[farber] http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070622/093628.shtml from the par-for-the-course dept Net neutrality is a complex issue, but as tends to happen with most things these days, it gets boiled down into easily consumable, though not wholly accurate, ideological soundbites from both sides. And even when people try to have an open, even-keeled discourse about the issue, they still run into problems explaining things well. For the most part, debate on net neutrality has glossed over the fundamental, but perhaps less incendiary issues, and been characterized by intellectual dishonesty and propagandizing from activist groups on both sides. It was hardly surprising, then, to read about a panel at the Supernova conference descending into a shouting match between a Commerce Department official (ie the "anti-regulation" guy) and "pro-net neutrality" supporters in the audience. Really, it's an apt characterization of the whole debate: a bunch of yelling, very little exchange of useful information, and nobody really moves from their previously established ideology. All this means is that, in the end, it's very unlikely for the right, or even a good, solution to emerge. Instead, it will just come down to whichever side can muster the most political clout -- which is pretty much how things have gone in telecom regulation anyway ---------------------------------------------------------- WWWhatsup NYC http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com ---------------------------------------------------------- [Reading Provocative Comment No 4 at http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070622/093628.shtml] # by Stu on Jun 23rd, 2007 @ 8:29am "political clout -- which is pretty much how things have gone in telecom regulation anyway." The problem is that political clout has become a function of money, rather than votes. It's much too difficult to replace an incumbent elected politician - also a function of money. Just listen to the news reporting about elections - it's all about the money. Out goes legislation for the common good - in comes legislation for big money interests. "The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it comes stronger than their democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is fascism - ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or any controlling private power." Franklin D. Roosevelt ____________________________________________________________________________________ Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha! Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated for today's economy) at Yahoo! Games. http://get.games.yahoo.com/proddesc?gamekey=monopolyherenow