<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Court&#8217;s FCC-Comcast Ruling Regarding The Internet Is a Shift From Neutral Into Reverse</title>
	<link>http://www.ustvmedia.org/media-and-democracy/2010/04/07/courts-fcc-comcast-ruling-regarding-the-internet-is-a-shift-from-neutral-into-reverse/</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 18 May 2012 09:41:09 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: Andy</title>
		<link>http://www.ustvmedia.org/media-and-democracy/2010/04/07/courts-fcc-comcast-ruling-regarding-the-internet-is-a-shift-from-neutral-into-reverse/#comment-52120</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Apr 2010 17:11:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.ustvmedia.org/media-and-democracy/2010/04/07/courts-fcc-comcast-ruling-regarding-the-internet-is-a-shift-from-neutral-into-reverse/#comment-52120</guid>
					<description>&lt;i&gt;&quot;The government attempting to regulate and police the Internet would be a fiasco&quot;&lt;/i&gt;

Net neutrality has nothing whatsoever to do with the government &quot;policing&quot; the internet. 

Another straw man argument from someone who is either terribly naive about the wonders of the &quot;market,&quot; or else is one of those paid apparatchiks of the telco astroturf organizations created to swamp the public discourse with a blizzard of misinformation.

More here...
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Astroturf_blogging

Unfortunately, based on previous experience, I would tend to guess to the latter option.

All this about keeping the government from limiting &quot;competition&quot; is simply contravened by facts on the ground, when the number of ISPs who can compete for your business has dwindled to near handfuls from the early days of internet services, most of which have been wiped out by the few huge conglomerates who leverage their size and position in order to dominate internet operations.

If you want the internet to operate like cable TV services, than oppose net neutrality. If you want it to continue to operate along the lines that is has developed under, then support it. It's the simplest way one can describe an admittedly complicated situation (of which USTV Media is repository of ample info and discussion on which you can find throughout our &quot;Media and Democracy&quot; section).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>&#8220;The government attempting to regulate and police the Internet would be a fiasco&#8221;</i></p>
<p>Net neutrality has nothing whatsoever to do with the government &#8220;policing&#8221; the internet. </p>
<p>Another straw man argument from someone who is either terribly naive about the wonders of the &#8220;market,&#8221; or else is one of those paid apparatchiks of the telco astroturf organizations created to swamp the public discourse with a blizzard of misinformation.</p>
<p>More here&#8230;<br />
<a href='http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Astroturf_blogging' rel='nofollow'>http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Astroturf_blogging</a></p>
<p>Unfortunately, based on previous experience, I would tend to guess to the latter option.</p>
<p>All this about keeping the government from limiting &#8220;competition&#8221; is simply contravened by facts on the ground, when the number of ISPs who can compete for your business has dwindled to near handfuls from the early days of internet services, most of which have been wiped out by the few huge conglomerates who leverage their size and position in order to dominate internet operations.</p>
<p>If you want the internet to operate like cable TV services, than oppose net neutrality. If you want it to continue to operate along the lines that is has developed under, then support it. It&#8217;s the simplest way one can describe an admittedly complicated situation (of which USTV Media is repository of ample info and discussion on which you can find throughout our &#8220;Media and Democracy&#8221; section).
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Dan Karas</title>
		<link>http://www.ustvmedia.org/media-and-democracy/2010/04/07/courts-fcc-comcast-ruling-regarding-the-internet-is-a-shift-from-neutral-into-reverse/#comment-52105</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Apr 2010 09:12:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.ustvmedia.org/media-and-democracy/2010/04/07/courts-fcc-comcast-ruling-regarding-the-internet-is-a-shift-from-neutral-into-reverse/#comment-52105</guid>
					<description>I personally agree with the DC court. I believe less FCC regulation of Internet service providers is a good thing. The government attempting to regulate and police the the Internet would be a fiasco IMHO. Newer and faster technology advances will increasingly provide more consumer options for obtaining high speed Internet access. Informed consumers and free market competition will force broadband ISP’s to offer better services for competitive prices least they lose the customer to the competition that does.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I personally agree with the DC court. I believe less FCC regulation of Internet service providers is a good thing. The government attempting to regulate and police the the Internet would be a fiasco IMHO. Newer and faster technology advances will increasingly provide more consumer options for obtaining high speed Internet access. Informed consumers and free market competition will force broadband ISP’s to offer better services for competitive prices least they lose the customer to the competition that does.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>

