In today's editorial on the internet, the NYT actually makes sense
all i can say to this is "amen"...
the nyt correctly argues that, since everything is moving into a single pipe, it requires robust regulation... there's no question that the internet is way more than just an information resource... it's my primary communication medium, a medium without which i simply couldn't live my life the way i do now and i know lots of folks who would say the very same thing...
Tweet
With the Internet fast becoming the most important communications channel, it is untenable for the United States not to have a regulator to ensure nondiscriminatory access, guarantee interconnectivity among rival networks and protect consumers from potential abuse.
Yet that’s exactly where the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit left us all when it said this month that the Federal Communications Commission didn’t have the authority to regulate the Internet — and specifically, could not force the cable giant Comcast to stop blocking peer-to-peer sites.
The decision, in the words of the F.C.C.’s general counsel, Austin Schlick, undermines the agency’s ability to serve as “the cop on the beat for 21st-century communications networks.” It also puts at risk big chunks of the F.C.C.’s strategy for increasing the reach of broadband Internet to all corners of the country and fostering more competition among providers.
Chairman Julius Genachowski said the commission is not planning to appeal the decision, and is studying its options. The F.C.C. could try to forge ahead with its broadband plan despite the court’s decision. Or Congress could give the F.C.C. specific authority to regulate broadband access.
But the court tightly circumscribed the F.C.C.’s actions. And with Republicans determined to oppose pretty much anything the administration wants, the odds of a rational debate on the issues are slim.
Fortunately, the commission has the tools to fix this problem. It can reverse the Bush administration’s predictably antiregulatory decision to define broadband Internet access as an information service, like Google or Amazon, over which it has little regulatory power. Instead, it can define broadband as a communications service, like a phone company, over which the commission has indisputable authority.
the nyt correctly argues that, since everything is moving into a single pipe, it requires robust regulation... there's no question that the internet is way more than just an information resource... it's my primary communication medium, a medium without which i simply couldn't live my life the way i do now and i know lots of folks who would say the very same thing...
Labels: ABC News, FCC, internet, internet neutrality, Julius Genachowski, NYT
Submit To PropellerTweet