Never Miss a Beat: Get a snapshot of the issues affecting the IT industry straight to your inbox.
November 9, 2010
3 Min Read
"In the name of neutrality, lobbyists want to stop Internet providers from managing their networks by charging more to providers or users of bandwidth-hogging services such as video and online games," he writes. "This amounts to a forced subsidy of certain users of the Web at the expense of others. As demands on the Web escalate, speed and reliability will inevitably depend on more management of the network, including through different prices for different levels of service."
While I urge you to read Crovitz's entire piece, let me offer one other excerpt from his analysis of unintended and ugly consequences that could follow if we as a society allow this phony 'neutrality' issue to fall into the hands of politicians and regulators instead of leaving it unregulated for entrepreneurs to exploit in a free society powered by a free economy. "For example, Apple offers applications designed specifically for its iPad tablet. Amazon's Kindle has a special deal with Sprint that allows for lightning-fast downloads of books. The closed community of Facebook regulates how people link to one another. Do we really want regulators in the name of neutrality determining which apps should be available on the iPad? How fair it is that Kindle has fast book downloads? Should the FCC decide how many Facebook friends are too many? It's not even clear what 'net neutrality' means in the context of these services." But one thing about this whole mushy mess is unmistakably clear, and as Crovitz chronicles, that clarity emerged in a tightly linked 3-step process: 1) Last month, 95 candidates for Congress signed a pledge that included this promise: "In Congress, I'll fight to protect Net Neutrality for the entire Internet—wired and wireless—and make sure big corporations aren't allowed to take control of free speech online." 2) Last week, those same 95 neutrality-supporting Congressional candidates ran for office. 3) And later last week, all 95 lost. Score it this way: Free-market common sense 95, and net-neutrality nonsense 0. RECOMMENDED READING: Global CIO: Steve Jobs Creating New-Age Broadcasting Network? Global CIO: Steve Jobs Declares War On Google Global CIO: The Awesome Transformative Power Of The Apple iPad Global CIO: The Top 10 Most Influential IT Vendors (Apple And Facebook?) Global CIO: Apple Storms The Enterprise As iPad And iPhone Surge Global CIO: Is IBM Or Apple The World's #1 Tech Brand? Global CIO: Google CEO Eric Schmidt's Top 10 Reasons Mobile Is #1 Global CIO: Larry Ellison And The New Oracle Rock The Tech World Global CIO: Inside Steve Jobs' Head: The Supremacy Of Software Global CIO: Will Social Media Kill The CIO? Global CIO: IBM's Top Product Exec On Strategy, Systems, & Oracle Global CIO: 10 Reasons CIOs Will Get Fired This Year Bob Evans is senior VP and director of InformationWeek's Global CIO unit.
To find out more about Bob Evans, please visit his page.
For more Global CIO perspectives, check out Global CIO,
or write to Bob at [email protected].
About the Author(s)
You May Also Like
*Why DDI? Why it is Important to Integrate DNS, DHCP, and IP Address Management in Your Network
Hybrid Mesh Firewall: An Essential Solution for Today's Distributed Enterprise
High Performance Applications with Dominion KX III
IT Service Management Vendor Rankings & Quadrant
Checklist: Top 6 Considerations to Optimize Your Digital Acceleration Security Spend