They're only telling half the story

In the fight to oppose Net Neutrality legislation, the telecom companies are trying to tell us that it's only big corporations that will pay the fees that telecom companies want to impose on the Internet. But that just isn't the case. Over at handsoff.org "blog" – I use the term loosely because comments aren't allowed on their posts – they've cited the switch of a USA Today columnist from being in favor of Net Neutrality to being against it.

Now, there are several things wrong with the reasoning of the columnist in making his switch, but the best way I can summarize it is in the title of the post. They're only thinking about it halfway. To illustrate my point, the quote I'd like to focus on is this:

"Think about it: Google owns Blogger. Do you think Blogger users are going to be deprived of bandwidth for lack of funds?"

Well, yes, I agree – let's think about it. The real question is: Do you think Blogger is going to absorb the extra cost of paying off the telecoms to preserve its bandwidth without passing on the cost to consumers? Right now Blogger is free and open to the public. Any increase in price of operating the service, and consumers will get hit with the difference. That means fewer people able to blog, fewer blogs, and fewer voices. See why Net Neutrality is so important now?

Let's face it. This is an outright power grab, a money grab by already wealthy corporate interests that are holding the future of the Internet hostage to their greed. If we let them redefine the debate as only affecting big corporations, we will all lose out in the end. And that's exactly what the telecoms want.

Think about it.