Not Neutrality: The Netflix Scandal That Isn’t
Matt Wood

And you think the consumer’s voice counts? Anything the government regulates impinges on free speech, a good deal of it through the FCC. They have tried for years to get the fairness doctrine implemented, but the market place basically neutered that, the people did not want to listen to the drivel that the anti conservatives wanted equal time for, but they keep trying. The FCC always favors monied interests over the consumers, the no call list is a joke with the caveats attached to it, and the fines are a minor cost of doing business. Telemarketers use your phones to try and sell you things you do not need with unsavory tactics and no one cares, to me anyone using my assets should be shut down, the FCC would touch none of this. Who do you think they will favor in Net Neutrality, certainly not the consuming public, the folks with the most bucks and best lobbyists; the government would be better off staying out of it, but then down the road they would not be able to tax it and that will come in a hidden way via the larger providers buried in their cost structure or as an add on in your bill. As of now larger entities on the net are censoring selected users and the DOJ has talked about leaning on those who speak badly of Muslims and global Warming[man made] and possibly prosecuting them; with free speech coming under such stress, how can the FCC be immune from such influence to limit free speech on the Net under the guise of Net Neutrality? The only reason the author has gone along is two fold, his ox has not yet been gored, and the dead rat of Neutrality has not yet begun to rot.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.