Learn more about how information technology is changing
our lives and our world. PLUS NEWS + EVENTS

Obama on Net Neutrality

Anne Broache of CNET has a good article up about Obama indicating during the Mtv and MySpace forum that he’s in favor of Net neutrality. This is nothing earth-shattering, of course, as all of the Democrats are in favor of an equal opportunity Internet, but it sounds like Obama has a good grasp of the concept, citing that companies like Google might not exist if it weren’t for Net neutrality.

Broache also noted that, while Net neutrality is not a “make-or-break issue akin to healthcare, immigration or the Iraq War,” it still holds some heat. As the question was posed by MoveOn, I would venture to second that assertion since they wouldn’t waste their bandwidth on a question of little importance. As someone who works from a remote office and who has used everything from 300 baud to a T3, I say speed does matter and anyone who says otherwise is just selling something.

Comments

  1. >I work for an advocacy group that opposes new laws regulating net neutrality, so I suppose I may be one of those selling something, but let me try anyway.The issues that have come up in recent weeks have done so free of any government involvement. I can understand the “there oughta be a law” sentiment, but I think it could actually be detrimental. Right now, people are paying attention. If the issue was handed to regulators, well, who knows how good the regulators would be. And of course, who knows if the regulations would have unintended consequences (considering what most in Congress seem to know about technology, I think pretty likely). And if handed to regulators, independent observers might forget about it. So in this way, I think, maybe we should leave things as they are. After all, these issues were addressed quickly.

  2. >I’m not necessarily pro or anti any particular legislation because I’m not completely up to speed on where it stands – I just want to avoid big monopolies controlling the flow of data because that has all kinds of scary potential consequences in terms of civil liberties.