(NPR) Why No One's Happy With The FCC's Net Neutrality

After years of debate, the Federal Communications Commission is moving forward with controversial rules intended to preserve the open Internet. The FCC chairman outlined the proposals this week and criticism came quickly, from all parts of the ideological spectrum.

Ever since he took the job, FCC chairman Julius Genachowski has been promising new rules of the road for the phone and cable companies that provide broadband access, as well as the companies and consumers who depend on it.

“It is the Internet’s openness and freedom ”” the ability to speak, innovate and engage in commerce without having to ask anyone’s permission ”” that has enabled the Internet’s unparalleled success,” he said.

In a brief appearance Wednesday, Genachowski sketched out the rules that he said would ensure that broadband providers treat all of the data on their networks equally ”” an idea known as net neutrality. But some public interest groups have seen a few more details than Genachowski announced. They say the proposed rules are net neutrality in name only.

Read or listen to it all.


Posted in * Culture-Watch, * Economics, Politics, Blogging & the Internet, Economy, Law & Legal Issues, The U.S. Government

5 comments on “(NPR) Why No One's Happy With The FCC's Net Neutrality

  1. Branford says:

    The court has already ruled that the FCC has no authority to do this. This must go through Congress with changes in legislation. I guess if you have the power of rule-making, you can just pretend Congress doesn’t exist.

  2. Dan Crawford says:

    Oh yeah, we will be well-served by Congress when they, as they always do, hand over the Internet to the largest corporations. The new crew of irresponsible do-nothings can be counted on to sacrifice ordinary hard-working people to their corporate overlords.

  3. Branford says:

    So that’s a good enough reason for the Executive Branch to ignore judicial rulings and Congressional mandates? Just because some think Congress will create legislation some might disagree with? Not exactly how our federal government is supposed to work.

  4. Sarah says:

    RE: “The new crew of irresponsible do-nothings . . . ” [read the Constitutional conservatives who have just been elected] . . .


  5. Daniel says:

    #2 – I see what you mean. Google bought and paid for access to the Obama administration with their corporate political contributions so their users can get all the broadband bandwidth they want (meaning Google continues to make obscene amounts of money), even though Google didn’t contribute once cent to the expensive building of required network infrastructure done by companies such as AT&T and Verizon. Would you agree that billionaire weasels like the Google boys who buy off politicians should be drawn and quartered?