Steven Crowder On Why He Is Against Net Neutrality
Steven's analogy to the postal service is the most apt in this video. In other words, with the FCC controlling the ISP market they can and will use their power to coerce them into providing content that's more toward their liking. Another argument to point out is that getting rid of net neutrality allows both of the biggest ISPs to collectively agree to change the nature of how isps are run all together to keep other competition out.
This entire video Can be debunks when people realize how their internet was pre obamas net neutrality policy. Soon the internet will be as absurdly pay-walled as Starwars Battlefront 2 was before public backlash. Net neutrality doesn't allow companies to specialize in giving you the ability to do what you want to do. Let's say there's an isp that specializes in all things gaming.
All this Net Neutrality talk is all based on the fact that you think any government is not going to get paid off by 1 company or another, also the fact that some of the largest companies in the world, like google, Facebook and YouTube are pro net neutrality should concern you.
If there is to be a standard for consumer protection with regard to ISPs, then perhaps it would better for Congress to pass a clear statute that maintains light regulation on the ISP market while returning the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to its role of being the enforcer in such matters.
@Robert Webber - I'm not claiming that ISPs are in no way correlated with the internet, I'm explaining the distinction between ISP regulations and internet regulations. But the analogy is incomplete; thanks to its quasi-governmental role, people more or less expect Congress to control USPS policy.
It removes the Title II designation, preventing the FCC from putting tough net neutrality rules in place even if it wanted to. And, it turns out, the Republicans now in charge of the FCC really don't want to. The new rules largely don't prevent internet providers from doing anything.
Net neutrality simply means that ISPs cannot block or degrade lawful internet content above and beyond reasonable network management. Ending net neutrality is ending internet freedom, this will be a financial boon for isp's and an expensive kick in the balls for small businesses that rely on internet freedom.
The FCC ordered that states scrap plans for their own net neutrality laws 3 While I am unfamiliar with most of Crowder's personal political philosophy, this alone should be a big red flag in his argument because this PREVENTS states from having a choice in what they believe is necessary.
Government exists to serve people, and people want net neutrality. And they're not huge like Netflix, Amazon, etc to be able to pay any ISPs for the privilege of a fast lane, yet together they would be large enough to make political difference. The FCC data shows that all of the delinquent cable companies made strong improvements since the FCC's initial reporting.
If people are surfing myspace for only an hour at night, and are watching low resolution cat videos in a quarter web page, providers can make some reasonable assumptions and charge users appropriately. As Ben Shapiro wrote in 2014, Consumers would dump Steven Crowder Net Neutrality those ISPs in favor of others” if those ISPs slowed down or blocked data as favoritism toward certain sites.
By getting rid of Net Neutrality, the ISPs get to control what succeeds and fails. Also, even if ISPs wanted to censor content or elevate some content over others, as long as we have a competitive ISP market, they wouldn't dare- they would lose their customers the minute they did it.