You are here


see the new updated scare ticker on net neutrality

There is a new updated net neutrality scareticker link to check out.

The bottom line here is that net neutrality is all about unsubstantiated allegations of problems.

  • If net neutrality was in fact a real problem, wouldn't we have seen at least some evidence somewhere in the U.S. after 4 years and 2 months and counting?
  • The FCC and the FTC have also both said they are vigilantly watching for any potential problems, but have not heard of any.
  • What's there to be afraid of?

John Edwards on Net Neutrality -- Lip synching the song's SaveTheInternet blog is touting Democratic Presidential Candidate John Edwards' recent comments supporting net neutrality.

  • So why am I bringing attention to this win by the other side?
  • Well first I think its always important to genuflect to's prowess when they get people to lip synch their talking points "song."

We all know politics is often driven by fear and by creating boogeymen where none really exist -- and at that, is a master.  

The Bogus "Human Face of Net Neutrality" -- as top-down puppeteer

The Politico ran a story April 9th called the "The Human Face of Net Neutrality" that grossly exagerates the "net roots" involvement on net neutrality. 

The article implies that there is somehow a difference between the " net roots" and traditional broadband lobbying.

  • Give me a break.
  •'s Free Press/SaveTheInternet is a very sophisticated Washington lobbying operation whose schtick is simulating "grass roots."
  • Lets be real.
  • is basically a 3 million person email list, where's Washington puppeteers pull the strings from the "top down" to "simulate" a "bottoms up" groundswell political movement on net neturality.   
  • I don't buy it.

All this Politico article reports is that was able to "top down" organize dozens of meetings during recess with dozens of members on net neutrality.'s self serving motive for supporting net neutrality

In one of my recent Internet searches I came accross a very interesting historical article that appears to predate's creation of SaveTheInternet to promote  so called "net neutrality."

The article in the NYT from fourteen months ago in February of 2006 called "Plan for fees on some emails spurs protest" show that is no different than any other special interest in looking out for themselves.

  • The article explains that Yahoo and AOL were looking to charge bulk emailers a quarter of a cent to a cent per email to deliver their emails.
  • That could have been a big new bill for, which has a three million person email list according to the article. 

When you connect the dots of when all this was occurring -- it is pretty clear that while and consumer groups claimed to be saving the Internet -- they were really asking for self-serving special interest legislation, which would protect them from paying a more market-based-rate for their emailings -- which have to be among the largest bulk emails in the country.

How was able to mobilize so many groups is that they played to their fears that they all might have to pay more in the future because in a market-based system they might have to pay for what they use.

  • So they have helped construct this elaborate net neutrality policy movement to simply protect themselves from having to pay a market-based rate.

What annoys me is that they call broadband companies self-serving, but they are no different.

  • This obvious hypocrisy is off the charts.   


Utah holds Google accountable for its "trademark Indentity theft"

It seems that more folks have Google's "number."

It seems Google is learning the lesson the hard way -- that those in glass houses should not throw stones.

Save the taxpayer from the save our spectrum coalition

A group of liberal activists today announced yet another Save... Coalition -- this time a new "Save our Spectrum coalition" that seeks to impose net neutrality on winners of the FCC's upcoming 700 MHz auction.

  • What we really need is a "save the taxpayer" coaltion to protect Americans from bogus social engineering and corporate welfare ideas like net neutrality.

Ironically, these liberal activists want to totally ignore the law, a spectrum auction law that was passed in 1993 by an all Democratic Government! is calling Google an "online information monopoly" in UK

It seems there is more trouble brewing in the eerily quiet ItsOurNet coalition of online giants who are promoting net neutrality legislation.

  • One of ItsOurNets' primary funders, IAC's, is calling the lead member, Google, an "online information monopoly" in the UK. Ouch!  

Today's WSJ article "'s Revolt Risks costly clicks" highlights a guerilla ad campaign that is running in "London subway cars exhorting commuters to "stop the online information monopoly."" 

Google's behavior called "fundamentally dishonest" by Democratic Congressman

National Journal's Tech Daily had an interesting article today reminding us that there is yet another dimension to Google's untrustworthy business behavior.

  • "Rep. Brad Miller, D-N.C., wrote a letter Friday, demanding an explanation as to why Google had replaced recent photography with images depicting the region before it was devastated by the hurricane.
  • Miller spokeswoman Luann Canipe said: "The congressman's concern is that it was fundamentally dishonest. Certainly the most basic question is, 'Did someone ask you to change the maps and if so, who was it?'" "

What is important here is this is just part of a well documented history and pattern of Google not doing the right thing and making a mockery of their double-negative corporate motto: "Don't be evil."

700 MHz auction: Latest la la land attempt to impose net neutrality

SaveTheInternet's Free Press arm and other liberal advocacy groups are going to ask the FCC to impose net neutrality on the winners of the upcoming 700 MHz wireless auction, according to Tech Daily on 3-30-07.

  • While I guess I have to give these groups credit for their persistence, they are basically spitting into the wind on this one.

Less than two weeks ago, the FCC unanimously voted to classify wireless broadband as an unregulated information service which pratically means that net neutrality does not apply to wireless broadband.

Great new flash video on Exaflood -- net nuetrality misses forest for trees

The Fiber to the Home Council has produced a great new flash video highlighting the "Exaflood" of data that is literally flooding the Internet requiring it to be upgraded.

  • Don't miss this four-minute, very-informative flash video.
  • It helps the average person to make sense of all the changes on the Internet and how they all add up to one big thing:
    • that Internet capacity needs to increase BIG TIME and fast!

Its a great problem to have.

  • The need to constantly upgrade, build-up and build-out the Internet is a great testament to the Internet's ever-increasing value and dynamism in everyone's lives; and it is also a testament to the competitiveness of everything Internet.
  • Anything good deserves investment to protect it and improve it.

Why I like the flash video so much is that it persuasively spotlights how vibrant and healthy the Internet is today.

  • Net neutrality proponents are really missing the boat here.
  • They are hysterical that the only big Internet issue is net neutrality -- preemptively solving a non-existent problem.

If net neutrality proponents were more responsible they would also be focused on solving real (not hypotheical)  ongoing problems that are critical to every user every day, which is how to increase the Internet's capacity so that it can continue to operate as it has or better.

The Bottom line: Net neutrality proponents are missing the proverbial forest for the trees.



Q&A One Pager Debunking Net Neutrality Myths