Why the FCC Is Ditching Net Neutrality
Charts: The "open internet" is no match for revolving doors and buckets of cash.—By Josh Harkinson
| Fri May 9, 2014 3:00 AM PDT
Late last month, the Federal Communications Commission announced that it would propose new rules allowing companies like Netflix or Google to pay internet service providers (ISPs) like Verizon or Comcast for faster data lanes to deliver video and other content to their customers. In other words, the FCC was proposing to replace net neutrality—the egalitarian internet that we all know—with a pay-to-play platform designed to favor the biggest and richest players.
The backlash online was so huge, swift, and predictable that one might wonder what the hell the FCC bureaucrats were thinking. Could a handful of powerful companies really matter more to the commission than pretty much everybody else who uses the internet? The charts below show how a few wealthy special interests wield huge sway within the FCC, particularly with regard to the net neutrality debate. But first, a quick refresher on what net neutrality means:
Proponents of net neutrality, also known as the open internet, fear that allowing a fast lane on the web would hurt start-ups, nonprofits, activists, and anyone else who couldn't afford to pay the toll. Bigger tech companies such as Google also tend to favor net neutrality, though sometimes more for the sake of public relations than principle. But, you might ask, since the internet is already quite fast today compared with a few years ago, is a few seconds' difference in the time needed to load a web page really all that important? Actually, yes, it is. Here's why:
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/05/charts-why-fcc-ditching-net-neutrality
= new reply since forum marked as read
Even in some of the larger cities.
I have DSL/Earthlink through a AT&T. I refuse to sign up for their UVERSE for Cable Bundling because I've heard so many complaints. And, I have Time-Warner Basic for cable and have heard so many complaints about their "Bundling" that I won't sign up for that, either.
Earthlink downloads (through AT&T wires) was causing so much trouble we complained to them about 6 months ago that we were considering leaving. They said: Oh...but we can upgrade your connection with AT&T for just $6.00 more a month. We asked why they didn't notify us before about this. They replied that they didn't offer the upgrade unless a customer called and complained. 
The upgrade has made our download speeds much better...but, we now lose connections and have to reset Modem and Router at least once a week or more. And, oddly enough, after Netflix made the deal with Verizon...we now are getting buffering when we watch Netflix Movies through Roku Box maybe three times a week. We never had buffering with Netflix through Roku even when our computer downloads seemed to slow down...so what's up with that?
So there's a lot going on that people are putting up with and it does hurt Google and the rest's business as more people demand more and more from the internet. Businesses are using SKYPE and people use their computers to watch TV and Movies cutting Cable and that's putting a huge drain on capacity. We aren't even allowed to have our cities run their own internet systems in our state. We have two cities who Grandfathered in local internet services but our legislature passed a bill that no other cities would be allowed to create their own systems.
So Net Neutrality is an important issue. And, that $6.00 a month extra we pay Earthlink for AT&T DSL will probably keep going up...just like our basic cable bill has for years but with more and more dropped connections. We citizens must do everything we can to stop getting sucked up in these monopolies who can keep raising rates whenever they want. The large companies must be regulated as "Common Carriers/Utilities" and open the door to private competition where it can be made available.
