Most net neutrality proponents try to justify their call for new regulation by claiming a duopoly or insufficient competition. Their incomplete and out-of-context argument is a good example of why in a court of law, courts ask people to testify to
"the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth." On the subject of broadband competition, the neutr-elitists are not saying the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
The big and egregious omission in their assertion is that this market used to used to be monopoly dial-up service. They omit sharing that in 1996 a bipartisan Congress passed the Telecom Act to end monoploy, promote competition and de-regulation, and that competition is now increasingly flourishing.
Net neutrality proponents must take info out of context to make their point because on the measures that matter most to consumers: expanding choice, falling prices and increasing competitive supply -- all prove an increasingly competitive market.
As my new one-pager proves: http://www.netcompetition.org/docs/Debunking-the-Myths-Part-2.pdf choice of broadband providers is expanding rapidly according to most recent FCC data; real prices for broadband have fallen over 50% in the last few years, and the supply of new broadband competitors continues to increase.
Net neutrality has become a smokescreen to hide behind for those who oppose competition and free markets for communications and who want to turn back the clock and return to utility regulation.
