FCC Approves Proposed Net Neutrality Rules

[Honky1012]

1000 bucks says keyser118s favorite tv show is msnbc

[oblivion3134]

@Honky1012 u so dum, srsly kill urself

[Keyser118]

Fox is so off base with this clip! I really feel sorry for those poor uninformed viewers who's only source of news is fox news. Net neutrallity is not the gov't trying to regulate what goes on the internet, it's purely to keep big businesses from rationing out quick net service to higher paying customers. Fox news is such a terrible influence on our country, it's really sad.

[thoughtchallenge]

Yes, the government needs to regulate the internet to prevent the Madoffs of this world from profiteering from denial of internet access. Net neutrality is about treating websites equally. Doing away with net neutrality will result in websites being block by your service providers. Internet service providers could then charge websites to give you access to their websites. Furthermore companies like AT&T could block competing long distance providers like Skyp and Vonage, forcing you to use.

[MAGNETGRUNT]

thoughtchallenge - I still smell something fishy. Since when does our governent, which actually should be called 'shadow governent' care anything about the people. Please be cautious. Our new government is headed by the epotomy of red herrings, false flags, lying and deceit. This looks remarkably like another Trojan Horse.

[thoughtchallenge]

Magnetgrunt- Some Internet Service Providers oppose Net Neutrality, because they would like to charge either their customers for access to particular websites, or charge websites for access to their customers. I understand your fears, but there are those who would play upon your fears. Do the research and find out what Net Neutrality is really about.

[Ezer101]

This is reporting a travesty. The real story here is that "regulation" is nothing more than keeping media outlets/ISPs from restricting traffic speeds and protocols. I.e., P2P data restriction, or any other protocol your ISP doesn't like. McCain wants the private companies to be able restrict internet access, and the govt. does not want companies to do so. McCain would like net non-neutrality, where cencorship comes via a private company.

[mytacostand]

fox is not even talking about the bill, the telecommunications corp. and internet providers have a monopoly, and the fcc regulates those companies from abusing their monopoly. what this bill would do is strip the fcc from regulating the corporations. giving a monopoly full control is not good for America, it goes away from the capitalist beliefs we hold dear, and will ultimately end up raising the cost of using the internet, as all monopolies tend to favor.

[Ezer101]

I believe this clip, if it is a clip from the one I saw, is related to the McCain-backed bill. The unaptly named bill is just that, while the govt. position is not represented at all by Fox, confusing viewers as to the contents of the actual bill and what the govt's. position on net neutrality really amounts to. I think we agree, though, that monopolies ought not to be around because they are bad for the end user.

[NotEasilyRegimented]

I read for a few hours about net neutrality. I decided to come down on this issue AGAINST whatever the government decides. That is the most reliable way I have found to be accurate.

[notsoblackops]

I believe the government should keep their hands off the internet, and not censer it like other stuff that they have, like movies, music and television. And continue it to grow as a free market, and a place of free speech.

[andruh99]

And to allow it to grow as a free market, it requires some means of allowing ALL people/orgs/businesses equal access and use.

Net Neutrality does not censor the internet. It just lets everybody use the net as they wish (within legal allowances.)

[SeekerNLife]

This is bad news.

We don't need Govt Control of the Internet.

[nsaneone]

Once again, the gov't is stick its nose where it doesn't belong. Why can't they leave anything up to the markets?

[picklebarrels]

Your name is apt.

Clearly, you don't know what net neutrality is and how it relates to pure competition, but hey, that's nothing new for a Conservatard. Open mouth, spew horsecrap, run before having to explain themselves.

It's just par for the course.

[nsaneone]

So your telling me that incentive isn't driving the market? Then what is? Nothing drives forward innovation and technology more than incentive, ie profit. If something isn't profitable, it's not worth exploring. If the markets make it worth exploring, then it becomes profitable.

[picklebarrels]

Incentive has always driven the market.

Now, if you had an application that you knew would be a huge leap forward and destined to be a success on the internet, would you like it to be shot down because an ISPs' partner that bribes them says it would hurt their business?

What would happen? You'd have to sell it, and then the ISPs' partner would make the money, not you. Does that sound like incentive to innovate? A completely unrelated industry meddling in yours and stifling your success?

[TAMARLANE]

You like the idea of government intrusion why?

[picklebarrels]

Hate to tell you, toots, but it's a little late to whine about government intervention. It's funny you Conservatards are whining about intervention while being completely unaware of the, oh, past decade or so of government spying no the internet.

That's not at issue here. Apparently FOX news doesn't know what the issue is either, judging from this "coverage".

Try reading a little about the subject so you can be a little less of a moron.

[NotEasilyRegimented]

You aren't very smart. You think that because I oppose any government regulation of the internet, as proposed in this "neutrality" push, that I am in favor of government intervention somewhere else. What an idiot.

And you also assume that because I am against it, I must not know anything about it, or must not understand itVhsngr

Chanage your name to picklebrain.

[picklebarrels]

No, I assume if you're a Conservatard, which you most likely are if you oppose net neutrality (since Conservatardism is the party of technological ignorance and ignorance in general) that you didn't bother to educate yourself when the government was spying during your illustrious Bush years - with that said - why the hysteria over the internet and gov't now?

Just admit it -"BECAUSE OBAMAMARXIST!!111"

And yes, if you're against it you know nothing about IT or have corporate interests.

[TAMARLANE]

assume defines itself. You are a complete and utter moron.

[picklebarrels]

So what you're saying is you have nothing to debate at all and can't think of one reason net neutrality is bad other than, "OMGOBAMAMARXISTMAOGLENNBECK!!­11"?

It's OK, I already knew that.

[TAMARLANE]

I think you think you know everything , dude.

"I think I think, therefore I think I am" kind of a guy.

Keep it up. The key to success is ignorance and self confidence.

[picklebarrels]

Well, the Republicans proved that ignorance and self-confidence doesn't, in fact, win.

So, no.

Also, I don't go mouthing off in topics I know nothing about, unlike Conservatards.

You haven't even given one reason so far why you're against this. So, especially in this instance, ignorance has nothing to do with it. Self-confidence, yes. Ignorance? No.

[TAMARLANE]

Keep arguing with yourself bitch.

[andruh99]

Like they left the financial systems free to be "up to the markets?"

How'd that work out?

[killergames187]

@andruh99 that's bull shit!The Gov't is way the markets got all fuck up!Look it up dumb ass!

[picklebarrels]

Yeah, I really trust John McCain with the internet.

This really is the worst coverage. Hey, guys, could you at least talk about net neutrality in your net neutrality segment?

Ha. Yeah, right. Too much for FOX.

[TAMARLANE]

Sorry you couldn't understand Fox news. Maybe you could understand better if you got an education first.

[andruh99]

Fox News doesn't seem to understand "news."

The idea behind news is to provide correct and informative topics that apply to the viewer.

Not, as they do here, to reframe the argument into something else entirely. the gove is not trying to regulate what will and will not be on the net; it's trying to make sure everything is a level playing field for all users and providers.

[NotEasilyRegimented]

Why not offer to help them out some, andruh,

do a little consulting. I'm sire they would appreciate it.

[coosoorlog]

This is some of the worst reporting of an issue that I've ever seen. Watching just this "news" you'd never find out, what's going on.

[andruh99]

I think that's the Fox M.O.

Keep the people in the dark, so the oligarchy can do whatever they want.