James Gattuso

Net Neutrality: Urban Legend # 5

One of the most useful websites I know of is snopes.com, which provides information and analysis of e-mails circulating on the Internet, from the “Bill Gates is Giving Away Money” hoax to the famous 602B e-mail tax bill. Among other things, Snopes ranks the e-mails based on circulation and other factors. Currently, the number five hottest email–beating out warnings about ether-laced perfume and the dangers of rat urine on soda cans–is a missive in support of net neutrality regulation circulated by Move.on org.

The surprising appearance of net neutrality–which until very recently was a term known only to hopeless tech geeks and policy wonks–is a worrying evidence of the efforts being made by Move.on and others in support of Internet regulation. And, unfortunately, for most who get this e-mail, and forward it on–it may be the only thing they hear of the controversy.

Of course, the issue is not fictional–unfortunately the push for regulation is no urban legend. Although Snopes classifies it as “true,” the e-mail does get some important facts wrong. For instance, it says Congress is considering “a radical law” to eliminate net neutrality. In truth, there currently are no neutrality rules in place. Moveon.org is asking for new regulations to be imposed. At the same time, the letter warns darkly of “giant corporations” who are fighting these rules, but doesn’t mention the rather large firms–including Microsoft–who are fighting to have these restrictions imposed on their potential rivals.

Its hard to follow up on mass-forwarded e-mails like this to explain the other side of the debate. (Though it wouldn’t hurt if sympathetic readers forward\ed on relevant posts from TLF–such as this, this, this, this, this, this or this–or perhaps this from Heritage, as a counter-point.)

In any case, it is clear that this debate has passed beyond the small world of telecom wonks, and is now squarely in the public eye–or at least the public’s inbox. And the outcome of this battle over Internet regulation may depend upon the Internet itself, and all of its advantages and flaws as a medium of mass communication.

Stay tuned. This should be interesting.

May 5, 2006 | Comments |

discussion by DISQUS

Add New Comment

Viewing 5 Comments

    • ^
    • v
    It's all about people bitching about file sharing being throttled down to nothing. Oh the horror. People might have to actually pay $0.99/song on iTunes or Napster instead of getting the stuff for free.
    • ^
    • v
    Actually, Mike, if an independent game developer tries to sell his/her games online, the idea that he/she has to pay extra money to guarantee that the bits still get to their destination, something that TCP already is supposed to guarantee, is a bit absurd.

    On the other hand, I was a bit suspicious that moveon.org didn't have an actual name for the legislation, nor any links to references about it. Still, I have had few reasons to not trust them before so I signed the petition.

    I'm glad there are counter-points to read. I'll look into them. I hope that I don't come to a different conclusion and regret signing the petition prematurely, but I'm open to the possibility. Thanks for giving me the chance.
    • ^
    • v
    I'll admit that the idea of regulating network neutrality isn't so appetizing anymore, but I do feel that James' arguments seemed to have been written in a deceptive kind of way. It felt like I was only reading one side of the argument without much commentary on why the other side is wrong. I'm not saying that it was deceptive, as I clearly don't know as much about it as you might, but I'm simply pointing out that when I read the articles, I felt like something was missing or being danced around.

    And Heritage? A admittedly conservative think-tank? With a Rush Limbaugh quote at the top promoting it? It's not exactly inspiring me with confidence that it would be unbiased and fact based, either.

    Still, I now have a feeling that Internet regulation would be bad and that the doom and gloom about the loss of network neutrality is likely exaggerated.
    • ^
    • v
    I still don't think it's an issue because there are many factors against it. I seriously doubt that it is ever going to be a real issue because there is enough competition to allow people to switch from an ISP that pulls this crap.
    • ^
    • v
    GB -- I'd suggest, if you haven't already, reading the resource page we put together on the issue -- http://www.heritage.org/Research/Regulation/Reg...

    The links we put in there are from both sides, so you can make the best informed decision. No dancing around there.
blog comments powered by Disqus