In
what the Washington Post referred to as Federal Communications
Commission (FCC) Chairman Tom Wheeler’s strongest endorsement yet of net
neutrality, he said:
Public policy should
protect the great driving force of the open Internet: how it allows innovation
without permission…. This is why it is essential that the FCC continue to
maintain an open Internet and maintain the legal ability to intervene promptly
and effectively in the event of aggravated circumstances.
Other
outlets regard Wheeler’s recent pronouncements as being more ambiguous. Does he favor the
right to offer variations in prices and services, or not? [Editor’s Note: That answer is
a logical fallacy known as the If By Whiskey Fallacy]....... There
are at least 15 reasons I insist net neutrality is poor philosophy, economics,
law, policy and politics, and I hope FCC staff and policymakers disinclined
toward regulation will take a look at them (below)……To Read More……
Part 1: Net Neutrality vs. Infrastructure WealthPart 2: An Alternative Case for Agency Neutrality
Part 3: The FCC’s Disdain for Markets
Part 4: FCC Order Creates Political Vulnerability for All Market Participants
Part 5: The Fallacies Motivating Net Neutrality
Part 6: Does “Market Failure” Demand Neutrality Regulation?
Part 7: Mandatory Dumb Pipes? But Why Sacrifice Genius?
Part 8: The Essential Elements of Non-Destructive Rulemaking
Part 9: How to Expand Consumer Choice and Access to Content
Part 10: Who’s Discriminating Online?
Part 11: The Inappropriateness of Compulsory Transparency
Part 12: Why Net Neutrality Threatens Homeland Security and Cybersecurity
Part 13: What FCC Should Do Now
Part 14: What Should Congress Do About Net Neutrality?
Part 15: Can We Please End This. Please.
No comments:
Post a Comment