The Christian Coalition now has a whole section on its website devoted to network neutrality regulations. Unfortunately, the letter from president Roberta Combs is chock full of misleading arguments, as well as some outright errors. For example:
Since its birth, the Internet has existed on phone lines, which were covered under what are known as “common carrier” regulations, (or “net neutrality”), which prevented discrimination by network providers based on content or where a call originated. This principle carried over to the Internet and helped make it a dynamic engine for free expression and economic growth.
I’m not sure what “has existed on phone lines” is supposed to mean. The Internet has always used a variety of interconnection technologies. In any event, as I’ve written before, common carrier regulations have never applied to the Internet backbone. Nor has it applied to cable modems or to dedicated high-speed lines like ISDN or T1 lines.
She goes on to raise wildly implausible scare stories:
Under the new rules, there is nothing to stop the cable and phone companies from not allowing consumers to have access to speech that they don’t support. For example, a cable company with a pro-choice board of directors could decide that it doesn’t like a pro-life organization using its high-speed network to encourage pro-life activities. Under the new rules, this could happen–and it would be legal!
Sure, it would be legal. But it would also be commercial suicide, as millions of irate pro-lifers would switch to their local Baby Bell and call their Congresscritters. It’s ludicrous to think that any large telco would think about pulling that kind of stunt.
Finally, the letter trots out the only three examples of alleged network discrimination that the pro-regulatory side has been able to muster: The first was in Canada, and involved blocking a site that Telus subsequently got shut down by a court order for violating the privacy of its employees. The second was probably an accident, and was quickly corrected. And the third is a case in which the FCC’s authority was sufficient to address the problem.
In short, there’s nothing new here: Combs is repeating the same misleading arguments as left-wing sites like MoveOn.org. Which is a shame, because there are some smart telecom experts at conservative think tanks who I bet would have been happy to set her straight.
The Technology Liberation Front is the tech policy blog dedicated to keeping politicians' hands off the 'net and everything else related to technology.
Comments on this entry are closed.