What is "net neutrality"? The FCC is getting ready to consider new regulations for the internet.?

Have you heard the term "net neutrality"?

I originally thought this was a good cause. I am now learning that the idea you get when you hear the term "net neutrality" of the internet being kept as the bastion of freedom of speech is actually the opposite goal of what the net neutrality people want to achieve.

Internet freedom being curtailed is now one of the highest priorities of the Obama administration and the other socialist at work in our great nation. Including the Josh Silver and the "net neutrality" crown

here is a link to jay Rockefeller speaking to an Obama administration official about it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YS4uJeMs0Yc

Youtube thumbnail

&feature=PlayList&p=C97F1C8110FC8C18&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=38

Update:

The idea of keeping something like the internet neutral is contrary to the first amendment. people have a right to express dissent. Whether you or I agree with it or not. They still have the right to NOT be neutral.

Update 2:

I get email updates from Josh Silver, and he is trying to raise millions of dollars to lobby the FCC to pass these neutrality regulations. this will redefine what is allowable on the internet and most likely much conservative speech will be outlawed. Contact the FCC and tell them, "say no to net neutrality."

14 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Best answer

    Net Neutrality is another way for Obama to control information whether it is radio, tv or internet. This is probably a pay back to a certain individual that owns a cable company...Ted Turner.

    This is exactly what Chavez has done in Venezuela. Rockefeller is a joke and hopefully New Yorkers will vote him out the next time he is up for re-election.

  • 1 decade ago

    let's see...given the government's track record- $800 toilet seats, Amtrak, the 'temporary safety net' that is welfare, the losses in both revenue and jobs after the takeover of the auto industry-the less government involvement there is, the happier we all will be!

    look at the orientation of the mass media...90% of TV, and the majority of newspapers, are liberal. the sole alternative outlets are: Fox (under open and declared attack from the administration), talk radio (with measures like the 'Fairness Doctrine', proposals for 'local content', etc being considered by the administration with an eye towards regulating it off the air) and the Internet...and we have AG Holder openly considering ways to regulate 'how people interact' on the 'net?

    i'm guessing that when 0bama refers to our Constitution as a 'flawed document', that pesky First Amendment is one of the 'flaws' he perceives

  • 1 decade ago

    Net Neutrality is simply the government telling telecom companies that they may not have a say in what data is transmitted over their system. Their network is to be looked on as just a set of pipes, and the type of data running through those pipes is to be governed by the sender and the receiver only.

    In theory this sounds like a good thing, and it may very well be.

    If you ask me, neither side has really made a convincing argument. Telecom companies say it will stifle competition and the buildup of their networks, but I've never heard them explain it logically. On the other side, we haven't really encountered any major problems without the regulation. I'm not convinced we need to do this yet.

    UPDATE: Net Neutrality is not censorship. If anything, the gov't would insist that your data, whatever it is, is not restricted or blocked by the telecom companies.

  • Anonymous
    4 years ago

    the FCC made it a rule that internet providers, like any other business, can't charge us money for their services and then turn around and not deliver those services that is what net neutrality is all about

  • What do you think of the answers? You can sign in to give your opinion on the answer.
  • bozieu
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    They control all our sayings now and sure Bill Gate and Yahoo are fellows

    on the side of leftists.

    worst as all socialist governement they are paranoid and worry the plot

    a nice way to hide their internal trouble typic commies' behaviour.

    they first empeach to send messages or link,but they do to list poeple who use to connect and exchange informations or jokes which can be used again their politic.

    We are not anti semites but the socialism has been created by jews:

    Trotsky veritable name Bronstein;Zinoniev and sure when they still to day defend or use socialism we face them easy knowing that they don't like to share...give me you watch i shall tell you what time it is or they shave free but to morrow you just have to wait.

    65% to 70% of jews use to vote dems and I was surprise that 65% voted for O'Bama it seems that they are somewhere less racist in the States than in other countries.

    Don't be surprised if they try to control all the means for information including internet:they know how brainwashing is the best way to handle the poeple and let do what they want remember Trotsky drinking coffes in Vienne during Exil with FREUD.

    Don't underestimate this poeple it's an usual mistake in the States to underestimate your ennemies.

    Source(s): I have the right to take advantages of my grade and sure as I read a name i know who is the owner and what he do have in his mind..... The indians refer more to body langage we have each our way.
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    What they are proposing to do is force internet service providers who spent billions of dollars of their own money and spent who knows how much time and research to allow you access to the internet to not censor any content through their service. It is basically the same as the government telling me that I have to give a customer of mine whatever he wants of my property or time, even if I don't agree with giving them that. It is an interference in the free market.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Alright, I did not hear any specific discussion concerning internet regulations, but, I do think that it is of the utmost importance that our privacy be protected on the internet.

  • 1 decade ago

    I see nothing wrong with the way the internet is now, I am always suspicious of new laws and regulations.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    i think Thelastn... has it correct. And I agree, the internet should have as little regulation as possible. They should not allow Bomb building sites.

  • 1 decade ago

    Whatever it is or does, I hope it negatively impacts the 102 million Americans who were eligible to vote in 2008...but didn't. Perhaps they will show up to make change in 2010.

Still have questions? Get answers by asking now.