All

The Importance of Net Neutrality Explained So Even Ted Kruz Can Understand


This, by far, is the best and an incredibly simple to understand explanation as to what net neutrality is about, and what may happen if corporations get their way. Explained so even the likes of Ted Kruz can understand, as this was written, created and posted by “The Oatmeal” especially for Senator Kruz. Please, put down your crab tacos and take five minutes to read all the way to the bottom.

FYI… Net neutrality will have a direct affect on anyone and everyone who uses the internet via a computer or mobile device. Everyone and no less. That means YOU!

Also, posted yesterday by TIME, is an article that states that “83% of voters who self-identified as ‘very conservative’ were concerned about the possibility of ISPs having the power to “influence content” online.” Hey, Kruz and Boehner! Are you seeing this?


*Source: Consumerist.



Source: Washington Post via Netflix 


**NOTE: This is not my work, not my creation and is the sole property of the website, “The Oatmeal.” I take zero credit in any of this content. I have decided to post in it’s entirety solely because of the importance of the content. Many people – myself included – do not care much for “site jumping,” so rather than lose a reader by trying to re-direct them to read the full content, I decided to post it all here.

That having been said, please go visit “The Oatmeal” after completing this post. It’s an awesome site!

Advertisements

Categories: All

8 replies »

  1. Sure, let ideologues with Government power get their hooks into the Internet. They’ve already demonstrated willingness to use their power to crush opposition thinkers with the “Fairness Doctrine”, using their FCC power. Remember how that crushed free speech and exchange of ideas in the past? Blaming the internet for providing alternative information sources besides the ideologically controlled mainstream media, these folks want VERY much to get the power to manage its content.

    They’ve stated their intention to crush ideological opponents in the Internet using various other techniques – so why not let them have the power of Government to do it? What could possibly go wrong?

    • Are you serious???? Sorry, but you’re just not getting the picture here. The government doesn’t want to take over the internet. All they want is to keep the corporations from taking over the internet.

      Wiping out net neutrality is the same thing as saying, “hey, I have extra money lying around to send to the internet carriers. Can I? please? Please? I want to pay them MORE!”

      Let’s use phone calls as an example. All national calls, not including international. For example, if your carrier is Comcast/Xfinity and you make a call to DirecTV, you will be charged an additional amount to make that call because Comcast doesn’t want you calling a competitor. Apply that to the internet. Let’s say Comcast has partnered with Microsoft. If you choose to use Google to do a search rather than Bing, you must pay an additional amount to do so.

      Losing net neutrality will destroy the internet as we know it. The government is needed to put leashes on corporations, not to control everything. it’s the corporations that want to control everything and, if allowed, will do anything and everything they can to make that extra dollar.

      • The corporations built the internet and the corporations have been running the internet all along. We currently HAVE net neutrality. Meaning, the internet is not under ideological control.

        When Leftist ideologues get government power over something, perhaps the IRS, FCC, Department of Energy, Department of Education… they use that power to achieve their political objectives.

        And that is why they want power over the internet. They blame it for giving people too much free, NEUTRAL access to information. They want the power to manage what you can and can’t see, just as they do via the FCC.

        FEC Democrat pushes for controls on Internet political speech
        Opponents: ‘Nothing short of a Chinese censorship board’

        Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/oct/24/fec-democrat-pushes-controls-internet-political-sp

        • Again, the government does not want to take control of the internet. They want to leave it as it is and keep the corporations from taking control. And that article is nothing more than right-wing propaganda.

        • The net is already neutral.

          Corporations have built and controlled the internet for about two decades. That is why we have free access to all kinds of material on the ‘net.

          But when Democrats are pushing for a return of the “Fairness Doctrine” in broadcasting to crush free speech (the effect it had last time it was implemented) it is time to question why they want to also get control over the internet. They have been rather clear about this.

          “Citizens are often aware that their private choices, under a system of limitless options, may lead in unfortunate directions, both for them as individuals and for society at large,” Sunstein wrote of the Internet in his book, Republic 2.0. One solution he proposed was forcing Websites to link to other Websites with which they disagreed. That is the SAME tactic of the Fairness Doctrine, which crushed political speech by forcing a political information outlet, at its own expense, to provide equal time to the opposition. It’s how Fascists force a private entity to become an outlet for the Party line.

          What you’re seeing is a perverse use of a label (like ‘fairness doctrine’) to reverse the meaning (‘we control what you broadcast’). Same goes for net neutrality.

          Step 1 is to give them ‘power’ over the content on the internet. Then, they can build on it to achieve their true objective.

          We see that in China and Russia, this basic power has extended to blocking websites, ISPs and bloggers that offend The Party.

          “Cass Sunstein, a Harvard Law professor who has been appointed to a shadowy post that will grant him powers that are merely mind-boggling, explicitly supports using the courts to impose a “chilling effect” on speech that might hurt someone’s feelings. He thinks that the bloggers have been rampaging out of control and that new laws need to be written to corral them.

          Advance copies of Sunstein’s new book, “On Rumors: How Falsehoods Spread, Why We Believe Them, What Can Be Done,” have gone out to reviewers ahead of its September publication date, but considering the prominence with which Sunstein is about to be endowed, his worrying views are fair game now. Sunstein is President Obama’s choice to head the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs.”

Go ahead... I can hear your thoughts. Please share with the rest!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s