How convenient! AP reporter resucitates his manufactured story on Comcast network management

It is telling that the AP reporter who originally manufactured the story on Comcast's network managment practices, (through his own unscientific test) is the only mainstream reporter resuscitating this non-story.

Peter Svensson's AP story: "FCC to probe Comcast data discrimination" isn't news but an advocacy piece cloaked as a news story (see earlier post).

• At a minimum, the article should have been labeled a "news analysis" or an opinion piece.

It isn't "news" that the FCC investigates petitions.

• The Svensson article should have been much more forthright in explaining that Svensson's own "test" and story, played an instrumental role in actually prompting FreePress to submit a petition against Comcast's network management practices.
• This Svensson piece was obviously biased in three ways:
  • First, he used the buzzword blackmail terms of "probe" and "data discrimination" which are designed to inflame not inform;
  • Second, its not news that the FCC is investigating the petition; that's old information from early November.
    • FCC Chairman Martin's response further underscores it isn't news, "sure we are going to investigate..." i.e. duh! do you think we don't do our job?
  • Third, it rehashed old news, the Verizon story on texting, which Verizon immediately admitted as a mistake and corrected.

This article is not news but a embarassingly transparent advocacy piece to keep a manufactured story alive and to provide advocacy support for the reporter's allies on the issue.

If this was really news why didn't responsible mainstream reporters pick up on the "news"?