The "Government Media Complex" ...

[NightHawkeye]

It mandates that an ISP can not limit access to websites. I didn't know that unrestricted access to websites was censorship.

Because the FCC is entirely impartial ...

 

[cow451]

Unfortunately, most of the people that watch Fox News all day probably visit sites like FoxNews.com, Townhall.com, RedState.com, etc., when they're online. Likewise for liberal counterparts. If people only want confirmation for what they already believe, they can easily find that to the exclusion of other points of view. We need to keep the internet free (thankfully, the first amendment guarantees that), but more importantly, we need to encourage everyone to constantly challenge their own beliefs, otherwise no amount of free information will do any good.

In the US, there is no shortage of access to the 'net, good, bad or ugly. Ron Paul has milked the media pretty well considering his extremist views in some areas. His lack of national success is about him and his message.

 

[TerranceL]

In the US, there is no shortage of access to the 'net, good, bad or ugly. Ron Paul has milked the media pretty well considering his extremist views in some areas. His lack of national success is about him and his message.

Yeah the idea of not spending money we don't have and not going to war with every country that doesn't do what we want just isn't that popular in todays america.

 

[Nabobalis]

Because the FCC is entirely impartial ...

So? By law, an ISP can not limit access to websites. That is net neutrality. To not support it is to allow censorship of the internet.

 

[NightHawkeye]

So? By law, an ISP can not limit access to websites. That is net neutrality. To not support it is to allow censorship of the internet.

The problem is government regulation ...

Network neutrality - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Network neutrality regulations are opposed by some Internet engineers, such as professor David Farber and TCP inventor Bob Kahn. Robert Pepper is senior managing director, global advanced technology policy, at Cisco Systems, and is the former FCC chief of policy development. He says: "The supporters of net neutrality regulation believe that more rules are necessary. In their view, without greater regulation, service providers might parcel out bandwidth or services, creating a bifurcated world in which the wealthy enjoy first-class Internet access, while everyone else is left with slow connections and degraded content. That scenario, however, is a false paradigm. Such an all-or-nothing world doesn't exist today, nor will it exist in the future. Without additional regulation, service providers are likely to continue doing what they are doing. They will continue to offer a variety of broadband service plans at a variety of price points to suit every type of consumer." Bob Kahn, another computer scientist, has said net neutrality is a slogan that would freeze innovation in the core of the Internet.

Farber has written and spoken strongly in favor of continued research and development on core Internet protocols. He joined academic colleagues Michael Katz, Christopher Yoo, and Gerald Faulhaber in an Op-Ed for the Washington Post strongly critical of network neutrality, stating, "The Internet needs a makeover. Unfortunately, congressional initiatives aimed at preserving the best of the old Internet threaten to stifle the emergence of the new one."
​

 

[Marek]

The problem is government regulation ...

You brought up a different issue altogether; one that I can understand has reasonable disagreement. But I'm wondering what's wrong with Nabobalis's proposal; that is, regulation to prevent ISPs from censoring and restricting website access.

 

[Nabobalis]

The problem is government regulation ...

Network neutrality - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Network neutrality regulations are opposed by some Internet engineers, such as professor David Farber and TCP inventor Bob Kahn. Robert Pepper is senior managing director, global advanced technology policy, at Cisco Systems, and is the former FCC chief of policy development. He says: "The supporters of net neutrality regulation believe that more rules are necessary. In their view, without greater regulation, service providers might parcel out bandwidth or services, creating a bifurcated world in which the wealthy enjoy first-class Internet access, while everyone else is left with slow connections and degraded content. That scenario, however, is a false paradigm. Such an all-or-nothing world doesn't exist today, nor will it exist in the future. Without additional regulation, service providers are likely to continue doing what they are doing. They will continue to offer a variety of broadband service plans at a variety of price points to suit every type of consumer." Bob Kahn, another computer scientist, has said net neutrality is a slogan that would freeze innovation in the core of the Internet.

Farber has written and spoken strongly in favor of continued research and development on core Internet protocols. He joined academic colleagues Michael Katz, Christopher Yoo, and Gerald Faulhaber in an Op-Ed for the Washington Post strongly critical of network neutrality, stating, "The Internet needs a makeover. Unfortunately, congressional initiatives aimed at preserving the best of the old Internet threaten to stifle the emergence of the new one."
​

Neutrality proponents claim that telecom companies seek to impose a tiered service model in order to control the pipeline and thereby remove competition, create artificial scarcity, and oblige subscribers to buy their otherwise uncompetitive services. Many believe net neutrality to be primarily important as a preservation of current freedoms.[5] Vinton Cerf, considered a "father of the Internet" and co-inventor of the Internet Protocol, Tim Berners-Lee, creator of the Web, and many others have spoken out in favor of network neutrality.[6][7]

Or there is that.