The Purpose of Net Neutrality

The FCC is now pursuing a new policy. They are promoting what they call Net Neutrality. The new Chief Diversity Officer (Diversity Czar) and FCC Associate General Counsel, Mark Lloyd wants to begin managing the ISPs (Internet Service Providers). They are privately held companies. Lloyd is on the record for having a problem with capitalism and conservative media outlets.

He co-wrote a 2007 report entitled "The Structural Imbalance of Political Talk Radio". This report calls for the FCC to create and enforce new definitions regarding "media diversity" and "localism" to maintain FCC broadcast license requirements. The sole intent of these requirements is to force conservative talk shows off the air and be replaced with a leftist point of view. How can the government legally (and objectively) manage privately held companies? They will regulate them. Is that legal? Is it constitutional? What is the real objective here with this man running the operation?

The Internet has been neutral since its inception, thus leveling the playfield for all participants. Major carriers (and the government) want to eliminate this neutrality in order to charge large popular sites for their respective heavy traffic. Should the government censor the Internet's content like China does?

In his new position, Lloyd wants to begin by policing the content that the ISPs provide and then initiate his version of the Fairness Doctrine over the Internet. The idea is to "make sure" that all individuals' rights are respected by looking at the freedom of all broadband (Internet) participants. Isn't that censorship?

Unchartered Waters
Is it safe to allow the government to regulate Internet content? Even with the best intentions, this could turn out poorly. Should the government have any say over what goes on the Internet? Is the Internet the government's property?

We believe not. The government should remain hands-off the Internet. It is NOT their jurisdiction and not theirs to control.