This cartoon is a complete misrepresentation of Obama’s position. It is very unusual for a President to make such a clear public statement that he wanted the public utility model: One internet. The Right lives in a parallel world.
Wait; Obama is being attacked for being pro Net Neutrality? Which he says can only be achieved through regulation……I’m on his side; the same debates are being waged here. Businesses CANNOT be trusted to be Net Neutral since they WANT a two tiered Internet. It’s a new charging model for them: you pay more for priviliged access.That blows Net Neutrality.I don’t think many folks quite understand what Net Neutrality is about.
All volunteer it is (mercenary if that is what you want to call it, but I think that is disrespectful of those very volunteers), however it is NOT controlled by private corporations, but by the US government itself. I find that type of elected civilian control to be the best!!
I’m not a big fan of Government Regulation but it is necessary when you have a monopoly or an extremely limited oligarchy and I think ISP is a good example. Maybe it’s different in the large cities but out in the rural regions, we are lucky to have even one ISP that isn’t dialup (virtually useless today).
The service lines are Private (Much like the railroads of yesteryear) but we all want to control how much the ISPs can charge and how they can structure their business.
If you enforce net neutrality (and any other regulations) on the private carriers – You will discourage them from investing in better infrastructure because they won’t be able to recoup the costs. On the other hand, the result of not regulating the carriers is that the internet will work for those who are willing to pay a premium and everyone else will be left riding coach (so to speak).
I applaud Mr. Obama’s goal of making the internet work for everyone because I think the country is well served by a state of the art communications network. But I think we, as a country, need to recognize the value of this infrastructure and invest in public lines (much like we pay for roads today).
As long as we are willing to let the Telecoms bear the cost of creating and maintaining the infrastructure – We must allow them to execute their business model to pay for those installations. The alternative is that they will just stop investing and we will see worse or even failed service.
This is one of the few things I am siding with Obama on. Like Meph said above, we are looking at a near monopoly power on the internet and if there are not safeguards put into place to prevent overcharging, the consumer will ultimately bear the burden. As it stands, we in the US have some of the worst rated internet connections in the developed world; our area caps out at 22 MB/s speeds, and there are countries with routine access to 100+ MB/s speeds. Charging more won’t improve that situation.In addition, internet providers are starting to balk at the bandwidth usage because people aren’t paying for cable nearly as much, so they are losing money and have to find another way. Time Warner, Comcast, Et Al are complicit in this — they are trying to suppress internet usage to drive people to the overly-expensive cable programming. I’m normally all for free-market solutions, but when you have no real alternatives (aka monopoly-esque), government needs to step in to protect the people.
Ms Benson is promoting more for the monied cable companies and phone providers. She should really study the issue before making such cavalier positions. Evidently she favors big business over the average citizen.
NetFix & Youtube should pay more for all the bandwidth they suck up broadcasting junk. NetFix changes their business model to take advantage all the free bandwidth slowing everything down for all of us.-Really, Gov’t is just trying to set up the major “suckers” of bandwidth so they can get in bed with them and control what is on the internet. It wasn’t too long ago that the Obama Gov’t wanted to give away control of the internet to all the anti-Americans around the globe (to the joy of most libs posting here) but they have repackaged that dung to doop us stoopid Americans.
Dtroutma over 9 years ago
Yep, let’s fight that internet neutrality, so Lisa can pay about $500 a panel to get her work out there on the web.
saschwartz over 9 years ago
This cartoon is a complete misrepresentation of Obama’s position. It is very unusual for a President to make such a clear public statement that he wanted the public utility model: One internet. The Right lives in a parallel world.
OmqR-IV.0 over 9 years ago
Wait; Obama is being attacked for being pro Net Neutrality? Which he says can only be achieved through regulation……I’m on his side; the same debates are being waged here. Businesses CANNOT be trusted to be Net Neutral since they WANT a two tiered Internet. It’s a new charging model for them: you pay more for priviliged access.That blows Net Neutrality.I don’t think many folks quite understand what Net Neutrality is about.
avarner over 9 years ago
There is a simple fact: If the government gets involved, what ever it is will get worse.
Count on it..
And of course, this has nothing to do with “controlling content.” LOL…
frodo1008 over 9 years ago
All volunteer it is (mercenary if that is what you want to call it, but I think that is disrespectful of those very volunteers), however it is NOT controlled by private corporations, but by the US government itself. I find that type of elected civilian control to be the best!!
Mephistopheles over 9 years ago
I’m not a big fan of Government Regulation but it is necessary when you have a monopoly or an extremely limited oligarchy and I think ISP is a good example. Maybe it’s different in the large cities but out in the rural regions, we are lucky to have even one ISP that isn’t dialup (virtually useless today).
The service lines are Private (Much like the railroads of yesteryear) but we all want to control how much the ISPs can charge and how they can structure their business.
If you enforce net neutrality (and any other regulations) on the private carriers – You will discourage them from investing in better infrastructure because they won’t be able to recoup the costs. On the other hand, the result of not regulating the carriers is that the internet will work for those who are willing to pay a premium and everyone else will be left riding coach (so to speak).
I applaud Mr. Obama’s goal of making the internet work for everyone because I think the country is well served by a state of the art communications network. But I think we, as a country, need to recognize the value of this infrastructure and invest in public lines (much like we pay for roads today).
As long as we are willing to let the Telecoms bear the cost of creating and maintaining the infrastructure – We must allow them to execute their business model to pay for those installations. The alternative is that they will just stop investing and we will see worse or even failed service.
Wraithkin over 9 years ago
This is one of the few things I am siding with Obama on. Like Meph said above, we are looking at a near monopoly power on the internet and if there are not safeguards put into place to prevent overcharging, the consumer will ultimately bear the burden. As it stands, we in the US have some of the worst rated internet connections in the developed world; our area caps out at 22 MB/s speeds, and there are countries with routine access to 100+ MB/s speeds. Charging more won’t improve that situation.In addition, internet providers are starting to balk at the bandwidth usage because people aren’t paying for cable nearly as much, so they are losing money and have to find another way. Time Warner, Comcast, Et Al are complicit in this — they are trying to suppress internet usage to drive people to the overly-expensive cable programming. I’m normally all for free-market solutions, but when you have no real alternatives (aka monopoly-esque), government needs to step in to protect the people.
superposition over 9 years ago
http://www.forbes.com/pictures/eglg45gmmml/where-the-internet-zooms-17/
ideations over 9 years ago
Ms Benson is promoting more for the monied cable companies and phone providers. She should really study the issue before making such cavalier positions. Evidently she favors big business over the average citizen.
Dave Ferro over 9 years ago
HANDS OFF THE INTERNET!!!
William Bednar Premium Member over 9 years ago
Now I’m wondering if Mr. O has drones “fixing” the satellites that broadcast internet signals too?
superposition over 9 years ago
Nothing like good old fashion competition to drive the prices down. http://money.cnn.com/2014/05/20/technology/innovation/chattanooga-internet/
3pibgorn9 over 9 years ago
Or restrict access.
wiatr over 9 years ago
The Blackwater organisation is a mercenary army. It is NOT an instrument of government like the US military.
SpicyNacho Premium Member over 9 years ago
NetFix & Youtube should pay more for all the bandwidth they suck up broadcasting junk. NetFix changes their business model to take advantage all the free bandwidth slowing everything down for all of us.-Really, Gov’t is just trying to set up the major “suckers” of bandwidth so they can get in bed with them and control what is on the internet. It wasn’t too long ago that the Obama Gov’t wanted to give away control of the internet to all the anti-Americans around the globe (to the joy of most libs posting here) but they have repackaged that dung to doop us stoopid Americans.
damifid0 over 9 years ago
Keep the net open to all,as in Freedom. of information for all and access to all.as in open.Thank you Prez Obama,for supporting ‘we’ the little ppl.