Everyone’s favorite crazyperson (Glenn Beck) has been really shockingly ill informed (and, therefore, ill informative) on Net Neutrality in his televised rants lately. Let’s just clear this up, shall we?
Beck, Limbaugh, et al have been running around spouting about how Net Neutrality is basically the Fairness Doctrine, but for the internet. It’s not. It’s nothing like that. It has nothing to do with politics whatsoever. The “neutrality” in question is absolutely, positively superfluous to any questions of what content can and can’t go on the internet. “Net Neutrality” means service providers (Comcast, Time Warner, etc.) can’t fuss about with what content gets to you, the consumer. It means that all content, no matter what it is, must be provided equally (or neutrally, as the case may be) to the consumer, so Time Warner can’t charge you for a “premium service plan” under which you get Netflix and Youtube faster than you otherwise would. It’s about making sure that the internet doesn’t wind up like TV with network (NBC, CBS, ABC), basic cable (FOX, MSNBC, CNN, Comedy Central, UPN, whatever), and premium cable (HBO, Showtime) offered at different rates.
Under Net Neutrality (which, for my money, should be implemented unequivocally), the internet will get to continue to be what it has always been and what it should always be: a completely open content market free from corporate judgment or favoritism. No one is trying to put The Huffington Post on foxnews.com. We just want to keep the internet the wild wild west of ideas it always has been. But this idea might get in the way of maximizing Comcast’s profits, so I guess that makes it bad, huh?
Update: Here’s a nifty online primer on the issue, simple and visualized.
