally shoving the Web out from under the existing light-touch Title I rules the 1996 Telecommunications Act placed upon it – which have allowed it to blossom into the free speech-free market Xanadu we all know and love.
And then slamming it into the Title II heavy-regulatory uber-structure that has for the last seventy-plus years crushed with regs and taxes landline telephones.…
If that sounds illegal – that’s only because it is. Congress put the Internet under Title I – they alone are the ones legally authorized to Reclassify as Title II.
The Media Marxist left wants this FCC Reclassification power grab – so as to then reimpose Net Neutrality. Unilateral Net Neutrality imposition has already been tried twice – how’d those go?
So the Media Marxists’ response to these overreaches is to demand a light-years-beyond overreach.
What is Net Neutrality? Whatever the Media Marxists wants it to be.
(T)he Left has now created a hay-yuge new, uber-expansive definition of Net Neutrality. From covering just the Last Mile – to encompassing the entire World Wide Web.
And they are expanding their definition yet again.
The Chilean telecommunications regulator Subtel has banned mobile operators from offering so-called zero-rated social media apps…(that) through deals with the carriers can be used without having to pay for mobile data.
Subtel says such practices are illegal under Chilean net neutrality law….
Witness the power of forward-thinking net neutrality law in action! This sort of thing could be hugely detrimental to the growth plans of Facebook in particular, but it’s ultimately very pro-consumer.
How is preventing consumers from getting free stuff “very pro-consumer?” I believe most consumers would like to have a word with their alleged protectors. Both abroad – and here at home.
Sports media giant ESPN has talked with at least one large U.S. carrier about subsidizing wireless access to its content….
Good news, right? Not according to the alleged consumer protectors.
Because you’re too stupid to realize that free stuff isn’t good for you.
Ronald Reagan famously said:
“The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’”
Please also save us from the “consumer groups” looking to dramatically expand said government – under the same pathetic guise.
[Originally published at RedState]