[bamahead]

Google and other content-providing companies who would have to pay billions to the ISPs to get their content to you are at the forefront of pushing net neutrality.

Google is also in bed with the Government on a lot of other things...and they know they'll be able to buy their way around whatever content controls are imposed.

Bottom line is - what do you want? Corporate control of the internet, like you have now? Free speech unregulated, pretty much anything goes. Providers do have the authority to cap bandwith and filter traffic...but hey, it's their equipment.

Or government control. Where a Washington career union bureaucrat gets to assess what speech and content is acceptable and 'neutral' and therefore not subject to state review?

I'll take the 'captialist pig' approach, thanks.

[GraceG]

If they piss off enough customers they will go to another provider and the company that was mucking about may change their policy.

Change in the free market comes faster than change in the government.

[antiRepublicrat]

Where a Washington career union bureaucrat gets to assess what speech and content is acceptable and 'neutral' and therefore not subject to state review?

Net neutrality precludes judging the acceptability or 'neutrality' of the content itself. Net neutrality is a policy for the network, meaning the network has to be neutral towards content. Net neutrality is not a policy for content, that's fairness doctrine.

IOW, net neutrality is freedom of speech.